EDU450 – Environmental Education

EDU450 – Environmental Education

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Community

Environmental Education

Vanja SekizovicBSc(Hons)

[email protected]

Objective

• To examine the role of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as an instrument for Environmental Education (EE)

Outline

1. Environmental Education (EE) and policy2. Introduction to EIA3. Opportunities for public involvement in EIA4. Contributions of EIA to EE5. Conclusions

Acronyms

DEC – Department of Environment and ConservationDEP – Department of Environmental Protection [now DEC]DMA – Decision Making AuthorityDoIR – Department of Industry and Resources (now DMP) DMP – Department of Mines and Petroleum EE – Environmental EducationEIA – Environmental Impact AssessmentEIS – Environmental Impact StatementEPA – Environmental Protection AuthorityEPAct – Environmental Protection Act 1986EPS – Environmental Protection StatementERMP – Environmental Review and Management PlanPER – Public Environmental Review

1. Environmental Education and Policy

•Policy options for environmental protection:

• Command and control • Licences and fines

• Self-Regulation• Revegetation Industry Association (WA)

• Voluntarism• Alcoa’s Jarrah Forests research

• Economic Instruments• Taxes and carbon trading

• Free Market Environmentalism• Allocation of rights for natural resources to private interests

• Education and Information Instruments

Gunningham et al. (1998)

What is EE?

EE means the process of developing awareness, knowledge, training, skills and sound behaviours in environmental matters.

(Govt. of WA 2000)

Why is EE important?

The ultimate goal of EE is to change human behaviour in order to develop citizens who will behave in environmentally responsible ways.

(Hungerford & Volk 1990)

Community education is required to improve awareness about how we impact on the environment, and to improve our knowledge of how to adjust our behaviour to reduce our environmental impacts.

(Govt. of WA 1998)

The 4 As of environmental education

Awareness Gaining awareness of and sensitivity to the environment (e.g. 94.5 news at 7am)

Attitudes Acquiring social values and feelings of concern for the environment and the motivation to participate in its protection and management (e.g. Earth Hour)

Abilities Knowledge of the total environment including skills for critically evaluating and solving environmental problems (e.g. Seminars)

Action Developing a sense of responsibility and urgency regarding environmental problems and becoming sufficiently empowered to take action to solve these (e.g. Clean up Australia Day)

2. Introduction to EIA

• What is environmental impact assessment - EIA?

• legal process (EPAct 1986) to guide decision-making for development proposals: ‘likely to have a significant effect on the environment’

• undertaken by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)

• EPA is a statutory authority - provides independent environmental advice to Government

Objectives of the EPA

15 . Objectives of Authority It is the objective of the Authority to use its best endeavours - (a) to protect the environment; and (b) to prevent, control and abate pollution and environmental

harm. [Section 15 amended by No. 54 of 2003 s. 30.]

16 . Functions of Authority The functions of the Authority are:(a) to conduct environmental impact assessments; ...(g) to promote environmental awareness within the

community and to encourage understanding by the community of the environment;

[EPA Act, section 16]

EPA review currently under way.

Definition of EIA

‘”Environmental impact assessment” means an orderly and systematic process for evaluating a proposal including its alternatives and objectives and its effect on the environment including the mitigation and management of those effects.

The process extends from the initial concept of the proposal through implementation to commissioning and operation, and where appropriate, decommissioning.’

(Government Gazette 2002, s1.3)

Systematic process ensuring environmental consequences of developments are examined in advance

EIA Process SummaryProponent refers proposal to EPA

EPA determines level of assessment(options: not assessed, PER or ERMP)

Proponent prepares EIS(predictions, mitigation, monitoring)

Public review of EIS

EPA recommendations to Minister

Approval decision by Minister

Project implementation(mitigation & reporting by proponent,

audits by DEC or DoIR)

Objectives of EIA

1. Ensure that proponents take primary responsibility for protection of the environment influenced by their proposals

2. Ensure best practicable measures are taken to minimise adverse impacts on environment

3. Encourage proponents to implement continuous improvement in environmental performance

4. Ensure that independent, reliable advice is provided to the Government before decisions are made

5. Provide opportunities for local community and public participation, as appropriate, during the assessment of proposals

