(WP)ICP / RUP /001 Report series No.: RS/93/GE/13(MAA) English only
REPORT
..... WORKSHOP ON ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH IMPACf ASSESSMENT
Convened by: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
-
WESTERN PACIFIC REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CENTRE (EHC) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 15-19 November 1993
-
Not for sale Printed and distributed by: World Health Organization Western Pacific Regional Environmental Health Centre (EHC) P.O. Box 12550 5.0782 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia .
i':,
December 1993
WHfJlWPRn LTTmARY ,;!" Phi~n:J1mu
-
NOTE
The views expressed in this report are those of the participants in the Workshop on Environmental Health Impact Assessment and do not necessarily reflect the policies of the Organization.
"..
"..
This report has been prepared by the World Health Organization Western Pacific Regional Environmental Health Centre (EHC) for governments of Member States in the Region and for those who participated in the Workshop on Environmental Health Impact Assessment, which was held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from 15 to 19 Novell)ber 1993. "..
CONTENTS SUMMARY
-
1.
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
U~ ~1~ ~ i~: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : I 1.4 Opening ceremony........................................................................................................ 2 2. PROCEEDINGS ................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Country reports .............................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Summary of papers and discussions .................................................•........................ 2 2.3 Evaluation ..................... ;................................................................................................ 6 3. CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................................... 6 ANNEXES: ANNEX 1 - LIST OF PARTICIPANTS, REPRESENTATIVES, OBSERVER AND SECRETARIAT ..................................................... 9 ANNEX 2 WORKSHOP PROGRAMME .............................................................. lJ
ANNEX 3 - LIST OF DOCUMENTS DISTRIBUTED DURING THE WORKSHOP ...... ,............................................................................ 17 ANNEX 4 - OPENING ADDRESS ............................................................................. 19 ANNEX' 5 - SUMMARIES OF COUNTRY REPORTS ........................................ 21
Keywords Environmental impact assessment - health impact assessment, workshop
SUMMARY
Objectives of the workshop: The objectives of the Workshop on Environmental Health Impact Assessment were: (1) to review and identify problems associated with conducting health impact assessments in the Region; (2) to examine procedures and techniques for carrying out environmental health impact assessments; and (3) to define actions and resources required for the development of more effective environmental health impact assessment processes.
Summary of proceedings and conclusions: The workshop was attended by 13 participants from China, Hong Kong, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Philippines and Viet Nam, representatives from the Urban Management Programme and the United Nations Development Programme/World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme, and an observer from Malaysia. The proceedings comprised presentations of country reports by the participants, and technical papers by WHO staff and consultants, and two group exercises. A half-day field trip to an industrial plant manufacturing industrial gases was also undertaken during the workshop. An evaluation by the participants showed that the above objectives had been successfully achieved . Various conclusions were made based on major findings from the presentations and discussions during the workshop as follows: (1) health impact assessment (HIA) is not adequately addressed in environmental impact assessment (EIA) in most countries and the participants agreed that HIA should be an integral part of EIA; (2) the participants developed an understanding of the process of HIA in EIA, and felt that the guidelines introduced in the workshop were useful; (3) governmental commitment, adequate regulatory framework and reorientation of health services were considered to be essential in establishing the process of HIA in EIA; (4) some problems in implementing the process of HIA in EIA identified by the participants included the establishment of effective intersectoral collaboration, poor health risk information, lack of guidelines for ensuing community involvement and difficulties in measuring health outcomes; (5) no participating countryhad a completely operational programme for H IA in EIA, and the participants agreed that the process of development of national frameworks, which started during the workshop, should continue on their return home; (6) although introduced as a tool for assessing health impacts of proposed projects, the HIA techniques are equally applicable to existing facilities, and such application should be encouraged in the light of gaining experience in the process and establishing a useful database for the assessment of future projects; and (7) assessment techniques are available to address the health impacts of both water resources arid industrial development projects, but further work is required to provide a unified approach to the application of these techniques.
•
1. INTRODUCTION
.... The Workshop on Environmental Health Impact Assessment was held at the WHO Western Pacific Regional Environmenta.l He~l.th Cent:e (EHC) ~n the campus of the University of Agriculture, Malaysia (UmversltL Pertaman MalaYSia), Serdang, Se\angor, Malaysia from 15 to 19 November 1993. The workshop was organized by WHO and funded by the Japan Shipbuilding Industry Foundation. 1.1 Objectives The objectives of the workshop were:
(1) to review and identify problems associated with conducting health impact assessments in the Region; (2) to examine procedures and techniques for carrying out environmental health impact assessments; and (3) to define actions and resources required for the development of more effective environmental health impact assessment processes. .
... ... ...
