1. The Danish Centre for Environmental Assessment
Citizens at the core of environmental assessments: Experiences from Denmark
MKB-dagen 2017
Ivar Lyhne
The Danish Centre for Environmental Assessment
Thanks for invitation..
Sorry for not being good at Swedish
My background, DCEA

2. Purposes of the presentation
To give insight in Danish system
To flag potentials in making citizens the core
To initiate interesting discussions
Welcome to interrupt – discussion points at the end
Not about benefits of public participation
Not about Aarhus Convention
Department of Planning

3. Danish EA Community A “family” with constructive dialogue
Annual “Miljøvurderingsdag” with participants
Continuous dialogue between legislators, practitioners and researchers
Miljøvurderingsdag (since 2011)
Department of Planning

4. Basis for the presentation
”Constructive public participation” in infrastructure development
Social impacts in EA
PhD within energy sector
Studies of processes, e.g.
radioactive waste deposit
wind power projects
shale gas project
Survey
Department of Planning

5. Citizens and public participation – what are we talking about?
Methods, practices, people, different views
Department of Planning

6. Citizen role in EA in Denmark
Department of Planning

7. Citizens the core of EA
Process: EA is in some sectors the only interaction with citizens
Quality: Citizens have key role in ensuring EA quality
Political: Local politicians focus on EA issues that bother citizens
Content: Citizen concerns get more space in EA reports
Planning reforms in 1970s: public role > expert committee
Department of Planning

8. Citizens getting an increased role
Political pressure in EA increasingly evident
E.g. wind farm development success rate low
Formal complaints have delayed many projects
Enhancing quality and dialogue
(Environmental board of appeal)
Getting more organised, e.g. wind power
Department of Planning

9. Asking planners of citizens’ role
80 practitioners, 2013
Department of Planning

10. Examples from practice
Wide variety of tools in practice - depends on resources and political sensitivity – some of those with highest output are bus trips and dialogue at the individual citizen
Department of Planning

11. Citizens to bring EA earlier in planning?
Citizens propose infrastructure routing
Insight about environmental aspects to ground proposals
Local ownership of routing/EA
Proactive rather than reactive integration
Institut for Planlægning

12. Technology, interaction and citizens
VR glasses to better understand visual impacts
Video animations
Social media bring new situations
Social media: Fake news, organising, speed
Developers: Primary purpose is to inform
Developer A
Developer B
Developer C
Developer D
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
Instagram
YouTube
Always
Sometimes No
Department of Planning

13. Danish research on citizens in EA context
Department of Planning

14. Research findings on citizens in EA
Citizen reactions: Everyday life > projects
Citizen needs differ  use complementing methods
Institut for Planlægning

15. How do we choose the right PP tool for a specific context?
… by engaging with the citizens!
Department of Planning

16. What is good public participation?
Department of Planning

17. Growing awareness of flaws
Bad public participation is expensive (delays, costs and PR)
That traditional hearings are often merely reproducing conflicts
The need to define what is debatable (what can/cannot be influenced)
The need to specify ”what is in it for me”
Department of Planning

18. Improving the vocabulary of “acceptance”
“The ladder of citizen satisfaction“
Advocate
Support
Satisfaction
Acceptance
Anxiety
Opposition
What is ”good” PP?
Department of Planning

19. Barriers to improved practice
Improvement potentials: Clarity about scope of influence + earlier involvement
80 practitioners, 2013
Department of Planning

20. Discussion points What is the role of citizens in future EA practice?
Quality control, content, politics?
How do we as a EA community cooperate on PP?
Common responsibility for PP culture?
Who is to make the innovations?
Public participation in the age of fake news
How big is the threat?
How do we handle it?
Department of Planning