UNIT II

Stage II: Scoping

• The Terms of Reference (TOR) shall be conveyed to the applicant by the Expert Appraisal
Committee or State Level Expert Appraisal Committee within sixty days of the receipt of
Form 1.
• If the Terms of Reference is not finalized and conveyed to the applicant within sixty days
of the receipt of Form 1, the Terms of Reference suggested by the applicant shall be
deemed as the final Terms of Reference for EIA studies.
• Display of approved Terms of Reference on the website
• Application may be rejected by the regulatory authority at this stage itself.
• In case of such rejection, the decision together with reasons for the same shall be
communicated to the applicant in writing within sixty days of the receipt of the application
• Scoping is used to
• Define the proposed action,
• Enlist the cooperation of agencies,
• Identify what's important,
• Identify what's not important,
• Set time limits on studies,
• Determine requirements of the study team,
• Collect background information,
• Identify required permits,
• Identify other regulatory requirements, and
• Determine the range of alternatives
• Classification and Prediction of Impacts
• Impact Types
• Environment impacts arising from any development projects fall
into three categories
• Direct impacts,
• Indirect impacts; and
• Cumulative impacts.
• These three groups can be further broken down according
to their nature, into
• Positive and negative impacts;
• Random and predictable impacts;
• Local and widespread impacts; and
• Short - and long term impacts.
ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE OF AN IMPACT

• The determination of significance is defined in terms of context and

intensity.
• Context refers to the geographical setting of a proposed project or action.
• Intensity refers to severity of impact
• Factors to be Considered for Taking Decisions Based on
Assessment of Significance of an Impact
• Magnitude
• Prevalence
• Duration and Frequency
• Risk:
• Importance
• Mitigations
Significant impacts

• Determine adverse negative impacts

• Determine magnitude, including cumulative impacts
• Determine geographical extension of negative impacts
• Determine duration and frequency
• Determine the degree of reversibility
• Assess its probability of occurrence
• Assess the scientific uncertainty of the probability of
occurrence of a significant impact
Key elements to establish the significance
(importance) of an impact

• Cultural Importance
• Social Importance
• Ecological Relevance
• Environmental Patterns
• Statistic significance
• Technical issues
• Political/institutional issues
Themes of interest in EIA

• Public health
• Safety and security, occupational health
• Vulnerable groups
• Gender
• Economic organization and wellbeing
• Population growth
• Cultural and aesthetic values
Finding the significance of impacts
EIA methodologies

• EIA methodologies – approaches developed to identify,

predict and value changes of an action.
• Reflected in the sequence of activities, steps, as well on the
range of environmental issues considered (physical, chemical,
biological, socioeconomic, cutlural, landscape values and
processes)
• Uses methods and techniques to quantify or to qualify those
changes. All aspects and variables can be easured, problem is
to value them.
EIA methodologies

• The development of METHODOLOGIES to assess impacts

depend on:
• The relationships between territorial elements (or characteristics)
and the actions
• The specific measurements and the necessary information to
estimate the impacts
• The mitigation measures, compensation and follow-up
Objectives of methodologies

• Understand the nature and location of the project and possible

alternatives
• Identify factors of analysis and assessment objectives
• Preliminary identification of impacts and scoping
• Baseline studies and evolution in the absence of projects
• Prediction and assessment of impacts and alternatives
comparison
• Mitigation
• Monitoring and impacts management
Objectives of methodologies

• Technique and method for the evaluation of impacts should

have the following qualities and characteristics
• It should be systematic in approach;
• It should be able to organize a large mass of heterogeneous data;
• It should be able to quantify the impacts;
• It should be capable of summarizing the data;
• It should be able to aggregate the data into sets with the least loss of
information because of the aggregations;
• It should have a good predictive capability;
• It should extract the salient features, and
• It should finally be able to display the raw data and the derived
information in a meaningful fashion.
Criteria for the Selection of EIA
Methodology
• General
• Simplicity
• Manpower time with budget constraints:
• Flexibility
• Impact Identification
• Comprehensiveness
• Specificity
• Isolation of project impacts
• Timing and duration
• Impact Measurement
• Commensurate units
• Explicit indicators
• Magnitude
• Objective criteria
Criteria for the Selection of EIA
Methodology
• Impact Interpretation and Evaluation
• Significance
• Explicit criteria
• Portrayal of "with" and "without" situation
• Uncertainty
• Risk
• Depth of analysis
• Alternative comparison
• Public involvement
• Impact Communication
• Affected parties
• Setting description
• Summary format
• Key issues
• Compliance
Example of methods

