IAIA16 FINDINGS:  REPORTS FROM SESSION CHAIRS

 

ADVANCING EIA OUTCOMES AND PROCESSES THROUGH LEARNING-CENTERED PROCESSES (I)

 

Session Chair(s):  John Sinclair and Alan Diduck
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • Recognizing learning as a key outcome of IA and also as central to making decisions that have a sustainability orientation.
  • Learning reflects and builds adaptive capacity, which supports resilience. Learning and resilience are thus inextricably linked but it is an ongoing challenge to get broad support in practice for learning-centered approaches to IA.
  • The “worst IA clients” are the least inclined to learn from IA experiences or be interested in learning-centered approaches to IA. It is imperative develop ways to get them going.

 

What needs to be done

  • A better understanding of what we want to achieve and what is being done now on the ground.
  • Highlight the efficiency gains (e.g., from reduced conflict) and improved effectiveness (e.g., from access to local knowledge) that can be captured from learning-centered approaches.
  • Less information out and more opportunities for all participants to dialogue.
  • Bring the focus of this dialogue to critical factors and key impact issues.
  • Promote the use of ways that people can learn together.
  • Establish a learning cycle in and for IA.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Increase the probability of moving forward with the best alternative in the least impactful way possible, while reducing potential of project delays and court challenges. Efficiency gains from implementing lessons from past experience through a learning-centered approach.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Sell the benefits of learning for decision processes and outcomes.
  • Recognize that we (IA practitioners) may not be the best placed people to do the “selling” – others may be better suited to share important messages with all stakeholders.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Recognize that IA has great potential to be learning oriented and encourage the adoption of learning-centered processes (e.g., meaningful participation, deliberative social learning forums).
  • Require better reporting in EISs and other IA documents of social learning forums if they are undertaken.
  • Develop tools to make it easier for stakeholders to share information thus ensuring that it becomes part of the institutional memory of IA.
  • Engage in “regulatory push-back” if there are if parties – particularly proponents – who are not cooperating. Require them to get into a room and talk to each other.

 

AS GOOD AS IT GETS. WORKING TOWARDS QUALITY IN IMPACT ASSESSMENT (I-III)

Session Chair(s):  Ben Cave, Rob Verheem, Alan Bond, Vincent Onyango
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • Variation in the ways that the quality of an impact assessment is understood and in the ways that the term is used.

 

What needs to be done

  • Better communication of the aspects that make up quality in impact assessment.
  • Analysis/exploration of, and debate, about the aspects of quality in impact assessment.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Improved communication of the value of impact assessments to the organizations and institutions that engage in or use impact assessment.
  • Improved practice in impact assessment.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • The quality of an impact assessment is not defined solely by the quality of its documentation.

 

ASEAN EIA UPDATE AND ROUNDTABLE
             

Session Chair(s): Matthew Baird
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • Massive infrastructure spending within ASEAN. Different levels of experience and capacity in applying EIA systems. Myanmar just adopted EIA yet has $48 billion of pledged investment.

 

What needs to be done

  • Options include greater use of Ministry to Ministry cooperation in EIA (based on the AECEN model). Perhaps this needs to have a clear agreement between the Ministries.
  • Bringing EIA Practice and Procedure to the ASEAN senior environment officers meetings and continuing the regional EIA Directors meetings. This will promote sharing between government ministries. This has been successful in Central American countries with support from USEPA.
  • The Regional Technical Working Group on EIA initiative of the Mekong Partnership for the Environment by PACT with USAID funding brings together NGO and Government. This is a very exciting initiative.
  • All of these activities may then lead to an ASEAN Framework Agreement on EIA Principles and Practices.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Benefits for industry and IA practitioners in making the system more accessible and harmonized between countries. NGOs and the community will benefit from the EIA Guidelines on Public Participation and Access to Information.
  • Governments will benefit by attracting more sustainable investments.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Support the expansion of AECEN to include EIA and promote sharing of information and best practice in EIA at the EIA Director-General level.
  • Continue to support the development of the Mekong Regional Guidelines on Public Participation and Access to Information in EIA.
  • Provide support for emerging EIA systems, such as Myanmar.
  • Further discussion and examination of an ASEAN Framework Agreement on EIA Principles and Practice.

 

ASIA DAY – THE ROLE OF SAFEGUARDS IN SUPPORTING PPP IN ASIA          

Session Chair(s):  Peter Leonard

Current challenges and impacts

  • There are legislative and policy challenges posed by the use of new approaches to supporting development, and use of Public–Private Partnerships in a number of sectors.

 

What needs to be done

  • To better understand the approaches of safeguards of various MDBs and value of implementing these safeguards, particularly for private sector projects.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Both the public and private sectors have a significant role to play. Strengthening PPP will promote sustainable development and infrastructure building.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Let all appreciate the importance of partnership in safeguards practices.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • The public and private sector may have different priorities and issues. It is important to make the best out of these sectors.

 

ASIA DAY – SUPPORTING COUNTRIES IN THE USE OF SEA AND CIA IN ASIA
              

Session Chair(s):  Peter Leonard

Current challenges and impacts

  • There has been an increasing use of SEA and CIA in Asia. More and more countries have developed the legislative framework for their implementation. There is significant variation among countries in the capacity in undertaking these assessments.

 

What needs to be done

  • Training and technical support for countries in Asia to develop the legislative framework for implementing SEA and CIA and for practitioners to master the techniques.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Many of the projects in Asia are large in scale, complex in nature and may also transcend political boundaries. SEA and CIA can help ensure all social, environmental and sustainability issues are adequately addressed.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Experience sharing and capacity building.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Need to provide technical assistance and build capacity for countries in need.

 

ASIA DAY – CAPACITY BUILDING AND COUNTRY SYSTEMS I AND II
             

Session Chair(s):  Peter Leonard

Current challenges and impacts

  • The meeting undertook a broad overview of capacity building and country systems in Asia. It was recognized that while good progress has been made, there is still a significant need to continue to support well designed and effectively implemented institutional strengthening and capacity development activities.

