GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) IN THE ARCTIC

ARCTIC STRATEGY Responsible Institution : Finnish Ministry of the Environment Paula Kankaanpää

Producer: Finnish Environment Institute Eeva Furman, Mikael Hildén

Drafting Group: Tord Céwe, Sweden John McEwen, Canada Mikael Hildén/Eeva Furman/Seija Korhonen, Finland Joe Nazareth, /Greenland Marianna Novikova, Russia Richard Wildermann, USA Kjell Moe, Gunnar Futsæter, Norway Holmfridur Sigurdardottir, Iceland Violet Ford, ICC/AEPS Indigenous Peoples Secretariat The Sami Council

Drawings: Mantsi Rapeli

Layout: Heikki Laurila/lIlusia

English language editing: Terry Forster

Printed at: Kirjapaino Auranen, Forssa 1997

Publisher: Finnish Ministry of the Environment P.O.Box 399 FIN-00251 Helsinki tel: +358 9 19911 fax: +358 9 9545

Citation: Arctic Environment Protection Strategy 1997: Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the Arctic. and Utilization. Finnish Ministry of the Environment, Finland, 50 p.

ISBN: 951-731-039-0

Copies available from: Finnish Ministry of the Environment P.O.Box 399 FIN-00251 Helsinki tel: +358 9 19911 fax: +358 9 9545

&

http://www.vyh.fi/fei/intercoo/arctic/index.htm, where additionally can be found information on EIA procedures in the eight arctic countries 2 Contents

1 Introduction ...... 5 2 Application of EIA ...... 11 3 Scope of the assessment ...... 13 4 Baseline information ...... 16 5 Impact prediction and evaluation ...... 18 6 Mitigation ...... 24 7 Monitoring ...... 27 8 The environmental impact assessment document ...... 30 9 Public participation ...... 32 10 Traditional knowledge ...... 37 11 Transboundary impacts ...... 39

Contributors ...... 42

Appendices I Common arctic features ...... 45 II Areas demanding particular attention in the Arctic ...... 46 III Definitions ...... 47 IV Sources of information ...... 49

Information on the EIA procedures in the eight arctic countries available on the www at http://www.vyh.fi/fei/intercoo/arctic/index.htm

3 Preamble

In 1991 at Rovaniemi, Finland, ministers use of traditional knowledge. Finland from all arctic countries approved the was asked to act as a lead country for Arctic Environment Protection Strategy the writing of the guidelines. (AEPS), which seeks to protect the Arctic environment. The Arctic Council EIA provides opportunities for local was established in September 1996 and people to participate and communicate the programs of AEPS continue under with developers and administrators, and its umbrella. One of the key objectives to have a say in matters that affect their of the Arctic Council is to promote sus- environment. These guidelines aim at tainable development. Sustainable reaching a wide audience of private per- development is defined as development sons, support groups, local adminis- that meets the needs of the present trators and developers, federal adminis- generation without compromising the trators and ministers of arctic countries, ability of future generations to meet and at giving practical advice for pract- their needs. Sustainable development itioners in carrying out environmental requires a planning approach where impact assessment in arctic areas. environmental integrity is maintained at permissible levels of development. Environmental impact assessment may ■ The Arctic Environmental Protection assist this planning approach, and, Strategy (AEPS) was adopted by Canada, therefore, is one of the important means Denmark/Greenland, Finland, Iceland, for achieving this objective. Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States through a Ministerial Declaration At their meeting in Inuvik in March at Rovaniemi, Finland, in 1991. The programs under the AEPS are: Sustain- 1996, the Arctic Environmental able Development and Utilization (SDU), Ministers asked that guidelines for en- Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna vironmental impact assessment (EIA) be (CAFF), Arctic Monitoring and Assess- prepared. The Ministers recommended ment Program (AMAP), Emergency that the guidelines should focus on Prevention, Preparedness and Response circumstances and issues of special (EPPR) and Protection of the Arctic importance in the Arctic, and explore Marine Environment (PAME). In future, ways of dealing with cumulative the AEPS programs will continue under impacts, transboundary issues, the parti- the auspices of the Arctic Council. cipation of indigenous people, and the

Acknowledgments

These guidelines are the result of a truly persons and organizations that took part international effort. After an initiative in producing these guidelines can be by the Finnish Minister of the found on page 42. The support of the Environment, Sirpa Pietikäinen (1994), Task Force on Sustainable Development international workshops and active cor- and Utilization and the encouragement respondence among the Arctic countries of the Senior Arctic Affairs Officials concerning texts and ideas have carried have also been crucial to the preparation 4 the process to this point. A list of all of these guidelines. 1 Introduction

Environmental impact assessment, These guidelines are not intended to hereafter called EIA, aims at avoiding replace existing procedures adopted by deleterious effects on the arctic environ- international, national or provincial ment, including all its fauna and flora, laws, land claim agreements, regulations abiotic components, natural resources, or guidelines. As they do not recom- and human health, security and well- mend any particular procedure for EIA, being. these guidelines are applicable across jurisdictional boundaries and in different EIA processes. They aim at providing What is the aim of suggestions and examples of good these guidelines? practice to enhance the quality of EIAs and the harmonization of EIA in diffe- These guidelines aim at giving practical rent parts of the Arctic. guidance for environmental assessments to all parties involved in development activities in the northern circumpolar What are the key tasks of areas, but especially to local authorities, an EIA? developers and local people. The guide- lines raise issues that are unique to arctic EIA is a process of identifying, commu- assessments – such as permafrost – but nicating, predicting and interpreting they also emphasize universal issues that information on the potential impacts of are particularly important in the Arctic – a proposed action or development on such as public participation and the use the environment, including humans, and of traditional knowledge. to propose measures to address and miti-

5 Table 1. Tasks in an arctic EIA process Application of EIA The decision to conduct an EIA for a project should take into account the special conditions in the Arctic; arctic-specific thresholds and sensitivity criteria are strongly recommended.

Scope of the assessment The scope of an assessment should include all potential environmental, socio-cultural and economic impacts, especially impacts on the traditional uses of resources and livelihoods of indigenous people and also the consideration of alternatives.

Baseline information The following key issues should be considered: combining traditional and scientific knowledge, using methods compatible to existing data collection programs in the Arctic, including socio-economic matters, using both qualitative and quantitative information and allowing sufficient time for collecting and compiling baseline information.

Impact prediction Issues identified through scoping are analyzed and and evaluation expected impacts defined by identifying the type of impacts, by predicting the magnitude, the probability of occurrence and the extent of the impacts and by determining the significance of the impacts. In the Arctic, cumulative impacts are of special concern.

Mitigation Mitigation aims at avoiding or lessening impacts. In considering mitigation measures, special arctic features should be taken into account and the public should also be involved.

Monitoring Monitoring should include follow up of impacts, verification of predictions and feedback on mitigation and project operations. The environmental conditions in the Arctic make monitoring a demanding task requiring careful planning.

The environmental impact An environmental impact assessment document should be assessment document prepared and provided to all involved parties. The document describes the project and its likely impacts upon the environment.

Public participation An EIA should ensure effective public participation and consultation. Unique features such as the culture, the socio- economic situation and the remoteness of the Arctic should be considered in planning and carrying out public consultations in the Arctic.

Traditional knowledge In the EIA process, traditional knowledge should be used in the understanding of possible consequences of predicted impacts and in reducing uncertainties.

Transboundary impacts Assessments of transboundary impacts require project developers and authorities to make allowances for different legal systems, to provide translations when necessary, and to make special arrangements for public participation across jurisdictional borders. 6 gate these impacts. An overview of the the public, regulatory and non- tasks in the EIA process, as covered by regulatory authorities to guide these guidelines, is given in Table 1. decision-making;

EIA should be initiated at an early stage ◆ to assist project design and planning of project development so as to become by identifying those aspects of an integral and influential part of plan- location, chosen technical solutions, ning. In addition, EIA is a means of im- construction, operation and proving decision-making, because it decommissioning that may cause allows for the input of public opinion, adverse environmental effects, and other knowledge and information, including social, cultural, to ensure fairness and balance in the health and economic impacts; final decisions. ◆ to identify environmental options ■ The Panel of the Northwest Territories and to evaluate the environmental (NWT) Diamonds project in Canada implications of all viable alternatives. concluded that, provided the project is Project proposals should balance developed as proposed and subject to environmental protection and the the Panel’s recommendations, the pro- conservation of natural resources ject can be an example of sustainable with other social, health and development in the industry. economic considerations; and In coming to this conclusion, the Panel observed the determination expressed by the proponent to draw on project rev- enues to invest in the social- and human- resource capital of the NWT through its employment preference, its work with the indigenous communities, and its edu- cation and training programs. The Panel draws this conclusion in the context of a rapidly expanding and young population, and in an economy limited in its ability to provide for the livelihood and well-being of this growing population.

NWT Diamonds Project, Review Panel Report, Canada 1996.

