IAIA17 FINDINGS:  REPORTS FROM SESSION CHAIRS

Adapting projects to a changing northern climate

Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Cameron McLean and Isaac Voyageur
Current challenges and impacts:

• All three presentations discussed the need for more information to be accessible for, proponents, EA researchers, and reviewers of EA for the decision making process. Data banks that are updated with info and that information will be usable in climate change models.

What needs to be done:

• Government at all levels, development industry, academia at all levels need to be aware of where the most important impacts will be felt, and welcome grassroots levels of northern villages, and Indigenous Peoples community.

Potential benefits and impacts:

• Information will allow projects to be designed in a way that accommodates the changing northern climate, melting permafrost, invasive species, droughts and fires, floods and erosion. It will reduce the social cost that emergencies cause, and reduce the damage.

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

• Access all levels of information possible and design projects with the trends of climate change in mind. Those reviewing projects should hold them to a high standard that the project addresses what is going on.

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

• Policy makers should go to the regions they are making policy, for and observe first-hand the effects and listen to those who work and reside there in order to make it more relatable and real.  Stakeholders should be documenting and communicating the changes they are observing to bolster understanding of the way the climate change is happening in unexpected ways.

Assessing climate change and natural disaster impact on urban areas (I)

Session chair(s):  Juchul Jung
Current challenges and impacts:

• Unexpected climate change impact or urban disaster.

What needs to be done:

• Consider climate change for hazard mitigation plan through planning regulations.

Potential benefits and impacts:

• Mitigating the impact of natural disaster.

Recommendations for IA practitioners:

• Consider climate change or scenario.

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

• Strengthen planning regulations on climate change impact areas.

Assessing climate change and natural disaster impact on urban areas (II)

Session chair(s):  Juchul Jung

Current challenges and impacts:

• The increase of social vulnerability because of climate change.

What needs to be done:

• We should consider for climate change on urban disaster.

Potential benefits and impacts:

• To manage social vulnerability on urban disaster.

Recommendations for IA practitioners:

• Consider social vulnerability and climate change.

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

• Regulate urban development on climate change impact areas.

Assessing livelihoods in social impact assessment (I)

Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Marielle Rowan
Current challenges and impacts:

• Addressing and monitoring impacts on livelihoods.

What needs to be done

• Addressing uncertainty in ESIAs, applying adaptive management, planning for robust data collection on resilience, using recognized methodologies for the assessment of impacts on ecosystem provisioning service, emphasizing management measures for livelihood impacts.

Potential benefits and impacts:

• Greater household and community resilience.

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

• Include traditional knowledge in baseline collection, involve elder forums throughout whole project cycle in areas where there IPs, more frequent engagement, link sustainable livelihoods and ecosystems management theories in SIA, focus on mitigation and enhancement measures that address the change from nature based subsistence lifestyles to a wage economy. 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

• Involve gov't authorities and policy makers in discussions about managing influx impacts.

Assessing livelihoods in social impact assessment (II)

Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Marielle Rowan
Current challenges and impacts:

• Addressing resettlement as trauma; establishing transparency and trust during the SIA.

What needs to be done

• Collect data on legacy issues, create awareness and capacity among clients about resettlement challenges, create moratoriums so that if a project does not proceed then potentially resettlement-affected households can get on with their lives.

Potential benefits and impacts:

• Understanding past experiences affects project acceptability.

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

• Use a health lens and consider providing mental health training for resettlement team; for livelihoods consider health and safety issues; in ESIAs, consider impacts during the planning and design phase; look at income and non-income related opportunities (e.g.; volunteering) for livelihoods.

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

• Limit the moratorium period to 3 years to not overly affect people's self-investment in their living patterns.

   

  Bridging IA and mediation in natural resource conflicts

  Session chair(s):  Lasse Peltonon
  What needs to be done:

  • Anticipate climate change driver conflicts and act accordingly (conflict analysis and prevention).

  Recommendations for IA practitioners:

  • Need to incorporate conflict prevention strategies in the design of IEA processes and enhance conflict communication skills of practitioners.

  Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

  • Regulators need to understand how process design and requirements of IA escalate/mitigate conflict and contention.

   

  Building the business case for climate change adaptation

  Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Laurent Da Silva
  Current challenges and impacts:

  • Decisions are often taken using single scenarios in order to design equipment and infrastructures.
  • Difficulty in conducting CBA at the project level, built counterfactual and monetize impacts (especially environmental and social impacts)

  What needs to be done:

  • Demonstrate the incremental value of climate change adaptation at the project level. Provide robust information to decision makers about the return on investment for different level of risk reduction to climate related risks. Not a one number approach. (BRACED, Ouranos, Economic think tank/research centers, etc.)

  Potential benefits and impacts:

  • Transfer the risk reduction/ROI decision to decision makers. Facilitate the decision, while dealing with uncertainties in the CC scenarios.

  Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

  • Turn to scientific community, especially climate scientist. The difficulty is dealing with cumulative uncertainties, but different methods exist. Climate scientist can guide them in interpreting, manipulating and analyzing climate data. In terms of economic and financial analysis, there is a need to build evidence of profitability of CC adaptation in development projects.

  Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

  • Need to align climate change adaptation with development objectives in developing countries.

   

  CEA and climate change: Who defines the baseline and forecast scenarios?

  Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Margaret Scott
  Current challenges and impacts:
  Need to integrate climate change into baselines for VCs. Currently not considered in Canadian EIA practice. Guidelines from European Commission suggest completing this. USEPA also requires the consideration of trends due to climate change on the baseline.
  What needs to be done:
  Collaboration is required to solve challenging cumulative effects problems. Government-led regional collaborations between stakeholders (including proponents and existing operators, regulators, and experts) and Indigenous Peoples to define the baselines for climate sensitive VCs for regions where large-scale development is anticipated or exists. These baselines should be available to provide a consistent interpretation of climate change sensitivities for future EIAs in the region.

   

  Climate change health impact assessment and risk-based decision-making

  Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Emma Hartnett
  Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

  • To include vulnerable populations.

  Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

  • Identify social environment as a factor for vulnerability and targeting for messages for health protection in future events.

     

    Climate change impacts on human health

    Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Geetha Ramesh
    Current challenges and impacts:

    • Understanding the holistic nature of health impacts by itself is difficult adding climate change to it is more complicated.

    What needs to be done:

    • IA practitioners, health practitioners need to understand the complexities and adopt it accordingly.

    Potential benefits and impacts:

    • It was evident that there were several impacts both direct and indirect on human health:  extreme heat, outdoor air quality, flooding, vector-borne infections, water-related infections, flood-related infections, mental health issues, food security and food contamination etc.
    • No positives were discussed.

    Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

    • Certain adverse health effects can be minimized or avoided with sound mitigation and adaptation strategies. Strategies for mitigating and adapting to climate change can prevent illness and death in people now, while also protecting the environment and health of future generations.

    Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

    • Climate change needs to adopted and understood. Policy needs to involve mitigation steps needs to be taken now.
    • Actions to be taken include reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to enhance the sinks that trap or remove carbon from the atmosphere. Appropriate mitigation and adaptation strategies will positively affect both climate change and the environment, and thereby positively affect human health. Some adaptation activities will directly improve human health through changes in our public health and health care infrastructure

    Other comments:

    • Climate change can be a driver of disease migration, as well as exacerbate health effects resulting from the release of toxic air pollutants in vulnerable populations such as children, the elderly, and those with asthma or cardiovascular disease.

     

    Climate smart(er):  IA's role in implementing the Paris Agreement & beyond

    Session chair(s):  Weston Fisher, Arend Kolhoff
    Current challenges and impacts:

    • Need to improve dialogue between IAIA practitioner and climate change community.

    What needs to be done:

    • Outreach; for example, facilitate change community.

    Potential benefits and impacts:

    • IA can strengthen both mitigation and adaptation in climate change and give climate change greater credibility by accountability, public participation, transparency, and adherence to IAIA ethical and professional standards.

    Recommendations for IA practitioners:

    • Use new protocols for IA if impacts on climate change on P&S.

    Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

    • Incorporate protocols and standardize guidelines for IA application to climate change P&S.

     

    Contention, social movements, and the politics of impact assessment

    Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  John Devlin
    Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

    • Seek to maximize public participation in all phases of the impact assessment process. Seek to convince proponents of the importance and value of public participation in terms of the speed of approval and the reduced costs.

    Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

    • Seek to include an extensive public participation process as a legislative requirement. If it is not required, it is very unlikely that proponents will build it into their assessment processes.  Policy must require more effective public participation. This is a responsibility of government agencies. Project proponents must recognize and accept the importance of effective public participation and provide a variety of opportunities for public engagement.

     

    Cultural heritage and the challenge of climate change and community wellbeing

    Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Véronique Karine Simon, Inge Lindblom
    Current challenges and impacts:

    • Threats to cultural heritage (archaeological, landscape, community well-being) such as erosion, sea level rise, increasing storms, etc. due to climate change.

    Potential benefits and impacts:

    • Potential use and adaptation of practical management strategies and frameworks for assessment.

    Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

    • Pro-active project design, holistic approach, mapping of values in the landscape.

     

    Digital impact assessment

    Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Jona Bjarnadottir and Jan Nuesink
    Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

    • Keep up the good work in developing digital tools to communicate with stakeholders, both the IA reports as well as various tools to evaluate and visualize the projects and its possible impacts.

    Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

    • The policymakers need to discuss and make decisions regarding the use of digital IA reports in the EIA process.

    Other comments:

    • I do think that the topic is very important and those that did attend did so as well. There is a need to develop tools to be able to communicate in each case the project in question as well as it possible impacts in a way that people will engage in the process while they have a chance to have influence on the design of the project in question.
    • The long written reports are not appealing to the common public thus not many do read them; the professionals do also appreciate to have less text and better visual presentation of the EIA material.

       

      Disasters, conflict and other crisis

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  C. Kelly
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Including the affected in the impact assessment process.

      What needs to be done:

      • Ensure social impacts are considered in the assessment process and that assessment results are used by those who commissioned the assessments.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Reduced harm to disaster survivors.

       

      Don't confuse me with the facts

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Jeffrey Barnes
      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners: 

      • The panel discussed the role and implications of social media in EIA. The discussion was robust and explored many perspectives, including of those of the audience.

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • It is important that decision-makers weigh "evidence" and understand what is evidence, opinion, or beliefs. Social media can be an important tool for engagement and the spreading of information, but is susceptible to misuse by interveners and proponents.

       

      EA in Canada: Where we are and where we should go

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Caroline Larrivée
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Calculating GHG emissions (what sources need to be considered, over what spatial and temporal scales).
      • Cumulative effects vs specific project assessment.
      • Conditions restricted to proponent's project.
      • Determination of significance of effects for decisions.
      • Knowledge acquisition and transfer toward projects and practitioners:
      • Baseline data and projections in a context of evolving changes.
      • Risk and impacts forecast.
      • Technologies and practices for GHG emissions reduction (reduction, capture, valorization).
      • Technology development, performance over time, access and application.
      • Minimize costs and maximize profits for green industries, especially in an international market context.
      • Fairness in application.
      • Level of awareness among the proponents and the public (as clients or consumers).

      What needs to be done:

      • Considering climate change in EA needs to be embedded within a larger framework to ensure coherence with emissions reduction targets at larger scales, and managing risks throughout the jurisdictions.
      • One promising avenue seems to be using the SEA process to address these climate change issues upstream of project approval, linked to land use development plans and policies.
      • The potential to apply SEAs already exists in many jurisdictions – it needs to be systematically applied.
      • Governments must set the example.
      • IAIA should advocate for its more systematic use.
      • Clear guidance on how this could be done should be developed.
      • Training, peer-to-peer learning, best practices and standards for it application should be developed.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Integrate CC consideration right at the outset of the project development phase, in order to make sure they are well adapted to a CC context and that GHG emissions have been minimized.
      • Integrate CC consideration throughout the decision making process.
      • Increase awareness on the importance of the fight against CC: better adapt to CC and reduce the GHG emissions.

