1. Public Participation & Stakeholder Representation Anders Ekbom, Environmental Economics Unit, Department of Economics, University of Gothenburg anders.ekbom@economics.gu.se Dec 1 2010

2. Public participation and Stakeholder representation Objectives: Understand what Public partici- pation and Stakeholder representation are in SEA context (env. management) Understand & discuss: - Why/why not (benefits/costs, lessons learned) - How it can be done (tools) - Risks, Obstacles & Solutions to poor public participation

3. Why Public Participation?

4. Enhancing stakeholder involvement in strategic planning can result in: Public debates => Social learning Public debates => Social learning Strengthened constituencies Strengthened constituencies Improved Governance Improved Governance Strengthened Accountability Strengthened Accountability

5. Why Public Participation? Stakeholder involvement in strategic planning pertains to: Power Power Democracy Democracy Influence and Rights Influence and Rights Elite vs the Public & the Poor Elite vs the Public & the Poor Experts vs “Wisdom of crowds” Experts vs “Wisdom of crowds”

6. Why Public Participation? “…. involvement of a variety of stakeholders in decision making increases the likelihood that solutions to complex problems like sustainable development will emerge.” (Slunge et al 2009) “…. involvement of a variety of stakeholders in decision making increases the likelihood that solutions to complex problems like sustainable development will emerge.” (Slunge et al 2009)

7. Why the Vulnerable Should Be Involved in Policy Planning Vulnerable groups: - - Often first to experience negative impacts of policies, plans, programs - - Are most affected by neg impacts - - Indeed have the capacity to appraise, analyze, plan, act, and monitor PPP - - Can stimulate debates on policy impacts and trade-offs based on experience Ref: Ahmed and Sanchez-Triana (2008)

8. Who participates?  Who are invited?  Who are not invited?  Fair representation?

9. Who participates? Media Foreigndonors Military LegislatureBureaucracy Politicalparties Ministries Universities, Research institutes Civilsociety IntlNGOs Businesssector Old elites Vestedinterests Judiciary

10. Timing is key for public involvement and information Policy Formation Policy Intervention New policies: Kenya (Land, Forest); Malawi (minerals)=> new/changed practices, new legislation, new agency, stakeholder involvement Before policy reform: Gov receptivity for new info, novel ideas, preparedness for change Research results Knowledge Public involvement Too late, missed opportunity

11. SEA & Participation Planning SEA Features: - Expert based - No partici- pation - Top-down

12. Planning SEA Features: - Some consultation - No feedback SEA & Participation

13. Planning SEA Features: - Involvement - Consultative - Interactive - Feedback SEA & Participation

14. Planning Features: - Integrated - Consensus building - Joint decision-making SEA & Participation

15. HOW: Five levels of stakeholder involvement (1): 1. 1. Information 2. 2. Consultation 3. 3. Joint Analysis 4. 4. Consensus building 5. 5. Decision making

16. HOW: Participation Dynamics in PPP 1. Information: Information about proposed policy 4. Consensus building: Negotiation of proposed policy Presentation of policy for decision 2. Consultation: Exchange of info and priorities for proposed policy Revision of policy planning process 3. Joint analysis: Preparation of feasibility studies Analysis of policy relevant data 5. Decision-making: Finalization of policy details Enactment of policy into law Formal Procedures Policy imple- mentation and monitoring Technical analysis Capacity building Social Mobilization

17. WHY:Benefits of Participation in PPP Ref: Ahmed and Sanchez-Triana (2008) Participation of vulnerable groups in policy formulation Empowerment of vulnerable groups (”intrinsic value”) Improved Policy analysis (”instrumental value”) More effective Policies Ownership And support for Policies More Accountable Government Inclusive and Equitable Political systems

18. HOW: Tools in the Participatory Policy cycle Policy Analysis Policy Monitoring Policy formulation Community score cards Citizen report cards Beneficiary assessment Policy Implementation Participation and consultation Stakeholder analysis Institutional analysis Social Impact analysis Part. Poverty assessm. Beneficiary assessment Participatory planning

19. Conclusions (Ahmed and Sanchez-Triana, 2008) Giving vulnerable groups a voice in policy formulation yields several benefits: - - Strengthens empowerment, social accountability and transparency - - Creates a more-open dialogue - - Greater understanding between those in power and vulnerable groups - - Policies are better informed, understood, and supported

20. Why not: Obstacles to stakeholder involvement (1): 1. Weak interests are difficult to identify: Who are the “weak and vulnerable?” 2. Their voice is often weak: not level playing fields; 3. Difficult to involve large unorganized groups: poor people often excluded from current policy debate; unorganized;

21. Why not: Obstacles to stakeholder involvement (2): 4. Policy makers’ may not be sincere: may use “participatory speak”, no willingness to use their input 5. Vested interests do not participate in the process: implementation obstructed by these groups, they control it in reality

22. Overcoming obstacles to stakeholder involvement: 1. Institutionalize formal laws that require participation or representation 2. Strengthen Accountability: formally! 3. Involve weak and other stakeholders 4. Strengthen networks that can demand improved stakeholder representation 5. Focus on small improvements (when obstacles large)

23. Wilkins (2003): The Need for Subjectivity in SEA Traditional perception:  Subjectivity (value judgements) in SEA often viewed as a shortcoming  Expert opinion and scientific analysis viewed as preferred approach

24. Need for Subjectivity in SEA (2) Wilkins (2003) contests these views  Believes in “wisdom of the crowds”; public’s knowledge from practical experience and subjective views  Expert opinion and scientific analysis loaded with value judgements

25. Need for Subjectivity in SEA (4) Wilkins (2003):  “Knowledge of the environment will never be sufficient to accurately predict the exact impacts of a project.”  “The influence of personal value systems and beliefs is unavoidable when creating an expert evaluation and interpretation.”

26. Need for Subjectivity in SEA (5) Uncertainty, Simplified assumptions, Subjectivity and Value judgements in:  - choice of data  - (application of) analytical methodology  - causal explanations  - projections for the future => Reduces credibility and public confidence

27. Need for Subjectivity in SEA (6) Wilkins (2003): Acknowledge Subjectivity and Value judgements in EIA/SEA!  Promote exchanges of views among people  Promote stakeholder involvement in planning and decision-making => Validation (of Strategic actions/PPP solutions) => Social learning

28. Need for Subjectivity in SEA (7) Social learning: “…is changes in awareness and changes in how individuals see their private interests linked with the shared interests of their fellow citizens.” …is achieved 1) through communication between stakeholders and the public and 2) by reaching agreements through accommodation and understanding.

29. Wilkins’ (2003) Conclusions Increased Public participation: - Provides a validation role of proposed PPP - Addresses the needs of good governance - Brings public values and preferences into the planning process - Results in better planning, decisions and political legitimacy - Assists to educate/inform stakeholders, the Government and PPP-proponent

30. Wilkins’ Conclusions (c’ed) Increased Public participation: - Reduces or avoids conflicts - Helps the public to become more responsive and democratic citizens - Allows people and Government to learn about each other (preferences, constraints etc.).