Recommendation of the Council on Environmental Assessment of Development Assistance Projects and Programmes

THE COUNCIL , HAVING REGARD to Article 5 b) of the Convention on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development of 14 December 1960; HAVING REGARD to the Recommendation of the Council on Environmental Assessment of Development Assistance Projects and Programmes [ OECD/LEGAL/0220 ]; the Recommendation of the Council on Measures Required to Facilitate the Environmental Assessment of Development Assistance Projects and Programmes [ OECD/LEGAL/0227 ]; and the Recommendation of the Council concerning an Environmental Checklist for Possible Use by High-Level Decision-Makers in Bilateral and Multilateral Development Assistance Institutions [ OECD/LEGAL/0246 ], which this Recommendation replaces; HAVING REGARD to the Recommendation of the Council on the Assessment of Projects, Plans and Programmes with Significant Impact on the Environment [ OECD/LEGAL/0172 ]; the Declaration on Anticipatory Environmental Policies [ OECD/LEGAL/0175 ]; and the Declaration on Environment: Resource for the Future [ OECD/LEGAL/0219 ]; HAVING REGARD to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (A/RES/70/1); the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 2015 Paris Agreement under the UNFCCC; the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity; the 1994 United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification; and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030; CONSIDERING that over the years a growing body of experience has been accumulated in assessing environmental effects of projects; MINDFUL of the need to take into account the possible impacts of aid activities on the environment and to strive for closer co-operation with developing countries; RECOGNISING that environmental assessment of development assistance projects and programmes can help reduce the risk of costly and potentially adverse effects on the environment and society, and is dependent upon effective organisation, clear procedures and adequate resources; RECOGNISING that while developing countries have the responsibility for managing their own environment, donor agencies have the responsibility to carry out environmental assessments having regard to any relevant domestic legislation in the host country. On the proposal of the Environment Policy Committee and the Development Assistance Committee: I.           RECOMMENDS that, as regards environmental assessment of development assistance projects and programmes, Members and non-Members having adhered to this Recommendation (hereafter “Adherents”) ensure that: 1.        Development assistance projects and programmes which, because of their nature, size and/or location, could significantly affect the environment and society, are subject to in-depth environmental assessment at as early a stage as possible; 2.        When examining whether a specific development assistance project or programme should be subject to in-depth environmental assessment, Adherent’s aid agencies pay particular attention to those projects or programmes referred to in Annex II, bearing in mind the particular legislative and socio-economic setting and environmental conditions in the host country; 3.        Where dangerous substances or processes are involved, continue to seek ways to promote the integration of best techniques of prevention and protection and best manufacturing processes in projects in which they and their industrial enterprises are involved. II.          RECOMMENDS , as regards measures required to facilitate the environmental assessment, that Adherents: 1.        Examine the adequacy of their procedures and practices with respect to implementing an environmental assessment policy or support the formal adoption of such a policy; 2.        Develop, in the light of that examination and to the extent necessary, effective procedures for an environmental assessment process taking into account the approach outlined in Annex I, which forms an integral part of this Recommendation; 3.        Having developed such procedures, firmly establish the responsibility for applying them within each office responsible for the planning and/or implementation of development assistance projects and programmes; 4.        Establish also the responsibilities for supervising and providing guidance on the environmental assessment process in a central office of their aid agencies; 5.        Ensure that adequate human and financial resources are provided to conduct the environmental assessment process in a timely and cost-effective way; 6.        Ensure the provision of human and financial resources to developing countries wishing to improve their capability for conducting environmental assessment, taking into account all or part of the measures outlined in Annex I; 7.        Make available the “Environmental Checklist for Possible Use by High-Level Decision-Makers” (included in Annex II) to their senior officials responsible for approving bilateral development assistance projects and their Representatives on the boards of multilateral development assistance institutions; 8.        Encourage officials identified in item 7 above to make use of the Environmental Checklist before approving or disapproving proposed development assistance projects and programmes. III.         INVITES the Secretary-General and Adherents to disseminate this Recommendation, including by transmitting it to multilateral development assistance institutions and other competent international organisations with a view to fostering better environmental review of development assistance projects by all donors. IV.         INVITES non-Adherents to take due account of, and adhere to, this Recommendation. V.          