Public Participation In Environmental Decision Research Articles

The Role of UNCLOS 1982 in Maintaining and Protecting the International Marine Environment

The disposal of nuclear waste in the Sea of Japan is a complex and controversial issue where it involves aspects of international law and the international environment. Japan, as one of the largest nuclear waste-producing countries, has faced pressure to manage that waste in a way that complies with international legal principles and environmental norms. International law, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), provides a framework for the management of marine resources, including waste disposal issues. However, the lack of clarity in international regulations regarding nuclear waste creates challenges in determining the limits of state responsibility and obligations. From an international environmental perspective, nuclear waste disposal can have long-term detrimental impacts on marine ecosystems and human health. Sustainability and sustainability of marine ecology must be a primary consideration in decisions regarding nuclear waste disposal. Meanwhile, various international conventions and agreements such as the Espoo Convention and the Aarhus Convention emphasize the importance of public participation in environmental decision-making. Therefore, the involvement of civil society in the decision process regarding the disposal of nuclear waste in the Sea of Japan is essential to ensure representation of public interests and concerns. This research aims to find out and analyze Japan's actions in dumping nuclear waste into the Pacific Ocean. The problem formulation in this research is: what is the role of UNCLOS 1982 in maintaining and protecting the international marine environment? This research was written using the normative juridical research type, which includes examining legal conflicts, legal vacancies, or vague norms.

The Aarhus Convention and the Latent Right to a Healthy Environment

Abstract The Aarhus Convention is an ambitious environmental agreement that recognises the right to a healthy environment in its opening article. However, the ambiguous language surrounding this right gives the impression that it is ornamentation and not something requiring serious legal attention. At the same time, the procedural environmental rights which are the centrepiece of the Convention are being eroded, either by design on the part of Contracting Parties or because of a broader malaise about the value of public participation in environmental decision-making. This contribution suggests that closer attention to the legal significance of the substantive right contained in the Convention can help to reinvigorate the procedural Aarhus rights. In so doing, it draws attention to the radical vision of the Aarhus Convention to protect the right of present and future generations to live in an environment adequate to human health and well-being.

National Strategic Development Project in Environmental Law: Economic Growth or Reduction in Public Participation

Public participation is fundamental aspect in environmental decision making though environmental impact assessment. Government in developing country, such as Indonesia tends to use constitutional law as a legitimation for development without consider the rights of people in the society. Purpose the article is analysing the implementation of public participation in national strategic development project. The article uses normative method to check regulation coherency. Comparative approach also uses to find problems in environmental decision making that is related to national strategic development project and conceptual approach as well to make an ideal trajectory for a model law. Result finds that information and access to participate have a major role on how government do a project for development. In conclusion, public participation in environmental decision making is important because it contains access to information, access to participate, and access to justice for creating democratic and establish genuine public participation.

The Human Right to Public Participation in Environmental Decision-making: Some Legal Reflections

Recent years have seen an increase in climate-related protests and demonstrations. There is a clear disparity between the opinions of the public and those of the state in relation to climate change and how it should be tackled. At the heart of the problem is poor communication between citizens and state actors, which has resulted in a lack of support from the public for the state’s climate policy formulation and implementation processes. To increase support for new and existing climate-related policies and initiatives, and to ensure that the fundamental human right to public participation is protected, the state must make a concerted effort to engage with the public during the policy formulation, introduction, application and monitoring phases. This would ensure that state actors are better informed about the concerns of the public and that, when promoting decision-making in climate-related policies, citizens are given opportunities to exercise their right to public participation. It would also promote transparency and accountability in the decision-making process and create a more engaged citizenry and inclusive society. The processes driving greater public participation are not new; they have been encouraged and supported by United Nations (UN) Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and have been incorporated into environmental law both at the national level and at an international level through the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, it may be necessary to rethink and reframe existing public participatory processes to encourage stronger cooperation between all stakeholders in environmental decision-making processes including climate change.

Trying to Express Climate Concerns through Environmental Law? The Changing Lawscape of Public Participation

Abstract The ‘lawscape’ (landscape) of public participation in environmental decision-making in Australia is evolving as climate change has become society’s dominant environmental concern. The traditional modes for citizens to express their concerns through administrative and legislative processes are losing their legitimacy and efficacy. The growth of civil disobedience by climate protesters is a response to this deficit. Rather than viewing such dissent as purely a phenomenon ‘outside’ the legal system, in defiance of the law, climate protest can also plausibly be understood as a shift in the mode of public participation within the legal system as discussions about climate science and action extend to new forums, especially courtrooms hearing criminal prosecutions against climate activists.