• Adhoc methods
• Checklists methods
• Matrices methods
• Networks methods
• Overlays methods
• Environmental index using factor analysis
• Cost/benefit analysis
• Predictive or Simulation methods
Adhoc method

• Simple method based on subjective environment impacts on

broad aspects.
• Adhoc method is useful when time constraints and lack of
information require that the EIA must rely exclusively on expert
opinion.
• It provides minimal guidance for total impact assessment while
suggesting the broad areas of possible impacts and the general
nature of these possible impacts.
Ad hoc method

• This method serves as a preliminary assessment which helps in

identifying more important areas like :
• Wildlife
• Natural drainage
• Recreation
• Endangered species
• Natural vegetation
• Exotic vegetation
• Grazing
• Social characteristics
• Groundwater
• Noise
• Air Quality
• Visual description and services
• Open space
• Health and safety
• Economic values
• Public faciIities
Types of Ad Hoc Methods

• Opinion polls.
• Experts opinion.
• ADVANTAGE
• Specialists on a particular area will provide guidance.
• DISADVANTAGE
• It require expert.
• Short/long term impact are merely examined on guess basis.
• Identification , prediction and interpretation of impacts are quite poor
CHECKLISTS
Checklist means a listing of potential Environmental
Impacts.
This method is done to assess the nature of the
impacts i.e. its type such as adverse /beneficial ,
short term or long term , no effect or significant
impact , reversible or irreversible etc
• Structured list of environmental factors potentially affected.
• Extensive and complete. Main function: identify ALL possible
consequences of the proposal
• Should enable identification of impacts on:
• Soil
• Water
• Atmosphere
• Flora
• Fauna
• Resources
• Recreation
• Cultural
Checklists

• Simple : no information needed on magnitude or importance of

impacts
• Descriptive: require information on magnitude or importance of
impacts as well as indication on prediction methods and
indicators.
• Scaling or Rating
Summary

• Checklist have the professional credibility and Usability

• As it is prepared by the professionals/ experts
• Provides a structured approach for identifying key impacts and or
pertinent environmental factors
• Can be used to stimulate or facilitate interdisciplinary team
discussions
• Clear definition of the spatial boundaries and environmental factors
and the codes used must be given
• Documentation of rationale basic to identifying key factors and/ or
impacts should be accomplished
• Factors and/or impacts from a simple or descriptive checklist can be
grouped together to demonstrate secondary and tertiary impacts
• Importance weights can be assigned to key environmental factor or
impacts
• Key impacts which should be mitigated can be identified using
simple or descriptive methods
• ADVANTAGES
• Simple to understand and use.
• Good for site selection and priority setting.
• Structured list of key potential factors for analysis or key impacts –
aide-memoire;
• Often result from experts judgement published by public / international
organizations;
• Enable interdisciplinary discussions;
• Preparatory stage for matrix assessment (checklist of actions /activities
and checklist of environmental components);
• DISADVANTAGES
• Do not distinguish between direct and indirect impacts.
• Do not link action and impact.
• Sometime it is a cumbersome task.
Matrices

• Double entrance tables, permit establishment of relationships:

• Project actions or activities (causes)
• And the environmental factors (effects)

• Functions:
• Preliminary identification of impacts (scoping)
• Comparative analysis of alternatives
• Impact assessment
• Presentation of evaluation results
Matrices

• Matrix and its variants provide us a framework of interaction of

different actions/activities of a project with potential EI caused
by them.
• A simple interaction matrix is formed where project actions are
listed along one axis i.e. vertically and EI are listed along the
other side i.e. horizontally.
• It was pioneer by Leopold et al(1971).
• It lists about 100 project actions and about 88 environmental
characteristic and condition.
Sectoral Matrix
•Leopold Matrix (Leopold et al., 1971). 100 causes
per 100 effects.
•Magnitude (left-hand corner) and Importance or
significance (right-hand corner). Scale 1 to 10.
Values can still be signaled as positive ( “+”) or
negative (“-”).
Stepped Matrices

• Also called as cross- impact matrix

• Used to address secondary and tertiary impacts

• In this environmental factors are displayed against other

environmental factors
 1 2 3 4 A B F G

A
B
C
D
E

A
B
H
I
J
Matrices – Basic rules

• Objectives and assumptions clear.