INSTRUCTS the Environment Policy Committee and the Development Assistance Committee to: 1.        Prepare guidance on the types of procedures, processes, organisation and resources needed to facilitate the assessment of environmental effects of development assistance projects and programmes and to contribute to the early prevention, including risk assessment, and/or mitigation of potentially adverse environmental effects of certain aid projects or programmes; 2.        Collect information from Adherents and facilitate the exchange of experiences among Adherents on the way in which aid agencies conduct environmental assessment of their development assistance projects and programmes in accordance with this Recommendation; and 3.        Monitor the implementation of this Recommendation and report thereon to the Council no later than five years following its adoption and at least every ten years thereafter Annex I SUGGESTED APPROACH IN ESTABLISHING AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES 1.           Whether a new process for assessing the environmental impacts of development assistance activities is created, or existing procedures are adapted to such a process, environmental assessment should be co-ordinated with the host country government (at an appropriate administrative level); integrated at an early stage of project or programme planning; reflected in the implementation of the activity and followed up by monitoring and post-audit evaluation. 2.           The following elements are recommended as part of such a process: a)        An initial screening process should be undertaken to determine whether or not a full environmental assessment is required; b)        An environmental assessment on a project or programme should begin at the pre-feasibility or project proposal stage and be integrated with cost-benefit and engineering feasibility studies; c)        The content of the assessment should be determined by a procedure designed to identify reasonable project/programme alternatives and the most significant environmental impacts associated with them. The reason for doing so is to ensure that the ensuing assessment is carried out in the most timely and cost-effective manner by addressing primarily the most important issues necessary for making a decision. The procedure should be implemented preferably with a group of individuals responsible for the project or programme coming together to discuss the issues and determine those to be addressed in the assessment. Host government officials and, to the extent possible, the public affected by the activity and other relevant parties should be included in the procedure as well; d)        After this, terms of reference should be drawn up for the assessment itself. Depending on the size, nature and location of the project/programme, the assessment can range from a one- to two- page analysis based on existing information and carried out by a single individual to a comprehensive environmental impact statement based on extensive field surveys and data gathering and carried out by an interdisciplinary team. Regardless of the extent of the assessment, it is necessary that it be carried out in conjunction with traditional investigations (e.g. engineering feasibility); e)        An assessment should not only point out the possible environmental consequences of a particular activity but also suggest avoidance (i.e. opting not to carry out the project) or mitigating (i.e. corrective) measures or alternative designs for limiting negative environmental impacts should the project/programme be implemented. In addition, attention should be given to the creation of appropriate institutional mechanisms in the host countries to ensure that mitigation measures are carried out. An assessment could also point out the potential for positive contributions of the project or programme to environmentally sustainable development; f)         The assessment process should continue beyond the point at which a decision is taken, to include monitoring of the activity during its construction and operation. Monitoring is necessary to ensure that the findings of the assessment (e.g. suggested mitigating measures) are implemented, and to test the accuracy of the predictions made (e.g. the actual impact of the project on air quality, water quality, human health, ecosystem stability). The results of monitoring can lead to project modification as well as improving the data base for implementing the procedure described in paragraph c) above in connection with future projects/programmes of a similar nature. SUGGESTED MEASURES BY ADHERENTS FOR IMPROVING THE CAPABILITY OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1.           The ultimate goal of an aid agency environmental assessment process should be to help developing countries themselves manage their own development in an environmentally sound way. The following measures are suggested as steps which could be taken by Adherents’ aid agencies in transferring to the developing world and supporting in it an environmental assessment capability. 2.           An immediate measure which can be taken would be to actively involve host country officials in conducting environmental assessments for which aid agencies are responsible. That involvement could begin by including host government officials and non-governmental stakeholders in the initial phase of the environmental assessment process and continue by engaging host country nationals, including, but not limited to, affected people and civil society, in conducting the assessment and in monitoring activities. 3.           