1.2
Participants
The workshop was attended by 13 participants from eight countries and areas inthe Western Pacific Region, a representative each from the Urban Management Programme, and the United Nations Development Programme/World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme, and an observer from the University of Agriculture, Malaysia. A Jist of the participants, representatives, observer and secretariat members is given in Annex I. 1.3
Organization
The workshop programme is given in Annex 2 and a list of documents distributed during the workshop in Annex 3. The,documents include country reports prep;' 'd by the participants, papers and hand-outs prepared by WHO staff and consultants and ,,~levant publications provided by the Asian Development Bank. Copies of these documc;,' s a;'e available on request from EHC. The opening session of the workshop was chaired by Mr B. Fisher, Acting Director, EHC. The remaining sessions were chaired by Dr H. Ogawa, Environmental Systems Engineer, EHC. The working papers were presented l?y Dr Ogawa and WHO Consultants Dr M. Birley and Dr D. Calvert. Participants presented country reports. Each presentation was followed by questions and discussion. A field trip was organized to an industrial plant, manufacturing oxygen, nitrogen and acetylene gases in Petaling Jaya. The participants observed the plant safety and environmental protection programmes, An exercise session was provided to enable the participants to prepare national frameworks for the promotion of environmental health impact assessment in their countries. Following the session, the results of exercise were presented and discussed .
...
-
.~-
JL.aJ
Ol)Jening ceremony
On behalf of Dr S.T. Han, WHO Regional Director for the Western Pacific, Mr B. Fisher, Acting Director, EHe delivered an opening address. The address noted the need for integration of environmental assessment and management into development decision-making and stated WHO's concern that health effects of development proposals were not adequately addressed in environmental impact assessment (EIA). It stressed the need to improve the health impact assessment component of ETA and develop effective programmes to promote it. The full text of the speech is given in Annex 4. Professor Dr Syed lalaludin Syed Salim, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of the University of Agriculture, Malaysia, addressed the opening and welcomed the participants to the University campus and Malaysia. He noted the impressive economic growth of the Western Pacific Region as well as negative environmental impacts resulting from such growth. It was stressed that there.was a need to incorporate environmental and health concerns into socioeconomic decision-making, and the workshop would provide guidelines as to how this could be done. He also emphasized the need for more proactive health and environmental education to create awareness about the health and environmental impacts of development activities. He then declared the workshop opened.
2. PROCEEDINGS
2.1
Country reports
The participants presented their country reports, highlighting relevant legislative provisions and institutional arrangements for EIA, the extent of health impact assessment (HIA) in EIA, post ElA auditing, and needs and future prospects for HIA in EIA. The country reports revealed that most countries and areas in the Region had a statutory or administrative process established for ElA. However, HlA was not fully incorporated into the ElA process, and consequently the health issues were not adequately addressed in most ElA reports. Most country reports concluded that there was a need to strengthen HIA in EIA. 2.2 2.2.1 Summary or papers and discussions Overview: Health impact assessment in environmental impact assessment
In the first session, Dr Ogawa provided an overview of HIA in ElA. His presentation covered the development of EIA programmes in countries and areas of the Western Pacific Region, and the general procedures of HIA in EIA and problems faced by the assessors of health impacts. It was pointed out that, in order to promote HIA in EIA, human resources would need to be developed, more case examples be made available. and health agencies be involved in EIA. He stated that the term, environmental health impact assessment or EHIA, would be used interchangeably with HIA in EfA in this workshop.
.. -3;
. 2.2.2 hitroduction to ADB guidelines for HIA of development projects Dr Birley introduced the Asian Development Bank (ADB) Guidelines entitled "Guidelines for the Health Impact Assessment of Development Projects" which he had written during 1992 with joint author Professor G.L. Peralta and in collaboration with WHO. A copy of this document had been handed to each of the participants. The Guidelines consisted of two main sections: a procedure for conducting H fA as part of ElA in development economies and an extensive review of the health hazards of development. Dr Birley guided the audience through the procedure via a set of flowcharts. The main steps in the procedure are: health hazard identification interpretation of hazards as health risks
.
health risk management. A rapid assessment procedure was stressed, that is aimed at classifying the project into one of three groups in a similar manner to that used by the Wor.1d Bank and other agencies for environmental assessment. In order to interpret health hazards as health risks, the procedure subdivides the problem into three subcomponents: community vulnerability environmental factors
.
capacity of health protection agencies . The ADB procedure does not depend on the quantification of risk. It merely seeks to rank the risk attributable to the project as likely to increase, decrease or have no effect. The procedure seemed to differ most from other procedures on account of these two features .
.