What are the objectives of an arctic EIA? The objectives of an arctic EIA are: ◆ to estimate and describe the nature and likelihood of environmentally damaging events to provide a basis for decision-making; ◆ to provide for the incorporation of traditional knowledge and consultations with the developer, 7 ◆ to devise and implement remedial cularly relevant to the project in ques- measures for eliminating or tion. A list of such features is provided minimizing undesirable impacts. in appendix I. More extensive descrip- tions of the Arctic are given in the EIA is used extensively throughout the sources of information, which include world in the initial stages of project pre- Internet links to extensive bibliographi- paration. In many countries, including cal lists (appendix IV). all the Arctic countries, EIA is mandato- ry for specific, often large-scale activ- The Arctic also has several unique areas ities. EIA will also be an integral part of that require special attention in assess- the Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas ments. These areas may represent uni- Guidelines, which is being prepared que or sensitive geomorphological char- under PAME (Protection of Arctic acteristics or biotopes, have special Marine Environment, AEPS). The key importance for the functioning of arctic concepts of EIA are defined in appendix ecosystems or are sites with special III. Information provided on the World spiritual, cultural and other socio-econo- Wide Web (WWW or Internet) gives an mic values (appendix II). Some of these overview of the EIA process in the areas may be protected by law or trea- Arctic countries, including the required ties, such as national parks or areas of contents of environmental impact state- specific interest; however, the vastness ments (see Contents for Web site). of the Arctic necessitates that every assessment should identify such areas What makes within the area of potential impact at an EIA special in early stage in the assessment. the Arctic? The objectives of environmental impact assessment in the Arctic cannot be met without paying attention to the special features of the Arctic. Although the Arctic is not a uniform area with respect to topography, , or politics, many common features can be recognized in the climate, the socio-cultural conditions and the functioning of the ecosystems. These affect the investigations that are carried out, the choice of methods and ap- proaches and the time span of the assessments. For example, the simple ecosystems and the slow breakdown of contaminants may influence fundamen- tal assumptions in predicting the fate of pollutants. The lack of baseline informa- tion may lengthen the EIA process com- pared with EIAs in temperate regions, and the importance of traditional knowledge in the Arctic demands new ways of collecting information. A first step in planning an arctic EIA is 8 to identify those features that are parti- What are the important elements for an arctic EIA? EIA in the Arctic should be based upon the same principles and include the same elements that characterize EIAs in other parts of the world. The elements that are of particular importance in arctic conditions include the following.

1. Multidisciplinary nature Many different fields of study and inte- rests are normally covered by an EIA, such as biology, geology, engineering, socio-economics and cultural heritage. This multidisciplinary approach is even more important in the Arctic, where the connection between the natural envi- ronment and socio-economic features may be stronger than in other regions. The use of many different types of infor- mation also includes accepting traditio- nal knowledge as an important source of information in assessing potential impacts.

2. Flexibility is the most complex of the Arctic count- EIA is a flexible process that can deal ries in the sense that it is inhabited by a with the complexity and the diversity of large number of very distinct indigenous cultural settings, and can provide a groups, each speaking a unique lan- forum for the exchange of differing guage. views and interpretation of information. EIA can also be adjusted to the size and 4. Cumulative effects scope of individual projects. In the Arctic, cumulative impacts are of special concern because of the sensitiv- 3. Participatory function ity of the area and the long recovery The EIA process allows for the partici- times. pation of a wide range of stakeholders who often hold different views and have 5. Precautionary principle and different values, including non-monet- assessment ary values of the Arctic and its environ- The prec a u t i o n a r y principle or approa c h , ment. The demographics of the people which is a part of numerous inter- in the Arctic regions varies, but some national treaties and declarations, has characteristics are shared. Many Arctic emerged as an important issue in EIA. As people live in sparsely populated areas, reflected in Principle 15 of the Rio and most still have livelihoods that Declaration, the precautionary approach depend upon large geographical areas. provides “where there are threats of seri- Iceland is the only area in the Arctic not ous or irreversible damage, lack of full inhabited by indigenous people. Russia scientific certainty shall not be used as a 9 reason for postponing cost effective environmental assessment, includes me a s u r es to pre v e n t en v i r onmental degra- similar tasks to those used during the dation”. This approach is particularly environmental impact assessment of relevant in the Arctic, where baseline individual projects. At the same time, data are scarce and there are gaps in the these plans can be a basis for the assess- understanding of the important ecologi- ment of individual projects and specify cal functions in the Arctic systems. The conditions a project has to meet to precautionary approach should there- avoid significant adverse impacts. fore be encouraged when carrying out EIAs in the Arctic. Similarly, environ- mental of development activities ■ In Ny Ålesund, Svalbard, Norway, an should be assessed in arctic EIAs. assessment of environmental impacts has been initiated at the strategic level. The How should EIA objective is, among other things, to assess the environmental impacts caused by be included at human activities in specified areas, to other levels of planning? assess the conflicts between various scientific research and monitoring pro- While cumulative impacts are recog- jects in the same geographical area and nized during the assessment of projects, to recommend actions to reduce these many cumulative impacts on the arctic impacts to a minimum level and, to the environment cannot be dealt with extent possible, maintain and restore the effectively at the individual project qualities of the Ny Ålesund area as an level. Land use and resource use plans or undisturbed reference area suitable for a area plans are often developed for parti- wide spectrum of environmental monito- cular regions. These plans can be used ring and scientific research. to guide the future direction of a sector, for example, the forest sector or rein- More information: Fred Theisen, deer husbandry, by taking into account Norwegian Polar Institute, P.O.Box 5072, criteria. The assessement Majorstua, Norway. of these plans, often called strategic

10 2 Application of EIA

The decision to conduct an EIA for a activities, whose impacts have so far project in the Arctic should take into only been found in more temperate account the special conditions in the areas. Arctic. Arctic-specific thresholds and sensitivity criteria are strongly recom- The two main approaches for deciding mended. The decision to identify and on the application and the extent of EIA specify the type of assessment to be procedures are mandatory assessment applied to a project is commonly called based on lists of environmentally harm- screening. ful projects and case-by-case decisions. The use of these approaches varies among jurisdictions (see Arctic site on When should EIA be applied? WWW). An intermediate approach using threshold levels has also been In the Arctic, EIA should be applied to used. Some jurisdictions also apply lists activities associated with the exploita- that exclude certain minor development tion of both renewable and non-renew- activities from assessment. able natural resources, public use, mili- tary activities and the development of infrastructure for different purposes that Why specific arctic thresholds? may cause significant environmental impacts. The growing development in Threshold levels ensure the application the Arctic may also bring new types of of EIA processes to activities that may

11 have significant adverse impacts. Since most Arctic countries have only part of How to use the sensitivity their territorial lands and waters in the criteria in the Arctic? Arctic, national laws do not always take Sensitivity criteria, in terms of land area into account the sensitivity of arctic and time period, are particularly useful areas, which may require lower thres- in case-by-case decisions. These criteria hold levels. In jurisdictions that do not draw attention to the possibility of have case-by-case selection criteria, cumulative impacts, and can be used in assessment decisions should be based on planning for the avoidance and mitiga- threshold levels specific to arctic condi- tion of impacts. A list of potentially sen- tions, for example, production levels, sitive areas in the Arctic can be found in capital expenditure, land demands, or appendix II. Because almost every activi- quantities of emissions. ty in the Arctic will be close to one or several sensitive areas, further specifica- tion is usually necessary to make them ■ According to the Icelandic EIA Act, any useful as application criteria. Land use new road construction requires an EIA, descriptions or plans, which identify the whereas in other countries EIA is often sensitivity of different areas, and the applied only to major infrastructure pro- Circumpolar Protected Area Network of jects. The EIA led the developer of the CAFF (Conservation of Arctic Fauna & Dragsnesvegur road project to propose Flora, AEPS) provide further informa- mitigation measures in the tion. Additional criteria for selecting Environmental Impact Statement as projects may include social, cultural and follows: socio-economic conditions, and regional and global natural values. ◆ where possible, integration of the road into the existing landscape; ■ In 1991, the Swedish icebreaker Oden ◆ carried out its first scientific expedition in avoidance of damage or loss to special Arctic waters. An Environmental Impact features of shores and bays; and Assessment was undertaken because of ◆ revegetation of the gravel concerns about the effects of underwater extraction sites. noise, interference with marine mam- mals and exhaust emissions. More information: Holmfridur Sigurdardottir, National Physical More information: SSPA Maritime Planning Agency, Laugavegur 166, IS-150 Consulting AB, P.O.Box 24001, S-400 22 Reykjavik, Iceland, email: [email protected] Gothenburg, Sweden

12 3 Scope of the assessment

The scope of an assessment should res that will be analyzed in the EIA pro- include all potential environmental, cess. Scoping should specify the project socio-cultural and economic impacts, and its alternatives in sufficient detail to especially impacts on the traditional identify potential direct and indirect uses of resources and livelihoods of indi- impacts, including cumulative effects. genous people and also the considera- Additionally, scoping should set realistic tion of alternatives. temporal, spatial and jurisdictional boundaries for the assessment, and spe- cify key environmental criteria to be What is addressed and methods to be used in the scoping? assessment.