 

What needs to be done

  • There is a need to showcase good safeguards practices and to develop the methodology for undertaking the country safeguards system survey. Experience sharing among countries is also important.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • The country safeguards system survey will help identify the strengths and weaknesses of various systems and indicate areas which warrant attention and support. All these will result in the strengthening of country systems and their harmonization with policies of various MDBs. 

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Based on the finding concerning strengths and weaknesses, practitioners can focus on those aspects which warrant strengthening and assistance.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • To provide technical assistance and capacity strengthening for countries to undertake the country safeguards system survey.

 

ASIA DAY: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS’ FORUM

Session Chair(s):  Sachihiko Harashina, Stephen F. Lintner, Wendy Emerton, Mark Kunzer; and Peter Leonard

A major highlight was the signing the “Principles of Collaboration for Country Safeguards Systems” by ADB, DFAT, JICA and the World Bank.

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Recognize the importance of long-term engagement in institutional strengthening and capacity building to support the “use of country systems” by multilateral development banks and bilateral donors.
  • Recognize, in some cases, the significant gaps in the borrowing countries current institutional environmental and social arrangements and capacity in relation to the requirements of international and bilateral financial institutions.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders
 

  • Measures should be taken to develop improved models for addressing environmental and social risks in the context of Public-Private Partnership projects.
  • The “Use of Country Systems” for environmental and social assessment by multilateral development banks and bilateral donors for development finance will require sustained and well targeted investments in institutional strengthening and capacity building over the medium and long-term.

 

ASIAN SEA, EIA AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICE ASSESSMENT: EIA AND SEA (I)

Session Chair(s):  Oyunaa Lkhagvasuren, Zhilan Lin

Current challenges and impacts

  • Socio-political situation in Hong Kong is not favorable for sustainability of its people, public management is going down, people feel low trust in its government.
  • People who are living in wind turbines plants area are not content.
  • Although China’s EIA guidelines have comply with recommended risk assessment process but there is a need to strengthen some guidelines.

 

What needs to be done

  • Strengthen guidelines on risk assessment, EIA, conduct EIA prior the beginning of the project.

 

ASIAN SEA, EIA, AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICE ASSESSMENT: EIA AND SEA (II)
             

Session Chair(s): Myungjin Kim

Current challenges and impacts

  • Different tools and understanding of resilience and sustainability depends on countries.

 

What needs to be done

  • Exchange of experiences of R and S in impact assessment

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Understanding of IA: resilience and sustainability.
  • Knowledge sharing of stakeholders (public, decision makers and EIA practitioners).

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Exchange of practical implementation tools

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Knowledge, understanding, and necessary awareness of coming issues

 

ASIAN SEA, EIA, AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICE ASSESSMENT: EIA AND SEA (III)

Session Chair(s): Myungjin Kim

Current challenges and impacts

  • Different tools and understanding depends on countries and lack of resilience and sustainability definitions.

 

What needs to be done

  • Exchange of experiences of and resilience sustainability in impact assessment.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Understanding of IA: resilience and sustainability.
  • Knowledge sharing of stakeholders (public, decision makers and EIA practitioners).

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Ecchange of practical implementation tools.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Knowledge, understanding, and necessary awareness of coming issues.

 

ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WITH COMPLIANCE GAPS

Session Chair(s): Yuan Xu, Zhenzhong Yang

Current challenges and impacts

  • Impact assessment processes and the expected impacts could run into serious challenges if entities were not under compliance. The compliance gaps could threaten resilience and sustainability.

 

What needs to be done

  • We need to consider compliance gaps better in impact assessment in order to enhance compliance and really mitigate/avoid environmental impacts.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • The expected control on impacts could be actually achieved but not run into unexpected negative outcomes.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • We should review the compliance assumptions we make in impact assessment.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Policy makers and stakeholders should pay more attention to compliance gaps. Full consideration should be given on the compliance incentives for entities.

 

BIODIVERSITY OFFSETS: THE ASIAN EXPERIENCE (I AND II)

Session Chair(s):  Vinod Mathur, Asha Rajvanshi

Current challenges and impacts

  • Conceptual framework for biodiversity offsetting needs re-visiting.
  • Good examples of biodiversity offsets in different landscapes not easily available/accessible.
  • No consensus on whether legal instrument(s) for biodiversity offsetting needed or not.

 

What needs to be done

  • IAIA-led working group should re-visit the conceptual framework.
  • BBOP and other Biodiversity Offset databases to be created/populated with both good and bad examples.
  • Experiences of “Voluntary Offsetting” to be shared within Offset Community/Practitioners.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Biodiversity offsets offer a good way forward but can also become “controversial.”
  • Due diligence is required in evaluating offsetting proposals.
  • Compliance monitoring needs to be strengthened at the country level.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • The impact assessment practitioners should form a working group to re-view and re-visit the conceptual framework for biodiversity offsetting based on the numerous but scattered examples of biodiversity offsetting in different landscapes and address all issues that relate to mismatching between offset theory and practice.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • The policy makers may consider the pros and cons of setting up an “Independent Board/Body” of professionals to advise, guide and review the biodiversity offsets with a mandate to impose penalties if there is any gap/inadequacy and lack in the application of the biodiversity offset and to ensure that “no net loss” has occurred and “net positive gain” has occurred.

 

BUSINESS AND HUMAN RIGHTS: WHERE TO NOW?

Session Chair(s):  Sara Bice

We discussed progress in human rights legislation, world-wide, and the panel agreed that it is highly likely that we will see more formalized regulation and higher thresholds for human rights in coming years.

The Danish Human Rights Institute cautioned against human rights impact assessments (HRIA) that are either cursory or “tick box” in nature, noting wide variations in what corporations were claiming constituted a HRIA: from a 2-week desktop research study to an 18-month full-scale supply chain investigation. They were critical of limited approaches and noted the need for strong HRIA standards to ensure that firms are unable to claim human rights legitimacy when only paying lip service to human rights.

The Danish Human Rights Institute's case study of a multi-stakeholder HRIA demonstrated the importance of broad ownership over the process, including development of the IA plan. The case study also demonstrated the value of flexibility in method, including consideration of language. In places like Myanmar, for example, a HRIA would be deemed too threatening to both the government and proponents so language and indicators were tempered. While this is not an ideal situation, the Institute argued that it is better to get human rights on the agenda to some degree and work slowly to eventually reach a more thorough assessment, than to have no assessment at all.

