New Process, Same Doubts: Participants’ Perceptions of Strategic Environmental Assessment in Western Newfoundland

Abstract

In order to learn about public participation in Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and identify opportunities for improvement of SEA, this research examined the Western Newfoundland Offshore Area SEA case in Canada. Through analysis of observation and interview data, findings reveal that participants involved recognized the shortcomings of the SEA process implemented despite being SEA neophytes. Data also showed that participants were aware that the basics of meaningful public consultation were not met. Participants recognized the need for alternative approaches and possibly an alternative name for the process in which they participated. They also indicated their dissatisfaction with the SEA, and related participation activities, noting they were left with feelings of distrust in the process and the sense that decisions were foregone. These findings undermine the credibility of SEA and erode its potential as a promising tool for enhancing policy, plans, and programs and eventually project decisions.

A Framework for Governance of Sustainability Indicator Systems in Strategic Environmental Assessment Processes

“…Coelho et al (2018) found that no participatory process was used when they analysed reports about SEAs developed in Portugal. Vespa et al (2017) show several flaws and shortcomings in the public participation process and some discredit in relation to it, while Gao et al (2013a) verified that, in one process, participation was effective and successful, but in another public involvement did not occur. In addition, indicators generated in participatory processes are sometimes criticised for insufficient objectivity or technical inadequacy.…”

Good Practices in Strategic Environmental Assessment Processes under the Brazilian Practitioners’ Vision

“…The participation of stakeholders throughout the process has been considered one of the most evident GP in environmental assessments [4] [29]. In a sample of 100 reports of SEAs, 52% showed a public participation process in strict compliance with the law; there was only occasional involvement of interested parties in 29% of the cases and in five SEAs there was no action in this regard [25].…”

“…One of the interesting things about this program [a program that the interviewee participated in, implemented in another country] is that every project that receives funding opens a web page where the project Several SEAs already use the presentation of information on pages of the world wide web, but in many cases the initiative does not allow exchange with the public. The GP, therefore, is not limited to dissemination in a virtual environment, but also should encompass the full potential of interaction within it, reducing the distance between practitioners and stakeholders [29]. The use of webinars, virtual conferencing, video-and photo-sharing, blogging, wikis, chat rooms, virtual worlds and instant messaging is also a possibility [30].…”