Scoping determines the environmental ■ “Northerners are anxious to participa- impacts of the proposed project, brings te and to share both the challenges, the into consideration alternative means of risks and the benefits but they obviously carrying out the project, including must be partners. The impacts are clear- technical and technological alternatives, ly going to be there, both good and bad. identifies the potential effects on the They are inevitable but with due process, sustainability of resources in the project planning and management, they are area and clarifies the mitigation measu- manageable. The impacts, risks and prob-

13 lems will be reduced by allowing more time, more resource and small scale pro- jects. The most difficult area is that of social change.” G.N. Faulkner, DIAND, Beaufort Sea Hydrocarbon Production and Transportation, Review Panel Report, Canada, 1984

Why determine the scope? By determining the scope systematically, the assessment of the project and its alternatives can be focused on the important environmental issues and risks, taking into account special arctic features and areas of particular impor- tance. Additionally, a well-defined scope would reduce overall assessment costs. Why alternatives? The recognition, discussion and consi- deration of alternatives, including the alternative of no action, are necessary for determining the scope of an assess- ment. Alternatives permit a com- parison of likely impacts and mitigation measures. As a result of uncertainties in data and a lack of detailed knowledge of ecological and socio-cultural conditions and functions, many impacts can only be examined through the relative diffe- rences between alternatives. For many activities, reasonable alternati- ve sites within a region are usually avail- able. However, some activities are site- specific, such as mining, extraction and use of natural resources, shipping (port facilities often depend on deep-water access), oil and gas operations, major restoration and rehabilitation projects, additions and extensions to existing in- stallations (e.g. oil refineries), housing developments and military installations. In all cases, alternatives based on differ- 14 ent approaches to the realization of the project should be considered. In addi- tants. The participation of the public tion to no action, these might be could lead to a negotiated agreement choices on scale, appearance, techno- between the researchers and indigenous logy, waste discharges, mitigation or other local communities so that infor- measures, and traffic management. mation can be shared in an organized and acceptable way, and the roles and responsibilities of all parties can be What is specifically described clearly. arctic in scoping? Public involvement in determining the Because of the close connections scope of assessments is useful especially between the environment, culture and for controversial activities. Scoping may economics in the Arctic, it is important identify problems or conflicts, which that scoping takes a broad view of the can be alleviated or solved while the issues to be dealt with in the assessment. proposed project is still being devel- Clearly, one of the most important fea- oped. Scoping may also be used to coor- tu r es in arctic assessment is the early and dinate actions of the various agencies full involvement of indigenous people involved in the assessment and decision- and other local communities, who hold making processes. special knowledge of the Arctic. Public participation in scoping is necessary for An open process while determining the the efficient use of this knowledge. scope of an EIA is also a crucial first step Without public participation it is virtual- towards building mutual confidence in ly impossible to cover the full range of fair environmental assessment and prob- diverse and complex values and lem-solving, and ultimately in a fair viewpoints typical of the Arctic inhabi- decision-making process.

15 4 Baseline information

In determining and obtaining baseline nisms. Other baseline information is information, the following key issues qualitative, illustrating socio-cultural should be considered: combining tradi- conditions or general features of tional and scientific knowledge, using landscapes. methods compatible to other programs for gathering baseline information in the Arctic, including socio-economic mat- Why is baseline ters, using both qualitative and quantita- tive information and allowing sufficient information needed? time for collecting and compiling baseli- ne information. Baseline information is needed on all central issues in the assessment, taking into account a broad definition of the What is baseline environment. Baseline information pro- information? vides a reference for all assessments, and for the comparison of alternatives and Baseline information characterizes the mitigation measures. It is used as a star- conditions at the time the project is pro- ting point in the prediction of likely posed. Some of the baseline information impacts resulting from the project and can be quantitative, for example, of naturally occurring changes in the concentrations of heavy metals in orga- environment.

16 How can baseline information be obtained? Baseline information is found in docu- ments and data banks, but field studies and interviews with indigenous and other local people are often necessary. Existing scientific programs may be too general to give sufficiently detailed data for specific projects. It is important to assess the availability and quality of data and information sources so that the compilation of baseline information for a specific project can be linked to other monitoring and baseline programs, including their techniques and metho- dologies.

Many indigenous people in the Arctic hold accumulated knowledge regarding the Arctic environment and on the sus- tained use of Arctic resources. Their knowledge of local cultural, social and ecological systems and the changes in established international arctic pro- these systems over time, including grams, scientific organizations and non- recent trends, may be an essential com- governmental organisations. Appendix plement to scientific observations. IV lists important sources of data and Indigenous knowledge of the indicators information concerning the Arctic. of stress in sensitive ecosystems may also be crucial for planning the assess- ment. Communities and individuals that Seasonal and hold this knowledge about the environ- ment may be identified during the sco- year-to year-variation and ping phase of the EIA. investigation costs

■ Baseline information on issues specific Because the Arctic environment is fre- to the Arctic are included in the Arctic quently subjected to large fluctuations in Monitoring and Assessment Programme seasonal and year-to-year conditions, (AMAP). This information can also be long-term observations are needed to found on the WWW understand the potential perturbations (http://www.grida.no/add/). in the Arctic environment. This in- creases even further the usually high costs of conducting investigations in the Arctic. Coordination of assessment acti- What data and vities with early exploration can reduce information are available? some costs. Cost saving can also be achieved through efficient use of diffe- Appropriate baseline and monitoring rent sources of information and traditio- information may be accessible from nal knowledge. 17 5 Impact prediction and evaluation

In the impact prediction and evaluation lative. These changes can be found at stage of an EIA, issues identified different ecological (species to ecosys- through scoping are analyzed and tem) and social (individual to communi- expected impacts are defined. This ana- ty) levels, can vary over space and time, lysis should: and can be either positive or negative. a) identify the types of impact; Direct impacts refer to changes in envi- ronmental components that result from b) di r ect cause-effect consequences of inter- predict the magnitude, the probability actions between the environment and of occurrence, and the extent of the project activities. Indirect impacts result impact; and from cause-effect consequences of inter- c) actions between the environment and determine the significance of the direct impacts. For example, the effect impact. of may not only be seen directly in the loss of local vegetation, but indirectly as a degeneration of the 5.1 health, culture and social structure of Types of impact local people. Cumulative impacts refer to the accumulation of changes to the Impacts on the environment can lead to environment caused by human activities changes in existing conditions; the (e.g. past, existing and proposed activi- impacts can be direct, indirect or cumu- ties, including activities associated with

18 the project under assessment). These changes occur over space and time and can be brought about by environmental effects that are additive or interactive. Marine mammals in the Arctic, for example, can be affected by hunting, oil spills, loss of habitat, and commercial pressure on prey species.

■ The initial assessment of potential impacts of oil exploration in the Fylla area, Greenland, focused on the general of the area, offshore fish and shrimps and their fisheries, seabirds, marine mammals, and the coastal zone and the exploitation of its resources. Potential impacts of oil exploration acti- vities, seismic activities and oil spills were assessed, taking into account that the consequences of, for example, oil spills are more severe during the winter season than during other seasons.

Oil exploration in the Fylla Area, Ministry of Environment and Energy, the National What are the types of Environmental Research Institute, cumulative impacts to be Technical Report, no. 156, March 1996. considered? Cumulative impacts may be characteri- 5.2 zed by the intensity, type and extent Cumulative impacts (spatial and temporal) of human activity or source of change to the environment, and by the influence this change may Why are cumulative impacts have on the environment. The source of addressed in an EIA? change could be: ◆ It is important to describe and analyze activities resulting from several the accumulation of change to the envi- developments occurring at the same ronment due to project-related impacts, time or sequentially (e.g. mine even though the projects may be small development, construction of access and their impacts minor. Cumulative roads); impacts resulting from development ◆ activities resulting from many activities should be considered at the different developments over resource and land use planning level. extended time periods and space Cumulative impact assessment at the (e.g. mine development, construction project level, along with an understan- of access roads, urban development); ding of environmental impacts at the and resource and land use planning level, helps set that project and its impacts in ◆ activities resulting from global a broader ecological and development occurrences widely dispersed over context. time and space. 19 What should be considered when assessing cumulative impacts? Some key issues to be considered when assessing cumulative impacts associated with the project: ◆ focus should be on valued ecological components, including arctic sensitive areas; ◆ spatial boundaries should be defined with respect to valued ecological components; ◆ temporal boundaries will vary with projected life span of project impacts; ◆ assessment should be kept at reasonable and manageable levels. The spatial and temporal boundaries of the cumulative impact assessment should be established, and the activities (past, existing and proposed activities, ne different scenarios and that the including those associated with the pre- underlying assumptions are presented sent project under assessment) that will transparently. be addressed in the assessment should be identified. Time and resources, and the roles and responsibilities in cumula- Once a potential impact has been deter- tive impact assessment, should also be mined during the scoping process, it is determined. necessary to identify which project acti- vity will cause the impact, the probabili- ty of occurrence of the impact, and its 5.3 magnitude and extent (spatial and tem- poral). This information is important for Impact Prediction evaluating the significance of the impact, and for defining mitigation and The accumulated knowledge and the monitoring strategies. findings of the environmental investiga- tions form the basis for the prediction of impacts. The requirements for exact pre- What are the important dictions are not necessarily met because of uncertainties in the data and a lack of considerations for impact baseline data. Claims of exact pre- prediction? dictions do not necessarily indicate assessments of high quality or accuracy, Baseline condition. The baseline in fact, detailed predictions may be mis- condition of a resource, ecosystem, or leading and direct attention and community without the potential effects resources away from central issues that of the proposed project must be are important to the assessment. Hence, established before the impact prediction 20 it is important that the predictions outli- process begins. Uncertainty. Arctic EIAs contain Quantitative and qualitative uncertainties resulting from methods. Qualitative impact measurement error and absence of descriptions, combined with the information, particularly in the case of consideration of key uncertainties and cumulative and socio-cultural impacts. quantitative data where appropriate, Qualitative and scenario analyses may provide a means for comparing may alleviate some of the problems alternatives. caused by the uncertainties. Are there important Spatial limits. Impact assessment, including cumulative impacts, must considerations for impact consider all activities that affect prediction in the Arctic? environmental components, even those components that lie outside the The understanding of the complex inte- immediate area affected by the project. ractions of effects is particularly impor- Because of the natural conditions in the tant in the Arctic because of its slow, Arctic, the affected area often is larger non-linear, and potentially irreversible than in temperate areas. ecological and physical processes. Several arctic characteristics play a Temporal boundaries. Impact major role in impact prediction; for assessment, particularly for assessments example, the effect of temperature on of cumulative impacts, may extend chemicals, the recovery rate of vegeta- beyond the period of time required for tion after the construction phase and the assessment of the project activities. changes in the perma f r ost after a disturb- This is especially true in the Arctic ance. There are common arctic features because most physical, chemical and (see appendix I) that need to be consi- ecological processes are slower than in dered, and which play a major role in more temperate regions. Assessments impact prediction. should take into account the impacts of past, existing and planned activities as well as those activities associated with the present project.