BUILDING EXCELLENCE IN IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Session Chair(s):  Charlotte Bingham

Messages on theme

  • Training is necessary for sustainable assessment practices.
  • Stakeholder engagement needed.
  • Community empowerment sustains stewardship of environment.

 

Recommendations for practitioners

  • Use ESIA as tool for mainstreaming health analyses and mitigation.
  • Use guidance for hydro projects and others to allow comprehensive impact assessment.
  • Involve stakeholders.
  • Examine links of environmental and social impacts, which result in indirect effects.

 

Recommendations for policy makers

  • Monitor effectiveness of mitigation measures.
  • Integrate environment and social concerns into ESIA.

 

BUILDING RESILIENCE FOR LONG-TERM WELLBEING

Session Chair(s):  Yoichi Kumagai, Maria Partidario, Daniella Ramirez-Sfeir

Current challenges and impacts

  • There are issues regarding “who does what for whom in terms of long-term wellbeing.” Sometimes it is between social and natural scientists, scientists and non-scientists, experts and non-experts (mostly local residents), project-based and strategy-based, engineering-driven and more nature-driven (giving more room for the force of nature), shorter-term and longer-term, smaller (human and community) scale and larger (city and nation) scale.

 

What needs to be done

  • It is important to always remember that there are these differences when we talk about long-term wellbeing.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • It enables discussion among different interests, as long as there is agreement about issues.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • It is important to think about how to deal with different definition of concept (long-term wellbeing), and try not to fight in a small field of assessment people over what approach is dominating (especially when the difference would be marginal, commonly looking for long-term wellbeing).

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • It is important to always remember that there are these differences when we talk about long-term wellbeing.

 

CONTRIBUTION OF SEA AND EIA TO RESILIENT PPP

Session Chair(s): Akiko Urago

Current challenges and impacts

  • It is a bit difficult to conduct cumulative impact assessment by a single project.
  • It is a bit difficult to get wide area habitat information and distribution information of specific species in single EIA study.
  • It is a bit difficult to identify the recoverable environmental damage for some species and carrying capacity of the area in single EIA study.
  • Sustainability of the category B projects cannot be well secured because the time and budget is very limited.

 

What needs to be done

  • Establish an organization which centralizes environmental data by government, universities, EIA study, monitoring study, and NGOs in limited areas such as watershed or island.
  • Information sharing among stakeholders.
  • Free access to the impact simulation software.
  • Continuous data analysis for resilience of the species and carrying capacity at Environmental Information Center at the area.
  • Minimum standard budget and time for category B should be given by some kind of authority.
  • Giving final assessment work and biological assessment work to the Environmental Information Center.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Based on the centralized database, we will be able to take precautions before some species become extinct.
  • Working with Environmental Information Center, the reliability of the prediction will be higher.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Do not accept work which is given too small budget and limited time.
  • Work with the area-specific organizations to identify the limit of the resilience during impact assessment.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders   

  • Establish some kinds of Environmental Information Centers by area and give some analysis work to identify the carrying capacity and recoverable environmental damage.

 

Other comments

  • Physical impact such as air quality, noise, or water is a bit easy for consultants who are not familiar with the area. But the biological impact, especially for the cumulative impact or identification of the recoverable environmental damage, is very difficult for consultants who are not familiar with the area. The requirement to the biological impact assessment by one consultant is too heavy.

 

COUNTRY EXPERIENCES WITH OIL SPILLS AND THE RESILIENCE OF ECOSYSTEMS

Session Chair(s): Svein Grotli Skogen / Arne Dalfelt

Current challenges and impacts

  • Securing local content, and securing tribal peoples’ rights.

 

What needs to be done

  • Communication with, and listening to, the local communities’ needs.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Communities’ collaboration and support for better and sustainable projects.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Pay attention to local communities’ needs and wishes.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders
 

  • Pay attention to intangible values.

 

CULTURAL HERITAGE: DISASTER PLANNING, MITIGATION, AND RESPONSE

Session Chair(s):    Hidefumi Kurasaka

Current challenges and impacts

  • During this session several new notions on IA as Heritage Impact Assessment and Asset-Based Community Development are introduced.

 

What needs to be done

  • We should keep enough considerations on these new notions.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • If the notion “sustainability” includes social aspects, to keep sustainability we need to give enough attentions to these new ideas.

 

DEVELOPMENTS AND TRENDS IN HIA AND HEALTH IN EA IN ASIA AND PACIFIC REGIONS

Session Chair(s): Robert Bos, Salim Vohra

Current challenges and impacts

  • Health is a pre-requisite, objective, and outcome of sustainable development. Health is not everything, but without health everything else is nothing.

 

What needs to be done

  • Embed community health with more purpose in impact assessments and recognize that health is more than control of pollution.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Healthy communities are more productive economically, more likely to live in balance with their ecosystems and have be more socially cohesive.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Embed community health with more purpose in impact assessments and recognize that health is more than control of pollution.

 

DISASTERS, CONFLICT AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Session Chair(s):  C. Kelly

Current challenges and impacts

  • Getting sufficient attention to impact assessment as part of conflict and disaster management.

What needs to be done

  • Raise additional awareness; engage sources of funding on risks of failing to consider IA, and benefits associated with considering IA.

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Reduce suffering, more efficient assistance and short and long term positive impacts from assistance linked to conflicts or disasters.

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Adopt available tools and procedures for considering disaster/conflict impacts.

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders 

  • Consider negative consequences of not assessing impacts and accountability for such failures.

ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Session Chair(s): Galina Williams

Current challenges and impacts

  • While economic impact assessment is limited to reporting output, employment, and income multipliers in many cases, there are many economic impact assessment tools that have not been extensively used in practice.

 

What needs to be done

  • Improve economic impact assessment practice and guidelines.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Better impact assessment will allow better mitigation of negative and enhancing positive impacts.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • There is a common socio-economic data collection stage. The need for more collaboration among all impact assessment disciplines.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders   

  • Better TOR for economic impact assessment.