(Government Gazette, 2002: s2.1)

3. Opportunities for public involvement in EIA

• The EIA process provides for meaningful public involvement at several points


EPA determines level of assessment(options: not assessed >> PER or ERMP)

Proponent prepares EIS(monitoring, predictions, mitigation)




Project implementation(mitigation & reporting by proponent, audits

by Dept of Environment)

Public involvementopportunities

Any person / DMA can refer a proposal










Any person may appeal EPA decision to increase

level of assessment












level of assessment

Proponent required to consult with affected

public












level of assessment


publicAny person may comment

on EIS to the EPA












level of assessment



on EIS to the EPA

Any person may appeal EPA recommendations












level of assessment



on EIS to the EPA

Any person may appeal EPA recommendations

Affected public normally kept informed about progress


Discussion Questions

1. What does it mean for communities if all these opportunities for public involvement in EIA are utilised?

2. In practice, how can we determine the effectiveness of EIA as a tool for EE?

4. Contribution of EIA to EE

• General claim that community environmental awareness has raised in last two decades

• EIA often accredited with major role in this • Open and inclusive public process (e.g.

compared to land-use planning process)

• In practice, difficult to isolate the influence of EIA given other influences• E.g. media, activist groups, schools etc…

Hungerford on Environmental Education

“…many educators firmly believe that “teaching about something” will influence behaviour…

Needless to say, what people know is important. Yet, knowing will not provide the learner with what we refer to as ownership and empowerment.

If we want learners to become actively involved in issue investigation and evaluation as well as citizenship behaviour outside of school it appears rather clear that they must own the issues on which they focus and be empowered to do something about them.”

(Hungerford, 1988)

EIA is a very empowering mechanism…

• 2 examples will be used to demonstrate this

• Study by Morrison-Saunders (1998)• Includes some case study examples

• Further local EIA case study• Bibra Lake Industrial Estate

Example 1: Study of the effect of public pressure during EIA on environmental management outcomes

• Research objectives:• To understand how public involvement in EIA

affects environmental management activities

Definition of public:• Any individual, group or government agency,

excluding proponents and decision makers

Morrison-Saunders (1998)

Methodology

• Six case study projects:• Cape Peron Ocean Outfall [CP]• Harding River Dam [HD]• Big Brook Dam [BB]• Narngulu Synthetic Rutile Plant [NG]• Sodium Cyanide Plant [SO]• Saladin Oilfield Project [SA]

• All environmental management activities were recorded:• As proposed in proponent and EPA documents; and• Undertaken in practice

• Origin investigated to identify management actions arising from public involvement

(Morrison-Saunders, 1998)

Potential sources of public influence

• Public submissions on Environmental Impact Statement [EIS]:

• Incorporated into new proponent commitments for environmental management or EPA recommendations

• Both published and become legally binding

• Legal action against a proponent:• Uncommon in WA (no examples in this research)

• Negative publicity • Either real or perceived threat

Influence of public during pre-approval decision stage of EIA

• Public submissions on EIA documents were an important influence

• Quality of submissions was more important than quantity (e.g. Big Brook Dam example coming up)

• Overall influence of public submissions:• 1-20 environmental management activities for the

6 case studies (3-33% influence)

Origin of proposed environmental management actions during pre-approval decision stage of EIA

Management action

proposed in...

Project

CP HD BB NG SO SA

Proponent commitments

28 37 10 51 52 45

EPA recommendations

4 8 4 9 8 8

Other legislation 0 1 0 1 1 2

Total 32 36 14 61 61 5

Publiccontribution

1 2 3 6 20 5

3% 4% 21% 10% 33% 9%

Big Brook Dam example: Influence of public submission for EIS on project design and management

• Dam to improve reliability of water supply for:• Pemberton Trout Hatchery• Pemberton town-site

• Key issue – migration of aquatic fauna (lampreys)

Big Brook Dam example [cont.]Lamprey Lifecycle

• Larval lampreys filtered feed in stream sediments for several years

• Metamorphose into adult form and move to the ocean

• Adult life spent at sea• Migrate upstream to

permanent fresh headwater creeks

• Adults spawn and die• Migration occurs in winter, on

dark, wet nights.

