Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Public Participation Training
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Public Participation Training

211

Published on

Published in: Technology, News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
211
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Main points: Facilities Level Information is a required case study for access to information. Examples include compliance reports and Pollution Release and Transfer Registers (PRTRs). To add this case you will select the case type of “facilities level reporting” then choose the case details from the following list: Reports on environmental compliance PRTRs Reports from industry audits select “surface water quality” for case details.
  • Explain the benefits of public participation. Use examples to illustrate. It is the way in which the public can influence decision-making. Allows for consideration of environmental and social consequences of projects and programs.
  • Main Points: The goal of public participation is to make better decisions which reflect the INTERESTS and CONCERNS of potentially affected people and entities. Values of Public Participation (from International Association for Public Participation ) Right to Participate: Public participation is based on the belief that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process. This includes the promise that the public's contribution will influence the decision. (It also necessitates access to information. Public participation provides participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way—meaning it has to work in tandem with access to information)   Communicating Needs: Public participation promotes sustainable decisions by recognizing and communicating the needs and interests of all participants, including decision makers.   Actively encourages involvement: Public participation seeks out and facilitates the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision. Public participation seeks input from participants in designing how they participate.   Public participation communicates to participants how their input affected the decision.  
  • What does the TAI assessment evaluate? (Quick introduction to the TAI methodology) Main points: The TAI assessment measures both LAW and PRACTICE at a national level. The law evaluation is completed with legal research and assesses the quality of the access rights as enshrined in the law. Capacity building evaluation looks at the legal requirements to provide capacity building on access rights. The case studies assess PRACTICE. Look at “on the ground” experiences with access. Case studies captures gaps in implementation (gaps between law and practice). It also identifies areas in which practice may be better than the legal framework.
  • Main points: Case studies capture the “on the ground” measurements of access rights. Public participation case studies look at three levels of decision-making 1) policy level 2) regulatory level 3) project level Reminder: There are no case studies designed to measure “capacity building”. Rather, capacity building questions are built into ALL of the case studies.
  • The public participation cases are selected assessed by looking at three levels of decision-making: Project-Level Decisions (required). Regulatory-Level Decisions (required) Policy-Level Decisions (required).
  • Remember to keep POVERTY in mind The 6 case studies in Public Participation must include at least two (2) but no more than three (3) case studies. Poverty case studies are designed to capture the concerns of the poor. The Poverty Guidelines are to be used for all TAI assessments. The poverty sensitized indicators are to be conducted for 6 of the 18 case studies.
  • Main points: Public participation requires 6 case studies Three are prescriptive and three are at the researchers discretion Of these 2 need to be relevant to the poor and employ the poverty sensitized instructions for the indicators
  • Main Points: The TAI assessment measures public participation at three levels. Each level represents a different scale of the decision-making processes and has different impacts and characteristics. Project-Level 2) Regulatory Level Policy Level Trainer should give examples and lead short session where trainees have an opportunity to give examples of public participation at all three levels
  • Main Points: Indicators about public participation assess a similar cycle of decision-making: Intention Draft Decision Implementation Monitoring of implementation Evaluation Revision Renewal Knowing the cycle is important as it is very important to know at what stage in the decision-making process there is space for public participation. In general, the earlier in the cycle the better, as there is a greater likelihood that participation will influence the final decision.
  • Main Points: The indicators for public participation ask questions about: What information about decisions is available and at what stage of the decision-making process Who can participate and at what stage of the process If government is accountable for the outcomes for participation The LAW indicators for public participation measure: the presence and quality of guarantees, laws, provisions, regulations and rules whether public participation is considered a general right or specific to certain types of decisions
  • Main Points: This is an example of a public participation indicator. This is indicator #60. Trainer reads the full question and the values. Researchers are provided with more information than this—there are also research guidelines. It is VERY important that you read the guidelines as it explains, for instance what a “clear description” is. Guidelines for this question are: CSOs often play a pivotal role in bringing attention to problems and holding government accountable. It is therefore vital that effective registration and unencumbered operation of CSOs be facilitated by a country’s laws and rules. This indicator focuses on learning whether the legal framework supports CSOs’ ability to operate. Key components of an enabling environment include (but are not limited to): • consistent rules for all CSOs • reasonable registration costs • clear registration, incorporation and reporting procedures • appropriate timeframes • open (not selective) eligibility criteria Definitions: “CSOs - Civil Society Organizations” include organizations that are neither part of the private (for profit) nor governmental sectors. “Laws and rules” include the laws of the relevant geographic area (country, province, city, etc) and/or the rules and policies that govern the ministries or other government institutions that have jurisdiction over CSOs. “Enabling environment” includes consistent rules for all CSOs, reasonable registration costs, clear registration procedures, appropriate timeframes, and open (not selective) eligibility criteria. Additionally, the Guidelines give recommended research methods. For this indicator they are: Recommended Research Methods and Sources: 1. Legal Research: Review laws and rules establishing the procedures, costs, registration, reporting and other requirements for CSOs registration and operation 2. Document review: Review statistics regarding average income in the country and GDP to determine what qualifies as “reasonable registration costs.” Include the data in your assessment report and/or the Explanation for this indicator.
