Environmental Mediation in Solid Waste Management an Institutional Analysis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Université de Montréal Environmental Mediation in Solid Waste Management An Institutional Analysis C, par Dilek Postacioglu Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l’obtention du grade de Ph.D. en aménagement Août, 2004 ©, Dilek Postacioglu, 2004 p DOz o Université fIIh de Montréal Direction des bibliothèques AVIS L’auteur a autorisé l’Université de Montréal à reproduire et diffuser, en totalité ou en partie, pat quelque moyen que ce soit et sur quelque support que ce soit, et exclusivement à des fins non lucratives d’enseignement et de recherche, des copies de ce mémoire ou de cette thèse. L’auteur et les coauteurs le cas échéant conservent la propriétè du droit d’auteur et des droits moraux qui protègent ce document. Ni la thèse ou le mémoire, ni des extraits substantiels de ce document, ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans l’autorisation de l’auteur. Afin de se conformer à la Loi canadienne sur la protection des renseignements personnels, quelques formulaires secondaires, coordonnées ou signatures intégrées au texte ont pu être enlevés de ce document. Bien que cela ait pu affecter la pagination, il n’y a aucun contenu manquant. NOTICE The author of this thesis or dissertation has granted a nonexciusive license allowing Université de Montréal to reproduce and publish the document, in part or in whole, and in any format, solely for noncommercial educational and research purposes. The author and co-authors if applicable retain copyright ownership and moral rights in this document. Neither the whole thesis or dissertation, nor substantial extracts from it, may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author’s permission. In compHance with the Canadian Privacy Act some supporting forms, contact information or signatures may have been removed from the document. While this may affect the document page count, it does flot represent any loss of content from the document. Université de Montréal Faculté des études supérieures Cette thèse intitulée: Environmental Mediation in Solid Waste Management: An Institutional Analysis présentée par: Dilek Postacioglu a été évaluée par un jury composé des personnes suivantes: Paul Lewis président-rapporteur René Parenteau directeur de recherche Peter Jacobs co-directeur de recherche Michel Gariépy membre du jury Louise Roy examinateur externe Jean-Guy Vaillancourt représentant du doyen de la FES ABSTRACT The use of collaborative (participatory or consensus-based) decision-making approaches in environmental planning and management is becoming more essential not only because of the complex nature of environmental problems caused by the uncertainty and value differences surrounding them, but also because of sfrong grassroots movements that are initiating local democracy and citizenship rights as new values, as well as becausc of institutional restructuring going on in the provision of public services. Ail ofthese cali for public participation. Environmental public participation is considered an essentiai element in achieving sustainable development, i.e., the new order of living. Progress towards sustainable development is proposed to be measured by progress in restructuring the institutional context to adapt ecological and democratic decision-making proccsses. Collaborative (consensus-based or participatory) approaches (including environmental mediation) are presented as effective tools for effective public participation. Success of collaborative approaches is suggested to be measured by their contribution to the transformation of an institutional context towards a structure, which facilitates and accommodates democratic decision-making processes. The quality of the coliaborative decision-making process in terms of its legitimacy and faimess is crucial for a democratic structure. $uch a process needs to be linked to the institutional context that it is supposed to fransform. The quality of the process as an accessible and empowering one, however, is limited by the institutional context itself. This thesis is an assessment of the quality of the environmentai mediation process for sanitary landfill projects in relation to the institutional context in which it is set up, i.e., in Québec’s environmental assessment and review procedure (PEEIE). This assessment is based on legitimacy and faimess, two cntena that dominate in the relevant literature. The assessment is carried out at several leveis. The first-level analysis consists of an institutional analysis of the public heanng and environmental mediation processes as they are set up in PEEIE. This is based on a comparative analysis that aims to discover the underlying similarities and differences between two processes. This analysis also establishes the basis for our second level of analysis, in which we explore links between the institutional context and the process. For this, a comprehensive analysis of legal provisions is undertaken, as well as a historical analysis of the events surrounding the practice of these two processes. The second level of analysis has two dimensions. The first dimension consists of an analysis of the environmcntal mediation process for eight sanitary landfill projects in terms of its appropriateness and legitimacy in relation to the institutional context. This analysis is based on an analysis of accessibiiity of the process, i.e., its inclusiveness as well as its representativeness and accountability. The second dimension consists of an assessment of the faimess of the process, which is based on the anaiysis of the distribution of roles, responsibilities, and resources among the participants, as well as the perceptions of the participants of the faimess ofthe process. We find that the iegitimacy and faimess of the environmental mediation process is Iimited because of the institutional context in which it is set up. In this structure, there is no conflict assessment phase in which issues and stakeholders can be identified, and the appropriateness of the mediation process can be determined in collaboration with ah relevant stakeholders. In addition, the mediation process is only open to participation of those groups who submit a public hearing request within the forrnal time himits. It also ailows deliberation and negotiation only on the issues raised by the groups with formal status. Representation of environmental interests and general public is problcmatic as well. Secondly, there is incquity between groups 11 in terms of access to information, negotiation capacity, and skills. There is no training and financiai support program for disputant groups to acquire the necessary skiils and knowledge. Furthcrmore, the lack of a question period (which would serve as a leaming process for the disputant groups) emphasizes the inequity between groups with direct access to technical and legal expertise and those with no access to these rcsources. Above and beyond ail of this, institutional fragmentation prevents environmentai mediation from becoming an effective coliaborative decision-making process. We see this in many areas, ail reiated to institutional context: the distribution of rights and responsibilities among different branches of govemment apparatus, the iack of powers of the BAYE Commissions, and the iack of coordination between different phases of public consultation and communication activities. The study finds that despite ail these drawbacks, mainly caused by the institutional context, the environmental mediation process has great potential in becoming an effective platform for public participation: one that is empowering. We propose several areas of intervention to be addressed in order to enhance the quaiity of the cnvironmental mediation process, i.e., in its iegitimacy and faimess. Among these there are: (a) adapting a conflict assessment phase in the process, in which the appropriateness of environmentai mediation is detcrmined, and issues and stakehoiders are both identified; (b) integrating better means for notification and information of the public of the project and the process aiike, and means for financial support and training for the stakehoiders; and (c) combining public hearing and environmental mediation processes to create a process that is accessible, provides better access to technical and legal expertise, and is resuits onented. Key Words: Environmental Impact Assessment, $oiid Waste Management, Public Participation, Environmentai Mediation, Institional Contcxt, Proccss, Québec 111 RÉSUMÉ L’usage des approches collaboratifs (ou participatifs) de prise de décision dans la planification et la gestion environnementale devient de plus en plus important non seulement à cause de la complexité des problèmes environnementaux crées par 1 incertitude et la différence des valeurs autour du sujet, mais aussi à cause de(s) forts mouvements originaux qui amènent la démocratie locale et les droits de citoyenneté comme nouvelles valeurs ainsi qu’à la restructuration des institutions publics. Tout cela nécessite la participation du public. La participation publique environnementale est considérée comme un élément essentiel pour atteindre un développement durable tel que le nouveau style de vie. Nous suggérons que le progrès dans le développement durable soit mesuré par celui de la restructuration du contexte institutionnel afin d’adapter les processus de prise de décision écologiques et démocratiques. Les approches de collaboration, basées sur le consensus ou participatives, incluant la médiation environnementale, sont présentées comme des outils efficaces pour une