 

EIA AND MONITORING PROTOCOLS FOR SEABED MINING IN DEEP-SEA ENVIRONMENTS

Session Chair(s): Hiroyuki Yamamoto

Current challenges and impacts

  • Seabed mining is potential risk yet, because no commercial based seabed mining started. EIA and EMP for deep-sea mining are recognized as an upcoming issue in our oceans and a key component for ensuring the technique establishment for effective management of deep-sea ecosystems. Japan, South Pacific Countries and EU conduct the nation projects to establish the protocol for sustainable development.

 

What needs to be done

  • Practical protocols and socio-economic study should be done soon.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • The techniques for effective management of marine ecosystem are potential benefit, because the techniques for deep-sea can be adopted any EIA case of marine habitats.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Deep-sea is a remote area from human residents, but the ecosystem services from deep-sea should be considered in the context of long-term interrelations.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Policy makers are recognized future issues on seabed mining. In 2015, the leader’s declaration from the G7 summit in Germany identified the conducting of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and scientific research as a priority issue for sustainable deep-sea mining. In 2016, the World Bank released a report on “Pacific Possible as Precautionary Management of Deep Sea Mining Potential in Pacific Island Countries.” Next step is practical frame of technology and knowledge transfer from scientific community to private sectors and developing countries.

 

ETHICAL DILEMMAS IN IMPACT ASSESSMENT
             

Session Chair(s):  Marla Orenstein
 
Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Understand that ethics is not black and white and that there are many grey areas and unique situations.

 

HABITAT AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION AS AN IMPACT MITIGATION OPTIONS
             

Session Chair(s):  Agi Kiss, Jing Fang

Current challenges and impacts

  • It is not always possible to avoid destruction or degradation of habitats/biodiversity in the course of pursuing economic development goals. Decisions on whether to proceed can depend in part on whether it is believed that the damage can be repaired at a later point through ecological restoration measures. Ecological restoration of degraded areas elsewhere (outside a project’s direct “Area of Influence”) can also play a role in “offsetting” of habitat/biodiversity losses.  However, the specific objectives of “restoration” are not always clear and the effectiveness of restoration actions can be hard to predict. 

 

What needs to be done

  • For a specific development project where ecological restoration is proposed as part of an environmental/social mitigation plan:    
  • Clarify the goals of the restoration actions, – e.g.,  to return to the previously existing state (same biological community, habitat features, etc.), vs. establishing a different but ecologically stable state that generates most or all of the same ecological services (aesthetic quality, water and food supply, climate moderation, etc.). Some participants proposed referring to the former as “restoration” and the latter as “rehabilitation.”
  • Make realistic estimates of and provisions for the potential costs and time that may be required to achieve the objectives.
  • Establish suitable baselines reflecting the goals, and put in place effective monitoring to determine whether and when the objectives have been achieved.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Clarifying restoration objectives and improving our understanding of what types of restoration can be achieved under which conditions and with what cost and timeframe will help improve our ability to make sound decisions regarding the sustainability of proposed development activities.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • See “What needs to be done” above.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Use public consultations to clarify ecological restoration goals. Recognize that true ecological restoration is not always possible or, if possible can be prohibitively costly or take a very long time to achieve. Support long term monitoring and adaptive management to maximize likelihood of successful restoration/rehabilitation.

 

HEALTH AND WELLBEING IN INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING: HOW DOES IA FIT?

Session Chair(s):  Geetha Ramesh and Salim Vohra
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • Health continues to be a major challenge and important to include health and wellbeing (H&W) can be better included in infrastructure planning and approvals through impact assessment (IA) for better resilience and sustainability.

 

What needs to be done

  • From a public health perspective, this lack of concrete boundaries and catch-all objective challenges the way H&W is routinely positioned in infrastructure planning and approvals.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Infrastructure is critical to sustainable community development and future well-being of any community and IA is used as the mechanism for ensuring sustainable infrastructure.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Though currently health assessment is necessary for infrastructure projects its does not fully consider health and wellbeing and the methods and process for doing so are still in infancy and not institutionalized. Hence need to incorporate it as part of the routine process.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Consideration of health and wellbeing including health equity, may pose a challenge to the fundamental purposes of, and public and private sector drivers for, infrastructure investment however inclusion of the same will reduce uncertainties and provide overall project benefits and losses which will be essential for planning.

 

HOW TO ENHANCE EIA IN ASIA           

Session Chair(s):Kenichiro Yanagi
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • The value of continuing communication and cooperation among the participants through as an Asia EIA network and IAIA conference was shared by participants.

 
What needs to be done

  • The same as above.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Impact assessment dealing with the concept of Resilience & Sustainability is a complicated issue, so it is important to develop the assessments.

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • The speakers recognized there are several emerging issues including cumulative impacts SDGs, climate change and biodiversity, and acknowledged the need to explore these issues further in the field of EIA.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders 

  • As transboundary effect is also critical in Asian region, cooperative action among related countries would be requires.

 

IFIS ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS: RESILIENCE AND SUSTAINABILITY 
              

Session Chair(s): Alfredo Abad, Dingding Tang
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • The Independent Accountability Mechanisms (IAMs) of the IFIs are fundamental to reestablish trust with the people and communities affected in projects whose impacts and mitigating measures were not properly identified or implemented.
  • However, IFIs Public accountability rights are not well known by affected communities.

 

What needs to be done

  • Keep communities and affected people informed of their rights to be heard by IFIs IAM when projects impacts have not been properly designed or are poorly implemented. IFIs IAMs are a last resort redress mechanism, but nevertheless, need to be embedded as part of the possible grievance redress mechanisms of the projects.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • The independent E&S Compliance reviews carried out by the IAMs provide a thorough analysis of issues to be considered; in addition, most of the IAMs embed problem-solving tools with the objective to resolve the problems identified and reestablish the trust between the different parties of the project.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Spend time at project preparation and be vigilant during project implementation.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • It is important to engage with people and communities affected at an early stage and involve them in the design of projects. Designing effective and independent redress mechanisms at project level is essential to ensure the resilience of the project.