The Importance of the Right to a Healthy Environment During the Pandemic

The protection and preservation of the environment and stable climatic conditions, as well as the right of public participation in environmental decision-making in public spaces, are emerging as topics of special significance, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. The need for integrated protection of natural goods of general interest, harmonization with the EU acquis, the need to simultaneously overcome the COVID-19 crisis and implement the Green Agenda for the Western Balkans raises numerous questions, some of them being: is environmental protection a priority during the pandemic and, if so, which aspects of environmental protection represent the primary concern; have the measures limiting public gatherings had an impact on public participation in decision-making; and, do the proposed legislative amendments and additions complete the environmental protection system, with clear criteria for an environmental impact assessment of the related activities and the decisions to support their pursuit?

Estado de direito ambiental e ONG especialistas na América Latina

This paper considers environmental rule of law in Latin America in the context of security problems across the Atlantic region. It considers efforts to improve environmental rule of law through external pressures and domestic institutional reforms, and argues that the role of expert environmental NGOs, such as litigators, educators, community organizers, and research organizations is underappreciated and under-studied. Principle 10 rights, especially public participation in environmental decision-making is an important area in which these expert NGOs contribute.

A Comparative Study on Public Participation in the Chinese-American Environmental Impact Assessment System

Public participation is a basic principle of environmental law. In order to ensure the fairness and openness of environmental decision-making, it plays an extremely important role in the process of environmental impact judgment through the expression and communication of public opinions. The United States is the first country in the world to establish an EIA system. Many countries in the world have cited it and regard the environmental impact assessment system as an important system in the field of environmental protection. Public participation in environmental decision-making is the core content of the EIA system. Due to the problems of public participation in the current environmental impact assessment system in China, it is difficult to meet the needs of the public and the society, so it is of great significance to promote the improvement of the public participation mechanism for the implementation of the environmental impact assessment system. This paper analyzes and recommends the public participation system in the environmental impact assessment system between China and the United States through comparative research.

How law structures public participation in environmental decision making: A comparative law approach

AbstractDespite some skepticism regarding its effectiveness, public participation has become a central facet of environmental decision making, including governments' various decisions to address climate change. However, the existing literature tends to address the general benefits of environmental public participation rather than examine details of how such participation actually occurs and how it differs among nations—even among nations all purportedly pursuing similar public participation goals. This article begins to fill that knowledge gap by examining law's key role in structuring how the public in different countries may actually participate in environmental decision making, including in unfolding national agendas to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change impacts. Both the United States and European Union member states have decades of experience in writing—and rewriting—public participation into their environmental laws. This article actively explores and compares how the laws of the United States, the European Union, and the Netherlands (as an exemplar of an EU member state) structure public participation in environmental decision making in order to assess how far along the scale of public participation categories each government has progressed. It concludes that, for the moment, United States environmental law more often allows for public collaboration and empowers the public to make certain kinds of environmental decisions—although a new law in the Netherlands may soon encourage more creative and collaborative forms of public participation there, as well.

Rule of law and expert NGOs in Latin America

This paper considers environmental rule of law in Latin America in the context of security problems across the Atlantic region. It considers efforts to improve environmental rule of law through external pressures and domestic institutional reforms, and argues that the role of expert environmental NGOs, such as litigators, educators, community organizers, and research organizations is underappreciated and under-studied. Principle 10 rights, especially public participation in environmental decision-making is an important area to which these expert NGOs contribute.

Let the people speak! Resisting the erosion of the right to public participation in the wake of The Federation of Fly Fishers v The Minister of Environmental Affairs

The need for public participation in environmental decisions is accepted in both international and South African law. In the run up to, and just after, the transition to democracy, South Africa was exemplary in many instances in ensuring that participation occurred in a meaningful and broad-based way. In recent years, however, some may question whether the underlying rationale for public participation is still as valued by government, or whether it is being diluted to a mechanistic procedural requirement reminiscent of the past. Disputes about the way in which requirements to give effect to public participation are being implemented have recently surfaced in the courts in respect of several environmental issues. There has been strong public opposition to municipal service delivery regarding waste and water, seismic testing off the South African coast, and law-making activities regarding trout. This article considers the court’s oversight of public participation processes in respect of one of those issues — recent decisions on the introduction of executive regulations. It does so by tracing the particular dynamics regarding the need for public participation in South Africa and assessing the way in which the court has adjudicated public participation disputes in the law-making context. It finds that the court appears to be willing to play its oversight role in a way which is true to the underlying ethos of democratic decision-making in the environmental context, albeit that further opportunities for the court to consider the full range of matters involving participation should be welcomed.