2.23
Introduction to WHO document on EHIA
Dr Calvert introduced a document "Methods for Environmental and Health Impact Assessment of Development Projects". The premise of the document was that the current process of EIA should also take into account the impact on human health. Health does not just mean the absence of excess mortality or the absence of overt disease; measures of illhealth should include measures of factors which impair well-being and effective function. HlA should be part of the process of EIA. A series of steps by which HIA could he carried out were outlined and the tasks associated with each step discussed. The outline was to be used during the workshop as a method for HIA.
.. ...
I..;. ;
22.4
Group exercise: HlA of hydropower and irrigation development projects
A group exercise was conducted to consider the health impact of a hydropo~er and irrigation project. The exercise consisted of a simulation based on the imaginary Island republic of San Serriffe. The participants were divided into three separate groups who worked together and then made group presentations. The procedure followed was based jointly on the Guidelines for Forecasting the Vector-Borne Disease Implications of Water Resources Development published by the Joint WHOjFAOjUNEP jUNCHS* Panel of Experts in Environmental Management and the Guidelines for the Health Impact Assessment of Development Projects published by ADB. Each group was provided with a facilitator whose main function was time-keeping and guiding the group through the documentation. The exercise produced lively and energetic discussions which enabled participants from both environmental and health agencies to seek a common understanding of the issues and procedures. One of the key issues identified was the lack of quantifiable information available for a rural, natural resource development. This was in contrast to the participants' experience in EIA of urban, industrial projects. Another issue was the need to bring Ministries of Health and Labour into the EIA process. The participants felt that the exercise would henefit from further refinement. This should include a clearer problem definition and a clearer statement of the hydropower project components. There were some interesting differences in the approaches taken by each group; One group accepted the scope of restricting the assessment to vectorborne diseases and considered the characteristics of vector populations in some detail. The other two groups had a broader view and included problems of malnutrition, sexually transmitted diseases and injury. All the groups made a conscientious effort to establish a hierarchy of impacts into first and second order effects and a hierarchy of interventions ranging from siting, engineering measures, preventative health measures to personal protection. All the groups accepted the need to identify the different subsections of the community and to classify them according to their differential vulnerability ("the sensitive receivers"). 2.2.5 Field trip
The participants visited the factory of Malaysian Oxygen Berhad in Petaling Jaya. A number of gases were purified at the plant, including nitrogen, oxygen, argon and acetylene. The site visit consisted of a briefing on the structure and products of the company, a detailed description of the safety programme of the company including safety in the plant and measures to ensure the safe distribution and use of its products, and a presentation on the use of oxygen to rehabilitate oxygen-depleted wastewater. A walkthrough tour of the facility followed. The company had an excellent record in occupational safety and in environmental concerns.
*FAO UNEP UNCHS
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Centre for Human Settlements
-5;
.. After the field trip, the participants discussed a check-list of areas which could be of environmental concern, led by Dr Calvert. These included aspects of materials handling, water pollution, air pollution, worker health and waste disposal. The field trip was used as a framework for a wide-ranging discussion of the problems of assessing industrial hazards and risks. . 2.2,6 HIA of industrial development: Case-study on the Chang Peninsula Industrial Development
...
The participants carried out an analysis of an urban environmental health impact associated with a road transport system for industrial chemicals, using a case-study prepared by Dr Calvert. The description of the project was first given to the participants, who then analysed the problem by applying a health risk/impact assessment procedure. The exercise and discussions were led by Dr Calvert with support from Dr Ogawa. 2.2.7 Panel discussion: Development of a national framework for HIA in EIA
.. ..
Dr Calvert introduced a document "National Framework for Environmental and Health Impact Assessment" which had been adopted in Australia as a national framework for HIA in EIA. The process of incorporating HIA in EIA in Australia included adoption of the principles of HIA in EIA by the relevant levels of Government (in 'Australia, the States and Territories) and the development of a regulatory framework including detailed guidelines and protocols, with technical expertise and educational programmes to support the process. The assessing authorities, proponents, the public health authorities and the public all have a part to play in developing HIA in EIA. It should be regarded as an ongoing process of development rather than as a straightforward legislative task. Dr Birley introduced the perception of regional experience. Many countries in the Region are establishing or have established an environmental protection agency to approve new project proposals. These agencies are often understaffed and some of the staff require additional training. The health sector is usually poorly represented on the approval committees and the check-list or terms of reference for the approval generally makes little explicit reference to health. National frameworks are required to rectify this problem. However, the procedures will differ according to the resources available in each country. 2.2.8 Exercise: Preparation of a national framework f(lr promotion of HIA in EIA
...