 

IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR SMART CITIES 

Session Chair(s): AC Chung

Current challenges and impacts

  • While there are sustainability policies in many countries, there are no clear drivers to develop a more focused resilience plan.

 

What needs to be done

  • Capacity building on the subject of resilience.
  • More experience sharing and international benchmarking.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Moving toward a more sustainable and carbon-neutral world while making our cities smarter.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Start to identify aspects and indicators relating to resilience plans.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Start to assess needs and identify resources for resilience action plans.
  • Incorporate as part of the Smart City initiatives.

 

IMPROVING CONFIDENCE IN BIODIVERSITY BASELINE STUDIES

Session Chair(s):  Mervyn Mason

Current challenges and impacts

  • No consistent approach to incorporation of resilience within impact assessment.

 

What needs to be done

  • Define resilience and sustainability in the context of a project-specific EIA.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • With a definition, practitioners will have a consistent basis from which to work.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Reconnect with the concept of sustainability assessment. Although the word is tired, the concept is not. After all, impact assessment in its purest form is a sustainability assessment.

 

INDIGENOUS CULTURAL LANDSCAPES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Session Chair(s):  Patricia McCormack

Current challenges and impacts

  • Finding ways for IA to incorporate or at least acknowledge the ways in which Indigenous people require a land base for cultural and individual resilience and sustainability of their cultures.

What needs to be done

  • Additional focus on intangible aspects and serious work for SIA.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Indigenous stakeholders will feel more included in the IA process and less marginalized.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Build collaborative relationships with Indigenous communities.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders

  • Allow adequate time and funding – both too limited now.
  • Stop treating SIA as insignificant compared to bio-physical considerations.

 

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE, IA AND RESILIENCE

Session Chair(s):  Marc Dunn, Angeles Mendoza Sammet, Kepa Morgan

Current challenges and impacts

  • Impact assessment processes are not contributing to maintain or enhance the resilience of indigenous communities.

 

What needs to be done

  • Promote different approaches to integrate communities throughout the assessment process as experts on how the project will affect them and what type of mitigations will be needed.
  • Understand that the concept of resilience has different meaning for different sectors of the society, for the environment and for the project, therefore it cannot be applied in a single way and IA needs to integrate those different perspectives.
  • IA report results need to be communicated in clear and simple way for indigenous communities.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Many benefits from changing the approach and continuation of impacts for communities and more risk for companies if the approach does not change.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Understand that the concept of resilience has different meaning for different sectors of the society, for the environment and for the project, therefore it cannot be applied in a single way and IA needs to integrate those different perspectives.
  • Promote different approaches to integrate communities throughout the assessment process as experts on how the project will affect them and what type of mitigations will be needed.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • To prevent the impacts on indigenous people, the impact assessment process needs to have a community focus and not a project focus.
  • Proponents need to be more aware that not engaging indigenous and other communities from the beginning represents more cost in time and money, not only from the delays in project  but also because of the ineffectiveness of mitigations and the cost associated.

 

INNOVATIVE COMMUNICATION OF PROJECT AND IMPACTS

Session Chair(s):  Margret Arnardottir, Runar Dyrmundur Bjarnason

Current challenges and impacts
 

  • Engagement of all stakeholders in the IA process.
  • IA reports are very technical and long thus not reaching the general public.

What needs to be done
 

  • Look for more innovative approaches to communicate the results of project impacts to all stakeholders.

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Social acceptance of projects

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Be creative, engage more people in the process by using new ways of communication, e.g.,  as done by the National Power Company of Iceland: http://burfellwindfarm.landsvirkjun.com/

 

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INDICATORS

Session Chair(s):  Kenichiro Yanagi

Current challenges and impacts

  • Public participation is a broad concept of impact assessment. We need to look at more specific indicators and concepts to be developed.

 

What needs to be done

  • The same as above.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Impact assessment dealing with the concept of resilience and sustainability is a complicated issue. So it is important to develop the assessments; guidelines are how we can do that.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • They have done very well with action, and we keep updating more information and data that can be useful in the future.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders 

  • They have also done well; however, need to understand the scale and governance in terms of successful outcomes of their activities.

 

JICA’S LEADERSHIP IN IMPACT ASSESSMENT CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT
             

Session Chair(s): Yoshio Wada

Current challenges and impacts

  • JICA enacts international-level Guidelines which stipulate the methodology of impact assessment required for the JICA-funded projects in the developing countries. In accordance with the Guidelines, JICA takes the outcomes of its environmental reviews into account when making decisions regarding the conclusion of agreement documents.
  • Since the requirements under the Guidelines will be undertaken by the project proponents under the domestic legal framework basically, whether the impact assessment of a project is appropriately implemented depends on the capacity of the recipient countries in a broader sense.
  • Especially in the case of infrastructure projects, the environmental and social impacts may last during a whole and long project life cycle. The capacity of the developing countries is a very important factor for sustainable development from a safeguard point of view.

 

What needs to be done
 

  • Capacity development of project proponents, such as implementing government agencies and private entities, and environmental authorities of the governments, is necessary for the proper implementation of impact assessment.
  • Since the capacity building is a wide-range and long-term process and effort, one institution cannot cover all of the demands. The coordination and collaboration among the donors, NGOs, academic, and governments of the developing countries in this field is important.

Potential benefits and impacts

  • World Bank, ADB, and other donor agencies as well as JICA are now promoting enhancement of country safeguard systems. Since capacity development is one of the essential components under the initiative, efforts for the capacity development can contribute to use of the country safeguard systems for donor-funded projects.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • The practitioners always need to have in mind that impact assessment is a tool handled by the one who implement the project, and to pay attention to the capacity of the implementer.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • The rules and procedures for impact assessment have been well developed for most of the developing countries. In order to make them workable, capacity building accompanied by the appropriate human and financial resource allocations is required.

 

ODA AND THE ROLE OF IA FOR SUSTAINABILITY
             

Session Chair(s):  Jong-Gwan Jung

Current challenges and impacts

  • Different understanding of sustainability implementation along generic criteria which is not necessarily context-specific for resilience and sustainability.
  • Insufficient public consultation and information disclosure.