Partycypacja społeczna jako filar demokracji środowiskowej w Chińskiej Republice Ludowej

The latest revision from 2014 of the Chinese Environmental Protection Law introduced a new mechanism of public participation in environmental law-making. It forces the Chinese legislative process to be more transparent and inclusive, that is to say — involve civil society and NGOs. Generally, this development deserves support and approval; there are, however, several shortcomings that should be addressed in the future. For instance, neither the level of cooperation between legislature and civil society nor the outcomes of public participation do always meet social expectations.
 The purpose of this work was to research the Chinese model of public participation in environmental decision-making, bearing in mind the authoritarian governance of the People’s Republic of China. Then, to analyze the real impact of the international cooperation and standards on the application of this model. Specifically, the EU–China Environmental Governance Programme (2010–2015) was discussed as a very influential example.
 The outcome of the research shows that Chinese environmental law has been notably shaped by public international and European law. There are considerable similarities between the legal instruments of environmental democracy applied in China and public international law standards promoted by the United Nations and the European Union through the implementation of the Aarhus Convention of 1998. And, without doubt, it has to be recognised that the People’s Republic of China has its own rich and diversified, however contradictory during the course of history, doctrines and a jurisprudence body of work considering civil society’s participatory role in decision-making.
 Each of the successive Chinese forms of government — beginning with despotism, then a glimpse of democracy, totalitarianism, and, finally, authoritarianism — did leave their mark on the Chinese political thought and law regarding the desired participation level of society (i.e. various civil movements and NGOs) in state affairs. In this day and age, social interest and support for the environmental protection is well-accepted by the Chinese government, especially due to the current plan of the Communist Party of China (CPC) to build an “ecological civilization” in China.

Decision-Maker-Oriented VS. Collaboration: China’s Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making

Public participation in environmental decision-making (EDM) has been broadly discussed. However, few recent studies in English have focused on the participation subject, scope, ways, and procedure in the EDM of developing countries such as China in the worldwide governance transformation. This study aims to provide an overview of public participation in EDM in China, thus elucidating both the legislation and practice of public participation in EDM in China to a broader audience, as such an overview has not yet been provided. At the beginning of this article, we clarify the key definitions of EDM, public participation and the public, and establish an analytical framework for analyzing public participation in EDM in China. We analyze the scope of the public, the participation scope, ways of participating, and participation procedure in EDM in legislation and practice, through document analysis and empirical survey. We then comment on challenges for public participation in EDM in China—including low public participation in EDM, narrow scope of participation, unbalanced ways of participation, and unreasonable participation procedure. In conclusion, we draw wider implications for public participation in EDM in China, arguing for a transformation from a decision-maker-oriented mode to a collaboration mode.

Recommendations for online elicitation of swing weights from citizens in environmental decision-making

There is a growing demand for public participation in environmental decision-making. However, it is unclear how a large number of citizens can best engage in such complex public policy decision processes. This need from the civil society challenges the OR community to develop online decision-making tools. This article reports on a feasibility assessment of swing weight elicitation, implemented online, for real-world decisions about future wastewater infrastructure. Eliciting weights with the swing method is common in MAVT/MAUT, but not online. A total of 298 affected citizens from the Paris region answered the online swing weight elicitation survey. Another 357 citizens directly rated objectives. Three aspects of learning in the context of MCDA were considered: did participants learn facts about the wastewater topic? Did they comply with the swing elicitation process, i.e. follow the instructions? Did participants learn about their preferences? Factual learning was limited. Process compliance was really low (12%), leading to a number of recommendations for improving the interface for online swing weight elicitation. The collected preferences differed statistically significantly between the compliant and non-compliant participants, and also between the non-compliant and direct rating respondents. This emphasised the effect of the elicitation method on preference construction. Moreover, more participants experienced a strengthening of pre-existing opinions than a change in opinion, and most reported being uncertain about their answers. This calls for better understanding process learning and preference construction. We discuss our developed procedure for online swing weight elicitation, recommend ways to improve swing online surveys, and suggest interesting future research lines that would allow empirically verifying our propositions.