-
Following the panel discussion, the participants from each country prepared a national framework or plan for promotion for HIA in EIA for their country in this session. The exercise involved the identification of problems and constraints associated with HIA in EIA in each country; the definitions of goals and objectives; actions and activities to achieve such goals and objectives; resources required for these actions and activities; and the timetable of undertaking the actions and activities. The exercise was carried out in groups, each consisting of participant(s) from a country/area. The representatives, observer and WHO staff and consultants assisted them in the exercise. The results of the exercise were presented in a plenary session, and comments and questions from other participants followed. Some of the consistent themes apparent in the exercise presentations are summarized as follows.
·
.
Problems (and opportunities for development) included ~ need for eff~ctive intersectoral collaboration (between government departments 10 health, environment, and other relevant areas such as industry and transport, for instance); underdeveloped sources of information on health risks; unclear mechanisms for effective community involvement; in some countries, lHck of clarity on the roles of the government and the private sector; uncertainty on how to deal with the cumulative impacts of multiple developments on health; and Jack of good and accessible health outcome measurements. Two consistent problems were difficulties in resource allocation to meet this need, and a Jack of public health expertise in many countries. Needs were experienced for clear and straightforward guidelines, and for training programmes at various levels for those involved. 2.3 Evaluation
Evaluation questionnaires were completed by each of the participants. With few exceptions, the participants agreed that the three objectives of the workshop had been achieved, and new knowledge and concepts acquired. The participants were generally satisfied with ampJe opportunities to discuss various issues and exch!lnge experiences at both plenary and group sessions. Although most participants responded that the working papers and topics included were adequate for the workshop, some indica'ted that more discussions on assessment techniques and successful application of methods would have been useful. The fieJd trip, the scheduling of activities and administrative arrangements were all satisfactory. There was general agreement :Imong the participants that the workshop was beneficial to their countries and to themselves personally. Most participants indicated that such workshops should be held regularly. With respect to follow-up activities, the workshop encouraged the participants to initiate activities to promote HIA in EIA in their countries.
3. CONCLUSIONS
The workshop was successful in assessing the current situation and appropriate process of HIA in EIA. It afforded an opportunity to discuss strategies and ways to promote HIA in EIA. The participants agreed thilt the workshop has met its objectives. The main findings of the workshop are summarized as follows: (I) Review of the country situation indicated that HIA is not adequately addressed in EIA in most countries. The participants agreed that H IA should be an integral part of EIA, c,lrried out routinely in appropriate cases rather than exceptionally. (2) Procedures and techniques of HIA are not generally well known to assessors and reviewers of impacts. Guidelines on the process introduced in the workshop were well received and agreed to. The nomenclature for the process might vary in different countries, but in general terms, the process involves screening applications for HIA in EIA, then if HIA were considered necessary, scoping (defining the scope of the examination), profiling (describing the relevant characteristics of the affected
- 7.-
-
population and area), risk assessment, risk management (including consideration of options), decision-making, implementation, and monitoring. (3) The process of establishing RIA in EIA was discussed. The participants agreed that governmental commitment was needed, but they stressed that infrastructure for RIA had to be established. This infrastructure included an adequate regulatory framework, and also involved a reorientation of health services to give the requisite information within the appropriate time frame.
-
(4) The participants discussed impediments to the HIA process. A number of problems were identified. These included difficulties in establishing intersectoral collaboration (i.e. EIAs are usually the responsibility of the environmental agency, whereas health matters are dealt with by the health agency), poor health risk information, lack of guidelines for ensuring community involvement and difficulties in measuring health outcomes. (5) Nevertheless, the participants agreed that there w"l' a major need for HIA in EIA, and stressed that the process of development of national frameworks for promotion of HIA in EIA which started during the workshop, must continue. It was noted that no participating country had a completely operational ERIA programme. The programme would differ in each country, but in each country it would have to include considerable educational efforts for all the participating sectors of society. The main focus of the environmental agencies in EIA was on the assessment (6) of future projects. By contrast, the main emphasis of environmental health agencies was monitoring and regulation of conventional health hazards associated with existing projects. The participants identified a real opportunity for environmental health agencies to undertake RIA of existing projects. This could be accomplished by first providing training in EIA to environmental health officers. The results of such assessments would then form a vital database for the assessment of future projects. (7) It was noted that development projects encompass a broad spectrum of activities from small-scale rural to large-scale industrial. Similarly, the scale of the associated health hazards covered a spectrum from moderate hazards, with medium/high probability, to severe hazards with very low probability. An example of the first would be malaria associated with agroforestry. An example of the second would be liquid gas explosion. Techniques are available to address the two ends of the spectrum but further work is required on their amalgamation into a universally applicable format.
-
-.
-9:
..