 

What needs to be done

  • Better implementation and policy amendment (capacity development, awareness raising, additional resources).
  • Shaping contextually-adapted frameworks for sustainability.
  • Operationalizing the sustainability in ODA projects for donor country implementers and recipient local communities.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Shaping good governance for SDGs achievement in the context of resilience and sustainability.
  • Reduction of social cost due to conflict among the stakeholders (public, local governments, decision makers and practitioners).

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Learn from experiences exchange of practical implementation.
  • Making good governance for effective performance of ODA projects.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Knowledge sharing and awareness-raising of safeguard policies of international institutions for ODA implementation.
  • Effective SA in development cooperation.

 

OIL POLLUTION AND GAS LEAKAGES

 Session Chair(s): Morgan Hauptfleisch and Peter Croal (debate)

Current challenges and impacts

  • Practitioners in developing oil and gas nations often feel isolated when trying to assess and manage environmental impacts.

 

What needs to be done

  • Partnerships are a key intervention. Partnering with government, academia and the NGO sector can enhance the role environmental practitioners have.

 

 Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Partnerships are important tools for dealing with EA challenges. Often developers isolate themselves in trying to address challenges. The industry was advised to look at a few examples of public/private partnerships which have helped with environmental challenges in the past.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders   

  • NGOs need not always be opposed to business. Examples such as the BBOP (Business and Biodiversity Offsets Program) can be studied in this respect.

OIL POLLUTION AND GAS LEAKAGES (I)

Session Chair(s): Morgan Hauptfleisch and Bryony Walmsley

Current challenges and impacts

  • Negotiating development impacts is a delicate challenge. EIA practitioners often struggle to balance the expectations of developers, their shareholders, communities, and environmental NGOs.

 

What needs to be done

  • Public participation needs to ensure that all parties get an opportunity to state their case, without being manipulated by other groups. The types of public participation forums need to be carefully considered.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Negotiation skills need to become part of the skill-set for EIA practitioners, especially in the oil and gas sector.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders   

  • To be effective, public participation needs to be driven by experienced negotiators; otherwise it can easily be manipulated. Ensuring that policy makes provision for and monitors effective public participation is key.

 

OIL POLLUTION AND GAS LEAKAGES (II)

Session Chair(s): Peter Tarr and Bryony Walmsley

Current challenges and impacts

  • Oil spills have mega impacts, whether a once-off event or slow leaks over many years. The impacts are ecological, social, and economic. Usually, proponents and communities have an adversarial relationship. Lack of trust is common.

 

What needs to be done

  • When planning a response to oil spills, consider equally technological and societal solutions. We rely disproportionately on technology, but we ignore local knowledge and community structures. Ecological impacts are one thing, but we often fail to consider social impacts. These can often be in evidence for much longer periods than ecological impacts.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Don’t complicate things. Keep it simple. Try always to understand and explain the big picture. Use SEA as often as possible. Keep a good balance between ecological and social impacts.

 

PERFORMANCE AND INNOVATION IN RESETTLEMENT AND LIVELIHOODS RESTORATION

Session Chair(s):  Ikuko Matsumoto
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • Livelihood restoration on resettlement.
  • Benefit sharing for project affected peoples.
  • Integration of right based approaches for involuntary resettlement.

 

What needs to be done

  • Resettlement should be considered as integral part of the project, enhancing its development impacts.
  • Integration of rights based approach for resettlement including right to access to natural resources, water, foods and others; rights to access to information; children’s rights for education and future opportunities.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Improvement of involuntary resettlement.
  • Benefit sharing for project affected peoples.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Strengthening regulations and policies regarding involuntary resettlement.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • Integration of rights based approach for resettlement including right to access to natural resources, water, foods and others; rights to access to information; children’s rights for education and future opportunities.
  • Resettlement should be considered as integral part of the project, enhancing its development impacts.

 

PLANNING FOR DISASTER DEBRIS

Session Chair(s): Karl Kim, Van Romero, Eric Yamashita, Kiyomi Kawamoto, Kay Bergamini

Current challenges and impacts
 

  • Disasters are increasing in frequency, intensity, and costs; major concerns related to management of disaster debris; impedes response and recovery; longer term concerns regarding public health and environment; need to enhance impact assessment and pathways for integrating EA, debris management, and resilience.

What needs to be done
 

  • Better understanding of complex, cascading events, integration of SEA as well as land use planning and hazard mitigation; need new tools and approaches for rapid debris damage assessment integrated with GIS, HAZUS, crowdsourcing, and new technologies; establishment of triggers for disaster debris; more guidance with respect to streamlining, fast-tracking some reviews but also maintaining and expand EA following disasters with an emphasis on debris management; need to encourage recycling as well as other strategies for reducing and re-using disaster waste. Need to enhance training and capacity building related to debris management planning at both strategic and operational levels.

Potential benefits and impacts
 

  • Environmental protection, building capacity, linkages between natural, economic, and social capital.

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Share examples and best practices of debris management plans; demonstrate the value of pre-event planning coordinate both strategic as well as operational tactics; promote a culture of environmental assessment especially  related to debris management issues:  classification of debris, temporary storage sites, separation/sorting, transport, recycling/reduction, waste-to-energy, and landfilling. Share guidance on hazardous materials as well as use of rubble for reclamation, raising baseline flood elevations, and other strategies for risk reduction.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders   

  • Invest in training and capacity building on debris management, environmental assessment, and land use planning to reduce disaster risks and increase resilience; foster stronger integration between sustainability and resilience programs; identify opportunities for waste trading (recognizing the problems associated with the flow of waste from wealthier countries with stronger environmental regulations to poorer countries with weaker environmental controls; build risk reduction, hazard mitigation, and climate adaptation into debris management and recovery planning.

 

POVERTY, INEQUALITY AND RESILIENCE
             

Session Chair(s):  Riki Therivel

Current challenges and impacts

  • “Success begets success” and its counterpart “poverty begets poverty” – how difficult it is to move people out of poverty.
  • Poor people cannot be “made resilient” solely from the bottom up. We need to tackle top-down inequalities, e.g., small farmers bear the costs of environmental problems (e.g., droughts) while the international corporations who buy their products don’t.
  • Lack of clarity about what is resilience and how to promote it.

