Abstract
The government of Ethiopia introduced environmental impact assessment (EIA) by proclamation in 2002. The overall objective of this study is to critically and qualitatively assess the implementation of that proclamation, considering the level of public participation and the adequacy and effectiveness of legally established laws in the EIA process. This study revealed that the role of public participation in the entire EIA stages is weak. The study also identified that both the legal and institutional frameworks have remained inadequate to ensure full effectiveness of the EIA system. Moreover, this study describes the existence of weak coordination among or between federal, regional, zonal and other sectoral units. Hence, this study recommends that its effective implementation necessarily requires involvement of the public and the issuance of more specific subsidiary instruments.
Keywords
“Laws and regulations suited to country-specific conditions are among the most important instruments for transforming environment and development policies into action”. 1 Development remains a high priority for all countries, particularly for developing and least developed countries like Ethiopia. For instance, Ethiopia’s decision to construct a series of dams over the Gilgel Gibe River and the commencement of work on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam are manifestations of the country’s development concerns. 2
However, precautionary measures are needed to ensure that activities aimed at achieving development are environmentally friendly, rather than destructive. For economic development to be genuine and meaningful, it has to be sustainable. Sustainable development requires taking environmental values into account and examining the impacts of development activities on everything that surrounds us. 3
The protection of everyone’s right to live in a clean and healthy environment is the basic question, and begins with the consideration of the environmental values that may be impacted by a given course of action. While various measures could be adopted to protect the environment, environmental impact assessment (EIA) is one of the most important mechanisms to serve these purposes because it enables decision makers to examine the possible impacts of a given course of action on the environment before it is pursued. 4 Therefore, current environmental laws recognise the importance of EIA as a tool capable of ensuring the integration of environmental values into decision-making processes, thereby promoting sustainable development and the enjoyment of the right to live in a clean and healthy environment.
In Ethiopia, EIA is a recent phenomenon. 5 The country’s EIA Proclamation declares the need for EIAs, recognising that they promote sustainable development and foster the implementation of the constitutionally guaranteed right to a clean and healthy environment. 6 The government of Ethiopia seems to be cognisant of the need to protect the environment while pursuing development. In fact, since Ethiopia is taking various developmental measures, the recognition and use of EIA in the decision-making process is an indispensable mechanism for promoting sustainable development.
The government of Ethiopia established the EIA system for development projects in 2002, with the promulgation of the EIA Proclamation. Even though EIA thereby became a legal requirement, a number of constraints have made its implementation fall short of realising its full potential as a frontline instrument to promote sustainable development. Seventeen years after the adoption of the EIA Proclamation in Ethiopia, the practice is still in its infant stages, due to a number of interlinked factors (including limited public participation in different EIA processes) that have slowed progress. 7 The overall objective of this article is to critically assess the provisions and implementation potential of this Proclamation.
Basic EIA Concepts
For EIA purposes, “environment” refers to the totality of all materials whether in their natural state or modified or changed by humans, their external spaces and the interactions which affect their quality or quantity and the welfare of humans or other living beings, including, but not restricted to, land, atmosphere, weather and climate, water, living things, sound, odour, taste, social factors, and aesthetics. 8
EIA is understood as an activity designed to identify and predict the impact of a project on the bio-geophysical-chemical environment and on human health so as to recommend appropriate legislative measures, programmes, and operational procedures to minimise negative impacts. It is an exercise to be carried out before undertaking any project or major activity, to ensure that it will not in any way harm the environment on a short or long-term basis. 9 EIA is also defined as a process for the collection and assessment of information about the environmental impacts of a project before a decision is made on whether the project should go ahead. 10
The Ethiopian EIA legislation covers both project-level and strategic assessments. At project level, EIAs address the possible environmental impacts of projects, while strategic assessment looks at the possible environmental consequences of government programmes, strategies and laws. In Ethiopia, EIA is defined as the methodology of identifying and evaluating in advance any effect, be it positive or negative, which results from the implementation of a proposed project or public instrument. 11
The process is relevant to “public instruments”, a term which refers to policies, strategies, programmes, laws and international agreements. 12 In general, EIA is considered a tool that enables decision makers to take environmental issues into account, and a means that authorities can employ to choose actions and make decisions with full knowledge of their impact on the environment. 13