ANNEX 1
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS, REPRESENTATIVES, OBSERVER AND SECRETARIAT
Participants
Designation and address Research Associate Institute of Environmental Health Monitoring Chinese Academy of Preventive Medicine 7 Pan Jia Yuan Nanli Beijing People's Republic of China Project Officer (Environment Engineer) National Environmental Protection Agency 115, Xizhimennei, Nanxiaojie Beijing 100035 People's Republic of China Acting Senior Environmental Protection Officer Environmental Protection Department 27/F, Southorn Centre 130 Hennessy Road Wanchai Hong Kong Medical Officer/Deputy Director of Planning Division Environmental Health Bureau Ministry of Health & Welfare 1-2-2 Kasamigaseki, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100-45 Japan Scientific Officer - Head of the National Drinking Water Quality Surveillance Unit Engineering Services Division Ministry of Health 1st Floor, Block E, Office Complex Jalan Dungun Damansara Heights 50490 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia
-
1.
MrTao Yong
2.
Mr Li Xinmin
-
3.
Mr David Cox
4.
Dr Mitsuhiro Naemura
5.
Ms Debbie Siru
-
-.
- 10 -
0.
Ms Mashitah Darus
DOE Control Officer (EIA) Department of Environment Ministry of Science and Technology 13th Floor, Wisma Sime Darby Jabn Raja Laut 511662 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Senior Environmental Health Scientist (Policy) Public Health Commission P.O. Bux 1795 Wellington ;~ew Zealand Secretary (Environmental Health) I>;,;, ilnienl of I Jealth P.O. Box 3991 Boroko, NCD Papua New Guinea Assistant Secretary (Environment Planning anu Assessment) Department of Environment and Conservation P.O. Box 0601 Boroko Papua New Guinea Senior Science Research Specialist Environmental Management Bureau Department of Envir~nment and Natural Resources 6th Floor, Philippine Heart Center Bldg. East Avenue, Diliman Quezon City Philippines Engineer III (Senior Sanitary Engineer) Environmental Healih Service Department of Health San Lazaro Compouml Sta. Cruz Manila 1003 Philippines Deputy Director Department of I lygiene amI Environment Ministry of Health 138 Giang Yo As~istant
7.
Mr Gruce Taylor
8.
Mr Linus'lY
Piliwa~
9.
Mr Robert Nororr.oe
10.
Ms Esperanza Sajul
J I.
rvlr Fnmsus Valdez
12.
Dr Iio;!llg Dinh Hoi
l-Ianoi Sociali:;l Republic of Viet Nam
- 11:
.....
Annex 1
13.
1.
Dr (Ms) Tran Thi Bich Thanh Medical Officer on Environment Ministry of Technology and Environment 39A Tran Hung Dao Street Hanoi Socialist Republic of Viet Nam
Representatives/Observer Ms PUca Abdullah Programme Officer Urban Management Programme Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific WismaAPDC . Pesiaran Duta P.O. Box 12224 50770 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Community Development Specialist UNDP/World Bank Water and Sanitation Programme P.O. Box 1324/JKT Jakarta 12940 Indonesia Head Department of Environmental Science University of Agriculture, Malaysia 43400 UPM Serdang Malaysia
2.
Dr Mary Judd
3.
Professor Dr Mohammad Ismail Yaziz
-
-
.. • 12 • Annex I
'
Secretaria t
I. 2. :\.
Dr Paul Guo Dr Hisashi Ogawa Ms L.Y. Chan Ms Y.M. Tan Dr Martin H. Birley' Dr G.D. Calvert**
Director, EHC Environmental Systems Engineer, EHC Administrative Officer, EHC Special Assistant, EHC
4.
5. 6.
WHO Consultant WHO Consultant
'Dr Martin 1-1. Birley Senior Lecturer The Health Impact Program111e Liverpool School or Tropicai I'.lcdicine
••
Pembroke Place !,.iverpool, 1.3 5QA United Kingdom
Dr G.D. Calvert Proressor or Public Hcalth and Medicine Medical Research Unit University of Wollongong Illawarra Regional Hospital (Wollongong Campus) Crown Street Wollongong New South Wales, 2500 . Australia .
. WORKSHOP PROG RAM ME
•..
