The meeting notes discuss the scope of work and ways of working for the YoungProfsNet Programme Council in Europe. Key points included: - The Programme Council will develop annual work programmes and project proposals, act as project coaches, and review work products. - Communication will primarily be online using Slack, with options for video calls. - Ideas for potential learning projects were proposed in environmental engineering, reviewing an impact assessment toolbox, social development, and collaborating with organizations in Kenya and Tanzania. - The group aims to eventually have 50-60 Programme Council members and run 100 projects annually.

1. Environmental and Social
YoungProfsNet
Development Practitioners
Meeting notes – Programme Council – Europe
Friday 18 November 2016, 18:00 – 19:30 UTC
Present: Alma Migens, Annalisa Gionni, Márton Havas, Maarten Smies
Preface
Eva Kimonye could not join as she was studying for an exam.
Annalisa Gionni is our representative in Italy and was a guest at this meeting.
1. Discussion note on scope of work and ways of working
1.1 Scope:
The directors propose that the council be engaged in the following:
1. Develop a work programme for the network (on an annual basis)
2. Develop project proposals for members to work on that cover the breadth of areas of
interest
3. Act as project coaches/mentors, help members to develop project proposals
4. Review work products resulting from projects
Meeting outcome
The scope of work was accepted as relevant. Alma suggested that the Programme Council (PC)
should lead programme and project funding proposals. It was agreed that the Programme
Council will be involved in acquiring programme and project funding.
1.2 Ways of working:
We shall work mainly over the Internet and shall use Slack as our communication tool. In
addition members can use Skype, Hangouts or WhatsApp for Instant Messaging and voice
and video calls. We may consider using Dropbox for the development of documents.
Meeting outcome
There was general agreement on the ways of working. Annalisa suggested that we look into the
merits and demerits (security) of using Google tools to develop new documents, which Márton
supported. We shall open a DropBox account for YoungProfsNet anyway, in case we want to use
that tool.
Annalisa has used Slack (for the Kenya project) and found that it worked well.
2. Time schedule for the development of a work programme and who will take the lead
Meeting outcome
This item was left to be decided upon following the other PC meetings to come.
3. Development of proposals for learning projects
Can we form some task forces to develop proposals for learning projects ?
- Environmental engineering
- Review and redevelopment of IOGP e-SHIMP toolbox i
- Social development
- Sustainable development
- Environmental and social development education (in cooperation with youth
organisations in Kenya and Tanzania)
meetingnotesprogrammecouncileuropa20161118public-161202215540.doc

2. - Energy efficiency and energy transition for manufacturing industries in developing
countries (a suggestion by Ashengai Kimath, Environmental Action and Community
Development Organization (ENVACODE), Tanzania)ii
Meeting outcome
Maarten explained that we want members and certainly the PC members to come up with ideas
for projects. That can be done with 10 to 20 lines of text. Such ideas can be posted on the
programme–council channel on Slack and PC members can indicate their interest to help
develop a project proposal for such ideas.
Social development and sustainable development/(corporate) social responsibility are our
weak fields.
Annalisa and Anna liked the idea that we work with environmental and social civic
organisations and ask them to come up with project suggestions that would provide learning to
our members and work products that these organisations (and others) can use.
Annalisa suggested more generally that we could try and deliver work products that can be
applied in environmental and social development practice. Although not directly a comment on
this point, Maarten and Márton brought forward that for our projects we look for best practice
and copy that shamelessly.
4. Extending the Programme Council
Meeting outcome
The meeting agreed that a PC of 50 to 60 members would be manageable, especially as most of
the work will be done by individual members or by small task forces of members.
5. YoungProfsNet website
Meeting outcome
We were all happy with the work that David Paulus has done so far to develop our website.
Maarten re-stated that we shall upgrade our web hosting package to be able to have all the
applications that we want to have (content management system and database server).
6. YoungProfsNet organisation chart
Meeting outcome
Maarten asked if the organisation chart makes sense. He gets mixed reactions to our brochure
(with the chart now in it). Many people tell him that is all very clear and they understand what
we are after. Others come with questions. In answer to a question from Annalisa, Maarten said
that he always follows up on those questions and that he may adapt the brochure to reflect good
comments.
The other meeting members felt that the organisation chart was clear. They commented that
the organisation should not be set in stone and may be changed later in relation to member
numbers or the experiences that we have with the work programme and with projects.
Maarten pointed out again that with 2000 members each taking part in one project every year,
and with 20 members on a project team, we would be running 100 projects a year. That could
have quite an impact.
2