Even though a proposed project or plan may intend to address or solve an identified problem, such projects may (and often do) result in degradation of the human environment that offsets the intended benefits. Hence, any developmental activity requires analysis of the need for such a project and of the monetary costs and benefits involved, as well as a consideration and detailed assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on the environment. 14
Overview: Environmental Impact Assessment in Ethiopia
Prior to becoming a legal requirement in 2002, EIA was introduced in Ethiopia, applicable to just a few sectors. The practice of contemplating environmental and health impacts was introduced as early as 1980 with regard to water resource development projects, assisted by the UN Development Programme and the World Health Organization. In those EIAs, however, the main focus was limited to water-related and water-based health problems. The practice then evolved into a formal requirement in international donor-assisted and financed projects in various sectors. The former Ethiopian Valleys Development Authority was the first national institution to incorporate EIA into its activities. The Authority developed its own specific guidelines for the application of EIA in pre-feasibility and feasibility studies of potential medium-scale irrigation projects. 15 Even though these efforts were limited to the irrigation sector and narrow in scope, and despite the fact that they were donor-driven, they have contributed to the emergence of the present system of EIA in the country. 16
The year 2002 was a turning point in the history of EIA in Ethiopia, with the adoption of important Proclamations, including establishing environmental protection organs 17 and environmental pollution prevention and control. 18 These proclamations stipulated the need for EIA and addressed institutional issues compounding EIA administration in Ethiopia. The re-establishment of the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 19 created a significant driving force behind the development of the EIA system in the country. One of the competences and duties of the EPA is to “prepare directives and systems necessary for evaluating the impact of social and economic development projects on the environment; and follow up and supervise their implementation”. 20
The EIA Proclamation
The rationale for introducing and developing the EIA system was to address the historical problem of ignoring or neglecting environmental considerations while prioritising technical and economic considerations with regard to development projects. Established by the EPA, the EIA system in the country is based on the principle of active participation and involvement of critical actors and stakeholders, whose collective contribution is brought into play to produce a working system. 21
The critical actors in the Ethiopian EIA process include the environmental protection authorities, the project proponent, consulting firm, interested and affected parties, and licensing agencies. The EIA process involves various stages: pre-screening consultation, screening, scoping, environmental impact study, reviewing, decision making, and environmental monitoring and auditing. 22
The EIA Proclamation requires an EIA process for any planned development project or public policy which is likely to have a negative impact on the environment. It makes EIA a mandatory legal prerequisite for the implementation of major development projects, programmes and plans in the country. It was promulgated to facilitate the implementation and the maximisation of socio-economic benefits, by assessing and managing the potential environmental impacts of a proposed development activity or public instrument prior to their implementation. With regard to development projects, it stipulates that no person shall commence implementation of a proposed project identified by directive as requiring EIA without first passing through the EIA process and obtaining authorisation from the competent environmental agency. 23
In line with this, project proponents must undertake an EIA and submit the report to the competent environmental body; and they must fulfil the EIA-related terms and conditions of the authorisation given to them when they implement the project. 24 Moreover, the Proclamation authorises the imposition of a fine of 50,000–100,000 Ethiopian Birr on any project proponent who proceeds with implementation of a project without obtaining authorisation from environmental agencies or who makes false presentations in the EIA study report. 25
Under the Proclamation, licensing institutions are obliged to ensure, prior to issuing investment permits or operating licences, that the relevant environmental bodies have authorised the implementation of the projects. 26 It requires such licensing institutions to suspend or cancel the permit or licence they have issued for projects where the concerned environmental body suspends or cancels the authorisation given for implementation of the project. 27 These provisions are important to ensure that project proponents comply with the EIA requirements.
Public participation is also addressed in the EIA process. The Proclamation requires environmental bodies to ensure that the comments made by the public (in particular the communities likely to be affected by the project) are incorporated into the EIA study report as well as into its evaluation. 28 To this end, it requires environmental bodies to make any EIA study report available to the public and to solicit comments thereon.
