Enabling Environmental Justice: Assessment of Participatory Tools
Background Report Prepared for: Environmental Department
United Nations Institute for Training and Research
Manjula Amerasinghe, Leanne Farrell, SheeShee Jin, Nah-yoon Shin, Kristen Stelljes
Department of Urban Studies and Planning - Massachusetts Institute of Technology MIT - 2008
Executive Summary [78p.] at: http://web.mit.edu/jcarmin/www/carmin/EnablingEJ.pdf
“…..A growing body of literature points to the importance of public participation in enabling procedural justice in public decision making. Procedural justice, in turn, is a prerequisite for distributive justice, which in environmental decision-making contexts, is the underlying tenet of environmental justice. Without the meaningful inclusion of those who will be impacted by the outcomes of environmental decision-making, fair distribution of environmental benefits and harms is unlikely to result.
This report sets out to test the extent to which various participatory tools have the potential to enable procedural justice in the environmental arena. The report synthesizes the findings of 59 case studies applying seven different participatory tools to environmental decision-making contexts in developed and developing countries. Tools analyzed are: notice and comment, public hearings, focus groups, participatory workshops, citizen advisory committees, citizen juries and referenda.
Findings show that different participatory techniques can, indeed, play an important role in improving decision making and enabling procedural justice, a fundamental component of environmental justice. Of the tools analyzed, participatory workshops have the greatest potential to be inclusive, interactive and empowering to participants. Yet, even for this tool and others that demonstrate high potential along these dimensions, several key capacity requirements must be first fulfilled. Participatory tools in general were found to be time consuming, financial and human resource intensive, and requiring of specialized skills and knowledge from their sponsors. Furthermore, the adequate inclusion of marginalized groups – a fundamental component of procedural justice – requires special attention on the part of governments to make sure participatory processes serve to level the playing field among stakeholders rather than perpetuating imbalances in access to power…..”
Content:
I. Introduction
1. Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making
Principles and features of participation
The benefits of public participation
Limitations of participation
Considerations Necessary in Public Participation
Inclusion of Public Participation in International Environmental Decision-Making
2. Environmental Justice via Public Participation
Principles of Environmental Justice: Distributive and Procedural Justice
Distributive justice
Procedural justice
Significance of Environmental Justice
Implementation of democratic environmental science
Establishment of legal frameworks at national and international levels
International Diffusion of Environmental Justice Movement
3. Purpose of Report
4. Methodology and Limitations
Identification and contextualization of participatory “tools”
Identification of case studies
Analysis of case studies
Limitations to the methodology
II. Use of Participatory Tools in Practice: Empirical Evidence
1. Notice and Comment
Overview
Contexts/sectors where used
Capacity Requirements
Time
Human Resources and Funding
Education and Knowledge
Tools in Action #1: Notice and Comment,
Implications for Environmental Justice
Inclusion
Interaction
Empowerment
Other Issues of Relevance to Environmental Justice
Tools in Action #2: Notice and
Tool Summary #1: Notice and Comment
2. Public Hearings
Overview
Context/Sectors where used
Capacity Requirements
Time
Human Resources and Funding
Education and Knowledge
Tools in Action #3: Public
Implications for Environmental Justice
Inclusion
Interaction
Empowerment
Tool Summary #2: Public Hearings
3. Focus Groups
Overview
Contexts/sectors where used
Capacity Requirements
Time
Human Resource Capacity and Funding
Education and Knowledge
Tools in Action #4: Focus Group, waste management strategies in
Implications for Environmental Justice
Inclusion
Interaction
Empowerment
Tools in Action #5: Focus Group, flood protection in the
Tool Summary #3: Focus Groups
4. Participatory Workshops
Overview
Context/Sectors where used
Capacity requirements
Time
Human Resources and Funding
Tools in Action #6: Participatory
Education and Knowledge
Tools in Action #7: Participatory
Implications for Environmental Justice
Inclusion
Interaction
Empowerment
Tools In Action #8: Participatory Workshop, protected areas in
Tool Summary #4: Participatory Workshops
5. Citizen Advisory Committees
Overview
Contexts/sectors where used
Capacity Requirements
Time
Human Resources and Funding
Education and Knowledge
Tools in Action #9: Citizen Advisory Committee,
Implications for Environmental Justice
Inclusion
Interaction
Empowerment
Other Issues of Relevance to Environmental Justice
Tools in Action #10: Advisory
Tool Summary #5: Citizen Advisory Committees
6. Citizen Juries
Overview
Contexts/sectors where used
Tools in Action #11: Citizen
Capacity Requirements
Time
Human Resources and Funding
Education and Knowledge
Implications for Environmental Justice
Inclusion
Interaction
Empowerment
Other Issues of Relevance to Environmental Justice
Tools in Action #12: Citizen
Tool Summary #6: Citizen Juries
7. Referenda
Overview
Contexts/sectors where used
Tools in Action #13:
Capacity requirements
Time
Human Resources and Funding
Education and Knowledge
Implications for Environmental Justice
Inclusion
Interaction
Empowerment
Other Issues of Relevance to Environmental Justice
Tools in Action #14:
Tool Summary #7: Referenda
III. Conclusions
Key Findings
Table 1: Summary of Input Requirements by Participatory Tool
Table 2: Summary of Outputs by Tool, Overall and for Marginalized Groups
Implications for Environmental Decision Making and Environmental Justice
IV. Works Cited
Annex 1: Comparative Tool Analysis
Annex 2: Case Study Articles Reviewed
* * *
This message from the Pan American Health Organization, PAHO/WHO, is part of an effort to disseminate
information Related to: Equity; Health inequality; Socioeconomic inequality in health; Socioeconomic
health differentials; Gender; Violence; Poverty; Health Economics; Health Legislation; Ethnicity; Ethics;
Information Technology - Virtual libraries; Research & Science issues. [DD/ KMC Area]
“Materials provided in this electronic list are provided "as is". Unless expressly stated otherwise, the findings
and interpretations included in the Materials are those of the authors and not necessarily of The Pan American
Health Organization PAHO/WHO or its country members”.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAHO/WHO Website
Equity List - Archives - Join/remove: http://listserv.paho.org/Archives/equidad.html
IMPORTANT: This transmission is for use by the intended recipient and it may contain privileged, proprietary or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this transmission to the intended recipient, you may not disclose, copy or distribute this transmission or take any action in reliance on it. If you received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by email to infosec@paho.org, and please dispose of and delete this transmission. Thank you.