  • Main Points: This is an example of a public participation indicator. This is indicator #60. Trainer reads the full question and the values. Researchers are provided with more information than this—there are also research guidelines. It is VERY important that you read the guidelines as it explains, for instance what a “clear description” is. Guidelines for this question are: CSOs often play a pivotal role in bringing attention to problems and holding government accountable. It is therefore vital that effective registration and unencumbered operation of CSOs be facilitated by a country’s laws and rules. This indicator focuses on learning whether the legal framework supports CSOs’ ability to operate. Key components of an enabling environment include (but are not limited to): • consistent rules for all CSOs • reasonable registration costs • clear registration, incorporation and reporting procedures • appropriate timeframes • open (not selective) eligibility criteria Definitions: “CSOs - Civil Society Organizations” include organizations that are neither part of the private (for profit) nor governmental sectors. “Laws and rules” include the laws of the relevant geographic area (country, province, city, etc) and/or the rules and policies that govern the ministries or other government institutions that have jurisdiction over CSOs. “Enabling environment” includes consistent rules for all CSOs, reasonable registration costs, clear registration procedures, appropriate timeframes, and open (not selective) eligibility criteria. Additionally, the Guidelines give recommended research methods. For this indicator they are: Recommended Research Methods and Sources: 1. Legal Research: Review laws and rules establishing the procedures, costs, registration, reporting and other requirements for CSOs registration and operation 2. Document review: Review statistics regarding average income in the country and GDP to determine what qualifies as “reasonable registration costs.” Include the data in your assessment report and/or the Explanation for this indicator.
  • Main Points: This is an example of a public participation indicator. This is indicator #60. Trainer reads the full question and the values. Researchers are provided with more information than this—there are also research guidelines. It is VERY important that you read the guidelines as it explains, for instance what a “clear description” is. Guidelines for this question are: CSOs often play a pivotal role in bringing attention to problems and holding government accountable. It is therefore vital that effective registration and unencumbered operation of CSOs be facilitated by a country’s laws and rules. This indicator focuses on learning whether the legal framework supports CSOs’ ability to operate. Key components of an enabling environment include (but are not limited to): • consistent rules for all CSOs • reasonable registration costs • clear registration, incorporation and reporting procedures • appropriate timeframes • open (not selective) eligibility criteria Definitions: “CSOs - Civil Society Organizations” include organizations that are neither part of the private (for profit) nor governmental sectors. “Laws and rules” include the laws of the relevant geographic area (country, province, city, etc) and/or the rules and policies that govern the ministries or other government institutions that have jurisdiction over CSOs. “Enabling environment” includes consistent rules for all CSOs, reasonable registration costs, clear registration procedures, appropriate timeframes, and open (not selective) eligibility criteria. Additionally, the Guidelines give recommended research methods. For this indicator they are: Recommended Research Methods and Sources: 1. Legal Research: Review laws and rules establishing the procedures, costs, registration, reporting and other requirements for CSOs registration and operation 2. Document review: Review statistics regarding average income in the country and GDP to determine what qualifies as “reasonable registration costs.” Include the data in your assessment report and/or the Explanation for this indicator.
  • Main Points: While this is an environmental assessment, economically important sectors should be considered.
  • Main Points: You will need to identify priority sectors for public participation. These can be the same or different from the sectors identified for the other pillars of access. They can also be the same across the levels of decision-making measured for public participation Discuss the advantages/disadvantages of choosing of using the same sector across all levels (Advantages: may be able to make general conclusions across sectors, save time and money; Disadvantages: would not know if this is a sector-specific situation or not, may need more case studies in other sectors later)
  • Main points: Project level decisions are required. This often means an EIA. Was there adequate participation in the EIA process for a particular project? Examples: hydroelectric dam project, oil and gas pipelines, mining concessions etc. When you enter a new case on computer, you will be asked to include “case type detail” for Project-Level Decisions your choices will be: Development permits Pollution permits Concessionary agreements Licenses for resource use Government procurement contracts other
  • Main points: THESE ARE GUIDELINES FOR PROJECT LEVEL CASE STUDIES ONLY Case studies for project-level decisions should: Represent single development projects or activities, in a sector of economic development with significant environmental impacts. Ideally, include at least one case from the same sector as a case study assessed under the policy-making case type. Again, sectors such as mining, forestry, transportation, and power generation are likely candidates. Heavy industries that are resource- or pollution-intensive (such as pulp and paper, chemicals, iron, steel, and aluminum) should also be considered. Ideally, include at least one case involving an environmental impact assessment (EIA), that is, a “systematic examination of the likely impacts of development proposals on the environment prior to any activity.” Be representative of the project type. A typical project-level decision-making process will demonstrate standard opportunities to participate and standard levels of involvement by the public.
  • Main Points Regulatory level case study is required for public participation When you enter a new case on computer, you will be asked to include “case type detail” for Regulatory-Level Decisions your choices will be: Laws Plans Financial decisions (e.g budgets) Other
  • Main Points Policy-Level case study is required for public participation When you enter a new case on computer, you will be asked to include “case type detail” for Policy-Level Decisions your choices will be: Strategies Programs Plans Other
  • Main points: THESE ARE GUIDELINES FOR REGULATORY AND POLICY-LEVEL CASE STUDIES ONLY (project level case studies will be discussed later) All case studies should: Be economically and environmentally significant sectors (i.e., resource or pollution intensive manufacturing, processing or extractive industries) Be representative. Meaning not best or worse practice. If they are, this needs to be noted in the research. Be recent. Meaning no more than 5 years old If you choose more than one policy-making case study (beyond what is required) One of the two must be from a ‘priority sector’ They should represent different scales (national and sub national)
  • Main points: There are 3 public participation case types 1) policy level decision making: explain and give example 2) regulatory decision making: explain and give example 3) project level decision making: explain and give example DISCUSSION: Break into small groups and come up with two case studies for each topic. Discuss and share with larger group.
  • Transcript