Where subsequent directives require EIA, the relevant public instruments must also pass through the EIA process prior to their approval. In line with this, the Proclamation obliges government organs to ensure that their policies have passed through the EIA process prior to their submission for approval. 29 Having provided the basic framework of EIA, the Proclamation envisages the issuance of specific directives and guidelines that further specify implementation of the EIA process. In particular, it requires the EPA to develop a directive identifying categories of projects likely to have a negative environmental impact, which would thus require an EIA. 30 It also requires the EPA to issue guidelines that determine the elements necessary to prepare and evaluate an EIA study report. 31 The Authority has developed such draft directives and guidelines but they have not yet been formally adopted and put into force.
Current Provisions of the EIA Proclamation
The EIA Proclamation remains the most important piece of domestic legislation in relation to EIA in Ethiopia. It considers the EIA process as multi-functional. In its preamble, it declares that EIAs have the potential to promote sustainable development, foster the implementation of the right to a clean and healthy environment, bring about administrative transparency and accountability, and enable the public to participate in planning and decision making on developments which may affect them and the environment. 32
The Proclamation recognises EIA as a tool applicable to both strategies and projects. This recognition is important. The use of EIA at the strategic level is critical for many reasons. In particular, if EIA had only applied at the project level, its consideration of environmental values would often be too late in the decision-making process to allow those considerations to affect project approval planning, design and implementation in any real way. By considering environmental values at the strategic level, those values can be integrated into all decision-making processes from that level down to the smallest projects emanating from those strategies, also giving decision makers a second chance to examine the possible impacts of a project on the environment.
The following sections discuss the primary provisions of the EIA process at present.
Definition of EIA
As noted above, the Proclamation defines EIA broadly as the methodology of identifying and evaluating in advance any effect, be it positive or negative, which results from the implementation of a proposed project (lower-level EIA) or public instrument. 33 The Proclamation clearly requires the use of EIA at the project level, 34 as well as at the strategic level, for public instruments, such as programmes and laws, that are listed by the EPA as subject to EIA. 35 Similarly, municipal master plans should be preceded by a strategic environmental impact assessment. 36
Scope
The Proclamation declares that the EPA should determine which activities are subject to EIA, and issue formal directives declaring these determinations. 37 The Environmental Protection Organs Establishment Proclamation 38 also tasks the EPA in connection with establishing the EIA system for public and private projects, and for social and economic development policies, strategies, laws and programmes. 39 In accordance with both proclamations, the EPA has the mandate to establish EIA processes at both the strategic and project level.
Decision-making Process
As noted, it is the EPA’s task to determine, by directives or guidelines, which activities at the strategic and project level are subject to an EIA. If an action is not identified as subject to EIA, then its approval at strategic level is not subject to EIA. In order to determine which activities are subject to EIA, the Authority must consider the possible environmental consequences of each type of activity. For projects with both beneficial and detrimental effects, the EPA or a Regional Environmental Agency (REA) should decide on the basis that if there is an error, it is better to err on the side of caution. Thus, the activity should be included, particularly if the balancing process shows the project is only slightly beneficial. 40
At the project level, this means that if the benefits of a project are considered slight or arguable when compared to its impacts, the EPA or REAs must determine whether the project could have a significant environmental impact. If so, a precautionary approach applies and the project will be subject to the EIA process. If a project is of a type that is included in the EPA directives as requiring an EIA, then its implementation can only begin under two circumstances: if an appropriate EIA is done and authorisation is obtained from the relevant environmental protection organ; or if authorisation is issued without an EIA, in cases where the competent environmental protection organ decides that the project has no significant impact on the environment.