Global environmental governance should be participatory: Five problems of scale

The goals of this project are twofold: (1) to show how research on, and normative-theoretical justifications for, public participation in environmental decision-making can inform discussions about how to improve global environmental governance (GEG) and (2) to present a series of questions that follow any attempt to scale up results from research on local, regional, and national public participation to meet global environmental challenges. It seeks to clarify what the ‘problem of scale’ means for democratizing GEG by classifying, and proposing partial answers to, multiple problems of scale: (1) The social barriers question: What political-economic barriers stand in the way? (2) The institutional formation question: What institutions need (re)forming? (3) The ‘who’ question: Who should participate and how should they be selected? (4) The procedural question: How and when should the global public participate? (5) The evaluative question: What are the criteria for process and outcome evaluation?

The Right of Access to Environmental Information in Ukraine and the EU

The purpose of our scholarly work is to explore legal regulation of access to environmental information and public participation in environmental decision-making in Ukraine and the EU. The article considers how the Aarhus Convention has been implemented in member states and Ukraine, concentrating on the public access to information as a valid instrument for environmental protection. Taking part in the Erasmus + Jean Monnet Module EU Environmental Policy and Law we have analyzed the possibility of obtaining operative environmental information on the state of the environment in cities and villages of Ukraine. We also have studied European standards in the sphere of disclosure of environmental information and public participation, found some gaps in Ukrainian legislation and filled them in. We offer an interdisciplinary approach: integration of information law, environmental law, international law, human rights and national security. This will allow us to form a conceptual understanding of the legal regulation of information on the environment as an object of realization of information human rights and a component of national security in the context of environmental threats. Keywords: Environmental information, information human rights, sustainable development, environmental policy

Soft Law in Environmental Matters and the Role of the European Courts: Too Much or Too Little of It?

Environmental policy entered the EU Treaties with the Single European Act. The Maastricht Treaty significantly changed and strengthened the provisions on environmental law and policy, as it made environmental protection an explicit aim of the European Community (EC), now European Union (EU), and empowered the Council to adopt environmental measures by qualified majority voting and no longer unanimity.1 Since the entry into force of the Treaty in 1993, EC (now EU) activity in the field of environmental policy has accelerated, resulting in an impressive body of legislative and non-legislative measures, which includes, according to the Commission, more than 200 pieces of EU legislation.2 Some legislation is sector-specific covering water, air, nature, waste, noise, and chemicals. Other measures are horizontal in nature and cut across all environmental sectors, for example, environmental impact assessments, access to environmental information, public participation in environmental decision making, and liability for environmental damage. Many of these measures deal with extremely technical issues, for example standards for pollutants such as ozone, particulate matter, and nitrogen dioxide, the requirements to ensure that surface waters in the EU keep a ‘good ecological status’ and a ‘good chemical status’ or the adequate conservation measures to preserve a certain natural habitat. Because of the consequent difficulties in the interpretation and application of the relevant pieces of EU law for national administrations, the environmental field has seen an impressive growth in the use of soft law measures. These measures come in the various forms of guidance documents, Commission notes, interpretative communications, and so on.

Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making in India: a Critique

Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making in India: a Critique

“Preemptive Participation” and Environmental Awareness Across Indian Water Quality Policy

Public participation in environmental decision making is promoted in the Global South as a core tenet of “good governance” associated with sustainability. This emphasis on participatory governance ...

South Korean green growth and the Jevons paradox: An assessment with democratic and degrowth policy recommendations

The policy instruments at the core of the notion of green growth are central to South Korea’s National Strategy for Green Growth (NSGG): (1) green stimulus packages; (2) “price-based” or market corrective policies; and (3) green research and development to bring about a technological shift that increases resource efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources. This assessment of the NSGG explores the potentials and limitations of (3) in light of the Jevons paradox, the commonly found association between improved efficiency and increased resource use. Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and total energy use have increased since the implementation of the NSGG despite overall improvements in energy efficiency. We argue that the Jevons paradox is a fundamental limitation of the NSGG and suggest policy alternatives to the NSGG: (1) increased public participation in environmental decision-making and (2) economic degrowth.