1 / 14

Public involvement focusing on alternatives: a case of a bridge project in Cambodia

Public involvement focusing on alternatives: a case of a bridge project in Cambodia. 12 May, 2016 Tetsuya Kamijo JICA Research Institute, Tokyo, Japan at IAIA16, Nagoya, Japan. Introduction. The discussion of alternatives is “the heart of the EIS” (CEQ 1978).

tbland
Télécharger la présentation

Public involvement focusing on alternatives: a case of a bridge project in Cambodia

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Public involvement focusing on alternatives: a case of a bridge project in Cambodia 12 May, 2016 Tetsuya Kamijo JICA Research Institute, Tokyo, Japan at IAIA16, Nagoya, Japan

  2. Introduction The discussion of alternatives is “the heart of the EIS” (CEQ 1978). However, little is known about the actual discussion of alternatives. The study aimed at better understanding the actual discussion of alternatives through quantitative text analysis (QTA).

  3. Tsubasa (wing) bridge in Cambodia Completed in April 2015

  4. Stakeholdermeetings • Schedule: From May 2004 to January 2006 3 stages (scoping, intermediate between scoping and draft reporting, and draft reporting) and 15 meetings • Location: Phnom Penh and Neak Loeung (project site) • Participants: 17 kinds of stakeholders, more than 1,596 attendants (Project proponents, local people, consultants, business, NGOs, central and local governments, university, etc)

  5. Alternatives analysis Four alternatives (no action, ferry improvement, bridge construction, ferry improvement plus bridge construction) and 13 evaluation criteria Analysis technique: AHP Three times of discussion (October and December of 2004, and March 2005) Result: ferry plus bridge (.480), bridge (.234), ferry (.191), and no action (.095)

  6. Quantitative text analysis (QTA) • The QTA is a method of content analysis that analyses text data using quantitative analysis methods. The minutes from the meetings of the project were analyzed. • A benefit is to search the data using coding rules. Five coding rules: environmental issues, social issues, development issues, alternatives analysis, and public involvement

  7. Five coding rules • Environmental issues: water or air or noise or smell • Social issues: relocation or resettlement or compensation or compensate or job or worker or livelihood or house or land or accident or AIDS • Development issues: economic or economy or market or investment or transportation or transport • Alternative analysis: alternative or criterion or option • Public involvement: participate or stakeholder or consultation

  8. Appearance ratio of codings by stakeholder (significant at *p<.05 and **p<.01)

  9. Summary of public involvement analysis Local people participated actively, and they were very interested in social issues and little interested in alternatives. Public interest in environmental issues was low, in particular project proponents’ interest was very limited. NGOs attended but their presence was not enough and their manpower seems to be limited. It is easy to understand the difference of interests between stakeholders by using QTA.

  10. Contents of speech Local people: “When we have a bridge…more cars and motorcycles and the atmosphere…polluted, however, the bridge is the best option” on October 28, 2004. NGOs: “The alternatives to avoid the negative impacts should be considered” on May 24, 2004. NGOs insisted that the consultant engineer criteria and the environmental NGO criteria were different on December 27, 2004.

  11. Discussion 1 Selecting a good alternative It was probably difficult for local people to understand a pair-wise comparison and calculate scores of AHP. It was preferable to set alternatives and evaluation criteria by reflecting opinions of NGOs. The alternatives analysis technique should be simple and objective.

  12. Discussion 2 Better understanding contents of discussion The discussion was one-sided and not active. Peoples’ understanding of EIA report was low. Good meeting materials by appealing to the visual senses, and facilitation of discussion could be the proposed solutions.

  13. Conclusion Even improving institutional constraints (language, location, information, etc.) were insufficient for increasing public involvement in decision making. A simple and objective alternative analysis, good quality of meeting materials, and facilitation of discussion could improve discussion of alternatives. Further research is needed to explore a simple and objective technique of alternatives analysis.

  14. Thank you for your attention

More Related