EDU450 – Environmental Education

1. EDU450 – Environmental Education • Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Community Environmental Education Vanja Sekizovic BSc(Hons) vanjas@iinet.net.au

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

3. Outline • Environmental Education (EE) and policy • Introduction to EIA • Opportunities for public involvement in EIA • Contributions of EIA to EE • Conclusions

4. Acronyms • DEC – Department of Environment and Conservation • DEP – Department of Environmental Protection [now DEC] • DMA – Decision Making Authority • DoIR – Department of Industry and Resources (now DMP) • DMP – Department of Mines and Petroleum • EE – Environmental Education • EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment • EIS – Environmental Impact Statement • EPA – Environmental Protection Authority • EPAct – Environmental Protection Act 1986 • EPS – Environmental Protection Statement • ERMP – Environmental Review and Management Plan • PER – Public Environmental Review

5. 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)

6. What is EE? EE means the process of developing awareness, knowledge, training, skills and sound behaviours in environmental matters. (Govt. of WA 2000)

7. 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)

8. The 4 As of environmental education

9. 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

10. 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: • 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.

11. 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

12. EIA Process Summary Proponent 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)

13. Objectives of EIA • Ensure that proponents take primary responsibility for protection of the environment influenced by their proposals • Ensure best practicable measures are taken to minimise adverse impacts on environment • Encourage proponents to implement continuous improvement in environmental performance • Ensure that independent, reliable advice is provided to the Government before decisions are made • Provide opportunities for local community and public participation, as appropriate, during the assessment of proposals (Government Gazette, 2002: s2.1)

14. 3. Opportunities for public involvement in EIA • The EIA process provides for meaningful public involvement at several points

15. Public involvementopportunities EIA Process Summary Proponent refers proposal to EPA EPA determines level of assessment(options: not assessed >> PER or ERMP) Proponent prepares EIS(monitoring, predictions, mitigation) Any person / DMA can refer a proposal Public review of EIS EPA recommendations to Minister Approval decision by Minister Project implementation(mitigation & reporting by proponent, audits by Dept of Environment)

17. Public involvementopportunities EIA Process Summary Proponent refers proposal to EPA Any person may appeal EPA decision to increase level of assessment EPA determines level of assessment(options: not assessed >> PER or ERMP) Proponent prepares EIS(monitoring, predictions, mitigation) Any person / DMA can refer a proposal Public review of EIS EPA recommendations to Minister Approval decision by Minister Project implementation(mitigation & reporting by proponent, audits by Dept of Environment)

19. Public involvementopportunities EIA Process Summary Proponent refers proposal to EPA Any person may appeal EPA decision to increase level of assessment EPA determines level of assessment(options: not assessed >> PER or ERMP) Proponent required to consult with affected public Proponent prepares EIS(monitoring, predictions, mitigation) Any person / DMA can refer a proposal Public review of EIS EPA recommendations to Minister Approval decision by Minister Project implementation(mitigation & reporting by proponent, audits by Dept of Environment)

21. Public involvementopportunities EIA Process Summary Proponent refers proposal to EPA Any person may appeal EPA decision to increase level of assessment EPA determines level of assessment(options: not assessed >> PER or ERMP) Proponent required to consult with affected public Proponent prepares EIS(monitoring, predictions, mitigation) Any person may comment on EIS to the EPA Any person / DMA can refer a proposal Public review of EIS EPA recommendations to Minister Approval decision by Minister Project implementation(mitigation & reporting by proponent, audits by Dept of Environment)

23. Public involvementopportunities EIA Process Summary Proponent refers proposal to EPA Any person may appeal EPA decision to increase level of assessment EPA determines level of assessment(options: not assessed >> PER or ERMP) Proponent required to consult with affected public Proponent prepares EIS(monitoring, predictions, mitigation) Any person may comment on EIS to the EPA Any person / DMA can refer a proposal Public review of EIS Any person may appeal EPA recommendations EPA recommendations to Minister Approval decision by Minister Project implementation(mitigation & reporting by proponent, audits by Dept of Environment)

26. Public involvementopportunities EIA Process Summary Proponent refers proposal to EPA Any person may appeal EPA decision to increase level of assessment EPA determines level of assessment(options: not assessed >> PER or ERMP) Proponent required to consult with affected public Proponent prepares EIS(monitoring, predictions, mitigation) Any person may comment on EIS to the EPA Any person / DMA can refer a proposal Public review of EIS Any person may appeal EPA recommendations EPA recommendations to Minister Approval decision by Minister Affected public normally kept informed about progress Project implementation(mitigation & reporting by proponent, audits by Dept of Environment)

31. Discussion Questions • What does it mean for communities if all these opportunities for public involvement in EIA are utilised? • In practice, how can we determine the effectiveness of EIA as a tool for EE?

32. 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…

33. 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)

34. 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

35. 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)

36. 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)

37. 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

38. 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)

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

40. 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)

41. 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.

42. 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

43. 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)

44. Big Brook Dam [cont.]Dam design and construction • Dam constructed with sloping spillway • Fish trap installed at the base of the dam

45. fish trap 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

46. 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

47. 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

48. Big Brook Dam [cont.]Management response • Lamprey guide installed around Pemberton Weir • And also at gauging weir downstream

49. Big Brook Dam [cont.] • Lamprey management system at Big Brook now standard approach used for all WA dams

50. 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