Adherents’ aid and environmental agencies could institute training courses in environmental assessment. The provision of training should be made to a number of target groups in the host countries including elected representatives and senior decision-makers in government and business, high level administrators, project managers, technical specialists, members of review bodies and representatives of environmental interest groups. The specific type of training to be undertaken would vary depending on the target group. For policy makers, for example, seminars should be conducted to demonstrate the negative effects which result from a failure to incorporate environmental elements in economic development planning and emphasise the benefits to be gained from environmentally sound planning. Training for project managers and technical specialists should emphasise procedures and methods for environmental assessment and their role and significance in environmental management. 4.           Adherents might consider direct support to developing countries by providing environmental advisers to work with national planning agencies for as long as requested. Such advisers would have the task of helping government officials assess the environmental impacts that might be expected to arise from projects, programmes or policies and to inform decision-makers and the public of reasonable alternatives that would mitigate negative environmental impacts and enhance the quality of the human environment in the affected area. 5.           The lack of adequate baseline data and information on the state of the environment is a major constraint to successfully implementing environmental assessment in developing countries. Adherents’ aid and environmental agencies might consider providing information such as host country “environmental profiles” and baseline studies on particularly sensitive areas, as well as landscape-level plans illustrating possible cumulative impacts. In addition, direct financial and technical assistance could be provided to host countries to carry out their own studies. 6.           As noted in section 2f) above, the assessment process should continue beyond the point at which a decision is taken, so as to include monitoring of the activity during its construction and operation, with appropriate involvement of the host country. Consequently, financial and technical assistance should be directed at strengthening the appropriate institutional mechanisms in the host countries to ensure that mitigation measures and post-audit evaluations are implemented. Annex II ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR POSSIBLE USE BY HIGH-LEVEL DECISION-MAKERS (see below for explanatory information) I.           Impact Identification 1.        Does the project or programme have an environmental or social impact? Have all reasonably, foreseeable environmental and social impacts been identified? 2.        Is there a clear statement of the significant beneficial and adverse environmental effects of the project or programme? Have the risks been evaluated? 3.        Has attention been paid beyond onsite effects to offsite effects (so-called upstream and downstream effects), including transboundary effects, and to the possible time-lag before effects are exhibited? 4.        Has an environmental analysis been made of any associated facilities? 5.        Have indirect and cumulative impacts been identified? 6.        Have the environmental and social impacts been identified in the context of the project’s area of influence? 7.        Has the area of influence, both spatial and temporal, been defined? II.          Mitigation Measures 8.        Has the “mitigation hierarchy” been fully and properly employed, i.e. avoidance, minimisation, restoration, offset, and compensation? 9.        What mitigation measures are proposed and what alternative sites have been considered? 10.      What lessons from previous similar projects have been incorporated into the environmental assessment of this project? 11.      Have concerned populations, groups and individuals, been involved and have their interests been adequately taken into consideration in project preparations? Is resettlement involved? Are appropriate compensatory measures envisaged? III.         Procedures 12.      Which environmental guidelines used by the agency and the recipient government have been taken into consideration, and how has this been done? 13.      In which phases of the decision-making process has the environmental assessment been included? 14.      How have the beneficial and adverse environmental effects of the project been integrated into the economic analysis of the project? 15.      Have developing country authorities responsible for environmental protection been consulted in the preparation of the project? Are the central authorities in the developing country responsible for project or programme approval aware of the environmental impact of the project and have they approved the environmental measures to be included? IV          Implementation 16.      Do developing country institutions need strengthening to make the environmental measures effective, and, if so, what action is foreseen? 17.      How and by whom will the environmental impact and mitigation measures be monitored during and after implementation? 18.      