Incremental condition. An impact prediction process should describe the incremental contribution of the project to impacts on the environment. Thresholds and additional criteria can be identified for some specific resources, which establish levels of impact beyond which resources cannot be sustained.

Interactions. Assessments of the interactions between impacts, particularly when considering cumulative impacts, should be included in the impact prediction process; for example, transfers of material between ecosystems or ecosystem components, and connections between human culture, resource use and the environment. 21 5.4 The significance of impacts may be determined during many phases of an Evaluation of impacts assessment; however, determination usually occurs during impact prediction. Consideration of impact significance The purpose of impact evaluation is to could affect the scoping exercise, and assign relative significance to predicted monitoring results could lead to a re- impacts associated with the project, and evaluation of impact significance. to determine the order in which impacts Decisions on impact significance should are to be avoided, mitigated or compen- be presented clearly, and in the case of 22 sated. disagreement, the different points of view on significance should be presen- ted. Which arctic features influence the determination of significance? ■ A migratory animal, such as caribou or Environmental impacts in the Arctic are reindeer, may only be affected by the often complex, multidimensional and proposed project within a 10-kilometre widespread, and the associated social radius of the project site; however, during and political issues are value-laden and migration, these animals may be affected conflict-prone. The interpretation of the by other activities a hundred kilometres assessment findings should recognize away. that: ◆ many important impacts cannot be How is impact significance quantified; determined? ◆ there is no common base for Decisions on significance should be comparing the significance of based on existing standards, discussions, different types of impacts such as judgement and agreement. These deci- impacts on flora and fauna and sions should take into account the cha- impacts on cultural values; racteristics of the impact such as the number of affected persons, and ◆ developers, indigenous people and the magnitude, extent, duration and other groups can have widely reversibility of the impact. The applied differing world views through which methods and the criteria used for they interpret assessment findings, ranking significance should be clearly and judge the significance of the presented. The key elements for findings; assessing the significance of impacts ◆ the different structure of knowledge include: gained from local and indigenous ◆ level of public concern; people has to be analyzed and evaluated using suitable methods for ◆ scientific and professional judgement; determining the significance of ◆ measure of disturbance to ecological impacts; systems; ◆ the sensitivity of the arctic ◆ impacts on social values and quality environment demands special of life; attention, possibly in the form of ◆ existence of environmental standards, special arctic thresholds for that is, international, national, significance; and provincial or local agreements; and ◆ the uncertainties in the Arctic stress ◆ availability of mitigation practice and the importance of the precautionary technology to ameliorate impacts. approach.

23 6 Mitigation

In considering mitigation measures, spe- ◆ Undertake a mitigation program cial arctic features should be taken into concurrently with a project to account and the public should also be alleviate impacts. A program for involved. inhibiting thawing of permafrost would be an example. ◆ Undertake a mitigation program after What is mitigation? an activity to restore an affected resource or area, or to replace lost or Mitigation is the action taken to avoid damaged resources in the affected or lessen the adverse effects of an activi- area or elsewhere. For example, ty. Mitigation may address ecological, damaged freshwater fisheries can be economic or socio-cultural effects. mitigated by stocking of fish or Project planning and implementation restoring river habitats. may include mitigation in several ways.

◆ Plan the location or timing of an When are mitigation measures activity to avoid affecting specific identified? resources or sensitive areas. Mitigation measures can be identified ◆ Include mitigation measures in any time during project planning, imple- project design to reduce the impact. mentation, and operations. In particular: For example, pipelines can be designed to allow for passage of ◆ as a result of public consultations or migratory animals. past experience, mitigation measures

24 can be identified early and included in the design and assessment of a proposal; ◆ mitigation measures may be developed in response to specific impacts identified in the EIA and adopted at the time a project is implemented; and ◆ measures may be developed to mitigate impacts that are not identified until after a project has been implemented.

■ In the Fylla area, oil spill response plans with operational environmental sensitivi- ty maps for enhanced damage control during spills were proposed as mitigation measures. Oil exploration in the Fylla Area 1996, Ministry of Environment and Energy, the National Environmental Research Institute, Technical Report, no. 156, March 1996. Who is responsible for Why is mitigation considered in mitigation? the EIA process? The party who initiates the proposal Careful planning and project implemen- and conducts the activity is usually res- tation can reduce or avoid unwanted ponsible for mitigation. Government environmental impacts. This can best be agencies approving or regulating a pro- accomplished if the development of ject must ensure that approved mitiga- mitigation is an integral part of the EIA tion measures have been implemented process. Public participation in the EIA and are working effectively. process allows adverse effects and miti- gation measures to be identified and evaluated prior to a decision. In the Are there mitigation measures Arctic, mitigation measures are often specific to the Arctic? developed in consultation with indige- nous communities. This ensures that To be most effective, mitigation should effective measures can be adopted when be tailored to the anticipated effects of a a project is implemented. The descrip- proposed project on a specific compo- tion of the nature and magnitude of nent of the environment. Some aspects potential impacts in the EIA also can be of the arctic environment that are espe- a basis for designing specific mitigation cially susceptible to adverse effects to reduce those effects. Finally, if mitiga- should be examined routinely in an EIA tion is identified during the EIA process, as candidates for mitigation. monitoring of the activity can be desig- ned to assess the effectiveness of those ◆ Oil spills in sea ice or pack ice are mitigation measures that are part of the difficult to clean up and pose a project. particular risk to marine mammals. 25 Projects that may cause oil spills ◆ Vegetation grows very slowly in the should include plans for containment Arctic. Therefore, facilities should be and clean-up of spills, including a sited to minimize disturbance to description of the location and vegetation. capabilities of oil spill clean-up equipment. How is ◆ Coastal areas in the Arctic include the effectiveness of essential habitats for migratory birds and other species that may be mitigation determined? particularly vulnerable to disturbance by aircraft and other human Once a project is implemented, moni- activities. If a project involves toring the activity will assess the effecti- transport by air, minimum altitudes veness of mitigation measures. In some or specific flight paths can be cases, a monitoring program can be designated near essential habitats to established as part of the project, in minimize impacts on nesting birds order to measure actual environmental and other species. effects and to assess the extent to which mitigation measures are reducing ◆ Traditional hunting and fishing impacts. Some impacts may occur that activities by indigenous people were not anticipated or that are more usually take place during fairly well- serious than predicted. Monitoring of defined periods of the year. the activity and the affected environ- Mitigation measures can be ment may suggest new or revised miti- developed in consultation with gation measures. indigenous communities to avoid or minimize conflicts with these To assess the effectiveness of mitigation, activities. information on the environment should be collected into a well-defined baseline ◆ Damage to permafrost can cause prior to project implementation. Once a long-term adverse effects such as project is implemented, measuring the differential settlement, terrain change in environmental conditions instability, and . Mitigation relative to the baseline conditions will measures to avoid or reduce these give an indication of the effectiveness of effects should be included in project mitigation measures in avoiding or redu- plans. cing impacts.

