In this paper we discuss whether environmental impact assessment (EIA) can serve as an arena for including citizens in the decisionmaking process. Through a case study of a proposed extension of a regional airport in Sweden, the role of EIA, and to what degree different actors and arguments influenced the decision, is analysed. It is found that there are serious problems concerning public participation when it comes to projects which extend beyond the local level and which play an important part in the regional economy. In these cases there is a risk, despite the aims of EIA, that the process will be characterised by public exclusion rather than by public involvement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlackmoreRWoodC, 1997, “The effect of environmental assessment on UK infrastructure project planning decisions”Planning Practice and Research12(3) 223–238
2.
BroAEdlundAJakobssonEPerssonG, 1998, “Grön demokrati. Om implementeringen av Agenda 21 i åtta svenska kommuner” [Green democracy. Concerning the implementation of local agenda 21 in eight Swedish municipalities] Novemus report number 5, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
3.
CarlmanIWesterlundS, 1994, “Miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar—forskning och utveckling” [Environmental impact assessments-research and development]Miljörättslig tidskrift2196–253
4.
EIA, 1997a, “The applicaiton from Örebro Airport Company”, The National Franchise Board for Environmental Protection, journal number 171-190-97, act number 221; available from the County Administrative Board, SE-70186, Örebro, Sweden
5.
EIA, 1997b, “Minutes of public meeting”, The National Franchise Board for Environmental Protection, journal number 171-190-97, act appendix number 225; available from the County Aministrative Board, SE-70186, Örebro, Sweden
6.
EIA, 1997c, “Statements in writing”, The National Franchise Board for Environmental Protection, journal number 171-190-97, act numbers 125, 137, 167, 168, 182, 184, 185, 192–194, 196–201, 203, 213, 216, 230; available from the County Aministrative Board, SE-70186, Örebro, Sweden
7.
EIA, 1998a, “Statements in writing”, The Ministry of Environment, journal number M98/1692/8; available from the County Aministrative Board, SE-70186, Örebro, Sweden
8.
EIA, 1998b, “Decision from the National Franchise Board for Environmental Protection”, report number 52; available from the County Administrative Board, SE-70186, Örebro, Sweden
9.
EPA, 1993, “Trafik och miljö: Underlag till ett miljöanpassat samhälle: Miljö '93” [Traffic and environment: Basis for an environmentally adapted society: Environment '93] report number 4205, The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, SE-10648, Stockholm, Sweden
10.
EPA, 1996, “På väg mot ett miljöanpassat transportsystem. Slutrapport frän MaTs-samabetet” [Towards an environmentally adapted transportsystem. Final report from MaTs co-operation] report number 4636, The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, SE-10648, Stockholm, Sweden
11.
EPA, 1997, “Ren luft och gröna skogar: Förslag till nationella miljömål” [Clean air and green forests: A proposal for national environmental goals] report number 4765, The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, SE-10648, Stockholm, Sweden
12.
ESBO, 1991, “Convention on environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context”, report E/ECE/1250; copy available from United Nations Publications, 2 UN Plaza, DC2-853, United Nations, New York, NY 10017
13.
EU, 1985, “Council Directive on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment”, EU directive 85/337, official journal L 175, 5 July, pages 40–48
14.
EU, 1999RTD info 21 magazine for European Research, supplement February 99: Fifth Framework Programme of the European Union” (European Union, DG XII–Science, Research and Development)
15.
GC, 1978Bättre miljöskydd I, Betänkande av Miljöskyddsutredningen [Better environmental protection. Official report on environmental protection] Governmental Commission Report, number 80 (Liber Förlag, Stockholm)
16.
GC, 1992Vår uppgift efter Rio svensk handlingsplan inför 2000-talet: Rapport från Miljövårdsberedningen [Our task after Rio Swedish actionplan for the 21st century: Report from the environmental protection committee] Governmental Commission Report, number 104 (Allmänna Förlaget, Stockholm)
17.
GC, 1996Ny kurs i trafikpolitiken: Delbetänkande/av Kommunikationskommittén [A new course in traffic policy: Report from the Committee for communications] Governmental Commission Report, number 26 (Fritze, Stockholm)
18.
Government Bill, 1997/98, “Miljöbalken” [The Environmental Code]Ministry of the Environment, SE-10333, Stockholm, Sweden, page 45
19.
GrandellN, 1996, “Allmänhetens deltagande i MKB-processen i de nordiska länderna” [Public participation in EIA in the Nordic countries] report TemaNord, Nordiska ministerrådet, DK-1255, Copenhagen, Denmark, page 588
20.
GutiérrezJMonzónAPinéroJ M, 1998, “Accessibility, network efficiency, and transport infrastructure planning”Environment and Planning A301337–1350
21.
Habitat, 1996, “The Habitat II conference”, report on the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements, Istanbul, 3–14 June; copy available from the United Nations, New York, NY 10017
22.