      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • (The focus of the session was mainly policymakers and regulators but it was suggested to develop guidance, working with practitioners.)

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • Learn from others – things are evolving in the EA process and legislative pieces.
      • Integrate climate change considerations throughout the decision-making process.
      • Encourage collaboration and cooperation between different jurisdictions to help ensure coherence in reach national and international targets and to minimize climate change-associated risks. If these risks are not dealt with up front, everyone pays (e.g., government help in cases of severe damages associated with extreme events). It is in everyone's best interest to minimize climate change associated risks.
      • Interdisciplinary collaboration is key to addressing complex problems (understanding the issues from different perspectives and identifying solutions that are relevant, realistic and won't cause other unintended issues.
      • Working with the range of stakeholders and engaging the public in meaningful ways (i.e. formally recognizing their knowledge, working with them in monitoring activities, etc.) will help ensure better projects that correspond to the vision of where as a society we would like to go.
      • Adaptive management approaches and more intensive monitoring efforts are increasingly important to deal with climate change associated risks.
      • In cases where there is too much uncertainty, projects should not go ahead.

       

      Economic impact assessment

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Galina Williams and Alla Sushko
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Improve economic impact assessment.

      What needs to be done:

      • Practitioners, policy makers.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Better decision making regarding projects approvals.

      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • Include a variety of economic methods in impact assessment.

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • Look into regional development not only employment and income.

       

      Energy needs and the climate dilemma

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Peter Tarr, Joseph Yeddu
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • We are not going to meet the Paris Agreement for climate change.

      Oil sands are costly and GHG heavy to produce

      • Oil and gas is both a driver and victim of climate change.

      What needs to be done:

      • Oil and gas sector needs to consider how climate change will affect their methods of operation.
      • SEAs and EIAs must have climate change aspects included, also risk assessments.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Solar and other renewables investment is exceeding all targets – growing exponentially.

      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • Climate change is embedded into the SDGs.

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • Zero fossil fuels are a very real possibility in the short term.

       

      Environmental impact assessments and the mitigation hierarchy: Tools for biodiversity conservation

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Rachel Asante-Owusu and Steve Edwards
      Current challenges and impacts:
      More needs to be done to help incorporate the potential effects of climate change into mitigation hierarchy and EIA methodologies. In terms of the mitigation hierarchy, issues around predicting residual impacts and corresponding biodiversity offsets from long-term projects/initiatives need to look at how climate change may effect projections.
      What needs to be done:
      EIA practitioners, governments, and companies/developers need to ensure that climate change is factored into their reports and strategies – this is of course difficult; however, there are some tools, such as the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, that will allow the effects of climate change to be factored into predictions on ecosystems and habitats. In addition, there needs to be more interaction between different organizations in order to mainstream climate change into EIAs and the mitigation hierarchy, for example between UNFCCC, NGO, IAIA, and government to look at how potential projects impact and align with climate change commitments.
      Potential benefits and impacts:
      More accurate EIAs and greater success in mitigation hierarchy biodiversity targets such as No Net Loss and Net Gain. Increased potential to use development projects and private sector activity to tackle issues related to climate change.

       

      Ethical dilemmas in impact assessment

      Session chair(s):  Marla Orenstein
      Recommendations for IA practitioners:

      • Don't "prostitute" yourself for what you think the proponent wants.

      Special comment:

      • Interesting observation that most IA practitioners in the room know a colleague who has been pressured to change their conclusions.

       

      Expanding IA to include indigenous concepts of inter-relationships

      Session chair(s):  Kepa Morgan
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Indigenous Peoples may support development, but not at any cost.
      • Indigenous Peoples welcome IA, but not of any kind.
      • Science does not communicate climate change implications at scales that are relevant to people.

      What needs to be done:

      • Need indigenous concepts regarding inter-relationships/levels of understanding not recognized by science.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Improved understanding of challenges/more effective input from Indigenous Peoples and their knowledge.

      Recommendations for IA practitioners:

      • Look at Aashukan Declaration as a benchmark for best practice and seek ways to empower the Declaration in work.
      • Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:
      • Evaluate the Aashukan Declaration relevance. Identify tools and processes that can inform processes.

       

      Financial engineering and EIA

      Session chair(s):  Eric Schellekens
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Accelerate implementation of projects.

      What needs to be done:

      • Customize resilient pathway to developing countries as well.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Combine EIA-lite in future city master planning.

      Recommendations for IA practitioners:

      • Be aware of financial engineering supporting breakthrough projects.

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • Capacity building > competencies to develop.

       

      GREEN vs GREEN 

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Jan Nuesink
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Pitching science and evidence in the social media world of soundbite:  make sure facts go beyond opinion.

      What needs to be done:

      • Renewable energy transition is key, but EIAs should clearly balance local impacts of mega projects (e.g., wind turbines) vs global goals of climate change with low fossil energy mix.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Support from the majority of the well-intentioned public, motivated decisions and sustainable future.

       Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • Evidence-based assessments are key, make clear difference with opinion and considerations on acceptability.

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • Effective use of evidence based assessments, justify choices made to public and stakeholders.

       

      Governance and public participation in EIA (I): An international overview (I and II)

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Mario Gauthier and Louis Simard
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • More public participation at each step.

      What needs to be done:

      • Adapt the approaches and the tools to the context.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Better projects, easier implementation.

      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • Public participation --- context adaptation ------  Human oriented

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • Public participation --- context adaptation ------  Human oriented

       

      Healthy planet, healthy people: The role of impact assessment

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Francesca Viliani
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Impacts on vulnerable categories are difficult to measure, as population is aging the impacts of climate change on people will further increase and the different impacts on vulnerable groups will increase even more.

      What needs to be done:

      • Intersectoral collaboration under the strong leadership of one key minister/agency (such as finance or planning or environment). The other authorities need to develop better and more user-friendly guidelines that can be used across agencies and departments.

       

      Hot topics in resettlement

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Eddie Smyth & Frank Vanclay
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Lessons from resettlement are relevant to climate change mitigation where communities as communities will be both economically and physically displaced.

