about niap

National Impact Assessment Programme (NIAP)

Using EIA Mapping to Identify Priorities for EIA Strengthening in PakistanEIA Mapping WorkshopIAIA 2011Puebla, Mexico


About NIAP

• Aims at contributing to sustainable development in Pakistan through: – strengthening EIA systems; and– introducing SEA in the national development

planning• Partners: Planning Commission of Pakistan, Ministry of

Environment, Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency, Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), and IUCN Pakistan.

• Funded through EKN, its four and a half years (15 November 2009 – 14 May 2014) Programme


EIA mapping

• Seven regional workshops conducted• Analysis workshop to share findings and get

feedback• Training of trainers (EIA mappers)


Karachi

Islamabad

Lahore

Muzaffar abad

Peshawar

Gilgit

Quetta


Methodology

• Review of background material provided by NCEA• Structured questionnaire shared with EPAs• Training of trainers conducted • Stakeholders invited for workshops• EIA mapping tool and workshop format adapted/

revised for Pakistan• First four workshops conducted by NCEA and

remaining three by NIAP staff


Methodology

• Review of all EIA maps undertaken to identify and fill gaps

• Overall analysis of the completed maps undertaken

• Analysis workshop conducted and report drafted

• Report shared and finalized


Key Results


Preconditions for good EIA performance(effective democracy external to government)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Federal Sindh Punjab AJK Gilgit Balochistan KP

Combination of scores foractive press, active NGOs,vocal public, independentjudiciary


Preconditions for good EIA performance(effective democracy internal to government)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


Combination of scores forinternal democraticchecks, complaintpossibilities, public natureprocedures, level ofparticipation, learningorganisation,accountability.


Legal Base for EIA (Pakistan average)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

percentage projects covered

completeness/clarity/coherence legal texts

public nature of procedures

guidance

obligation to provide information beforehand

screeningrequirements on contents

scoping

requirements for good quality information

reviewing

solidity of EIA system funding


Legal base decision-making (Pakistan average)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80exhaustiveness & coherence legal framework.

customer friendliness

public nature decision-making

public participation decisions

decentralisation of decision-taking

power sharing and control on power

transparency/justification

appeal options


Number of EIA/license decisions

0

50

100

150

200

250

300


Number decisions on EIA's 2009

Number of decisions on licenses 2009


EIA practice

0

20

40

60

80

100dissemination/knowledge legal texts

institutional capacity (%)

expertise for managing procedures

public nature of EA procedures

public participation in EIA

use of independent external expertise

available means

coverage of projects by EIA/IEE

results (quality EIAs)

monitoring and follow through

Federal

Sindh

Punjab

AJK

Gilgit

Balochistan

KP


Practice decision making

0

20

40

60

80

100awareness of legal texts

user friendliness

publicity of decision-taking

public participation in decision-making

decentralisation of decision-makingdemocratic checks and balances on powers

transparency/justification in practice

appeal practice

functioning inspectorate / enforcement

Federal

Sindh

Punjab

AJK

Gilgit

Balochistan

Kyberpastungua


Biases

• Length of workshops/ number of questions resulted in disinterest of the participants

• Group composition – higher percentage of government participants biased some discussions

• Communication barrier – questions not properly understood by participants resulted in wrong answers


The Way Forward

• IEE/ EIA Rules need to be drafted• Technical capacity of EPAs needs

strengthening• Structural funding for EIA process

needs improvement• Decision making needs to be more

transparent and inclusive


The Way Forward

• Review criteria needs to be revised and made consistent for all regions of Pakistan

• Accreditation system for consultants needs to be developed

• EMP monitoring needs to be institutionalized


Conclusions

• First comprehensive qualitative and quantitative review of EIA process

• Helped set baseline on EIA for all regions of Pakistan

• Process followed was well defined and comprehensive

• Similar process at the end of the project would help in assessing impact of the project


Thank you!

about niap

Documents