26 7 Monitoring

Monitoring should include a follow-up activity or mitigation measures. If neces- on the impacts, a verification of the pre- sary, those responsible for the activity dictions and feedback on the mitigation are required to further reduce environ- and project operations, as appropriate to mental effects, protect resources, or domestic EIA practices. The environ- improve the efficiency of the activity. mental conditions in the Arctic make monitoring a demanding task requiring careful planning. Why is monitoring considered in the EIA process? What is monitoring? A good EIA describes the proposed acti- Monitoring is the systematic observa- vity in sufficient detail to predict with tion or tracking of an activity to deter- some degree of specificity the nature, mine whether it is proceeding or magnitude, and duration of significant functioning as expected. Through moni- environmental impacts. However, the toring, the accuracy of environmental extent to which the descriptions and impact predictions are also assessed. A predictions are accurate can only be good monitoring program will provide determined through post-project moni- adequate information to measure envi- toring. Therefore, the EIA provides a ronmental change and assess the effecti- basis for designing a monitoring veness of procedures employed to miti- program. The monitoring verifies the gate adverse impacts. This information environmental effects and the effective- should be the basis for modifying the ness of mitigation.

27 Public concern for projects often inclu- des questions about follow-up on the project activities once a decision to pro- ceed is made, and the need for assu- rances that problems will be identified and corrected. A good monitoring program, developed during the EIA pro- cess, can be an important step to address this concern effectively.

■ Planning for the Kiruna border highway, nr 98, in Swedish Lapland star- ted in 1974, and the final section was ope- ned for traffic in 1982. The road is 132 kilometres long and includes 26 bridges. For most of its length, the road follows a mining railway. Monitoring has shown that land use has changed because of the road. The infrastructure (towns, rest stops, etc.) covers as large of an area as the actual road, and has required an equal amount of investment. Vegetation planted next to the roadside has not thri- ved, and planted ground vegetation has not done well. Banks higher than 2 met- res were still without vegetation 10 years after the construction of the road. Bäck, L., Jonasson, C. and Strömquist, L. Environmental impact studies of the highway construction between Kiruna ◆ environmental criteria, if available and Riksgränsen, Long term impact 1985- and applicable, for certain 1987. UNGI Report Nr 75, VIII+78 pp, environmental components such as Uppsala. Abstract in English. water or air; ◆ a method to measure the amount of What should change to an environmental resource be monitored? occurring over a specific period of time, the change should be measured A determination as to what to monitor quantitatively if possible; should be done selectively, based on the nature of the proposed activity and the ◆ a method to determine the extent to results of the EIA. which the activity in question contributes to the environmental What are the basic elements of change; ◆ a method to assess the effectiveness successful monitoring? of mitigation measures adopted with A good monitoring program should the action; include: ◆ regular review and revision, when ◆ clearly defined objectives; necessary, to ensure that the program ◆ an environmental baseline for objectives are being met as cost- 28 measuring change; effectively as possible; and ◆ standardized methodologies that are longer period of time to establish baseli- comparable with those used ne conditions for monitoring be consi- elsewhere in the Arctic as well as dered. internationally. The costs of monitoring programs, as with other research, may be greater in Who is responsible for the Arctic than in other regions because monitoring? of the remoteness of many areas and the extreme environmental conditions. Monitoring may be performed by the Monitoring programs should take into project operator, a contractor, an inde- account that the Arctic is particularly pendent monitoring institute or a vulnerable to disturbance because it is a government agency. Monitoring respon- natural sink for water- and airborne pol- sibilities and procedures should be lutants. described in the documentation giving approval for the project. Government Indigenous and local communities agencies responsible for project appro- should be consulted about the design val or regulation must ensure that any and implementation of monitoring monitoring program adopted with the programs that directly or indirectly proposal is conducted as planned. affect their life. Their traditional knowledge should be incorporated into these programs along with standard Are there aspects of monitoring scientific data. specific to the Arctic? The greater year-to-year variability in What should be reported from arctic biological resources (i.e. species monitoring? population) compared with non-arctic regions, and the high degree of uncer- All monitoring reports should be publis- tainty in measurements of environmen- hed and made available to administra- tal components and in predicting tors, proponents, people affected by the impacts in the Arctic, requires that a project, and the public.

29 8 The environmental impact assessment document

An environmental impact assessment and engineering characteristics of the document should be prepared and pro- proposed development, and land use vided to all involved parties. The docu- requirements during the construction ment describes the project and the likely and operational stages. It should state impact upon the environment of the the main characteristics of the develop- proposed activity. ment processes proposed, including the type and quantity of resources to be The information should include: used; 1. A description of the proposed project and its 2. A description of the environment that could alternatives, including information about the be affected by the proposed project or location and the design and size or scale of the alternatives. This should also include a project. This includes physical, technical description of the baseline state with

30 which predicted changes are to be com- tives. Difficulties such as uncertainties or pared; problems in compiling specified data, should also be reported; 3. The data and other information that have been used to identify and assess the main effects 6. Based on the above, an identification of which the project is likely to have on the impact area; the environment, including a descrip- tion of the traditional knowledge incor- 7. The likely significant impacts (see defini- porated into the EIA. The documenta- tion in section 5.1, page 18) on the tion of traditional knowledge should be environment of the proposed activity carried out in cooperation with the and its alternatives. The effects may community; result from activities including the use of natural resources, the emission of pollu- 4. The estimated type and quantity of expected tants, the creation of nuisances, and the impact factors resulting from the proposed elimination of waste; project when in operation; 8. Where significant adverse effects are 5. The methods used in the assessment such as identified, a description of the measures propo - identification and forecasting of any effects on sed to avoid, reduce or rectify these effects taking the environment, descriptions of the use, assess - into consideration the slow recovery ment and evaluation of available traditional and regeneration factors in the Arctic. knowledge, and methods used to compare alterna - This should also include a description of monitoring programs to detect unfore- seen impacts, and that could provide early warning of any adverse effects, in addition to dealing promptly and effi- ciently with accidents; 9. An evaluation of the different alternatives, including the alternative of no action; 10. A description of the integration of EIA, public participation and public consultation into planning and decision-making throughout the process; and 11. A summary in non-technical language, assisted with figures and diagrams, of the information specified above. If need be, other means of displaying this infor- mation should be based on the cultural heritage of the local and indigenous people. The non-technical summary should be presented in national and local language(s).

31 9 Public participation

An EIA should ensure effective public nevertheless, the Panel concludes that participation and consultation. Unique the review process was materially assis- features such as culture, socio-economic ted and that intervenor funding enhanced and remoteness factors should be consi- the quality and substance of interventions dered in planning and carrying out pub- from northern residents whose interests lic consultations in the Arctic. would be most directly affected if the development were to go ahead. The Panel recommends that intervenor fun- Who is the public? ding be made available for all future pub- lic reviews, and that funding be restricted When used in the context of the EIA to those participants who would be signi- process, the “public” means the indivi- ficantly affected by the proposal under duals, indigenous people, groups, orga- review. nizations, or communities that have an interest in or could be affected by the Beaufort Sea Hydrocarbon Production proposed action. and Transportation, Review Panel Report, 1984.

■ In 1981, the federal government estab- lished an intervenor funding program to What is provide financial assistance to those wis- hing to present their views to the Panel. public participation? Intervenor funding enabled many partici- pants to prepare briefs and to travel to In EIA, public participation provides the public sessions to present the briefs. affected and interested public an oppor- Although this program was independent tunity to influence planning, assessment of the Panel’s review responsibilities, and monitoring of projects. Public parti-

32 cipation includes public hearings, public meetings, public access and public right to comment.