Have needed environmental measures been costed and are there adequate and realistic assurances for their funding? EXPLANATORY INFORMATION RELATED TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS ON THE CHECKLIST Question 1 : Environmental effects may concern: a)        Air quality; b)        Water (ground and surface water) resources; c)        Soils and soil conservation areas; d)        Areas subject to desertification; land degradation, arid and semi-arid zones; e)        Dry and humid tropical forests and other land-based ecosystems; f)         Habitats of value to protection and conservation and/or sustainable use of fish and wildlife resources, particularly wetlands, coastal ecosystems (e.g. mangrove swamps) and ocean ecosystems (e.g. coral reefs); g)        Critical habitats of endangered or threatened species; h)        Areas of unique interest (historical, archaeological, cultural, aesthetic, scientific); i)          Areas of concentrations of population or industrial activities where further industrial development or urban expansion could create significant environmental problems (especially regarding air and water quality); j)          Areas of particular social interest to specific vulnerable population groups (e.g. nomadic people or other people with traditional lifestyles); k)        Changes in atmospheric and ocean conditions, including climate change; l)          Associated facilities that are not funded as part of the project and that would not have been constructed or expanded if the project did not exist and without which the project would not be viable (e.g. railways, roads, captive power plants or transmission lines, pipelines, utilities, warehouses, and logistics terminals). Question 2 : At a minimum, the types of projects for which a clear statement of environmental effects should be provided include those which involve: a)        Substantial changes in renewable resource use (e.g. conversion of land to agricultural production, to forestry or to pasture land, rural development, timber production); b)        Substantial changes in farming and fishing practices (e.g. introduction of new crops, large-scale mechanisation); use of chemicals in agriculture (e.g. pesticides, fertilizers); c)        Exploitation of water resources (e.g. dams, irrigation and drainage projects, desalination plants, water supply and water and basin management); d)        Infrastructure (e.g. roads, bridges, airports, harbours, transmission lines, pipelines, railways); e)        Industrial activities (e.g. metallurgical plants, wood processing plants, chemical plants, power plants, cement plants, refinery and petrochemical plants, agro-industries); f)         Extractive industries (e.g. mining, quarrying, extraction of peat, oil and gas); g)        Waste management and disposal (e.g. sewerage systems and treatment plants, waste landfills, treatment plants for household waste and for hazardous waste); h)        Activities that take place in or near critical habitats or habitats with threatened or endangered species.  Specific types of beneficial and adverse environmental effects can vary from project to project. For example, an irrigation project – paragraph c) above – can have the beneficial effect of creating a new potential for fresh water fisheries. At the same time, it can have the adverse environmental effects of increasing salinisation, soil erosion, etc. Question 3 : An example of an offsite effect would be negative effects on aquatic life downstream from an industrial site when effluents are not treated before their discharge into a river or other receiving water body. An example of the importance of including considerations of time lag in the decision is secondary impacts of roads that penetrate undisturbed natural areas as they are often followed by large-scale (shifting) cultivation and environmental degradation. Question 4 : Mitigation measures are actions taken to diminish or alleviate negative environmental effects. Examples include: a)        Treating industrial effluents before they are discharged into bodies of water; b)        Providing noise barriers for highway and industrial projects; c)        Building ecological (ecosystem) bridges or wildlife corridors (e.g. underpasses, tunnels, viaducts and overpasses) spanning over highways, roads or other infrastructure developments; d)        Establishing wildlife reserves and other protected areas to offset or compensate for land taken for development purposes. Question 5 : Affected populations should participate in defining and understanding the problems in planning and implementing the solutions associated with development projects. This requires a heavy emphasis on equity considerations in development and the need to decentralise decision-making processes. This should be accompanied by efforts which help foster sustainable development and full participation on the part of rural populations. Appropriately designed and inclusive consultations should take place, including with vulnerable segments of the project-affected community.  Question 6 : An environmental assessment of a project or programme should begin at the pre-feasibility or project proposal stage and be integrated with cost-benefit and engineering feasibility studies. Question 7 : One way for ensuring the dissemination of environmental information related to the project is through an inter-ministerial commission/agency consultative process in the developing country prior to making a final decision on the project. Question 8 : Examples of measures that can be taken to strengthen developing countries’ governmental institutions include the provision of training courses in environmental assessment and management; the provision of environmental advisors to help government officials assess the environmental impacts that might be expected to arise from projects, programmes or policies and to inform decision-makers and the public of reasonable alternatives that would mitigate negative environmental impacts and enhance the quality of the human environment in the affected area. Private and non-governmental organisations might be supported to strengthen environmental awareness among local populations.