Jane Nishida and participants of Group D

Transcription

1 International Workshop on EIA System and Implementation in Asia February 2015, Tokyo, Japan GROUP DISCUSSION ON EMP AND MONITORING (GROUP D) Jane Nishida and participants of Group D 6 MAIN CHALLENGES IDENTIFIED AND POSSIBLE MEASURES/RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Corruption >>> Penalty provision (3 types administrative for financial financial (fines). criminal for both project proponents, EIA consultant, government officials, termination of concessions, etc. >>> Public transparency for both project proponents and governments (soft measure), and associated public awareness raising >>> Level of playing field for all projects both public and private sectors 1

2 6 MAIN CHALLENGES IDENTIFIED AND POSSIBLE MEASURES/RECOMMENDATIONS 2. Effective monitoring >>> Citizen participatory compliance covering regulators, NGOs, local communities; overarching approach >>> Minimize the needs of monitoring by better designing and reduce impacts during the project implementation >>> Part of certification requirement >>> More innovative monitoring (online, remote) next generation enforcement by US EPA, Vietnam s practice >>> Environmental Police in Vietnam >>> Prioritization based on risks 3. Capacity at both national and sub-national levels >>> Training for short-/long- term training >>> Certification process >>> Exchanging best practices (mentoring, twinning) >>> Donor experts in country >>> Guidelines and check-list, sectoral manuals >>> Compliance assistance center 2

3 4. Stakeholder engagement >>> Continuous engagement through the project cycle >>> Mapping stakeholders for appropriate engagement, incorporated in the monitoring process >>> Grievance mechanism, increased understanding by the communities (in local language etc.) >>> Public interest litigation and green/environment court >>> Freedom of information 5. Linkage between EMP and EIA >>> Incorporate EMP into local and national systems >>> Update EIA to reflect EMP with detailed measures to suit actual situations 6. Authority by regulator as well as project proponent >>> Set up bond/deposit >>> Continuous capacity assessment of adequacy of measures proposed in the report >>> Cooperation with regulators and lenders >>> Practice incorporated into EIA; EMP incorporated into contract to hold project proponent responsible (applies to subcontractors too) 3

4 WAY FORWARD - Clearing house for good practices - Twinning/ match making with countries - Survey to identify priority areas of interest - Targeted training in the next AECEN conference in September 2015 THANK YOU 4

5 (((RECORD OF DISCUSSION))) POINTS BY RESOURCE PERSONS Enforcement: Provisions for penalty: being considered in Cambodia s draft EIA as a mean of enforcement (fines, cancelation/termination of concession/project, imprisonment) Provision for compensation and restoration Compliance Experience from int l project. Ex) railway project in Indonesia : noise, vibration, and many others. >>> Important to prioritize within available financial resources. Good design for EMP taking into consideration of project s characteristics (sector/types of projects) and data management for effective monitoring Excellent EIA report, but actual implementation on the ground is still challenging. What should be done, details, Who?, At what stage? With what level of resources? Barriers: design modification, new facts or additional unexpected impacts or unforeseen issues: Developers: intent and policy>>> commitment including compliance or practice good practice Procedures to translate intent into practice Who is responsible? >>> allocation of responsibilities, POINTS BY RESOURCE PERSONS CONT'D Public engagement Proactive engagement >>> feed back to the system to identify additional measures needed,; building trust and reduces the risk of conflicts Is monitoring: for responsible authorities? Pay more attention to affected communities. Project organization s limitation >>> discussion at the senior level to balance the project and community s concerns 5

6 COMMON CHALLENGES/EXISTING PRACTICES Weak enforcement Appropriate capacity to fully implement EMP is still a challenge in reality in some countries. (both government and private sector); some countries do not have good filing system/archiving/ database to retrieve relevant documents for monitoring. (Indonesia, Vietnam); lack of authority by ministry of environment to enforce Corruption >>> government is increasing the transparency in the process (Indonesia) by sharing information among agencies; Smooth transition may be needed to introduce penalties >>> training for government officials as a longer-term measure, communication with other line ministries/permitting agencies Weak capacity of project proponent in compliance Monitoring: communities can be very large; trained inspector to do the job; Indonesia's EMP: not enough quantitative data Project proponent s design Deal with residual impacts in the design phase (not to leave the impact untouched - wrong approach) Government can incorporates monitoring into contract and hold project proponent responsible and have them to set aside sufficient resources >>> Challenge put this into a country system 6

7 What is the catalytic activities based on USEPA:s accumulated experience? >>> US s National impact assessment, public engagement and evolve into regulations (example of air pollution in China); violated company be published >>> US s next generation enforcement - more innovative approach in addition to stick and carrot, >>> Anyone can act on legal action; in Asia there are more environmental court cases: >>> Multi-stakeholders participatory monitoring and enabling mechanism/system >>> Regulated entity, citizen's organization, (Philippines case) >>>In Thailand, governments officials can be brought to court. For wrong doing. If damage is made, there will be fines. This has been embedded from early stage. >>> Indonesia: : criminal cases By contrast, Japan's EIA law may be considered too flexible 'which can be burdensome, monitoring period. Compliance is part of appropriate action. 7