HarropD ONixonJ O, 1999Environmental Assessment in Practice (Routledge, London)
23.
Hilding-RydevikT, 1990, “Miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar i kommunal planering. Förutsättningar samt förslag till arbetsmetodik” [Environmental impact assessment in municipal planning. Prerequisites and suggestions to a work method] report number 90:1055, Trita-kut, Department of Land and Water Resources, Royal Technological Institute, SE-10044, Stockholm, Sweden
24.
KvarnbäckM, 1995, “Hur beskrivs konsekvenserna för miljön?” [How is the environmental impact described?] report number 4469, The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, SE-10648, Stockholm, Sweden
25.
LakeR, 1994, “Negotiating local autonomy”Political Geography13423–442
26.
LermanP, (Ed.), 1996Boken om MKB. Del 1 och 2 [The book on EIA. Parts 1 and 2] the Swedish Board of Housing, Building and Planning, SE-37123, Karlskrona, Sweden
27.
LermanP, 1999, “Gröna lagar ska rädda miljön” [Green acts will save the environment]Planera Bygga Bo120–21
28.
LidskogR, 1995, “Konflikter vid lokalisering. Dialogens villkor och gränser” [Siting conflicts. Conditions and limits for a dialogue] report number 4451, The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, SE-10648, Stockholm, Sweden
29.
LowN RGleesonB JElanderILidskogR, 2000Consuming Cities: The Urban Environment in the Global Economy after Rio (Routledge, London)
30.
Luftfartsverket, 1985, “Flygplatsstatistik” [Statistics of airports]Accounts Department, The Swedish Board of Civil Aviation, SE-60179, Norrkoping, Sweden
31.
Luftfartsverket, 1997, “Flygplatsstatistik” [Statistics of airports]Accounts Department, The Swedish Board of Civil Aviation, SE-60179, Norrkoping, Sweden
32.
McCarthyM, 1996, “Strategic environmental assessment: Rhetoric or action? Legislative and policy options for South Australia”Australian Planner33125–131
33.
MoE, 1997, “From environmental protection to sustainable development: National report on the implementation of Agenda 21”, Ministry of the Environment, SE-10333, Stockholm, Sweden
34.
MyersenGRydinY, 1996The Language of Environment: A New Rhetoric (UCL Press, London)
35.
Nerikes Allehanda1997, “De startar upprop mot flygplatsen” [They start a rising against the airport] 28 August, page 21
36.
NUTEK, 1997, “Engergiläget 1997” [The energy situation 1997] report from the Swedish National Board for Industrial and Technical Development, SE-11786, Stockholm, Sweden
37.
Örebro kommun, 1994–98, “Miljövårdsprogram för Örebro kommun” [Program for environmental protection of Örebro municipality] policy document from the Local Board for Environmental Protection, SE-70135, Örebro, Sweden
38.
Örebro län, 1999, “Örebro län. Fakta och perspektiv 1998” [County of Örebro. Facts and Perspectives 1998] report from the Joint Strategy Board, County Administration Board, SE-70186, Örebro, Sweden
39.
PalermJ R, 1999, “Public participation in EIA in Hungary: Analysis through three case studies”Environmental Impact Assessment Review19201–220
40.
PettsJ, (Ed.), 1999Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment (Blackwell Science, Oxford)
41.
RobertsJ, 1991MKB vad är det? [EIA what is that?]; available from the Swedish Board of Housing, Building and Planning, SE-37123, Karlskrona, Sweden
42.
RRV, 1996, “MKB i praktiken” [EIA in practice] report number 29, Riksrevisionsverket, Stockholm
43.
SFS, 1969, “Miljöskyddslagen” [The Environmental Protection Act] report number 387, Swedish Code of Statutes; copy available from Sveriges Riksdag, SE-10012, Stockholm, Sweden
44.
SFS, 1998a, “MKB-förordingen” [Act on Environmental Impact Assessment] report number 905, Swedish Code of Statutes; copy available from Sveriges Riksdag, SE-10012, Stockholm, Sweden
45.
SFS, 1998b, “Miljöbalken” [The Environmental Code] report number 808, Swedish Code of Statutes; copy available from Sveriges Riksdag, SE-10012, Stockholm, Sweden
46.
SzerszynskiBLashSWynneB, 1997, “Introduction: Ecology, realism and the social sciences”, in Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology Eds LashSSzerszynskiBWynneB, (Sage, London) pp 1–26
47.
ThomasI G, 1998Environmental Impact Assessment in Australia: Theory and Practice (Federation Press, Leichhardt, NSW)
48.
van ZwanenbergPte VeldeRØstbyP, 1999, “Roads to sustainable transportation? On public engagement in infrastructure projects in Britain, Norway and the Netherlands”, in Technology Policy Meets the Public. Pesto Papers 2 Ed. JamisonA, (Aalborg University Press, Aalborg) pp 109–145
49.
VickermanR W, 1995, “The regional impacts of trans-European networks”Annals of Regional Science29237–254
