DEMOCRACY IN PRACTISE Workshop "Public Participation: from Obligation to Advantage" Introduction Dušica Radojčić, Zelena Istra Pula, April 2009

Croatian legislation - limited requirements for PP - input on the proposed project in a scoping phase (not obligatory for the proponent) or - comments during the EIS review and public hearings. Too late in the decison making process to influence the decision. PP as public relations: defending a decision that is already been made, or placating the public by soliciting opinions that are subsequently dismissed. The myopic view of public participation

No real understanding of positive outcomes from PP among practitioners. Missing tradition of meaningful PP. Missing good practise examples. Decision-makers are applying only the minimal law requirements for PP.

Presentation of public participation values and positive outcome Best practise examples Encouraging the development of new techniques in the field of impact assessment and public participation WORKSHOP GOALS

WHY INVOLVE THE PUBLIC IN EIA? Because we're required to. Or...? There are 4 basic positions: 1. PP - proper conduct of democratic government (based on the democratic ideal of citizen representation in decision-making). 2. PP - a way to ensure that projects meet citizens' needs and are suitable to the affected public

WHY INVOLVE THE PUBLIC IN EIA? Because we are required to? Or...? 3. The project carries more legitimacy and less hostility if potentially affected public can influence the decision- making process. 4. The final decision is "better" when local knowledge and values are included and when expert knowledge is publicly examined.

Based on the previous bad experience of un-effective participation in EIA procedures, the public in Croatia is inclined: - to organize citizens initiatives in order to oppose resistance to development - to be suspicious and mistrustful Distrustful citizens tend to respond with contentious or legalistic actions which can be time-consuming and expensive. Recent examples in Istria are prooving it (Kaštijun, Rockwool, Golf Motovun). BUT...

CAPACITY BUILDING Therefore, more efforts to organize a meaningful public participation are required. Authorities and proponents have not learnt yet how to deal effectively with people in the community (especially on contentious projects). There is a clear need of capacity building related to participatory communication.

BEYOND THE REQUIREMENTS Citizen involvement reduced to a procedural exercise instead of a substantive process to include the public in environmental decision-making. The goal of our project is to provide ways to improve its effectiveness. Going beyond the minimum requirements can benefit the public, the project proponent and the final project/plan.

- proved that a proactive, substantive approach to public involvement has benefits over a reactive, procedural approach - data from 239 cases of public involvement in environmental decision making - the view of PP derived from the analysis is quite positive - evaluation of relative success of different participatory mechanisms and specific process elements - helps to understand what PP has accomplished and to understand what leads to effective process - valuable material for those who intend to plan PP for a specific project, for those willing to go beyond procedural requirements or those still suspicious about the positive outcome of PP Democracy in Practise research

For more information: Zelena Istra, Gajeva 3, HR Pula Tel./fax (0) Sunce, Hrvatskog narodnog preporoda 7, HR Split tel (0) D Delegation of the European Commission to the Republic of Croatia Trg žrtava fašizma 6, HR Zagreb tel (0) , Fax: (0) The content of this presentation is responsibility of Zelena Istra and can in no way be understood as reflecting the views of the European Union. Project "Democracy in Practise is funded by the European Union" Phare 2006 Program