• Matrices can be used creatively to identify indirect impacts,
cumulative impacts or contributions to mitigation measures.
• Its better to use colour codes and graphical symbols in
matrices.
• The development of a matrix does not imply that it needs to be
used in the report, it may simply be an element of work
• Each impact analysis needs to be contextualized
• ADVANTAGES
• Link action to impact
• Good method for displaying EIA results
• DISADVANTAGES
• Difficult to distinguish direct and indirect impacts
• Significant potential for double-counting of impacts
• Qualitative
Network Method

• It uses the matrix approach by extending it take into account

primary as well the secondary impacts.
• Shown in the form of tree called as Relevance/Impact
tree/Sequence diagram.
• Identification of direct ,indirect /short and long term environment
impact is a crucial and intact basic step of making Impact tree.
• Used to identify cause-effect linkages
• Visual description of linkages
Primary and secondary impacts
Tree diagrams – decision-making
• ADVANTAGES
• Link action to impact
• Useful in simplified form in checking for second order impacts
• Handles direct and indirect impacts
• DISADVANTAGES
• Can become overly complex if used beyond simplified version
• Qualitative
 Overlay
• Rely on a set of maps of a project area’s environmental
characteristics covering physical , social, ecological, aesthetic
aspects.
• Separate mapping of critical environmental features at the
same scale as project's site plan
• e.g. wetlands, steep slopes, soils, floodplains, bedrock outcrops,
wildlife habitats, vegetative communities, and cultural resources...
• Older Technique: environmental features are mapped on
transparent plastic in different colours.
• Newer Technique: Geographic Information Systems (GIS).
• ADVANTAGES
• Easy to understand and use
• Good display method
• Good for site selection setting
• DISADVANTAGE
• Address only direct impacts
• Do not address impact duration or probability
There is no single ideal
method
Uncertainty in impacts prediction

• Sources of uncertainty:
• information on baseline and on the project (quantity, precision,
reliability)
• associated to the model
• preparation of the model
• application of the model
Uncertainties related to

• Quantity: spatial and temporal resolution, reading mistakes,

bias and imprecision associated to the technique.
• Precision: detail on measurements
• Reliability: correction of such measurements The more precise
is the information the more difficult it is to get reliable data.
 Baseline
• Characterization should:
• limit itself to the relevant affected factors
• be proportional to the probable significant impact

• 1st step- establish objectives in information collection

• Do not collect and present available information just because it is
available, if it is irrelevant, concentrate efforst on relevant information
• 2nd step- analysis of available information and verification of such
information to the defined objectives.
• spatial and temporal representativeness
• 3rd stage- identify additional information needs, field work/ time
available
• 4th stage- synthesize collected information and identify gaps in
knowledge and how important they are to the key objectives
Baseline - methods

• • Methods vary depending on natural, social or economic

variables
• Function of scoping and impacts identification
• Criteria for selection of methods:

• - Objectives
• - impact indicators (relationship with monitoring)
• - limitation: time and budget
Prediction of impacts - Methods

• Prediction of impacts is based on the quantification or

descriptive qualification of impacts identified. Prediction impacts
are clearly dependent on impacts and disciplines.
• Type of methods:
• Experts opinion
• Case comparison
• Use of models
• Experiments
Prediction of impacts - Models

• Physical models
• Representation of the reality ina reduced scale, simulating processes.
(Exs. Wind tunnels or coastal area physical models that simulate
waves)
• Visual models
• Elaboration of images that represent the environment before and after
the development of a project and its alternatives. It can also address
the timing dimension (e.g., seasonal changes, vegetation growth).
• Mathematic models
• Maths or statistic simulations applied to the deterministic or
probabilistic calculation, based on quantitative values.
• Cartographic models
• Representation of reality that will be affected by the project through
maps or charts. Cartographic overlaps enable impact predictions.
Alternatives
Alternatives

