NEW DIRECTIONS FOR THE PHILIPPINE EIS SYSTEM: A PERSPECTIVE FROM A CSO Presented at the Forum on New

1
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR THE PHILIPPINE EIS SYSTEM A
PERSPECTIVE FROM A CSOPresented at the Forum on
New Directions for Philippine EIS System, World
Bank Office in Manila, 13 July 2005

• ISAGANI R. SERRANO
• Senior Vice-President
• Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM)

2
WHATS WRONG ABOUT THE EXISTING PHILIPPINE EIS
SYSTEM?

• Over its two decades of implementation, the
  effectiveness of the Philippine EIA system has
  been saddled with policy, institutional, and
  implementation constraints/weaknesses
• Poor compliance with the regulation due to the
  limited appreciation of the usefulness and value
  of EIA
• Many EIAs are carried out late in the planning
  stage
• Lack of effective communication and coordination
  among the implementing agencies
• Lack of baseline data resulting in vague
  predictions and therefore poor quality EIS
  documents
• Inadequate budgetary allocation

3
WHATS WRONG?

• Inadequate training of assessors and reviewers
  within the implementing agency
• Public participation is not systematic and its
  impact on decision-making is still undetermined.
• Multipartite-Monitoring Teams (MMTs) are created
  midstream of project implementation (e.g.,
  Bacon-Manito Geothermal Project).

4
WHATS WRONG?

• Lack of just compensation for affected
  stakeholders, particularly indigenous communities
  
• Social acceptability requirement (i.e.,Local
  Council endorsement) unacceptable (e.g., Northern
  Negros Geothermal Project)
• Questionable practices by public servants (e.g.,
  EMB technical staff being involved in EIA
  preparation itself)
• Political intervention determines the outcome of
  some environmental reviews

5
WHATS WRONG..?

• In sum, despite its two decades of implementation
  and a wealth of techniques, coupled with
  elaborate legal instruments, the EIA system is
  still poor in content and process.
• Government efforts at addressing these problems
  have been at best stop-gap measures designed to
  provide short-term remedies.

6
WHATS GOOD ABOUT THE EIS SYSTEM

• The Philippine EIS system - one of the most
  elaborate systems in place supported with
  administrative structures and legal instruments
• Project developers show a modest acceptance of
  the system
• A wealth of tools and techniques have been
  developed- including environmental risk
  assessment, carrying capacity assessment, etc.

7
WHATS GOOD

• Setting up of an Environmental Guarantee Fund
  that will address any significant risks posed by
  any project to human life, health, property and
  the environment.

8
WHAT THE EIS SYSTEM SHOULD BE

• EIA shift from a technical exercise to an
  approach to public decision-making many aspects
  involve value judgments that are inherently
  political in nature.
• EIA be redefined as a process of environmental
  planning that provides a basis for resource
  management to achieve the goal of
  sustainability. a link to integrate the
  science of environmental analysis and the
  politics of resource management.

9
WHAT THE EIS SYSTEM SHOULD BE

• Redefine EIA along the following
• as a political process of decision-making and its
  defined role within the institutional
  arrangements for management
• integration of stakeholders into the assessment
  process and
• greater emphasis on methods for impact management
  than impact assessment.
• The heavy emphasis on technical and economic
  criteria over environmental considerations,
  particularly for energy projects be complemented
  with consensual decision-making

10
WHAT THE EIS SYSTEM SHOULD BE

• Stakeholder participation in the EIA process
  must be strengthened- public hearings,
  participatory, community-based approaches such as
  community consultation/validation meetings,
  walk-through, tribal rituals,
  seminar-workshops, and joint planning, etc,
• The proposal to remove the social impact
  assessment (and correspondingly the social
  acceptability requirement) runs counter to the
  concept of sustainable development.
• Need for just compensation of affected
  communities for displacement and adverse
  environmental impacts of projects
• Need for continuing capacity building for
  stakeholders (including IEC campaigns) in
  all aspects of EIA and environmental management

11
WHAT THE EIS SYSTEM SHOULD BE

• Need for proper economic valuation of natural
  resources and their intangible ecological
  services.
• Need for a third-party validation of ECC
  compliance monitoring
• Need to undertake research on critical issues
  that inhibit citizen participation, esp. those
  that address power relationships between
  stakeholders, equity considerations, the
  integration of scientific and indigenous
  knowledge and determination of public interest.
• Need for a working and comprehensive data base
  and information system that is accessible to key
  stakeholders and the public.

12
WHAT THE EIS SYSTEM SHOULD BE

• Need to integrate programmatic EIA into local
  land use and development planning as well as
  apply EIA concepts/principles and tools to
  evaluate environmental impacts of national
  policy.

13
THANK YOU !