3. 7. YoungProfsNet business development
Meeting outcome
Alma saw the argument for running a not-for-profit and a for-profit organisation side by side,
but she doubted if we would have the capacity to run them both at the same time. And there is
the question of finding funding for both. Maarten pointed out that Eva, Annalisa and he had
talked about this: it is a chicken and egg situation. In our case we need to demonstrate that
YoungProfsNet works and produce some chickens (work products) in order to convince people
to give us some eggs (funding); but think about running 100 projects every year.
Alma and Annalisa both agreed that YoungProfsNet would primarily focus on capacity building.
That is also an area where grants, subsidies and sponsorship are likely to available.
This is all still work in progress.
8. YoungProfsNet incorporation
Meeting outcome
Annalisa and Alma both felt that incorporation would only be useful after we have
demonstrated that YoungProfsNet is viable and can produce valuable work products besides
learning and development.
The Hague, 19 November 2016
Maarten Smies
3

4. 4

5. i
I have been thinking about developing a project to review and redevelop the e-SHRIMP (Environmental Social
Health Risk and Impact Management Process), which is a support tool for impact assessment developed by the
International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP):
Report No. 389, April 2007: http://www.iogp.org/pubs/389.zip
Report No. 529, November 2014, http://www.iogp.org/pubs/529.pdf
IOGP's 2014 report (No. 529) is a useful overview of e-SHRIMP and a good, brief introduction to impact
assessment of capital investment projects in the oil and gas industry. The original e-SHRIMP report (No. 389,
2007), for which I was a project team member on behalf of Shell's exploration and production of oil and gas
business sector, does not only describe the e-SHRIMP process but also provides a toolbox with worksheets for
tasks to be fulfilled in the various stages of impact assessment in parallel with the technical project development
phases.
In retrospect, I think that the e-SHRIMP toolbox, however useful, became perhaps a bit too far removed from the
impact assessment practice followed by the environmental consulting community. So, reviewing and
redeveloping the e-SHRIMP toolbox to fit and serve the environmental consulting community would be of
considerable value, notably by providing common language and standardised tasks. I have been in touch with
the Technical Director of IOGP on this and he would support a re-development of the e-SHRIMP toolbox.
Maarten Smies
ii
I have had contacts with some of our members in Kenya and Tanzania who are also active in youth and
environment and youth and sustainable development organisations. My suggestion has been to form a network
with these organisations. We could then work to develop learning projects for our members that would deliver
work products that these organisations can use in their activities. ENVACODE in Tanzania is another
organisation that came into view recently (and there are many more of them). Ms Ashengai Kimath (ENVACODE
director) in discussion with me brought up the reduction of CO2 emissions by the manufacturing industries as a
subject of interest.
Maarten Smies

6. i
I have been thinking about developing a project to review and redevelop the e-SHRIMP (Environmental Social
Health Risk and Impact Management Process), which is a support tool for impact assessment developed by the
International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP):
Report No. 389, April 2007: http://www.iogp.org/pubs/389.zip
Report No. 529, November 2014, http://www.iogp.org/pubs/529.pdf
IOGP's 2014 report (No. 529) is a useful overview of e-SHRIMP and a good, brief introduction to impact
assessment of capital investment projects in the oil and gas industry. The original e-SHRIMP report (No. 389,
2007), for which I was a project team member on behalf of Shell's exploration and production of oil and gas
business sector, does not only describe the e-SHRIMP process but also provides a toolbox with worksheets for
tasks to be fulfilled in the various stages of impact assessment in parallel with the technical project development
phases.
In retrospect, I think that the e-SHRIMP toolbox, however useful, became perhaps a bit too far removed from the
impact assessment practice followed by the environmental consulting community. So, reviewing and
redeveloping the e-SHRIMP toolbox to fit and serve the environmental consulting community would be of
considerable value, notably by providing common language and standardised tasks. I have been in touch with
the Technical Director of IOGP on this and he would support a re-development of the e-SHRIMP toolbox.
Maarten Smies
ii
I have had contacts with some of our members in Kenya and Tanzania who are also active in youth and
environment and youth and sustainable development organisations. My suggestion has been to form a network
with these organisations. We could then work to develop learning projects for our members that would deliver
work products that these organisations can use in their activities. ENVACODE in Tanzania is another
organisation that came into view recently (and there are many more of them). Ms Ashengai Kimath (ENVACODE
director) in discussion with me brought up the reduction of CO2 emissions by the manufacturing industries as a
subject of interest.
Maarten Smies