• To find the most effective way of meeting the need and purpose of
the proposal, either through enhancing the environmental benefits of
the proposed activity, and or through reducing or avoiding potentially
significant negative impacts
• Consideration of potential alternatives in the EIA process is one of
the most critical elements of the scoping phase
• Its importance is highlighted by Glasson et al. (1999) and by the
Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) in the United States,
which describes the consideration of alternatives as the ‘heart’
of EIA (CEQ, 1978)
• It is not uncommon to find that feasible alternatives are omitted
deliberately or that alternatives proposed by stakeholders are
rejected without adequate justification.
• It provides the opportunity for an unbiased, proactive
consideration of options, to determine the most optimal course
of action
• Failure to consider alternatives adequately at the outset is often
symptomatic of a biased process that is intent on defending a
project proposal
• Such EIA reports are often referred to as ‘sweetheart’ reports
• They can also lead to stakeholder dissatisfaction through failure
to consider relevant suggestions for alternatives from
stakeholders and as such may lead to conflicts within the EIA
process.
• By contrast, recognition of the valuable role of alternatives
implies a desire for transparency in the EIA process and a
willingness to explore all feasible options in an objective
manner, with a view to facilitating balanced decision making in
order to achieve sustainable development.
Obstacles to the full consideration of
alternatives include
• Technological obstacles
• Where high costs of a particular technology may prevent it from being
considered as a viable option, or the lack of technological development
may preclude certain options from consideration
• Resource availability obstacles
• Which may limit the range of alternatives in a particular context
• Political economy or intellectual obstacles
• In which barriers may be imposed by groups or individuals, usually
holding positions of economic or political power, who wish to advance
a particular agenda
TYPES OF ALTERNATIVES

• A range of types of alternatives exists, not all of which are

necessarily appropriate for each EIA
• Consideration should be given to those that are most
appropriate for the potential project
• An important starting point for determining appropriate
alternatives is to consider the following aspects:
• Who is the proponent? (private or public sector)
• Who are the intended beneficiaries? (general public, select groups or
individuals)
• Where is the proposal to occur? (zoned land use, common property or
private property)
• Discrete alternatives
• Generally identified during the pre-feasibility, feasibility and or scoping
phases of the EIA
• Incremental alternatives
• Arise during the assessment process in order to address the negative
impacts that have been identified
• Usually developed to reduce adverse impacts and or enhance benefits
• Since they are linked closely with the identification of mitigation
measures, they are often included with a discussion of mitigation
measures or are incorporated into the final project proposal
The following types or categories of
alternatives can be identified
• Activity alternatives
• Location alternatives
• Process alternatives
• Demand alternatives
• Scheduling alternatives
• Input alternatives
• Routing alternatives
• Site layout alternatives
• Scale alternatives
• Design alternatives
Activity Alternatives

• Referred to as project alternatives

• To embrace policies, plans and programmes as well as projects
• Consideration of such alternatives requires a change in the
nature of the proposed activity
Location Alternatives

• Location alternatives could be considered for the entire

proposal or for a component of a proposal
Process Alternatives

• Also referred as technological alternative and equipment

alternative
• The purpose of considering such alternatives is to include the
option of achieving the same goal by using a different method
or process
Demand Alternatives

• Demand alternatives arise when a demand for a certain product

or service can be met by some alternative means
Scheduling Alternatives

• Also known as sequencing or phasing alternatives

• An activity may comprise a number of components, which can
be scheduled in a different order or at different times and as
such produce different impacts.
Input Alternatives

• Most applicable to industrial applications that may use different

raw materials or energy sources in their processes
Routing Alternatives

• Consideration of alternative routes generally applies to linear

developments such as power lines, transport and pipeline
routes
Site Layout Alternatives

• Site layout alternatives permit consideration of different spatial

configurations of an activity on a particular site
Scale Alternatives

• Activities that can be broken down into smaller units can be

undertaken on different scales.
Design Alternatives

• Consideration of different designs for aesthetic purposes or

different construction materials in an attempt to optimise local
benefits and sustainability would constitute design alternatives
• The design alternatives could be incorporated into the project
proposal and so be part of the project description, and need not
be evaluated as separate alternatives
THE ‘NO-GO’ ALTERNATIVE`

• The ‘no-go’ alternative is sometimes referred to as the

‘no-action’ alternative (Glasson et al., 1999) and at other times
the ‘zero-alternative’
• It assumes that the activity does not go ahead, implying a
continuation of the current situation or the status quo
• In a situation where negative environmental impacts have high
significance, the ‘no-go’ alternative takes on particular
importance
• In some cases, the ‘no-go’ alternative may be the only realistic
alternative and then it has a critical role to play
• Many practitioners argue that the ‘no-go’ alternative should be
included in every environmental assessment as it provides a
baseline against which to assess the relative impacts of other
alternatives
• It is recommended that the ‘no-go’ alternative should routinely
be included as part of the analysis in EIA. The ‘no-go’
alternative provides the means to compare the impacts of
project alternatives with the scenario of a project not going
ahead. In evaluating the ‘no-go’ alternative it is important to
take into account the implications of foregoing the benefits of
the proposed project (World Bank, 1996).
IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES

• Determination and analysis of alternatives should be

appropriate for the potential project being examined
• Alternatives should be identified as early as possible in the
project cycle (e.g. during the pre-feasibility stage)
• Identification of alternatives usually takes place during the
scoping phase of the EIA.
• The search for alternatives should be broad and objective and
should be well documented
• Stakeholders should be consulted in the identification of
alternatives and their views taken into account
• Key criteria when identifying alternatives are that they should
be “practicable”, “feasible”, “relevant”, “reasonable” and
“viable”
• The starting point for project EIA is to identify the project
objectives. For SEA, the starting point is to define development
objectives. This is followed by identifying alternative
technologies or alternative development strategies
• Alternatives must be assessed and evaluated at a scale and
level that enables adequate comparison with the proposed
project
• Assessment should focus on the potential impacts, both direct
and indirect or cumulative, on the environment of all reasonable
alternatives
• The discussion of alternatives should include a statement on
the criteria used to select certain alternatives and how the level
of investigation that was applied to each alternative was
established. If an alternative was rejected, a full motivation
should be provided.
• Methods for comparing alternatives range from very simple
descriptive and non-quantitative methods, through methods
based on varying levels of quantification to a full quantitative
comparison, in which all impacts are expressed in monetary
terms (Glasson et al., 1999).
ROLE OF VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS IN THE IDENTIFICATION
AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES

• The role of the environmental practitioner is to:

• Encourage the proponent to consider all feasible alternatives;
• Provide opportunities for stakeholder input to the identification and
evaluation of alternatives;
• Document the process of identification and selection of
alternatives;
• Provide a comprehensive consideration of the impacts of each
of the alternatives; and
• Document the process of evaluation of alternatives.
• The role of the proponent is to:
• Assist in the identification of alternatives, particularly where
these may be of a technical nature;
• disclose all information relevant to the identification and
evaluation of alternatives;
• Be open to the consideration of all reasonable alternatives; and
• Be prepared for possible modifications to the project proposal
before settling on a preferred option.
• The role of the public is to:
• Assist in the identification of alternatives, particularly where
local knowledge is required;
• Be open to the consideration of all reasonable alternatives; and
• Recognise that there is rarely one favoured alternative that
suits all stakeholders and that alternatives will be evaluated
across a broad range of criteria, including environmental, social
and economic aspects.
SPECIAL CASES WHERE ANALYSIS OF
ALTERNATIVES IS NOT FEASIBLE
• These may include a project that is granted exemption from the
EIA process by the competent authority since no significant
environmental impacts were identified during the screening
process
• In such a case it must be clearly demonstrated that the
proposal is aligned within a re-evaluated development zone.
ROLE OF ALTERNATIVES IN STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT

• Consideration of alternatives is critical

• Early identification and assessment of alternatives in policies,
plans and programmes can avoid many potential problems at
the project level (Therivel and Partidario, 1996)
• In certain cases there may be a range of alternatives at the
strategic level to consider.
 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Definition
Process by which the concerns of
local affected persons and others
who have plausible stake in the
environmental impacts of the project
or activity are ascertained with a view
to taking into account all the material
concerns in the project or activity
design as appropriate

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Ensures the EIA process is open, transparent and

robust, characterised by defensible analysis
Includes public consultation (or dialogue) and
public involvement, which is a more interactive and
intensive process of stakeholder engagement
Most EIA processes are undertaken through
consultation rather than participation
Public involvement must provide an opportunity
for those directly affected by a proposal to express
their views regarding the proposal and its
environmental and social impacts

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Organized, continuous, two-way communication

process or on a general level as a practice used by
governmental agencies, private-sector
organizations or companies to consult and involve
members of the public in the planning,
decision-making, management, monitoring and
evaluation process of an Impact Assessment
Feed-forward describes the process where the
public officials give information to citizens,
information feed-back is the reverse which means
that citizens give information to the public officials
about policies