    • 1. TAI Training: Public Participation
    • 2. Four Pillars Acce Justic Acce Info Public Par Capa Buildi
    • 3. Public ParticipationPublic Participation  Provides a forum  Ensures voices are heard  Promotes dialogue around important issues  Provides a forum  Ensures voices are heard  Promotes dialogue around important issues
    • 4. Valuing Public ParticipationValuing Public Participation
    • 5. TAI Assessment StructureTAI Assessment Structure Constitutional Law Case Studies Access to Information: 27 indicators Public Participation: 31 indicators Access to Justice: 33 indicators 6 constitutional law indicators applied once per assessment + General Law 16 general law indicators applied once per assessment + Capacity Building: 12 capacity building indicators applied once per assessment
    • 6. ` Capacity Building is integrated into the case studies and general indicators. Public Participation Case Studies Emergencies Air Quality Monitoring Facility Reporting Policy-Level Decision Regulatory-Level Decision Project-Level Decision Access to Information Public Participation Environmental Harm Water Quality Monitoring State of Enviro Reports Non- Compliance Access to Justice Access to Information Public Participation
    • 7. Public Participation Case Studies
    • 8. Poverty Case StudiesPoverty Case Studies Captures the concerns of the poor Two (2) case studies must use the poverty indicators Poverty-sensitized indicators
    • 9. Number of Case StudiesNumber of Case Studies Prescriptive Case Types Case Types at Researchers’ Discretion Total Minimum Cases Access to Information 4 4 8 Public Participation 3 3 6 Access to Justice 3 1 4 TOTALS 10 8 18
    • 10. Three Levels of Participation
    • 11. Decision-Making ProcessDecision-Making Process
    • 12. Public Participation IndicatorsPublic Participation Indicators What information isavailable? Are there provisions, regulations or rules? What stage of the decision- making process? Are there laws or constitutional guarantees? Who can participate? Is government accountable?
    • 13. Valuing Indicators: LawValuing Indicators: Law 51. To what extent does the law require the government to provide opportunities for public involvement in the selected decision-making process?
    • 14. Valuing Indicators: EffortValuing Indicators: Effort 60. To what extent does the responsible agency make available to the public a clear description of its decision-making processes, including opportunities for participation?
    • 15. Valuing Indicators: EffectivenessValuing Indicators: Effectiveness 84. To what extent did public participation influence the final decision in the selected case?
    • 16. Choosing Priority Sectors Economically Significant • Significant contributor to GDP • Large employer • Unique to your country Environmentally or Socially Significant Representative • Significant environmental impacts • Significant health impacts • Impact vulnerable populations • Should reflect average practice • If it is NOT an average case, then this must be noted in the assessment
    • 17. Sample Priority Sectors IMPORTANT SECTORS  Water and sanitation  Extractive Industries  Biodiversity  Forestry  Agriculture  Poverty  Electricity  Tourism  Women  Manufacturing  Services  Children and Youth  Government  Fisheries  Minorities  Chemicals  Transport  Health  Toxics  Indigenous Peoples  Trade  Globalization  Genetically Modified Organisms  Illegal immigrants
    • 18. Project-Level Decisions
    • 19. Guidelines for Case Selection From a “priority” sector Ideally from the same sector as a policy-making case study Representative Project-Level case studies should be: Ideally one case will involve an EIA Recent
    • 20. Regulatory-Level Decisions
    • 21. Policy-Level Decisions
    • 22. Guidelines for Case Selection CASE STUDIES SHOULD BE From a “priority” sector Representative Recent EXTRA CASE STUDIES SHOULD Represent different scales Only one needs to be from a ‘priority sector’ Regulatory and policy-level case studies
    • 23. Public ParticipationPublic Participation LAW PRACTICE (Effort and Effectiveness) Case Type Example Cases Public Participation Legal Analysis Policy level decision-making Water Resources Management Plans of Saraburi and Petchaburi Provinces, Thailand Regulatory decision-making Reforms to the NOM ECOL- 22 (Water Standard) Without Taking Into Account the Public Participation Process Specified by Law, Mexico Project level decision-making Planning and Construction of the Via Baltica Expressway, Poland

    ×