ANNEX 2
-
Monday. 15 November 1993 0900 - 0920
0920 - 0950 0950 - 1000 1000 - 1020
Introductory remarks M,r B. Fisher, Acting Director, EHC Opening speech B. Fisher, Acting Director, EH C Oil behalf of the WHO Regional Director for tile Westem Pacific Welcome address. Professor Dr Syed Jalaludill Syed Salim, Deputy Vice-C/zancellor, University ofAgriculture, Malaysia Group photograph and coffee/tea break Administrative briefing Ms L. Y. Chan, Administrative Officer, EHC Introduction of consultants, participants, and workshop sessions Dr H. Ogawa, Environmental Systems Engineer, EHC Overview: Health impact assessment in environmental impact assessment H. Ogawa Country reports Hong Kong Japan Malaysia
-
1020 - 1100
1100 - 1240
1240 - 1340
Lunch Country reports New Zealand Papua New Guinea . Philippines Viet Nam
-
1340 - 1520
1520 - 1540 1540 - 1620
Coffee/tea break Introduction to ADB guiuelines for health impact assessment of development projects Dr M. Birley, WHO cOllSultant
-
- 14 \
."
Annex 2
1620 - 1700
Introduction to WHO document on environmental health impact assessment Dr D. Calvert,WHO cOllSultant
Tuesday, 16 November 1993 0900 - 0930 Briefing on group exercise: HIA of hydropower and irrigation development projects M. Birley Group exercise (3 groups) Coffee/tea break Group exercise (continued) Lunch Group exercise (continued) Coffee/tea break Presentation of group exercise and discussion
0930 - 1020 1020 - 1040 1040 - 1230 1230 - 1330 1330 - 1500 1500 - 1520 1520 - 170n
Wednesday, 17 November 1993 0800 - 1300 Field trip to an industrial plant (Malaysian Oxygen Berhad), Petaling Jaya Lunch Discussion on the field trip D. Calvert HIA of industrial development: Case-study on the Chang Peninsula Industrial Development D. Calvert Coffee/tea break HIA of industrial development (continued)
1300 - 1400 1400 - 1445
1445 - 1500 .
1500 - 1530 1530 - 1700
,
"
• 15 .
.. .. ... 1020· 1040 1040· 1050
Annex 2
Thursday, 18 November 1993 0900·0930 0930·1020
Country report· China Panel discussion: Development of a national framework for HlAin EIA r D. Calvert/M. Birley
Coffee/tea break Panel discussion (continued) Briefing on exercise: Preparation of a national framework for promotion of HIA in EIA by each participating country (Identification of actions and resources required) H. Ogawa
..
1050· 1100
1100·1230
Exercise: Preparation of a national framework for promotion of HIA in ElA Participants
1230·1330
Lunch Exercise (continued) Coffee/tea break Exercise (continued)
..
1330· 1520 1520· 1540 1540·1700
Friday, 19 November 1993 0900· 1030
Presentation of exercise and discussion China Hong Kong Malaysia
1030· 1050 1050·1230
Coffee/tea break Presentation of exercise and discussion (continued) New Zealand Papua New Guinea Philippines Viet Nam
-
Annex :2
1230· 1300 1300· 1400 1400· 1420
Summary and evaluation
Lunch Closing remarks
\. , "',
- 17ANNEX3
LIST OF DOCUMENTS DISTRIBUTED DURING THE WORKSHOP
Working papers WPR/RUD/EHC/l/93.2 Overview: Health imract assessment in environmental impac assessment By Dr H. Ogawa Health impact assessment (HIA) of hydropower and irrigation development projects By Dr M. Birley
-
WPR/RUD/EHC/l/93.3
country reports WPR/RUD/EHC/l/93/INF./l WPR/RUD/EHC/l/93/INF./2 WPR/ RUD /EHC/ 1/93 /INF./3 WPR/RUD/EHC/1/93/INF./4 People's Republic of China By Messrs Tao Yong & Li Xinmin Hong Kong By Mr David Cox Japan By Dr Mitsuhiro Naemura Malaysia By Misses Debbie Siru & Masllitah Darus New Zealand By Mr Bruce Taylor Papua New Guinea By Messrs Lindsay Piliwas & Robert Norombe Philippines By Ms Esperanza Sajul & Mr Fransus Valdez Socialist Republic of Viet Nam By Drs Hoang Dinh Hoi & Tran Thi Bich Thanh
-
WPR/RUD/EHC/1/93/INF./5 WPR/RUD/EHC/1/93/INF./6
-
WPR/RUD/EHC/l/93/INF./7 WPR/RUD/EHC/l/93/INF./8 Publications/hand-outs I.
Environmental risk assessment: Dealing with uncertainty in environmental impact assessment. Asian Development Bank Environment Paper No.7. Guidelines for the health impact assessment of development projects. Asian Development Bank Environment Paper No.1!, Guidelines for forecasting the vector-borne disease implications of water resources development, Martin H. Birley. PEEM Guidelines Series 2. Methods for environmental and health impact assessment of development projects. G.D. Calvert, C.E. Ewan & K. Bentley.
2. 3. 4.