      What needs to be done:

      • Development-induced resettlement practitioners need to exchange experiences with climate change experts.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Sharing of experiences will build knowledge on planning for climate change impacts.

      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • More research is needed into the longer-term impacts of climate-change induced resettlement. It is important not to consider a resettlement a solution to climate change impacts – much resettlement can impoverish communities.

       

      If you can't stand the heat… Sex and gender in impact assessment

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Lea den Broeder and Benjamin Ofosu-Koranteng
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Climate change and the measures taken to address this have differential impacts on men and women, girls and boys. Failing to take this into account is a missed opportunity to create better and sustainable policies, programs and projects

      What needs to be done:

      • IAIA needs to further the understanding of this important topic, e.g. by developing guidance and other publications

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Gender-sensitive impact assessment will result in healthier and happier communities on a healthier planet

       

      IFI'S Accountability Mechanisms – Results of Investigations (I) 

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Victoria Marquez Mees and Bill Kennedy
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Accountability mechanisms have not to date received complaints related to climate change but foresee that in the coming years this will be a concern raised by communities more frequently.

      What needs to be done:

      • How to ensure that IAs address in a direct fashion the impacts on communities due to climate change and how they are being attended / advice to practitioners.   

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Clarify information to communities who might fear impact of projects on their living conditions. Also relevant for them to know that these issues are being addressed by the experts.

      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • Review our work to see if there any tips/lessons that could be taken on board for their practice.

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • Support practitioners and allow them to work in identifying impacts and implement plans as required to avoid harm.

       

      IFI'S Accountability Mechanisms – Results of Investigations (II) 

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Victoria Marquez Mees and Bill Kennedy
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • Accountability mechanisms and E&S practitioners are facing increased challenges when working is related to new financing products such as Financial Intermediaries, Guarantees, and Equity.

      What needs to be done:

      • Reinforce the transparency of funding so as to enable the sustainability of operations.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • Clarify information to communities who might fear impact of projects on their living conditions. Also relevant for them to know that these issues are being addressed by the experts.

      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • Revie our work to see if there any tips/lessons that could be taken on board for their practice.

      Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

      • Support practitioners and allow them to work in identifying impacts and implement plans as required to avoid harm.

       

      Impact assessment and renewables

      Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Katharine Gotto Walton, Ben Bradshaw, Rauno Sairinen, Kevin Hanna
      Current challenges and impacts: (in relation to renewables and environment/social impacts)

      • Renewables are often assumed to be sustainable and "green," but it was evident from the session that there is emerging suite of environmental and social impacts that must be understood and addressed
      • There is a global mix of IA legislation – in some countries legislation is standardized for all sectors including renewables. IA legislation in some countries has been adjusted for renewables and in the case of Chile with an aim to help the delivery of climate change through enhanced renewable energy.
      • The lack of social and meaningful consultation requirements in IA legislation is impacting the quality of IA process and outcomes for the renewable sector
      • There has been in recent years, and continues to be, a rapid expansion of renewable developments globally. Despite this profusion of projects, data sharing and learning from one IA to the next in the renewable sector is limited, which is in turn limiting the quality and relevance of IAs despite years of project experience. Remember that renewable projects take many different forms and scales, so learning must be for all types of renewable developments.
      • Concerns were raised that in some locations poor quality IA process including weak communication, meaningless consultation (little to no influence), poor transparency is directly leading to inequality, injustice, and conflict. This was supported by examples from Sweden, Denmark, Canada and India.
      • Project proponents don't trust some of their stakeholders, e.g., NGOs, and assume that sharing information with these stakeholders will leave them open targets for protest.
      • In many locations, renewable developments will always go ahead, i.e., are a "given" with no option for stakeholders including Indigenous peoples to reject a proposed development.

      What needs to be done:

      • Project proponents, governments, and other parties involved in impact assessments need to share their experiences so that IA are relevant and effectively identify impacts (including cumulative impacts) and their management. Adoption of approaches such as the Industry Evidence Programme (sharing evidence, good practice, guidance) allows for adaptive learning within and between renewable projects. This applies to consultants undertaking IA, project proponents in their management systems, and the regulatory authorities.
      • Meaningful stakeholder engagement and communication must take place throughout the IA process. Start disclosure and engagement as early as possible. It is vital to embrace innovative and effective ways to communicate during the IA process and the results to ensure that stakeholders understand the projects and their impacts and so can provide relevant feedback. This applies to project proponents, consultants, and the regulatory authorities.
      • Maintain a standard approach to IA (don't specialize for the renewable industry), but a quality scoping phase is vital to ensure that process is focused on the right range of E&S impacts using a risk based approach. Project proponents must allow the time and funds for the scoping phase and commit to use this phase of the IA to inform the focus/schedule of the remainder of the IA. Regulatory authorities need to look at the requirements for scoping are sufficient to enable a quality process. IA consultants need to push for quality scoping and then deliver.
      • More work needs to be done to identify the "stick" that changes the performance of project proponents. It may be that society "disgust" regarding the renewable industry impacts may have to grow publicly before enough awareness and momentum is achieved to change performance on developments.

      Potential benefits and impacts:

      • There is a genuine wish in most countries to use renewable energy as a means to manage emissions and reduce climate change.
      • The session believed that the renewable sector can be sustainable (green) and "co-existence" with stakeholders is possible if projects are developed in an appropriate manner with good communication and a quality IA process. We are seeing good practice. We must work out how to ensure this becomes common shared practice.
      • Key to the renewable sector becoming consistently "sustainable" is a quality transparent IA process with early meaningful disclosure and engagement/consultation. This will re-establish IA as an effective and trusted impact prediction and management tool rather than a measurement of damage.

      Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

      • Research and share data on impacts, learn from other examples to inform understanding of the industry impacts. Use tools such as the Industry Evidence Programme.
      • Work with project proponents and authorities to put in place an effective integrated IA with meaningful disclosure and consultation. The process must embrace transparency to enhance stakeholder trust and confidence.
      • Push for a solid risk based scoping phase to inform the focus and depth of the remainder of the IA process.
      • Understand stakeholders and engage with them effectively in a timely manner.

