i) Examples: The Pak Mun Dam project in Thailand, The Three Gorges Dam; China, Sadar Sarovar project, India; Arun lll Hydroelectric project, Nepal; Shell and Ogoni-land, Nigeria; decommissioning of the Brent Spar oil platform, UK; the Chad-Cameroon Oil Pipe line project, Chad/Cameroon; the China Western Poverty Reduction project, China; Natural gas exploration in Kirthar National Park, Pakistan and in the Sun-derbans National Park, Bangladesh; Intended road construction in the Banc d’Arguin in Mauritania; Bujagali Falls Dam Project, Uganda.
ii) Turmoil has been accompanying the WTO Seattle meeting in 1999, the IMF and World Bank meetings in Washington, spring 2000, the IMF and World Bank meeting in September 2000 in Prague and the EU con-ference in December 2000 in Nice. Initiatives are imminent to increase democratic control on these institutions.
The OECD is now asking export credit assuring companies in its member countries to screen the export credits they assure on social and environmental sustainability.
iii) See: Liability for Environmental damage and the World Bank’s Chad-Cameroon Oil and Pipeline project, IUCN 2000, ISBN/ISSN 9075909055.
Probably one of the first cases: on September 14th, 2000 a US court decided to address a case against Shell filed by members of the Ogoni tribe from Southern Nigeria (Rtrs, AFP).
iv) Examples:
1. the World Bank is in the process of starting to recognise the importance of independent review. It has fielded an ad hoc team of independent advisors covering environmental, social and economic aspects to advise the Bank on compliance with its own social and environmental policy for a proposed Bank funded large and controversial dam project in Laos. Recently, the Bank decided to establish a similar independent International Advisory Group to oversee a controversial oil pipe line project in Chad and Cameroon.
2. In 1993, in response to calls to establish possibilities for appeal by private citizens who believe that they (or their interests) have been or could be harmed by Bank funded projects, the World Bank has established an (independent) Inspection Panel.
3. In the region of southern Africa (including the countries that belong to the Southern Africa Council for Development or SADC), an initiative has been launched to provide a regional capacity for quality review of environmental assessments to support informed decision-making. To this end, a Southern Africa In-stitute for Environmental Assessment (SAIEA) is being established to provide independent advice to governments on request.
4. In the Netherlands the directorate general of Development Co-operation of the Ministry of Foreign Af-fairs has recognised the need for independent advice on EA for certain project initiatives that are pro-posed for funding either bilaterally or multilaterally through an international financial institution such as the World Bank. In 1993 the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs entered into an agreement with the independent Dutch Commission for Environmental Impact Assessment to provide, upon request, services in both ex ante and ex post evaluation of projects.
v) The need for independent review is, in a most practical sense, illustrated by the fact that increasingly (com-mensurate with the establishment of its name on a world wide scale) the independent Netherlands Commis-sion for Impact Assessment is requested by governments, enterprises and NGOs, to review Impact Assess-ments for development initiatives in which the Netherlands has no stakes whatsoever.
Private business and industry have shown to be willing to have the impacts of their projects and initiatives reviewed, sometimes even if the decision-makers in government do not require it. These companies (as de-velopers) want to ascertain and show that their impact assessment reports stand up to (international) scrutiny and accepted best practice, and that their consultants have done a good job. They use the results of in-dependent review of their impact assessment reports to shield themselves from possibly unjustified criticism of activists and arbitrariness of decisionmakers.
Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs) are interested in independent review of impact assessment reports as the results of such reviews have provided certainty about the validity of their arguments and promoted achievement of their goals in cases their arguments proved right.
Governments have asked for independent review in cases that the national EIA system was not yet effective or incapable to address the (often complicated) issues.
In general it is observed that all parties are specifically interested in independent review as independent re-view may settle otherwise lengthy disputes and streamlines decision making. The Netherlands Commission is honoured to respond to requests for independent advice, but sees the illogicallity of the practice that enti-ties from all over the globe turn to a Dutch legal body to provide independent advice on EIA for their development initiatives.
vi) Informal consultation has taken place with some Dutch ministers, multinational companies, NGOs, World Bank officials, Impact Assessment experts from many countries and planning ministries and – commissions in several developing countries.
vii) Multinational companies would favour the ICIA that provides its services in all countries of the world; limitation of its service to the developing countries only would not be acceptable to developing countries. Moreover, multinationals would appreciate provision of advisory services on Impact Assessment for their investment plans before they engage in formal EIA procedures.
viii) Scoping is the formulation of guidelines for the Impact Assessment. |