 

What needs to be done

  • The biggie: tackle the global market-based system, i.e., make the polluter pay (including fair wages).
  • Tackle climate change, which will disproportionately affect poor people.

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Consider the interaction between environmental and social impacts more.
  • The political structure (e.g., large corporations holding a lot of power but not really being socially/environmentally accountable) helps to foster NON-resilience. Can this be changed?
  • Not sure that impact assessment is the correct ‘scale’ at which to tackle resilience. Resilience seems to be at the individual level (too small for IA) or at the social level (too big for anything except policy SEA).

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • The trend towards globalization, free market, capitalism/wealth creation is making us increasingly NON-resilient.

 

PUTTING OUT THE FIRE WITH GASOLINE: LOGISTIC SECRETS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION P EVENTS
             

Session Chair(s):  Timothy Peirson-Smith, Chris Wong
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • In terms of public participation, events may sometimes be hijacked by the minorities for “grandstanding” and thus amplifying their voice. It has greatly impacted the balance of voice to be heard by the organizer/stakeholders. Another point of challenge concerns the independence of PP events. It is often seen that PE events are organized by the proponents or the consultants they hired. They also prepare all project information and presentations for the events, and it undermines the effectiveness of PE events. Furthermore, as pointed by one of the participants, there is no shortage of technique, but a shortage of the right use of technique.

 

What needs to be done

     Innovative ideas for future PE events. They include:

  • The Netherlands: Playing “games” as a form of consultation.
  • Hong Kong: 3D consultation.
  • Stakeholder matrix: People are divided into 4 groups and discussion. An interviewer would be assigned from each of the group to another group and get information back for discussion. Talking to other people results in greater impact than thinking only from your own standpoint.
  • Sensitivity training: People are put in different situations for experience, and it proves to be effective, particularly for Indigenous people.
  • Showing project impact through arts.
  • Proponent-silent Forum: Project proponent is told to be silent, and participants are allowed free discussion.
  • Netherlands: Public forum is organized, with the mayor’s attendance, for consultation on settlement of refugees. People participated actively.
  • Consultation shall be separated for both NGOs and the general public.
  • Using social media as a means of engagement, given the declining readership of traditional media.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Information that is circulated in social media may be false/wrong/incorrect.
  • In fact, people may be tired of proponent-led consultation.
  • Using techniques of consultation for EIA may not be always useful in different situations.
  • From Hong Kong’s experience: Private sector produces public participation in a better way compared with how the government does it. The government fears taking risks, and engagement results in a bad outcome.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Same as (ii)

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders   

We have come up the following conclusions/insights for policy makers and stakeholders for holding PP events in the future:

  • Inviting in person for engagement events would be more effective than sending out a message.
  • People may be tired of proponent-led consultation.
  • People would be more willing to participate if they see their inputs do have “impact” on project outcome.
  • Public participation means share and change. Willingness to share matters most.
  • Public engagement means to inform the decision-making process, and project proponents to know the trade-off.

 

 QUANTIFYING BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS AND RESILIENCE POTENTIAL

Session Chair(s):  Akira Tanaka, Pamela Gunther, Sangdon Lee
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • Challenges include a systematic approach for applying quantification for biodiversity.
  • Use of a global systematic quantitative approach that could be applied to most projects.

 

What needs to be done

  • Continuation of a global approach that demonstrates success of a quantitative analysis for biodiversity.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Agreement among many users for development of a quantitative approach that can be applied universally.
  • This approach must be tested by many different users to make sure that the quantitative method is successful.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Apply quantification methods such as Habitat Evaluation Procedure into ecological impact assessment.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • State unavoidable impacts such as loss of habitats and effects of mitigation measures in Environmental Impact Statement by using quantification methods.
  • Mitigation hierarchy should be integrated in EIA system.
  • Compensatory mitigation (biodiversity offset) must be mandated.

 

RENEWABLE ENERGY LANDSCAPES – LIVABILITY THREAT OR NIMBY

Session Chair(s): Jan Nuesink 

Current challenges and impacts

  • No trust in information from authorities can be issue.
  • NIMBY response in order to channel anger from other ongoing issues into another -> may lead to quick dismissal of otherwise viable options.
  • Affluent people have more resources to enter such legal conflicts procedures.
  • Something that would have been consented to a hundred years ago won't necessarily be consented now because mentalities also change

 

What needs to be done

  • Need to find facts together with public -> joint fact finding process.
  • Necessity must be communicated in a way that is factual but not technical -> use terms that lay people will understand.
  • People are engaged in issue too late and not in a value-driven way:  they don't always see the necessity for a project and aren't asked what they feel they need.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Underground transmission lines are mandatory in Germany. Why not try that? (Dutch) because not much experience, high voltage, hence dangerous if done badly and very costly. Also there will be limitations (e.g., magnetic fields) with that just as there are with current options.
  • In Japan the public is not so sensitive about visual impacts.
  • Experience from various countries:  aspects of a project are all positive at the national level and negative at the local level.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Take into account the history, local context. Why there is a NIMBY problem now, because it wasn't a problem in the past?
  • We should respect people's opinions enough to investigate into their concerns.
  • Engage stakeholders in thinking about the future, not only immediate present -> evidence of public doing that anyway (Iceland), as they identify need for power generation in remote areas to keep people there.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders   

  • Problem of ownership (UK): rich land owners get richer from renewable developments. There's bitterness about that because it's hard to see how renewables are for our kids and not them.
  • Should politicians at some point simply toughen up and go through with decisions?
  • Proposed: compensation approach: give ownership to locals or change taxation system.
  • Can zoning address NIMBY?

 

RESILIENCE IN IA FOR POWER TRANSMISSION

Session Chair(s):  Steef van Baalen

  • Resilient projects might be the result of well-performed IA, but you need to recognize it up front.