It is an effective way to integrate envi- ronmental, cultural, social, economic, and technological considerations. It pro- vides a forum for the expression, discus- sion, analysis and evaluation of issues, information, values, perspectives, and interests. It facilitates the fair and reaso- nable resolution of conflicts through mediation, negotiation, and public review. Why involve the public in the EIA process? There are several reasons to involve the public in the planning and analysis of proposed activities that could affect people’s environment and quality of life, Public participation ensures the open- including: ness of the EIA and, ultimately, the acceptability, accountability, and credi- ◆ To provide a means for those who bility of EIA decision-making. may be affected by a project to provide input into the planning, Effective community involvement is cri- assessment and monitoring of the tical to successful public participation. project. Understanding and trust must be estab- ◆ To inform people about the lished among the public, project pro- characteristics, location, and design ponents, and regulators, if affected com- of the proposed activity. People need munities are to accept and contribute information about a project to lessen positively to a proposal. This requires a anxiety and to plan accordingly. sincere commitment by all parties to work cooperatively throughout the EIA ◆ To determine the scope of the EIA. process and once the project is imple- People who will be affected by an mented. activity have a stake in identifying the important issues or concerns and alternatives to be analyzed, and in When does public participation setting the temporal boundaries of occur in the EIA process? the EIA. ◆ To acquire information. The Public participation occurs before and individuals and communities affected throughout the EIA process and conti- are a primary source of information nues afterwards if the project is imple- for the EIA. mented. Participation should be as con- tinuous as possible to avoid the loss of ◆ To establish mutually agreed rules interest from the participating parties. and procedures for conducting public Specific points for scheduling public meetings and consultations. participation include: 33 ◆ The public should be informed when a project is first proposed (application of EIA), and given information on how to get involved. An early plan should be made for incorporation of traditional knowledge. ◆ The public should participate in the scoping and baseline monitoring phases during the initial EIA planning when the environmental issues, and, in some cases, mitigation measures are identified. ◆ The public should have the opportunity to review and comment on each phase of the EIA. ◆ After the EIA is completed, the public should be able to review the final analysis and recommendations, and submit comments to the acting agency or party before project implementation. ◆ Once a project is implemented, the public should be routinely informed negative decision on the project. The about the activity, including having expert commission did, however, allow access to information about any for new studies to find adequate technical environmental effects, monitoring solutions to the problems. At present, programs and the effectiveness of these studies are underway. A program mitigation. for social support of the indigenous popu- lation has also been put forward. ■ In 1989, the State Committee for More information: Marianna Novikova, Natural Resources and Ecology con- the State Environmental Review of the ducted an EIA on the technical and eco- State Committee of the Russian nomic plan for the extraction of natural Federation for Environmental Protection, gas at Bovanankovo and Kharasavey (the ul. Kedrova, 8/1, Moscow. Yamal peninsula). Experts from, among others, the State Committee for Natural Resources, the Academy of , the What are the important elements State Sanitary Service, the Ministry of Health, and the State of effective public participation? Hydrometeorological Service, as well as local authorities and representatives of Clear rules and procedures for con- indigenous peoples living in the area of ducting meetings and consultations possible impact participated in the proce- should be established, for example, who dure. The assessment concluded that the is able to participate, by which means following sensitive natural features would and on which terms. Public participation be affected: permafrost, coastal zone, wet and awareness will be increased through tundra, reindeer pastures and migration easy access to EIA documentation and routes. Two indigenous settlements were clear, concise communication of infor- 34 located nearby. The assessment led to a mation. A variety of methods can be used by through equal nomination of government government agencies or project pro- officials (federal and territorial) and indi- ponents to involve the public. In addi- genous groups. Legislation is also being tion to traditional means of informing developed to implement in the Yukon the the public through letters and media environmental assessment process inclu- announcements, public participation ded in the 1995 Umbrella Final may be encouraged by: Agreement. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada ◆ visits to communities by government staff or project proponents, or the establishment of local offices; Which aspects of public ◆ public hearings held by panels, commissions or advisory committees, participation demand special which include members of the attention in the Arctic? public; and The Arctic is culturally and socio-eco- ◆ teleconferences to allow participation nomically a non-uniform and complex in meetings when travel is not area. Therefore, the participation of possible. Arctic communities is needed to resolve conflicts and disputes between people The methods of communicating with with different values, perceptions, and the public should be tailored to each goals, and frequently exhibiting a lack stage in the EIA process, and should of mutual trust and understanding. A accommodate the needs and preferences successful EIA process should acknowl- of those segments of the public involved at each stage.

■ With the implementation of land claim agreements in the Canadian Yukon and Northwest Territories, new environmen- tal impact assessment processes have been and will be established. Environmental assessment processes pur- suant to the Western Arctic (Inuvialuit) Claim (1984) and the Nunavut Land Claim Agreement (1993) are already in place. Legislation is being developed to implement the Gwich’in (1992) and Sahtu (1993) land claim agreements, and it is anticipated that the proposed Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act (MVRMA) will be passed by Parliament in 1997. The MVRMA will establish an integ- rated system of land and water manage- ment and environmental assessment throughout the Mackenzie Valley (that portion of the Northwest Territories that does not include the Inuvialuit Settlement Region and Nunavut). The MVRMA will establish the Environmental Impact Review Board, which will be appointed by the government of Canada 35 edge different opinions, perceptions and and liaisons established. perspectives fairly to foster common understanding. Time frames for EIA in arctic environ- ments are often longer than for a non- Government agencies, project pro- arctic EIA. This is to take into conside- ponents, and researchers need to deve- ration the cultural and socio-economic lop an understanding of indigenous factors and the remoteness of towns and people, their culture and socio-econo- communities. Therefore, sufficient time, mic structure, and need to work to- within reasonable limits, is needed by gether with their community leaders. the public to review and respond to the Methods of communication should not information. be intrusive and should be sensitive to indigenous peoples’ customs and life- When scheduling meetings, the remote- styles. The use of translators and inter- ness of many arctic communities should preters who master local languages is be taken into consideration, and com- often essential. munity activities should be accommoda- ted whenever possible. Additional fun- Indigenous people should be provided ding may be needed to enable people with the opportunity to contribute their from isolated locations to participate in traditional knowledge throughout the public meetings. Meetings should be process. Requests for information and planned imaginatively with cultural dif- documents should recognize the diffe- ferences in mind. The standard hearing rences between and traditional format, with a hearing panel and testi- knowledge. Contacts within communi- mony read into the record by indivi- ties should be established early so that duals under time constraints, may not be indigenous people who are experts in appropriate, in most cases, in indigenous traditional knowledge can be identified communities.

36 10 Traditional knowledge

In the EIA process, traditional knowl- ment, and the management of its edge should be used for understanding resources for present and future genera- the possible consequences of the pre- tions. This knowledge is passed down to dicted impacts and for reducing the younger generations through activities uncertainties. Traditional knowledge is of actual resource use, and by storytel- commonly referred to as knowledge ling, dance, songs and legends. It ensu- held by indigenous people. Local knowl- res the survival and integrity of the indi- edge, non-indigenous or indigenous, also has an important role to play in genous people in the arctic regions. EIA. Nevertheless, in recent years, indi- Traditional knowledge is the intellectual genous people have upheld traditional property of indigenous communities and knowledge in international fora. the holders of this knowledge.

Traditional knowledge is recognized by What is traditional knowledge? the newly formed Arctic Council as a Traditional knowledge has been defined key element in the sustainable develop- in many ways and is an evolving ment of arctic resources and is rapidly concept. For the purposes of these gui- gaining global recognition as an essen- delines, traditional knowledge is defined tial component in the management of as accumulated knowledge held by indi- natural resources. It is now included in genous people on the arctic environ- the Convention on Biological Diversity.

37 practices and biological resources, and What is the role of traditional whose input would be included in the knowledge in environmental Final EIS. Then, prior to publication, MMS asked Tom Albert, biologist for impact assessment? Alaska’s North Slope Borough, and others to review the EIS analysis sections Traditional knowledge is recognized as a on subsistence, bowhead whales, marine vital source of information in the envi- mammals, and marine and coastal birds ronmental impact assessment process. It where indigenous knowledge had been has become a key component in current incorporated. research on arctic ecology and the envi- ronment, and is intended to comple- ment and support scientific and ecologi- cal findings. How is traditional knowledge to be used in the EIA process? Traditional knowledge is used to gain a better understanding of the conse- quences of predicted impacts, to reduce The use of traditional knowledge in an uncertainties in predictions, and to assist arctic EIA requires careful planning. All in establishing baseline conditions and parties have to know how and on what monitoring programs. basis the traditional knowledge is to be used, and how it is to be evaluated. Modern scientists should recognize the ■ The Minerals Management Service various methods by which this knowl- (MMS) integrated the Inupiat Elders’ edge is received, assessed, and evaluated. statements about sea ice, fish, birds, The holders of traditional knowledge polar bears, marine mammals, bowhead must be given respect by the scientists whales, caribou, and subsistence into the researching traditional values. Once a text of the September 1966 Beaufort Sea liaison with those who possess traditio- lease sale Environmental Impact nal knowledge has been established, it Statement (EIS) and other decision docu- should be sustained through continuous ments. These statements came from mutual consultations. Because traditional lease sale public hearings and workshops knowledge is the intellectual property of conducted in North Slope Borough com- the people who hold it, it is essential to munities, and from village outreach trip agree with those people on the rules for report notes, synthesis meetings, and a the use of traditional knowledge. variety of other written sources. At com- Adequate compensation is to be provi- munity workshops conducted in August ded for this information, based on terms 1995 in Barrow, Kaktovik, and Nuiqsut, and conditions agreed on by all parties MMS asked for each community to iden- involved. Researchers are to abide by tify people who were considered local the ethical research guidelines set out by authorities on particular subsistence the respective communities.

38 11 Transboundary impacts

In the EIA process, possible transboun- announced invitations to a hearing on the dary impacts should be considered, scope of the assessment in newspapers, when appropriate. Assessments of trans- both in Finland and Sweden. The boundary impacts require project deve- announcement was also sent to the lopers and authorities to make allo- Norrbotten county administrators and wances for different legal systems, to Haparanda municipality, both in Sweden. provide translations when necessary, and Further information: Outokumpu Polarit to make special arrangements for public Oy, 95400 Tornio and Lapland Regional participation across jurisdictional bor- Centre, P.O. Box 8060, Rovaniemi, ders. Finland.