       

      Impact assessment for promoting Sustainable Development Goals

       Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Geetha Ramesh, Filipe Silva
      Current challenges and impacts:

      • The biggest challenge is the understanding on what SDGs are all about. It all not a requirement for countries to align their projects to SDGs.

      What needs to be done:

      • This was a follow up from last year. It was meant to raise awareness and see if SDGs have been adopted in the projects/of the projects in different countries align to SDGs. This session was aimed at IA practitioners.

         

        Potential benefits and impacts:

        • Once there is an understanding of the process and monitoring, then it would be transparent for others to follow.

        Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

        • Look to see if you are a contributor to the SDGs. Does your project/national policy of your country adopt/follow the SDGs?

         

        Impact assessment of policies

        Session chair(s):  Kwadwo Adusei Asante
        Current challenges and impacts:

        • Lack of framework for assessing policy impacts.
        • SIA currently relying on various frameworks in the policy space.

        What needs to be done:

        • IAIA should commission or encourage the development of policy impact assessment framework.

        Potential benefits and impacts:

        • Professionalization of policy impact assessment.
        • Consolidation of IAIA authority in the PIA space.

        Recommendations for IA practitioners:

        • Interest in impact assessment is growing, so the time has come for IAIA to start looking into it.

        Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

        • IAIA needs to set up a task force to start developing policy impact assessment framework.

         

        Involuntary resettlement: Responses to extreme weather and adaptation to climate change

         Name(s) of Session Chair(s):    Manon Circé and Charlotte Bingham

        Current challenges and impacts:

        • Climate change puts populations at risk and in such cases resettlement can be a solution. 

        What needs to be done:

        • Preventive resettlement allows adapting to climate change and it needs to involve all stakeholders.

        Potential benefits and impacts:

        • It is more cost efficient to prevent losses caused by extreme weather events than to replace and rebuild after a disaster.

        Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

        • Practitioners should rethink resettlement and not always seek to avoid it, especially because resettlement allows to avoid impacts if recurrent natural disasters. Preventive resettlement needs to be undertaken with the agreement and involvement of the affected people.

        Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

        • Governments should be proactive and adopt preventive measures rather than reacting to extreme weather events. Disaster management officials need to react quickly to resettle those affected or people will tend to move back to the disaster area and be subject again to the next disaster.  Also, policy makers need to develop land use plans and strict zoning to prevent reoccupation of hazardous areas.

         

        Lessons learned in IA and capacity building

        Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  John Boyle
        Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

        • Capacity building in EA agencies best undertaken as a sustained effort over time while staff capabilities, policies and procedures are put in place to become sustainable without external support.

         

        Losing focus in the murky waters of the kitchen sink

        Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Earle Hickey
        Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

        • Work early in the process with regulators and stakeholders to focus the scope of the assessment.

           

          Methodologies and tools for climate change consideration in EA and decision making

          Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Melissa Gagnon and Sean Carriere
          Current challenges and impacts:

          • Broader climate change management policies are needed to have the greatest impact on addressing climate change.
          • There are tools and methodologies existing and under development for specific projects. Broader tools and methodologies for assessing climate change in IA and decision making are not there yet. More work needs to be done on how to develop and implement these tools, and make them accessible.
          • Impact of uncertainties on exploitation management:  too much or not enough conservative choices can lead to important losses of money.

          What needs to be done:

          • Government needs to establish clear criteria to qualify the importance of the GHG emissions of a project and thresholds or cap in order to be able to take a decision on the acceptability of a project on the basis of its GHG emissions.
          • Government needs to set the policy goals and guidance for EA practitioners to achieve the outcomes.
          • Proponents need to take under consideration their contribution to greenhouse gas emissions in optimizing their project designs.

          Potential benefits and impacts:

          • Real time tool, with more accurate predictions can allow better management practices and reduce impact on the environment and other adverse effects (ex.: disturbance - noise and dust),
          • Assessing climate change and GHG emissions from projects as part of EAs will help inform and develop the corrective measures and overall policies needed to address climate change.

          Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

          • Not always blame the uncertainties on models predictions, sometimes the level of precision required to make a choice for the management of a project doesn't need to be high, trends alone sometimes can suffice for the decision making process.

          Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

          • Need broader policy objectives and outcomes.
          • Continue to work on accessible methodologies and tools that can be used in assessing climate change and reducing GHG emissions.

             

            Mind the Gap! The Giant Step between ESIA and Project Implementation

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Bryony Walmsley
            Current challenges and impacts:
            Many ESIA reports are several years out of date by the time project construction starts and even older by the time the project starts operating. As a result, climate change issues may not have been included in the "old" ESIA and/or may be out of date by the time the project is implemented.
            What needs to be done:
            If more than 2 years have elapsed between ESIA completion and project implementation, ESIAs and ESMPs should be revised and updated – this may (but not always) be required in terms of the country's laws, but is seldom enforced. It should also be one of the conditions of the loan approval from the Bank(s), but is seldom mentioned. Thus, both the regulatory authorities and the Development Finance Institutions should be encouraged to ensure that the ESIA and ESMP are revised prior to project construction if more than 2 years have elapsed.
            Potential benefits and impacts:
            Reduced financial risk for the lending institutions, reduced impact for project-affected persons, improved long-term sustainability.
            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:
            Clearly articulate climate change risks associated with projects so that the DFI(s) and regulatory authorities can take a considered view of project risks and impacts.
            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:
            There is a much greater need for adaptive management strategies to be in place (to react to changing project scope, environmental and policy conditions:

            • Environmental authorities: include in records of decision/authorizations.
            • DFIs: include need for ESMP updating every 6-12 months as part of loan conditions; improve project supervision.
            • Resident engineer:  ensure that all the conditions included in the project loan agreement and environmental authorization are actually implemented.

            •       Consultants: include need for updates in ESMP requirements.