Big Brook Dam [cont.]Public submissions on EIS

• 1 public submission on EIS pointed out that there was not enough information on which to judge likely impacts on the lampreys

• Proponent provided a supplement to the EIS (included in the EPA report)

• Commitment to maintain suitable surrounding vegetation to allow lampreys to migrate around the dam wall on the banks

Big Brook Dam [cont.]EPA recommendation

• The EPA recommends that the [proponent] establish a monitoring programme to determine the effect of the proposed dam on migratory species of aquatic fauna and the effectiveness of remedial measures proposed in the [EIS]…

EPA (1985:6)

Big Brook Dam [cont.]Dam design and construction

• Dam constructed with sloping spillway• Fish trap installed at the base of the dam

Big Brook Dam [cont.]1st year monitoring

• Fish trap not successful because it was not in main flow

• Trap was subsequently abandoned• Lampreys unable to negotiate expansion joint on

dam wall • Modifications undertaken to fill expansion joint

fish trap

Big Brook Dam [cont.]2nd year monitoring

• Lampreys able to negotiate expansion joint on dam wall, but still having difficulties

• Attempts to go around the dam failed due to concrete walls / steps

• Only a few lampreys observed at the base of Big Brook Dam

• Found to be blocked by 2 dams downstream owned by the proponent

Big Brook Dam [cont.]Pemberton Weir

• Lampreys accumulating below Pemberton Weir (downstream)

• Unable to negotiate right angle bend at top of dam• During heavy rain, followed rivulets into forest

• Subsequently stranded and died

Big Brook Dam [cont.]Management response

• Lamprey guide installed around Pemberton Weir• And also at gauging weir downstream

Big Brook Dam [cont.]

•Lamprey management system at Big Brook now standard approach used for all WA dams

Influence of public during operational stage of EIA

• Public pressure on project performance• Narnugulu Synthetic Rutile Plant

• Commenced operation in March 1987 following EIA• Rotating reduction kiln for mineral sands• H2S produced• Numerous odour complaints from community• EPA closed the plant in July 1987

• “Pollution abatement notice”• Proponent installed a new afterburner and new

scrubber ($2 million cost)• Operations recommenced October 1987

• Implicit pressure, fear of negative publicity• Sodium Cyanide Plant

• Plant start-ups which emit smoke for 10-15 minutes are undertaken at night-time so as not to alarm people in Kwinana area

Study Conclusions

• The public made an important contribution to environmental management for each of the 6 case studies

• Raising issues not addressed in the EIS

• Watchdog for environmental performance

Example 2: Influence of public involvement and appeals – Bibra Lake industrial estate

• 89 ha land parcel adjacent to Bibra Lake• Previous use – waste disposal with remnant

bushland• Irrigation / effluent ponds to become

industrial land (LandCorp as proponent)• Landfill area to become public open space• Remainder of site bushland

Bibra Lake Industrial Estate [cont.]Developmental concept

Bibra Lake Industrial Estate [cont.]Key Environmental Issues

• Buffer to South Lake• Increased from 50m to 150m after discussion with DEP, Wetland

Conservation Council and Noongar elders• Rehabilitation of buffer

• Denuded wetland areas rehabilitated with endemic species• Management of fauna

• Retain some natural vegetation and provide revegetated habitat • Landscape amenity

• Landscape plantings for amenity and entry statement• Site contamination

• Soil and groundwater assessed to develop contamination management plan

• Drainage and protection of South Lake• Drainage to be collected and directed away from South Lake

Bibra Lake Industrial Estate [cont.]EPA assessment of EPS

• Full EIA not warranted• Consultation with a range of stakeholders took

place• Proponent commitments to be made into legally

binding conditions• Proposals can be managed in an

environmentally acceptable manner without a full EIA (EPA 2000)