- 18 Annex 3
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
National framework for environmental and health impact assessment, C. Ewan, A. Young, E. Bryant, D. Calvert, University of WoUongong, August 1993. Regional experiences (Notes for discussion), M. Birley. Notes for visit to the factory of Malaysian Oxygen Berhad, D. Calvert. Exercise: The Chang Peninsula Industrial.Development, D. Calvert. Guidelines for preparation of a national framework for promotion of HIA in EIA, H. Ogawa.
- 19 -
OPENING ADDRESS
ANNEX 4
I,.
__ ...... _
...
Opening speech by Dr S.T. Han, WHO Regional Director for the Western Pacific. delivered on his behalf by the Acting Director. WHO Western Pacific Regional Environmental Health Centre (EHC)
On behalf of Dr S.T. Han, WHO Regional Director for the Western Pacific, I am pleased to welcome you to this five-day Workshop on Environmental Health Impact Assessment, and extend my best wishes to you . As you are aware, national leaders met in June 1992 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development or UNCED in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and agreed on various actions related to environmentally sound and sustainable development. The results of their deliberations were compiled in an action document, Agenda 21, calling for the integration of environmental assessment and management into development decision-making, and promoting the use of environmental impact assessment, commonly known as ElA, as a means of achieving this goal.
-
In most countries of the Western Pacific Region, ElA has been adopted as a statutory or administrative requirement to locate and mitigate negative impacts of development projects on the environment. In this context, the environment includes not only the physical, biological or ecological components, but also the social and cultural surroundings, all of which affect human health. However, in spite of the widespread popularity of ElA, and increasing public concern over health risks resulting from environmental changes, the assessment and mitigation of effects on health associated with development activities are not explicitly incorporated in most ElA studies. A factor contributing to this is that ElA is often considered to be the sole responsibility of the environmental agency, and the involvement of other agencies, particularly the health agency, is frequently ignored. As a result, health issues are not adequately addressed in most ElA reports.
-
The prevention of negative effects on health and the promotion of a healthy environment are important mandates for WHO. Emphasis on the health component of ElA, which is <;Jften referred to as "environmental health impact assessment" or EHIA, is not new within WHO. Since the mid-1980s, a number of activities, including meetings and national workshops; the development of guidelines and publications; and the establishment of information exchange networks, have been carried out. WHO has also cooperated with other international agencies in promoting EHIA. The most notable case in this Region was the recent collaboration of WHO with the Asian Development Bank in the preparation of guidelines for the health impact assessment of development projects, which will be introduced later in the workshop.
- 20 Annex 4
In addition to giving you an opportunity to examine procedures and techniques for carrying out EHIA as outlined in these and other guidelines, this workshop will enable you to review how health impact assessments are conducted in the countries of the Region and to initiate a plan for the development of more effective EHIA programmes in your countries. r
I urge you all to participate actively and wish you a fruitful week of discllssion, as well as a pleasant stay in Malaysia. Finally, I would like to express my appreciation to the Government of Japan for their support in financing this workshop, and to our hosts, the Government of Malaysia and the University of Agriculture, Malaysia for their valuable support in making the workshop possible. Thank you.
.. - 21 -
. ANNEX5 SUMMARIES OF COUNTRY REPORTS
1.
People's Republic of China
A procedure for environmeht<ll impact assessment (EIA) in China has been developing since 1973 and continues to develop following the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992. There are both national and provincial project certification procedures, depending on the magnitude and importance of the perceived impacts. These are supported by a two-time review or one-time review process. Major projects are subject to two-time review, consisting of preparation of the terms of reference and subsequent appraisal of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In one-time revie .... there is an initial environmental examination and final approval made by the Natipnal Environmental Protection Agency or Provincial Environmental Protection Bureau. ElAs are carried out for air, water, noise, solid waste, hydroelectric development and expressways. A series of technical guidelines has been published. More than 10 UOO EISs have been prepared. The responsibility of the environmental health institutions is described as research and monitoring of the effects of existing projects. In common with other countries, the linkages between the environmental health institutions and the environmental impact assessment procedures are unclear. Several environmental health problems are identified as heing in need of further study. These are pesticide pollution; pollution caused hy rllral industry; and the economic analysis of impacts.
2.
Hong Kong
The ErA process in Hong Kong is designed to avoid creating pollution problems and focuses on standards for air quality (especially through control of vehicle emissions). noise impacts (especially construction), waste disposal and receiving waters. There is no provision for a discrete component of the ErA study that is devoted tn HIA. Post EIA auditing and monitoring are carried out through the development of a. 'ion plans and standardized approaches. CUrrent problems include late submission of EISs and lad< of legal requirements for mitigation measures to be implemented. The Environmental Protection Department often has to rely on the cooperation of other departments or authorities to implement mitigations through administrative instruments such as leases and works contracts. Further legislation is required fQr the EIA process. Linkages with the health sector, environmental health or occupational health and safety are not discussed.