■ The Outokumpu factories in Tornio, Finland, are major producers of ferro- What are transboundary chrome and steel products. In 1996 the impacts? developer announced an EIA would be prepared on the proposed enlargement Transboundary impact means any of the factories. The document describing impact within a country (the affected the scope of the assessment was open to country) that is caused by an activity public inspection from 29 April to 17 May located in another country (the country 1996 in municipal offices and in regional of origin). environment authority offices both in Finland and Sweden, since the factories Proposed projects that may cause are based only two kilometres from the impacts across provincial or municipal Swedish-Finnish border. The Finnish borders, and the assessment of these regional environment centre that was impacts, may have features in common overseeing the assessment publicly with transboundary impacts and assess-

39 ments between countries. However, pro- While determining the scope of the vincial or municipal border projects assessment, the potential transboundary should be dealt with according to the impacts should be identified and the national legislation or land claim agree- methods to be used for assessing them ments. should be agreed upon. During the assessment, harmonization of baseline information, and assessment of appro- How should impacts across aches and assessment methodologies borders in the Arctic be may be required to ensure compatibility between results of the assessment on dealt with? both sides of the border. Joint study or steering groups may provide a forum for When a proposed project may lead to exchanges of information. impacts across jurisdictional boundaries, the country of origin and the project developer should ensure that the Public participation should be made affected country and its citizens within available to the public in the areas of the area of likely impact are given the likely impact on both sides of the bor- opportunity to participate in the envi- der. Everyone should receive the same ronmental impact assessment. The information, and be given the same country of origin should thus provide opportunity to participate in the assess- information on the assessment at an ment and comment on the results. early stage in the assessment process, Where necessary, translation of key when a decision to apply an EIA is made documents should be provided for. or when the scope of the assessment is determined. Open dialogue and infor- The UN ECE Convention on EIA in a mation exchange should be established Transboundary Context, the Espoo between the country of origin and the Convention (1991, entered into force in 40 affected country or countries. 1997), provides a comprehensive frame- work for dealing with activities likely to operation is often so large that trans- have significant adverse transboundary boundary impacts can occur even impacts. Further details can be laid though the border is far away. In addi- down in bi- or multilateral agreements tion several smaller activities, such as or other arrangements to provide for an development, land drainage and effective transboundary assessment in road building have caused transbounda- regions with special features such as the ry impacts, when these activities have Arctic. occurred close to borders. Planned acti- vities, for example, the opening of new sea routes in the high Arctic and their Which activities may cause required port facilities are also likely to transboundary impacts in cause transboundary impacts. In many countries, detailed lists of activities that the Arctic? may cause adverse environmental impacts have been compiled. In the bor- All activities assessed according to the der areas in the Arctic, these lists should national EIA legislation should be scree- be compared and harmonised through ned for the likelihood of transboundary bi- or multilateral agreements. impacts. The ECE Convention includes a list of activities for which transboun- dary impact assessment is mandatory. Bi- How should public or multilateral agreements may also mandate activities to be covered by participation be arranged for transboundary assessments. Because of a transboundary EIA? the sensitivity of the Arctic environ- ment, relevant activities requiring EIA, Communities in the area of anticipated other than those listed in the ECE impacts should be given an opportunity Convention, should be agreed upon for to participate, irrespective of their loca- the Arctic region. In addition, for those tion relative to the border. The Inuit activities already on the ECE Circumpolar Conference, the Sami Convention list, lower threshold levels Council and the Indigenous Peoples may be needed for projects in the Secretariat are accredited non-govern- Arctic. mental organisations on the Arctic Council, and which are active in several In the Arctic, the development of oil arctic countries. They may thus provide and gas resources, large-scale hydro- useful links to the public on both sides electric projects, and extensive mining of the border. Other international non- and smelter works are activities that governmental organisations such as the have already led to transboundary WWF Arctic also have extensive trans- impacts. For these activities the scale of boundary networks in the Arctic region.

41 Contributors

Aikio Leena, the Sami Council, Utsjoki, Finland Childers Dorothy, Alaska, USA Alexandrovsky Yuri, Ministry of Protection of Cunningham Bob, National Science Foundation the Environment and Natural Resources, – OPP, Arlington, Texas, USA Moscow, Russia Dahl Reidar, Directorate for Nature Artobolevsky Valery, Murmansk Regional Management, Trondheim, Norway Environmental Committee, Murmansk, Russia Denisov Vladimir, Murmansk Marine Biological Bäck Lennart, Institute of Cultural Geography, Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Kola Uppsala, Sweden Science Centre, Russia Bengtson John, Alaska Centre, Diskurssi Ltd., Helsinki, Finland National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, Donnelly Annie, Environmental Planning Group, Washington, USA IIED, London, UK Bourtsev Sergei, Russian Federation Ministry of Dupuis Sylvie, Canadian Environmental Environment Protection, Moscow, Russia Assessment Agency, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Brelsford Taylor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Elling Henrik, Danish Polar Centre, Anchorage, Alaska, USA Copenhagen, Denmark Céwe Tord, Swedish Environment Protection Engraf Anette, Greenland Homerule, Nuuk, Agency, Stockholm, Sweden Greenland

42 Fayen Molly, OES/OA/PA c/o US Department Klein Heidi, Mackenzie Valley Environmental of State, Washington, D.C., USA Impact Review Working Group, Yellowknife, North West Territories, Canada Forbes Bruce, Arctic Centre, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland Koivurova Timo, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland Ford Violet, Inuit Circumpolar Conference, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Kontio Matti, Geological Survey of Finland, Rovaniemi, Finland Futsaeter Gunnar, Norwegian Polar Institute, Oslo, Norway Kontio Panu, Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, Finland Gibson Robert, Department of Environmental and Resource Studies, University of Waterloo, Korhonen Seija, Ministry of the Environment, Ontario, Canada Helsinki, Finland Gresham P.H., EA Service, IUCN, Switzerland Kostin Alexandr, Murmansk Regional Environmental Committee, Murmansk, Russia Halonen Leif, the Sami Council, Kautokeino, Norway Lange Manfred, Arctic Centre, Rovaniemi, Finland Heininen Lassi, Arctic Centre, Rovaniemi, Finland Langlais Richard, Arctic Centre, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland Henry David, UNEP/GRID-ARENDAL, Arendal, Norway Larsen Lars-Henrik, Akvaplan-Niva AS, Norway Hovorka Mark, WWF Arctic Programme, Laughlin Tom, National Oceanic and Toronto, Ontario, Canada Atmospheric Administration, Office of International Affairs, Washington, D.C., USA Howard Kerry, Division of Governmental Coordination, State of Alaska, Juneau, Alaska, LeBlanc Patrice, Policy and Process USA Development, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Hull, Quebec, Canada Hukkinen Janne, Arctic Centre, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland Leskelä Tuula, Nature Conservation Centre, Rovaniemi, Finland Hume Valerie, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Quebec, Canada Mannio Jaakko, Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, Finland Huntington Henry, Inuit Circumpolar Conference, Anchorage, Alaska, USA McEwen John, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Hull, Quebec, Canada Hurwich Evelyn, Circumpolar Conservation Union, Washington D.C., USA McFarland Fred, Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Husby Stig Roar, NIBR, Oslo, Norway Mehr Katreen, Swedish Environmental Jansson Anders, Finnish National Road Protection Agency, Solna, Sweden Administration, Helsinki, Finland Moberg Rainer, Ltd., Finland Joki-Heiskala Päivi, Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, Finland Moe Kjell, Norwegian Polar Institute, Oslo, Norway Kalabin Gennady, Kola Science Centre, Apatity, Russia Molander Tuomo, Lapin liitto, Rovaniemi, Finland Karjalainen Yrjö, Lapland Regional Environmental Centre, Rovaniemi, Finland Montgomery Joe, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., USA Kennedy William, EBRD, London, UK Mähönen Outi, Ministry of the Environment, Kinnunen Kari, Lapland Regional Environmental Helsinki, Finland & Lapland Regional Centre, Rovaniemi, Finland Environmental Centre, Rovaniemi, Finland 43 Nazareth Joe, Ministry of Environment and Schrage Wiek, Economic Commission for Energy, Copenhagen, Denmark Europe, Geneva, Switzerland Novikova Marianne, The State Committee of Scrivener David, Keele University, Department the Russian Federation for Environmental of International Relations, Staffordshire, UK Protection, Moscow, Russia Sigurdardottir Holmfridur, National Physical Oja Robert, U.S. Regulatory Branch, Army Planning Agency, Reykjavik, Iceland Engineer District, Alaska, USA Sippola Anna-Liisa, Arctic Centre, University of Osherenko Gail, Institute of Arctic Studies, Lapland, Rovaniemi, Finland Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA Soumina Elena, Department of Arctic and Islands Territories, Russian State Committee Pagnan Jeanne, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada for the Development of the North, Moscow, Russia Paukkunen Marika, Ministry of the Environment, Helsinki, Finland Torikka Ritva, Sami Council, Inari, Finland Petersen Hanne, National Environmental Tuovinen Pekka, Neste Ltd., Finland Research Institute, Department of Arctic Valve Helena, Finnish Environment Institute, Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark Helsinki, Finland Petersen Aevar, Icelandic Institute of Natural Vanhanen Erkki, Geological Survey of Finland, History, Reykjavik, Iceland Rovaniemi, Finland Rädeker Hanne, Ministry of the Environment, Virtanen Risto, University of Oulu, Finland Copenhagen, Denmark Watson Jeter, Environmental Compliance Raulinaitis Mindaugas, University of Turku, Services, Inc. & Circumpolar Conservation Turku, Finland Union, USA Rautio Milla, Finnish Environment Institute, Whitby Leslie, Environment and Renewable Helsinki, Finland Resources, Department of Indian Affairs and Receveur Olivier, Centre for Nutrition and the Northern Development, Hull, Quebec, Canada Environment of Indigenous Peoples, McGill Wildermann Richard, Minerals Management University, Quebec, Canada Service, Herndon, Virginia, USA Richter Marianne, Federal Environmental Wilson William, LGL Alaska Research Agency, Berlin, Germany Associates, Inc., USA, Riska Kaj, Helsinki University of Technology, Wilson Simon, AMAP, Norway Ship Laboratory, Espoo, Finland Young Oran, Institute of Arctic Studies, Rogne Odd, International Arctic Science Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, Committee Secretariat, Norway USA Rouhinen Sauli, Ministry of the Environment, Zwaag van der David, Marine and Helsinki, Finland Program, Dalhousie Law School, Nova Scotia, Canada Ruza Sandra, Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development of Latvia, Riga, Latvia The initial discussion paper for the Guidelines Salminen Pekka, Finnish Environment Institute, was prepared by Pekka Salminen, Finnish Helsinki, Finland Environment Institute, Finland