 

SOCIAL LICENCE TO OPERATE AND RESILIENCE

Session Chair(s):Sara Bice

The CSRM Section has hosted thematic sessions on “social license to operate” (SLO) since the Puebla 2011 conference. SLO continues to remain prominent in SIA, and practitioners, proponents, communities and governments continue to grapple with its meaning, application and utility.

Across the two sessions, the key themes and ideas that emerged included:

  • The need to engage community capacity to facilitate communities’ abilities to utilize/leverage an SLO.
  • The need for cumulative impact assessment and/or regional approaches to truly address the issues related to SLO and resilience.
  • Recognition that SLO remains poorly defined and is often still claimed by proponents.
  • Recognition that SLO is mostly a negative governance instrument; that is, "You'll know about your SLO if you haven't got one."
  • Linkage to community impact and benefit agreements and achievement of SLO through community ownership of the process.
  • Communities are partners in the project, not stakeholders.
  • SLO relates to in-migration and resettlement issues, too.
  • Work toward and with an SLO is difficult and takes dedication and time.
  • It is the “sacred trust” developed in relationships that facilitates SLO. Where the relationship is strong, disagreements and difficult issues can be worked through within respectful relationships. Without these relationships, you will have only conflict.
  • Communities must be empowered to collect, understand, analyze, and confirm/access data. Where communities trust the information on which decisions are based, SLO is possible.
  • SLO is dynamic, not static, and just because an Impact and Benefit Agreement model has worked in one community or in relation to one particular project, this does not mean that it's a plug and play model.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • For those interested in more ideas about SLO and IA, please see the December 2014 special issue of Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal . IAIA members can access the journal for free via IAIA.

 

SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT IN SOCIETIES WITH DECREASING POPULATIONS

Session Chair(s):   Hidefumi Kurasaka

Current challenges and impacts

  • In societies with decreasing population, we are facing the loss of good human impacts, including nature maintenance efforts, human care, maintenance of built environment, and so on.

 

What needs to be done

  • We have to do “assessment of no action” in population decreasing societies. The research project “OPOSSUM” of Chiba University provides the result of such assessment for each Japanese municipality, and invites opinions from future generations by setting “future workshop”. See  http://opossum.jpn.org/english/

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Assessment of no action in population decreasing societies gives new work area for impact assessment societies.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Impact assessment practitioners should give adequate considerations on the good human impact on the environment. In other words, the SATOYAMA concept is very important.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders  

  • The magnitude and significance of losing good human impacts on various areas in the near future could be estimated. Thus it would be subject to be assessed. Policy makers should keep attention on this area.

 

SUSTAINABILITY: SOLID GROUND OR A SLIPPERY PIECE?

Session Chair(s): Asha Rajvanshi, Vinod Mathur, Richard Chueng

Current challenges and impacts

  • Sustainability assurance is a promise that is often made by investors and developers but is seldom honored. Examples of unsuccessful offsets have demonstrated this to be true.
  • How best to integrate sustainability and human well-being in impact assessment approaches.
  • It is hard to define a currency that gives us a measure of sustainable outcomes of planned developments.

 

What needs to be done

  • Sustainability has to move beyond a concept and become a reality.
  • Sustainable Development Goals offer a new hope for integration of biodiversity and ecosystem services for human well-being.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • Sustained flow of services from nature are crucial for sustaining businesses and livelihoods.
  • Many of the Sustainable Development Goals and their Indicators have direct links with ecosystem services. This offers an opportunity to redefine the scope of biodiversity inclusive impact assessment to include impacts on ecosystem services.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • We need robust and verifiable indicators to evaluate sustainability of development projects.
  • Tradeoffs of ecosystem services can become a major barrier for sustained growth and building resilient societies. Impact assessment practice needs to respond to this urgency of addressing any potential threat to ecosystem services.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders   

  • Ecosystem services should be seen as non- negotiable assets for perpetuity of benefits from nature.
  • Lessons learned from the presentations in this session reiterate that policies need to be better aligned to promote sustainable developments.
  • Valuation of ecosystem services must form the essential input to impact assessment for informing decisions to safeguard ecosystem services that are crucial for buffering against climate change and for providing the insurance against environmental and ecological risks.
  • Governance, at all levels local to global, must find means to facilitate principles of inclusiveness and sustainability in development agenda.

 

SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT: CURRENT SITUATIONS AND CHALLENGES
             

Session Chair(s):  Hideharu Morishita, Yoshitugu Hayashi
 
Current challenges and impacts

  • To change the transport mode, to make good relationship between committing organizations on traffic was introduced to reduce the number of private cars. A social experiment to avoid the traffic jam was also presented.

 

What needs to be done

  • Promotion of e-mobility, public transportation increasing, fossil fuels price increase, etc., were introduced.
  • It is shown using a model that for effectiveness on the environmental and socio-economical aspects, investment to the rail way is more useful.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • To reduce the GHG is one of the most important issues. The same time, easy accessibility is required. Presentations in this session showed the directions. Such as the smart city, compact city, mode and combination of mobility.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • In this session, some quantitative model and some results of simulation were introduced. It will help to identify and consider more to their targets.

 

Recommendations for policy makers and other stakeholders
  

  • From social experiments, it was learned that good collaborations with related organizations makes the process easier and the results better.

 

SYSTEMS APPROACHES TO IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR RESILIENCE AND SUSTAINABILITY

Session Chair(s): Jenny Pope

Current challenges and impacts

  • A lack of systems thinking in impact assessment, lack of understanding of history and trajectory when considering baselines, insufficient focus on cumulative impacts.

 

What needs to be done

  • Increased use of systems thinking and systems approaches that recognize the interconnectedness of impacts and issues, incorporation of holistic concepts such as wellbeing, appreciation of the history of a region with a focus on resilience (how did it become the way it is?), increased community involvement (e.g. in monitoring cumulative impacts), but also an appreciation that some communities may need capacity building before they are able to participate.

 

Potential benefits and impacts

  • More holistic understanding of the effects of development (or disasters) on regions and communities, and therefore more chance of managing impacts effectively in the long term to deliver ecosystem community resilience and sustainability.

 

Recommendations for impact assessment practitioners

  • Consider the points in above