The EIA proclamation imposes on any licensing agency (such as investment bureaus and trade and industry bureaus) the obligation to ensure that an environmental permit or environmental clearance certificate (ECC) is obtained for a project subject to EIA before issuing an investment permit or a trade or an operating licence for any project. 41
Rights and Obligations in the EIA process
The duty to perform an EIA falls on project proponents. It is up to them, not government authorities, to get expert advice and produce all EIA-related reports. 42 Government authorities then are under the obligation to assess the EIA, including to ensure that it is done properly, and to evaluate its contents in 15 working days. 43
Since Ethiopia is a federal State, this obligation is divided between the EPA and REAs as appropriate. The EPA may delegate its decision-making authority on EIAs to sectoral ministries or agencies. Division of these responsibilities is also stated. REAs are responsible to authorise EIA preparation regarding projects that are not subject to licensing, execution and supervision by a federal agency and that are unlikely to produce trans-regional impacts. The REAs must evaluate such EIAs and monitor their implementation. 44
Another key area of rights and obligations (further discussed below) applies to the public. The EIA Proclamation recognises the relevance of public involvement in the EIA process and mandates public participation rights. 45 Public participation is considered of paramount importance for the effectiveness of the EIA system, both during the EIA preparation and during the government’s evaluation.
Implementation Challenges
Effective implementation of the Proclamation’s provisions requires the issuance of implementing legislation, including regulations and directives, by the Council of Ministers and EPA respectively. 46 In the absence of such implementing legislation aimed at putting the stipulations of the EIA Proclamation into effect, implementation of the Proclamation encounters challenges in achieving its aims.
Public Participation in the EIA Process
Provisions in the Proclamation
As noted above, public participation is an important part of the EIA process and recognised as such in the EIA Proclamation. Articles 9 and 15 provide for rights for the public during the EIA evaluation stage. Under Article 15.1, the EPA and REAs are required to make EIAs accessible to the public and solicit comments on them, while under Article 15.2, they are required to ensure that the comments made by the public, particularly by the communities likely to be affected by the project, are incorporated into the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) report and in its evaluation. Following evaluation, including taking into account comments by the public and expert opinions, the EPA and REAs are required to take action on the EIA within 15 working days.
Implementation of the public participation provisions of the EIA Proclamation, however, remains challenging, in particular at the EIA evaluation stage, because there are no binding instruments (such as regulations or directives) specifying how the public can participate in the EIA process. For instance, it is not clear how the EPA and REAs should make EIS reports available to the public for comments; or the minimum time period allowed for comments, particularly since decision making should proceed within 15 working days. There is no specific time period allocated to public participation in the EIA evaluation process; instead, the Proclamation provides for 15 working days as the overall time for gathering comments, reviewing reports and making a decision. It is hardly possible for the authorities to engage the public, review EIAs, and eventually make a decision within only 15 working days.
Examples from Other Countries
Examples from other countries may be instructive in this context. In Africa, for example, Uganda, Ghana, Zambia and Morocco offer useful experience. In Asia, examples from Mongolia and China may be useful, as may various experiences from the US. All of these countries specify the time allocated for public participation in the EIA process. In Uganda for instance, 21 days are allowed for review only by lead agencies and 28 days are allocated to public hearing where it is required. In Ghana, 50 days are given for review. A minimum of 122 working days are allocated in Zambia, and 68 days in Morocco. 47
Addressing Participation Gaps
In Ethiopia, the EIA Proclamation does not allocate specific time for public participation during the review process. As a result, it is up to the EPA or REAs to determine the time allotted to the public for comments and to the agency for review of those comments and decisions on how to accommodate or reflect them. Gaps like these create challenges in the implementation of the EIA Proclamation and obstruct achievement of objectives regarding public participation in the EIA process.
In addition, coordination between or among government agencies is highly hierarchical. This highlights other gaps and inadequacies in the regulatory framework, which need to be urgently addressed through subsidiary instruments. 48
It has been argued that both of these types of regulations would be indispensable for the effective implementation of EIA. Hence, the gaps in these two participatory areas may explain why the Ethiopian EIA Proclamation has so far failed to achieve its objectives, 49 despite the institutionalisation of EIA in development activities. The potential of the EIA process and practices in Ethiopia to tackle the root cause of environmental degradation has encountered serious challenges, leaving a huge gap between theory and practice. 50
Conclusion
Recognition of EIA as a requirement in the decision-making process emerged in Ethiopia with the adoption of its 1997 Environmental Policy, and EIA Proclamation No. 299/2002 remains the most important piece of EIA-related domestic legislation in the country. The Proclamation considers the EIA process as multi-functional. In its preamble, it declares that EIAs have the potential to promote sustainable development, foster the implementation of the right to a clean and healthy environment, bring about administrative transparency and accountability, and enable the public to participate in the planning of and decision making on developments which may affect them and the environment.