44 Appendix I Common arctic features

Climate, geographic and geological features ◆ extent of ice-cover on waters ◆ typified by cold areas (cryosphere) – permafrost – periglacial features – glaciers/ice sheets – stored greenhouse gases such as CO2, methane – stored fresh water ◆ ink for airborne/waterborne pollutants ◆ slow break down of contaminants ◆ large variations in conditions between years

Ecosystems and biological resources ◆ young ecosystems and numerous sensitive areas (see appendix II) ◆ sharp gradients in the environment and ecosystems both in time and space ◆ low productivity levels in general, but some areas of very high productivity ◆ short food chains ◆ slow recovery/regeneration rates ◆ risk of irreversible processes/cascades (e.g. as a consequence of erosion) ◆ low carrying capacity ◆ high concentration of stocks (groups of certain species) ◆ at genetic and landscape levels ◆ unspoilt landscapes that are large enough to allow ecological processes and wildlife populations to fluctuate naturally

Socio-cultural and economic features ◆ cultural variability: indigenous/other local/settler population ◆ high percentage of local inhabitants are dependent on renewable resources ◆ extensive (vs intensive) patterns of land use – forestry, herding, hunting ◆ areas of very low to very high population densities ◆ growth of industrial development and exploitation of non-renewable resources

Knowledge of the systems ◆ lack of baseline environmental knowledge ◆ traditional knowledge

45 Appendix II Areas demanding particular attention in the Arctic

Areas or sites of great sensitivity or unique geomorphological characteristics: ◆ permafrost terrains and insulating layers, ◆ ice-edges, leads, polynyas especially unique permafrost land forms ◆ glacier rivers ◆ wet tundra ◆ glaciers, eskers ◆ coastlines ◆ timberline forests ◆ thermoabrasion coastlines ◆ large deltas ◆ soils and waters prone to acidification, in some cases alkalinization ◆ continental dunes

Areas of special importance to wildlife: ◆ fish spawning and nursery areas ◆ denning areas for large ◆ nesting, rearing and staging areas predators and rearing areas for waterfowl and other birds for other animals ◆ migrating and calving areas for ◆ seal pupping areas moose and caribou ◆ marine mammal migration routes

Areas with valuable, sensitive and representative biotopes: ◆ palsa bogs ◆ vegetation on scree slopes ◆ snowbed habitats ◆ calcareous rock walls ◆ eutrophic, calcareous tundra heaths ◆ tundra steps

Areas of spiritual, cultural and other socio-economic value as well as areas of special importance for traditional resource use: ◆ sacred and spiritual places ◆ traditional trails ◆ burial grounds ◆ marine mammal harvest areas ◆ reindeer round-up sites ◆ traditional fishing or hunting campsites

46 Appendix III Definitions

Cumulative environmental effects (CEEs) are additive (aggregate), synergistic, or antagonistic (neutralizing) environmental changes of multiple impacts from past, present, and future development activities that degrade valuable ecosystem components. The pathways of CEEs can be difficult to determine because direct and indirect impacts can crowd or lag in time and space or become apparent only after specific triggers or thresholds are exceeded.

Environment encompasses the natural (biological and physical) environment and the human (social, cultural and economic) environment. The conceptualization of the environment, from the point of view of each arctic country, can be found at the information site on the WWW or from the national EIA authorities (see appendix IV).

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a process for identifying, predicting, evaluating, and mitigating the biophysical, social, and other relevant effects of proposed projects and physical activities prior to major decisions and commitments being made.

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is a process of prior examination and appraisal of policies, plans, and programs and other higher level or pre-project initiatives.

Sustainable development is, according to the Bruntland Commission (1987), a process of change in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technological development and institutional change are all in harmony and enhance the current and the future potential to meet human needs and aspirations.

The precautionary principle used by the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development is as follows: Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.

Traditional knowledge (TK) is the accumulated knowledge of natural ecosystems, based on the spiritual health, culture, and language of the people, and which is passed to successive generations through stories, song, dance, and myths to ensure the survival of the people and the integrity of the socio-cultural and socio-economic systems of the people. Indigenous knowledge is dynamic, based upon an intimate understanding of the 47 components of the abiotic and biotic environments – land, water, snow, ice, weather, plants, and wildlife – and the interactions between them. TK systems are grounded in the practicality, reasoning, and logic of historical experiences, and provide guidelines and governance on the respect, use, and sharing of natural resources (from Roberts 1996). TEK = traditional ecological knowledge.

48 Appendix IV Sources of information National Contacts:

Canada Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Northern Affairs Natural Resources and Environmental Branch Environment and Renewable Resources Directorate 10 Wellington Street Hull, Quebec, Canada K1A OH4 [email protected]

Finland Ministry of the Environment Lapland Regional Environment Centre P.O. Box 399 P.O. Box 8060, FIN-00121 Helsinki, Finland FIN-96101 Rovaniemi, Finland tel: 358 9 19911 tel: 358 16 329 4111 fax: 358 9 9545 fax: 358 16 310 340 http://www.vyh.fi/yva/index.htm

Greenland/Denmark Department for the Arctic Greenland Institute of Danish National Resources Environmental Research Institute P.O. Box 570 Ministry of Environment and Energy 3900 Nuuk, Greenland Tangensvej 135, 4. Sal tel: 299 2 10 95 2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark fax: 299 2 59 57 tel: 35 82 14 15 fax: 35 82 14 20 [email protected]

Iceland Ministry for the Environment National Physical Planning Agency Vonarstraeti 4 Laugavegi 166 IS-150 Reykjavik, Iceland IS-150 Reykjavik, Iceland tel: 354 560 9600 tel: 354 562 4100 fax: 354 562 4566 fax: 354 562 4165 http://www.mmedia.is/umhverfi/ http://www.islag.is

Norway Miljöverndepartementet Norwegian Polar Institute Ministry of the Environment Middelthuns gt. 29 P.O. Box 8013 Dep P.O. Box 5072 Maj. N-0030 Oslo, Norway 0301 Oslo, Norway tel: 47 22 249090 tel: 47 22 959500 fax: 47 22 242759 fax: 47 22 959501 49 Russia The State Environmental Review State Committee of the Russian Federation for Environmental Protection Ul. Kedrova, 8/1, Moscow, Russia tel: 7 095 254 7256 fax: 7 095 254 8283

Sweden Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Boverket Blekholmsterrassen 36 P. O. Box 534 S-106 48 Stockholm, Sweden S-37123 Karlskrona, Sweden tel: 46 8 698 1000 tel: 46 455 53000 fax: 46 8 698 1 253 fax: 46 455 53121

USA Council on Environmental Quality Executive Office of the President 722 Jackson Place, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20503, USA http://www.whitehouse.gov/CEO

Internet sites:

Arctic links http://www.urova.fi/~arktinen/pverkkot.htm

Canada http://www.inac.gc.ca/nin/nin.html

Danish Polar Cente [email protected]

Finnish Environment Institute http://www.vyh.fi/fei/intercoo/arctic/index.htm

Iceland http://www.mmedia.is/umhverfi/

International Arctic Environmental Data Directory (ADD) http://www.grida.no/add/

International Legislation http://sepac.ciesin.org/pidb/pidb-home.html

Polar pointers http://www-bprc.mps.ohio-state.edu/polarpointers/PolarPointers.html

50 Environmental impact assessment aims at avoiding deleterious effects on the arctic environment, including all its fauna and flora, abiotic components, natural resources, and human health, security and well-being.

These guidelines aim at giving practical guidance for environmental assessments to all parties involved in development activities in the northern circumpolar areas, but especially to local authorities, developers and local people. The guidelines raise issues that are unique to arctic assessments – such as permafrost – but they also emphasize universal issues that are particularly important in the Arctic – such as public participation and the use of traditional knowledge.

These guidelines are the result of a truly international effort. All of the Arctic countries, representatives of indigenous peoples and the WWF Arctic Programme has taken part in producing these quidelines.