             

            Northern ecosystems and biodiversity under pressure: climate change and other anthropic stressors

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Stéphanie Bleau
            Current challenges and impacts

            • Climate change is emerging as the dominant stressor on Arctic biodiversity; rapid change.
            • Lack of knowledge on cumulative effects of industrial development on northern regions and climate change on natural and social heritage.
            • Planning and managing ecosystems and species in the context of uncertainties.
            • Some species that are important both globally and to Arctic people are decreasing, while southern species are making their way to more northern latitudes (fox, bears, mouse).
            • Spatial and temporal change and dynamics.

            What needs to be done

            • Data acquisition and monitoring of Arctic and Nordic ecosystems to better understand species interactions.
            • Long-term observations are required to identify changes in biodiversity.
            • Efforts to conserve significant habitats intactness (functions and species)
            • Although the extent of Arctic protected areas has increased, protected marine areas remain under-represented, effective protection of large representative tracts of habitat, including hotspots for unique Arctic biodiversity and northern refugia areas, is of paramount importance.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Habitat intactness is a measure of adaptive capacity of species (Eigenbrod et al. 2014).
            • Proactive prevention of habitat loss is more effective than recreating habitat (Hodgson et al. 2009).
            • Intact ecosystems provide best defense against climate change (Martin & Watson 2016).
            • Intact forests and wetlands offer protection against extreme events (e.g., floods) on the coast and inland (Martin & Watson 2016) and are carbon sinks.
            • Impact assessment regimes is a successful process in Nunavik because of the land claim settlements with Indigenous peoples and the participation of Indigenous groups enshrined in law (JBNQA 1975, 2014 Parnasimautik Consultation Report, Sanaruttik Agreement between authorities in 2002 and Nunavik master plan of land use in 1998).

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Safeguarding important areas for biodiversity
            • Incorporate and proactively include intactness
            • Identify refugia and include in planning
            • Reduce non‐climate stressors
            • Consider cumulative effects at regional scales
            • Invest in monitoring and community‐based approaches
            • Use decision‐support tools that consider future
            • Lock at working case studies such as Nunavik for balancing development and conservation
            • Take into account, temporal and spatial scales in the context of climate change and issues are not static but rather dynamic in time for the land and its populations

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Use ecosystem-based management approaches because of long term effects of climate change on biodiversity and systems.
            • Mainstreaming biodiversity.
            • More research on CC and addressing individual stressors for biodiversity.
            • Improving knowledge and public awareness on climate change long term effects on planning and managing practices and land.
            • More R&D as changes in Arctic biodiversity have global repercussions.
            • Raise awareness and educate IA specialist and governments to northern regimes and realities such as CC and cultural way of life.
            • Read Clarkson et al.'s Responsibility to the Seventh Generation.
            • Recognize that food connects people and the environment.
            • Realize that traditional food systems are about a lot more than just the size of the caribou herd or the salmon run.
            • Pursue knowledge co-production; it builds trust, collaboration, and validity.
            • Know more about communities' previous experience with research and researchers.
            • Use traditional knowledge systems as a model of knowledge-to-action integration or maybe rethink SEA, IA models for the North.
            • Include the people.

             

            Participatory Approaches in ES

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Patricia Fitzpatrick
            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Context is important when designing participatory methods; you need to understand which methods will reach your participants.
            • More consideration should be given to images – there is good research supporting the notion that a picture is worth a thousand words.

             

            Potential role of life cycle assessment in EIA, SEA, and management

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Annie Levasseur, Wouter Achten
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • Territorial GHG accounting leads to the exportation of GHG emissions (through embedded emissions in imported products for instance).
            • EIA does not take into account global scale issues such as climate change.
            • What needs to be done:
            • Governments could adopt two levels of GHG accounting: territorial (as currently done) and consumption-based (using bottom-up process LCA and top-down input/output LCA) and develop policies to decrease both.
            • Linking EIA and LCA to enlarge the scope.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • More effective climate change mitigation policies.
            • Projects assessed using a combined EIA/LCA approach could lead to less GHG emissions and less local environmental impacts at the same time. LCA also allows performing eco-design for the project.
            • Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:
            • To integrate LCA in EIA practice.
            • Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:
            • Policies regarding GHG intensity of technologies as well as consumption patterns are needed to reach our ambitious targets.

             

            Practical aspects of public participation organization

            Name(s): of Session Chair(s):  Tim Peirson-Smith
            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Incorporation of climate change into EIA has different ***** and areal extents and comprises a need to engage global publics.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • It is hard! Several panel members of the plenary intimate it could be solved. Too late.

             

            Public participation International Best Practices Principles

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  John Devlin
            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • This session discussed the document Public Participation International Best Practices Principles which was originally published by IAIA in 2006. The PP Section is working on revision of the document. Some ideas emerging from the discussion today included the idea that cooperation and conflict do not need to be seen as contradictory. Practitioners should recognize the potential of conflict to express deep concerns among the public.
            • A second theme discussed the tension between international principles and sensitivity to local context. The consensus was that international principles should be recognized as "higher level" but that at the level of implementation it is possible to make some adjustments to local context which may be in conflict with the international principles. Practitioners need to develop skills for navigating this tension.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Seek to include an extensive public participation process as a legislative requirement. If it is not required, it is very unlikely that proponents will build it into their assessment processes.  Policy must require more effective public participation. This is a responsibility of government agencies. Project proponents must recognize and accept the importance of effective public participation and provide a variety of opportunities for public engagement.

             

            Renewable energy and climate change:  Scenarios for IA

            Session chair(s):  Grace Barrasso
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • Predicting climate change effects is challenging.
            • Need more socio-eco/social impact assessments.

            What needs to be done:

            • Scenario analysis and the use of varied methods to derive at a more holistic analysis (how things would play out).
            • More engagement with stakeholders.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Unintended consequences in environmental area (impact).
            • Benefits:  moving toward sustainability-type appraisals.

            Recommendations for IA practitioners:

            • Prepare environmental statements to inform decision making.
            • Climate change should not be the only driver.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Competitive bidding process to be linked to EIA.
            • SEA can address EIA shortcomings.
            • Regional CEAs as a planning tool.