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Notice of Public Hearing

Advertisement of venue, date and time in
one major National and one local
newspaper.
A minimum notice period of 30 (thirty) days
shall be provided to the public for
furnishing their responses
Advertisement shall also inform the public
about the places or offices where the public
could access the draft EIA and Executive
summary

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Public Hearing is applicable for all Category ‘A’ and

Category B1 projects, except the following:-
modernization of irrigation projects
all projects or activities located within industrial
estates or parks approved by the concerned
authorities
expansion of Roads and Highways which do not
involve any further acquisition of land.
All Building /Construction projects/Area
Development projects and Townships
All projects or activities concerning national defense
and security or involving other strategic
considerations as determined by the Central
Government

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Videography
Regulator shall arrange video recording of entire
proceedings.
A copy of the videotape or a CD shall be enclosed with the
public hearing proceedings and forwarded to the
Regulatory Authority concerned.
Proceedings
The attendance of all those who are present at the venue
shall be noted and annexed with the final proceedings.
Every person present at the venue shall be granted an
opportunity to seek information or clarifications on the
project
Views and concerns expressed shall be recorded by the
regulator
Regulator shall also display the proceedings on its
website for general information

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Arnstein’s ladder-
Describes Public involvement in EIA
Process

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The purpose of public involvement is to:

inform the stakeholders about the
proposal and its likely effects;
canvass their inputs, views and
concerns; and
take account of the information and
views of the public in the EIA and
decision making.

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

key objectives of public involvement

are:
Information dissemination, education, and
liaison
Identification of problems, needs, and
important values
Idea generation and problem solving
Reaction and feedback on proposals
Evaluation of alternatives
Conflict resolution by consensus

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Public participation at various stages

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Necessity of Public Participation:

As a tool to ensure quality of an
Impact Assessment decision
For the creation of greater legitimacy
Ensures a democratic process in the
public decision-making activities

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Principles of public participation:
Process should be:
inclusive – covers all stakeholders
open and transparent – steps and
activities are understood
relevant – focused on the issues that
matter
fair – conducted impartially and without
bias toward any stakeholder
responsive – to stakeholder requirements
and inputs
credible – builds confidence and trust

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Levels of Public Participation

Information
Consultation
Participation
Negotiation

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Stakeholders in EIA process:

People – individuals, groups and
communities– who are affected by the
proposal;
Proponent and other project beneficiaries;
Government agencies;
NGOs and interest groups; and
others, such as donors, the private sector,
academics etc.

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Factors affecting conductance of Public

Participation:
Poverty
Remote and rural settings
Illiteracy
Local values/culture
Languages
Legal systems
Interest groups
Confidentiality
P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR
 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Factors needs to be considered while

conducting Public Participation:
Number of participants and their interests
Degree of interaction between participants
Participants influence on decisions
Stage of the EIA at which it is conducted
Time available for conducting the process
Complexity and controversy
Consideration of cultural norms

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Advantages:
Legitimacy
Improves quality of decision
Identifies and address controversies
Fosters transparency
Two–way communication avoids:
misunderstanding and misconception
Less protest/ disagreement
Ensures mutual acceptable solutions

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Disadvantages:
Chances of delay in process
Requires more time
Lack of knowledge from public can
result in wrong implementation and
high cost
More demand from public (citizen
power)
More vested interests causing
controversies
P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR
 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Methods of Public Participation

Public meetings\informal, small group
meetings
Information and coordination seminars
Forum of other agencies or groups
Operating fields offices
Local planning visits
Field trips and site visits
Public displays and model demonstration
Workshops
Charettes
Special committees
P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR
 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Best-Practice Public Participation

Integrity and accountability
Influence
Fair notice and time
Inclusiveness and adequate
representation
Fair and open dialogue
Multiple and appropriate methods
Informed participation
Adequate and accessible information
P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR
 EXPERT SYSTEMS

Expert systems are alternatively

referred to as knowledge-based
systems
Used in processing and impact
identification stage
Some systems even helps to identify
management and mitigation plans
Helps in decision making

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 EXPERT SYSTEMS

Rule based systems:

Software based
Can address specific issue or holistic
Artificial intelligence (IoT)
Remote Sensing and GIS
Models (Air quality model, Water quality
models, climate change models)

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 EXPERT SYSTEMS

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 EXPERT SYSTEMS

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR

 EXPERT SYSTEMS

P. Purushothaman, Dept. of Civil Engineering, SRMIST, KTR