• But… public appeal at level of assessment

Bibra Lake Industrial Estate [cont.]Minister’s determination on appeals against level of assessment

• Native vegetation not adequately recognised

• Closer examination of bushland value warranted

• More extensive community consultation required

• Minister required proposal to be more fully and publicly assessed (i.e. at PER level)

Bibra Lake Industrial Estate [cont.]PER and EPA Assessment

• Same basic proposal put forward as PER• Changes during assessment process:

• Increase in area to Beeliar Regional Park (from 6.2 ha to 11.2 ha)

• Increased lake buffer (from 150 m to 214 m)• Reduced number of lots (from 180 to 170)• Rehabilitation commitments: 10ha in Regional Park

and 5 ha in buffer zone• Staging changed to allow fauna migration

• EPA advised that proposal acceptable (EPA 2003)

• But… public appeals against recommendations

Bibra Lake Industrial Estate [cont.]Minister ‘s determination of appeals against EPA recommendations

• Minister appointed Appeals Committee in June 2003 (s106(1)(c) of EPAct 1986)

• Committee performed detailed investigation of issues

• Under-representation of certain vegetation complexes• Relatively large and compact bushland area• Connectivity of bushland with Beeliar Regional Park• Important fauna habitat function

• Outcome: further doubling of conservation reserve to 22ha

• Outcomes of public involvement

• South lake buffer increased from 50m to >200m

• Bush conservation area increased from 6ha to 20ha

5. Conclusions

• EE involves changing people’s behaviour towards the environment

• Successful EE empowers learners to act for the environment

• EE requires a lot more than simply providing people with information

• EIA is a government decision-making process that empowers the public to make a difference to development project outcomes

• EIA can be seen as a tool for community EE

ReferencesAnderton J. 1997 Environmental Knowledge, Attitudes & Commitment of Year 10 Students in Western

Australia. Dept. of Env. Protection, WAEnvironmental Protection Authority 1993. Environmental Protection Act 1986 Environmental Impact

Assessment Administrative Procedures 1993 EPA, WAEnvironmental Protection Authority 2000. Industrial subdivision – Lot 502, North Lake, Sudlow and Phoenix

roads, Bibra Lake: Western Australian Land Authority trading as LandCorp. Report and Recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority. Bulletin 999, EPA, Perth, WA.

Environmental Protection Authority 2003. Industrial subdivision – Lot 502, North Lake, Sudlow and Phoenix roads, Bibra Lake: Western Australian Land Authority trading as LandCorp. Report and Recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority. Bulletin 1091, EPA, Perth, WA.

Government Gazette 2002. Environmental Impact Assessment (Part IV Division 1) Administrative Procedures 2002. Government Gazette, WA, No. 26 special, 8 February 2002, 561-580

Govt. of WA 1998. Environment Western Australia 1998: State of the Environment Report. Dept. of Env. Protection, Perth, WA, p7

Govt. of WA 2000. Environmental Education: A Discussion Paper. Dept. of Env. Protection, Perth, WA, 11ppGunningham N, D Sinclair & P Grabowsky 1998. 'Instruments for Environmental Protection'. In: Smart

Regulation: Designing Environmental Policy. Clarendon Press, Oxford, Chapter 2Hungerford, H.R. 1988. What We Know About Citizenship Behaviour in Environmental Education: A

Discussion of Selected Environmental Behaviour Research and Implications for the Non-Researcher. Science Education Centre, Dept. of Curriculum and Instruction, Southern Illinois Uni at Carbondale, US

Hungerford, H.R. and Volk, T.L. 1990. Changing Learner Behaviour Through Environmental Education. Journal of EE. 21(3), 8-21

Office of the Appeals Convenor http://www.appeals.dpc.wa.gov.au//Morrison-Saunders A. 1998, ‘The Effect of Public Pressure During Environmental Impact Assessment on

Environmental Management Outcomes’, Presented at: IAIA'98 Sustainability and the Role of Impact Assessment in the Global Economy. 18th Annual Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, 19-24 April 1998, Christchurch, New Zealand. http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~angusms/

Any Questions

Documents

EDU450 – Environmental Education