How can marginalized communities be included in EIA processes?

The first step is to go outside one's own field of expertise in to all the tangents of/with the intersecting systems where the positive and negative outcomes may be realized and embedded. This may mean going far enough out of one's comfort zone, and as already mentioned, solicit assistance of local groups with trusted voices. Then show up authentically as human beings, not with an intention to extract knowledge for one's marketing or assessment needs. There needs to be genuine reciprocity. And, respect people's time. Lived experience is real information. Compensate people for their engagements. Go back and show how their input and participation manifest in the final project or outcome.

Based on my experiences working on impact assessments in the European Commission on inclusion-related topics, the most efficient way to include marginalized groups for governments and companies is partnering up with civil society organizations on local/national/regional level that represent marginalized communities to ensure that their voices are heard and their needs are taken into account. These organizations can help involve them also in the decision-making process, seeking their input and feedback, and addressing their concerns. It is also important to have transparent and accessible communication channels to keep these communities informed and involved throughout the EIA process.

FAIRNESS • Marginalized targeted group should be in the research process, including in study design, study implementation, data ownership, intellectual property, and authorship of language development • Access by researchers to any traditional knowledge, cultural or should be subject to the free and prior informed consent of the owners • A culturally appropriate plan to share benefits should be agreed. RESPECT Potential cultural sensitivities should be explored in advance of research with local communities. Tailored risk management plans should be agreed upon by the stakeholders. Plain language and a non-patronizing style in the appropriate local languages should be adopted in communication.

The foundational principle should be about being deliberate and intentional about enabling and ensuring community participation in the process. For this to be operationalised community agency must be be recognised and processes and mechanisms will need to be put in place to activate this agency. In doing this one must recognise and accommodate the diversity in the community, and the power imbalances and inequalities within the community. Community participation must reflect this diversity and imbalances, such that community representation in the platform for community participation is inclusive. The community participation process and platform must be driven and controlled by the community.In this way community agency is activated.

1. One thing I have experienced that Unorganized marginal community have less voice than other community people. 3. Every civil society organization has their own agenda and they do according to that. In this connection marginal community should have their own organization as a tool. 4. I am experiend that these organizations must have a national network that can reach to the policy makers. 5. Caution: Facilitators roll is important here. They should not take any leadership in this process. Thanks for initiating the issue.

Social safeguards is intrinsic to the EIA process including a multistakeholder monitoring to the compliance of the environment management plam

I have not found any EIA covering and clearly stating the policy and plan to address the marginilised communities. The law also only focuses on Air, Water and land impact.

Including marginalized communities in EIA processes is crucial for ensuring that their perspectives, needs, and concerns are taken into account. Here are some strategies to achieve greater inclusion: 1. Early and Transparent Engagement, allowing marginalized communities to be involved from the beginning of the EIA. Clearly communicate information about the project, its potential impacts, and process in a transparent and accessible manner. 2. Provide training and resources to build the capacity of marginalized communities, enabling them to participate effectively in the EIA process. 3. Community Representation: Facilitate the inclusion of community representatives in decision-making processes, project design, and monitoring activities.

Il est clair que la puissance publique doit absolument mieux évaluer l’impact de ses politiques sur les publics visés. Le retour d’expérience est très limité, et souvent la tâche se limite à sa propre finalisation alors que l’impact est le cœur du sujet. De l’autre côté, les communautés marginalisées évoluent aussi dans un contexte sociale complexe où d’autre communautés le sont moins. Cela doit être pris en compte pour offrir aux communautés priorisées les solutions nécessaires mais sans déstabiliser l’ensemble de la société, au risque de créer de nouvelles marginalisation. Ce dernier point doit justement être un critère d’évaluation.

In my experience working on Environmental Impact projects in Africa where EIA and ESMP are conducted project beneficiaries or impacted communities are involved Partially during the exercise. Their Socio-cultural activities are included in the EIA or ESMP report, well captured and documented. But when it comes to implementation the stories are different. The question is whose responsibility is it to ensure that the reports are implemented properly? Who does the monitoring? Who enforces the compliance?

In this section there is mention of the need for, "Public administrators" to, "ensure that the EIA process contributes to the empowerment and development of marginalized communities" (and that they benefit from the opportunities and resources generated by the proposed project or policy), but there is no "guidance" for how to do this. (HOW to "Empower the marginalized communities.) It is also mentioned that, "They should ensure that the EIA process enhances the social and environmental justice and equity for marginalized communities (and that they are not exposed to disproportionate or unfair risks or burdens).", but again there is no guidance on HOW these "marginalized communities" can be "empowered".

Public Administrators need to be open to undertaking "continuous dialogue" and collaboration not just with the "marginalized communities" (and people) themselves, but to also collaborate across multiple sectors in the local communities that they seek to assist and to consider making connections beyond the local communities to potential stakeholders who may not have otherwise been given much consideration in the past (and may have seemed "peripheral" to the success of the projects, but may in fact help to get to the "root" of solving the actual problems or issues).

Theory says inclusion through consideration of their views. However, practice has shown a reduced voluntary contribution to the public processes from the side of these marginalised communities. The reasons are countless (from language and cultural barriers to a lack o trust, to weak channels as many of these communities are not routinely integrated in social life). Two recommendations emerge from this: 1) liaise with local representatives who are trusted by these communities, and understand them at a more personal level - avoid large NGOs. and 2) complement all these by in depth - real - analyses of the different factors that might contribute to their participation, to create a REAL theory surrounding this issue.

This shouldn't even be a question when talking about EIA - everyone needs to be on the table. But here we are! To add. Mindfulness and complete understanding of impacts. There are subtleties that are often neglected as low impact or irrelevant. That is why it is imperative to include all - or at least, strive to gain 100% participation without any excuse.

I've seen no mention of the specifics of the #structure of #Empowerment systems nor how they should operate. From my experience dealing with marginalized peoples in our own Network (#UnityNet) we have found (based on more than 2 years of deliberations and ongoing interactions with these same people) that a Multi-stakeholder #Partnership approach will likely work best, but only if it is done within a framework of Cultural Cooperation (at nearly all levels of interaction across time and geography).