             

            Rethinking engagement to include the vulnerable

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Alison McCallum
            Current challenges and impacts: (around incorporating vulnerable groups meaningfully into the impact assessment process)
            There were several challenges raised on this topic, but they ones that stand out are as follows:

            • Vulnerability is not static. It changes constantly as the context changes – with projects sometimes creating new categories of vulnerability. This requires an on-going revisiting of who is vulnerable and who isn't'.
            • Sometimes the vulnerable and invisible don't want to be made visible (e.g. illegal immigrants). We need to respect this and find other ways of facilitating their input into the IA process.
            • In what ways does being labelled "The Vulnerable" having negative consequences? It is empowering to be labelled as vulnerable?
            • Where does government's responsibility to address vulnerability begin/end, and when is it the project proponents' responsibility to address?

            What needs to be done:
            Below are some of the key ideas that emerged around how to deal differently with the issue of vulnerability:

            • Need to get government and project proponents on board regarding the importance of including the vulnerable in the impact assessment process. This may require getting the client/proponent to lead by example.
            • It is essential that we ask stakeholders (in this case "the vulnerable") how they want to be engage – vs imposing what we think is best.
            • Vulnerability isn't a cut and paste exercise between projects. As the context changes, so will who is/isn't vulnerable.
            • Understanding who is vulnerable requires us to ask people, "who do you think is the most vulnerable?" It is useful to find indicators that provide insight into this (e.g. where is the worst place to live?)
            • Engaging with the most vulnerable often requires a building of trust. This is likely to require a continuous presence in order to build the trust, and is sometimes only built one family at a time.
            • Consider this approach/message: "We are not meeting you because you are vulnerable … we are meeting you because you are RELEVANT."

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • In addition to what is already captured above, practitioners need to actively and consciously seek out innovative and creative ways of engaging with vulnerable groups. "Same old" engagement techniques won't cut it! Identify and apply methodologies that bring equity into the engagement space.
            • As practitioners we also have a key role to play in influencing our clients and sometimes our wider project team on the importance of using approaches and techniques (some of which have time and cost implications) that allow for the meaningful engagement of the vulnerable and "voiceless."

            Recommendations for project proponents:

            • Engaging the most vulnerable often takes more time than what a typical IA allows for. However, their inclusion allows for more comprehensive understanding of impacts (the most vulnerable are often the most impacted upon), and thus more comprehensive management measures.
            • Investing in the engagement of the vulnerable, is key to fulfilling commitments around impact management, and thus critical to your long term social license to operate.

             

            Road ecology in IA: New methods and platforms to move towards larger scales

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Aurora Torres and Jochen A.G. Jaeger
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • Improve understanding of the linkages between road development and climate change.

            What needs to be done:

            • Improved collaboration between policy makers, practitioners and scientists to 1) develop new IA tools, 2) reduce bias of current approaches, and 3) integrate linkages of road development with other environmental and sustainability challenges. One way to increase the interaction is through the creation of global community platforms that act as a hub bringing together policy makers, practitioners and scientists.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Provide better decision support to regulate the expansion of new roads, support regional planning and road development schemes, and increase the efforts to mitigate its detrimental effects.

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Make use of the tools and platforms presented in this session in order to improve the prediction and assessment of the impacts of roads on wildlife, and increase the exchange with scientists.
            • Consider the impacts of roads beyond local scales, taking into account urban regions and other roads, as well as the cumulative impacts of multiple developments involving the creation of new roads.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Consider the impacts of roads beyond local scales, taking into account urban regions and other roads, as well as the cumulative impacts of multiple developments involving the creation of new roads.
            • Promote opportunities for interaction with practitioners and scientists.
            • Support rigorous science to assess, avoid, minimize, and offset road impacts.

             

            Shifting to climate smart agriculture: ESIA and other tools

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Jeannette Tramhel, Ann Pacey, Ijeoma Vincent-Akpu
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • Panelists considered how agriculture is both impacted upon by the environment (and climate change) and has an impact upon it, especially as a contributor of GHG emissions. It was described and examined from different angles as a "wicked problem" using examples from Australia, Latin America, and Africa. Challenges commonly identified among presentations were lack of knowledge (CSA practices, data, etc.); lack of capacity; lack of governance (appropriate ESIA policy).      

            What needs to be done:

            • The panel acknowledged that consideration of agricultural sector has been largely "left out" in ESIA – both in policy and practice. As a first step, this needs to be recognized. Assessment of climate change and agricultural productivity cannot continue to be conducted in silos. The few available tools that seek to bridge this gap were discussed (FAO EIA Guide, SAFA Guide, etc.).     

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Presentations suggest there is a shift taking place in current thinking - towards integration of climate change implications at various levels of policy-decisions around agriculture for both resilience and mitigation.

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • The IICA panelist provided examples from its Resilience Program to increase adaptation of agricultural systems in its member countries by addressing the multiple risks of climate change and other environmental risks. These experiences indicated the need to contextualize possible solutions with involvement by stakeholders throughout the process, given diverse situations, to develop site-specific solutions.  
            • The Cardno panelist discussed the use of Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis (VAA) as a tool to inform policy and programming to address challenges in food security, poverty and climate vulnerability and to support CSA integration and scalability.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders (please specify if possible):

            • Governments are dealing with the dilemma of food production in a carbon constrained economy with growing demands for protein-rich diets. While the production focus is on 'sustainable intensification', policy dialogue could also include climate smart consumer diets.
            • Policymakers engaged in the (re)design of EIA legislation should reconsider whether 1) as drafted and 2) as applied, it offers adequate protection of the inputs necessary to ensure global food security for future generations (consider, e.g., dwindling arable land per capita).

             

            So you think these impacts are due to climate change? Prove it!

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  C. Kelly, W. Fischer
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • Dealing with climate change skeptics; getting people to understand the use and limits of the data.

            What needs to be done:

            • Do a better job at communicating climate change information and making sure it is used.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Reduced harm from a changing climate.

