Environmental assessment (EA) is now institutionalized in over 100 countries but is widely criticized by practitioners and analysts for failing to convince decision-makers. Environmental sustainability is still not placed high on the list of criteria influencing project and programme approvals. This paper suggests that the failure of EA reflects the politically contested domain of EA. A framework for the analysis of public participation in EA based on the study of contentious politics is introduced. Public participation is a crucially important condition for influencing decision makers to pursue sustainability objectives, but the effectiveness of public participation is conditional upon characteristics of the coalitions created by diverse stakeholders. The importance of coalitions between local stakeholders and intellectuals is highlighted and exemplified through four cases in the Philippines, Brazil, South Africa and Taiwan where public participation in EA processes is associated with the blockage of large-scale development projects.

No abstract

No abstract

This article analyzes the public participation and follow-up stages of the environmental assessment process to secure an operating license for an iron-ore mine in Itabira, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Vale, a major Brazilian mining company, eventually received authorization to begin operations in 2000, but only after making significant concessions to public demands on a variety of environmental and social conditions. In the years following the approval, Vale met several conditions regarding environmental cleanup, parks and infrastructure, water protection, and commitment to the local community. However, over time some of these activities were interrupted or aborted, while a number of conditions were never met. This article suggests that these weaknesses in follow-up were a consequence of the demobilization and retreat of the state and a parallel demobilization of civil society after 2000. The case demonstrates that state and public attentiveness can be episodic and suggests that high-profile agreements do not assure sustainable outcomes. Institutionalized participatory monitoring and management units appear necessary for continued environmental management that pursues long-term sustainability.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This study investigates incentives and disincentives regarding adoption of controlled tile drainage (CTD) in a region of eastern Ontario, Canada, where CTD could be used prolifically from a biophysical standpoint, but is not. Irrespective of documented environmental and agronomic benefits of CTD, adoption remains low. Surveys and semi-structured interviews with producers and drainage contractors/experts were used to evaluate awareness of CTD and identify producer adoption impediments. Surveys indicated nearly 70% of producer respondents had heard about CTD. Top ranked incentives identified by producers (who adopted) and drainage contractors/experts combined were: soil water retention benefits, increased crop yields, and gratification improving the environment. Top ranked disincentives combined by target groups were: increased farm labor, perceived lack of extension services, and costs. Many producer adopters emphasized motivators grounded in personal or community bearing, such as peer interaction and doing the right thing for the environment. Drainage contractors emphasized adoption impediments tied to a perceived lack of extension support for CTD. Drainage contractors themselves desired more extension support and firm data/research foundations with respect to advocating CTD to clients. With respect to motivation for producers to adopt CTD, this latter point may be critical given that producers highly valued drainage contractors as an information source on drainage practices.