As this article reveals, public involvement in the EIA process in Ethiopia is weak and the Proclamation fails to ensure the full effectiveness of the EIA system. Moreover, the highly hierarchical structure of environmental government agencies (at the federal, regional, zonal and district levels) leads to weak coordination between agencies, resulting in ineffectiveness of the Proclamation. The constitutionally guaranteed right of the people to participate and be consulted in any development activity that could affect them still needs to be realised in its full sense in the entire EIA process in Ethiopia.
The EIA Proclamation is not in itself adequate to build an effective EIA system. Its effective implementation requires the issuance of more specific subsidiary directives and regulations by the Council of Ministers. Weak legal and institutional arrangements for coordination and communication between or among environmental government agencies have further created a great deal of confusion in the EIA process. Clearly coordination must be strengthened and hierarchical power relations must change, to ensure that any development activities are environmentally friendly.
Footnotes
Dejene, G. 2012. Environmental Impact Assessment in Ethiopia: Laws and Practices. Doctoral dissertation. University of Alabama.
Ibid.
Hunter, D., Salzman, J. and Zaelke, D. 2007. International Environmental Law and Policy. Third Edition. New York: Foundation Press.
Supra, note 2.
Ethiopian EIA Proclamation No. 299/2002 (EIA Proclamation). Preamble, paras 2–3.
Ashenafi, S. 2011. Evaluation of the Implementation of Environmental Impact Assessment in Dam Projects: The Case of Ribb and Dire Dams. Master’s Thesis. Addis Ababa University. Available at http://etd.aau.edu.et/bitstream/handle/123456789/6917/Sileshi%20Ashenafi.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
S upra, note 6.
Anjaneyulu, Y. and Manickam, V. 2007. Environmental Impact Assessment Methodologies. Hyderabad: BS Pub. The authors note that “environmental impact is any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, wholly or partially resulting from an organization’s activities, products or services”.
Wathern, P. 1998. Environmental Impact Assessment: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
Supra, note 6, Article 2.3.
Ibid., Article 2.10.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Kebede, S. 2003. Environmental Impact Assessment in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: Environmental Protection Authority.
Ibid.
Environmental Protection Organs Establishment Proclamation (Proc. No. 295/2002) as well as the EIA Proclamation, supra, note 6.
Environmental Pollution Control (Proc. No. 300/2002).
Environmental Protection Organs Establishment Proclamation, supra, note 17.
Supra, note 6.
Environmental Protection Authority of Ethiopia (EPA). 2002. Environmental Impact Assessment Procedural Guideline series 1. Addis Ababa: EPA.
Supra, note 6, Article 3.1.
Ibid., Article 7.
Ibid., Article 18.
Ibid., Article 3.
Ibid., Article 12.
Ibid., Article 15.
Ibid., Article 14.
Ibid., Article 5.
Ibid., Article 8.
Ibid., Preamble.
Ibid., Article 2.3.
Ibid., Article 5.
Ibid., Article 13.
Ethiopian EIA Procedural Guideline 2003.
Supra, note 6, Articles 5 and 13.
Environmental Protection Organs Establishment Proclamation, supra, note 17.
Ibid., Article 6.4.
Supra, note 6, Article 4.2.
Ibid., Article 3.3.
Ibid., Article 11.
Ibid., Article 9.
Ibid., Articles 9 and 14.2.
Ibid., Articles 6, 9 and 15.
Ibid., Articles 19 and 20.
Supra, note 2.
Supra, note 2.
Gubena, A.F. 2016. “Environmental Impact Assessment in Ethiopia: A General Review of History, Transformation and Challenges Hindering Full Implementation”. Journal of Environment and Earth Science 6(1): 1–9.