             

            Socio-economic management plans and planning

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Mark Shrimpton
            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Expand IAIA to IAIAM "International Association for Impact Assessment and Management")
            • Recognize that positive effects and their management (moving us beyond a focus on "mitigation"…) must be fully part of IA practice.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Recognize that planning and management are going to play a key role in delivering desired socio-economic (and biophysical) outcomes.
            • Adopt socio-economic management plans, planning and initiatives.

             

            Status of the IAIA climate change and impact assessment action

            Session chair(s):  Shirley Lee, Phil Byer, Arend Kolhoff, Peter Croal, West Fisher, Ana Maria Quintero
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • Limited resources (dedicated persons) to devote time and focused attention over annually- agreed recommended action:  progress appeared less than desirable.
            • IA practitioners (who value EIA/SEA and other IA processes and their impact and contribution to combat climate change) have an imminent need to establish contact and dialogue with other "climate change scientists" outside of IAIA, as the latter do not fully understand the role and benefit of IA on climate change actions.

            What needs to be done:

            • Quickly (i.e., within 2017 and before Durban IAIA) to convene a forum for IA practitioners of IAIA to meet, communicate with the other climate change scientists, aiming to improve mutual understanding, acceptance, and to allow exploring opportunities for collaboration.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • The current disregard on the part of UNCCC officials and other "climate change scientists" and experts of the capacity of various IA processes to contribute positively and significantly in the combat on climate change consequences should be resolved ASAP in order to facilitate process to next actions/initiatives of the climate change section of IAIA.

            Recommendations for IA practitioners:

            • IA practitioners should actively seek to engage and convince other climate change scientists in order to optimize the use of various IA tools, e.g., via "internal guidelines/requirements" to benefit IAIA in the combat over climate change-induced risk and disasters.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Discussion to consider key stakeholders to be "climate change scientists" extend to IAIA (some attended the roundtable) including meteorologists and UNCCC officials who currently put IA tools on a low value platform and do not recognize IA tools as effective toward climate change solutions. They need to switch mindset and IAIA should be proactively pursuing this.

             

            Sustainable infrastructure: Lessons learned from IAIA Panama Symposium

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Dave Blaha
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • Constructing sustainable infrastructure.

            What needs to be done: 

            • Better strategic planning by host governments with support from MDBs.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Better located and more sustainable infrastructure.

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Location of project really matters, so that decision should not be left to the private sector.
            • Need to be more proactive than reactive.
            • More rigorously apply the mitigation hierarchy.
            • Find creative solutions that minimize project footprints
            • Think full life cycle of project.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Emphasis on need for more strategic upstream planning by governments to guide infrastructure development.

             

            The challenges of renewable energy for biodiversity

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Emmanuel Boulet
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • How to achieve a win-win situation to ensure that development of renewable energy which is necessary in the global fight against climate change does not happen at the expense of biodiversity.

            What needs to be done:

            • Follow available best practices: choose carefully location to avoid impacts; apply mitigation hierarchy; compensate/offset residual impacts.

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Consider biodiversity impacts of renewable energy carefully; don't accept trade-off climate change vs. biodiversity; good practices for a net positive gain on biodiversity exist for most renewable energy technologies.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • As development of renewable energy scales up as one of the most cost-effective options to mitigate climate change, embed the mitigation hierarchy in the policy framework.

             

            The interplay between climate change and impacts assessments

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s): David Huard
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • Climate impacts analysis is too complex to be done by amateurs, especially when dealing with long-time horizons or rare extreme events. Successful impact analyses involve specialists able to make value judgements about the type of information to include and its interpretation.

            What needs to be done:

            • IA professionals need to either become better acquainted with climate science or obtain support from climate service providers. Governments should promote or facilitate the establishment of climate service providers that specialize in local and regional climate processes.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Better exploitation of climate information for all aspects of IA. Mitigation measures that are robust to climate change.

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Get professional support from climate service providers to inform the various climate-dependent analyses done in IA.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Mainstream climate change assessment, make it part of every long term planning process and keep it light.

             

            The role of impact assessment for smart cities

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s):  Andy Chung, Urmila Thakur
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • No strict requirements to undertake climate change impact assessment.
            • Not too easy to convince relevant parties / stakeholders the importance of IA in addressing climate change.
            • Climate change issues are much wider – spatially, temporally.

            What needs to be done:

            • Training, capacity building workshops with a lot of examples and showcases to illustrate how IA contribute and benefit climate change issues. By IAIA / local IA associations (observing local rules and regulations).

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Shall be able to raise awareness and place more emphasis on IA from climate change policies to project level.

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Be ready and equipped on integrating climate change issues in IA.

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • To learn more about the importance of IA in addressing climate change issues

             

            Traditional Knowledge and EA

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Michele Gilbert
            Current challenges and impacts:
            Communities see trends and cumulative effects as nonlinear and this needs to somehow be incorporated into IA.
            What needs to be done:

            • IA practitioners and communities need to come up with priorities together to determine impact indicators.
            • Governments that are signatories to UNDRIP need to ensure policies and processes in IA are aligned.

            Potential benefits and impacts:

            • Change to environment is not necessarily an environmental impact.

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Cultural impact assessment is a new and evolving component of IA that should be considered where relevant for studies.
            • Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:
            • Understand how to implement UNDRIP in environmental approval process.

             

            Uncertainties of climate futures in EA

            Name(s) of Session Chair(s): Caroline Aguti
            Current challenges and impacts:

            • None-inclusion of climate change analysis in project EIAs and manifestation of the impacts such as increased water level, salt water intrusion, impacts on the communities' livelihoods.
            • None-communication of climate change impacts to the stakeholders.

            What needs to be done:

            • Inclusion of climate change analysis in all projects analysis with scenario setting for the worst and best case scenarios.
            • Inclusion of communication strategies in EIAs

            Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners:

            • Inclusion of uncertainty and risk analysis in EIA reports/studies

            Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders:

            • Come up with Policies in Government that enable enforcement of integration and mainstreaming of climate change in projects and PPPs.
            • Develop models for climate change analysis
            • Collection of quantitative and qualitative data for climate analysis.

             

             

            Go Back