-
3. EIA procedures are based on Cabinet agreements dated between 1972 and 19114. The procedures include preparation of draft EIS by the project proponent. This is then discussed by interested parties. The health department comments on the draft EIS if deemed necessary. Some 200-300 EISs are submitted per year. The principal concerns are pollution control and conservation ()[ the natural environment. A list of projects subject to EIA procedures is included. Post EIA auditing and monitoring are not done .
,, .
....
- 22Annex 5
J __
•
Health impact assessment (HIA) is not included in EIA. It is considered that if EIA is done properly, health impact will not occur and so HIA is not necessary. 4. Malaysia
Malaysia has comprehensive legislation governing EIA. The powers which provide for the legal enforcement of EIA are drawn from Section 34A of the Environmental Quality Act, 1974. It was made mandatory for any development or activities in the category of "prescribed activities" gazetted in the Environmental Quality (Prescribeu Activities) Environmental Impact Assessment Order 1987 to conduct EIA prior to implementation of the proposed development. In audition to this overall legislation there is local legislation to consolidate control of adverse imp:lcts on the environment. Under the Act persons planning prescribed activities must submit an assessment of the environmental impact and the proposed mitigation measures for approval, anu development cannot proceed until approval has been granted. Nineteen categories of projects require EIAs, defined according to size and production level. The parties involved in an EIA are the Project Initiator, the Approving Authority (e.g. the National Development Planning Committee for Federal Government sponsoreu projects, the State Government Authorities, and some ministries such as the Ministry of International Trade and Industry), the EIA Secretariat which facilitates the work of the ad hoc review panel, environment-related agencies and the public and public interest groups. EIAs in Mllillysia consist of a two-stage process in which project proponents are required to submit a preliminary assessment and in some cases, a detailed assessment. The detailed assessment will include an evaluation of the environmental costs and benefits 10 the community. There have been some vagaries in the EIA process at the State level, and there is no specific requirement for HIA in EIA.
5.
New Zealand
EIA is currently based on the Resource Mllnllgement Acl 1991, although EIA has been utilized since the early 1970s (Environmental Protection and Enhancement Procedures 1974). EIA requirements include details of consultation with interested parties, and details of effects on Ihe neighbourhood in wider community. There are currently no requirements or guidelines for HIA, llOd experience is that HIA is rarely and inadequately covered in EIAs. The Public Health Commission has recently proposed the development of a framework and guidelines on HIA to the Minister of Health, and it is likely that this will be developed in the next 1-2 years. 6. Papua New Guinea
The major relevant legislation is the Environmental Planning Act (1971\); other relevllnt legislation includes the Water Resources Act (11)78) and the Environment.1I Contaminants Act (1978).
- 23Annex 5
....
The proponent of any development must liaise with the Dep:~rtment of Environme~t and Conservation to determine if there is a need to prepare an environmental plan,. anll, If necessary, to submit an environmental plan which must be approve~ before.the project can go ahead. Guidelines to define which projects woulll have to submit an envIronmental plan are expected to be published in 1994.. . I
-
Assessment and decision making require consultation with national anll provincial government departments as well as 10ca.1 ~omr;lunit~es. The lev~l of CO?sult~tion will. depend on the scale of the proposal. DIffIcultIes aflse when major projects III the mlllcrais and energy sector are the outcome of initiatives by the Departments of Finance anll Planning, and Minerals and Enef/:,'Y. A limited social impact assessment is required under the Environmental Planning Act, but this may not be done 'at all if the development is not being carried out by the Department of Environment and Conservation. On the other hand, the complexity of the lanll tenure system may' mean that the proponent has to undertake considerable community consultation. There are practical problems in implementing the Environmental Planning Act, chiefly because of inallequate resources available for fully assessing projects. EIA approval can be a lengthy process. The ability to monitor health and in some cases to monitor the extent of environmental contamination, is also limited. There is no specific institution for collecting information on health or environmental health, and there is no statutory requirement to consider health in EIA.
-
7.
Philippines , ~. .......-
The Philippine EIA system is based on the Presidential Decree (PD) 1151 of 1<)77 which requires all project proponents to prepare environmental impact ~tatements (EIS); PD 1586 of 1<)78 which defines the procedure and scope of the EIA system including a twostage EIA of Project Description (i.e. preliminary EIA) and EISs (i.e. full EIA); PD 2 J4(j which specifies the environmentally critical projects (ECPs) and environmentally critic;d areas (ECAs) that are subject to EIA; and the Department of Administrative Order No. 21 of 1992 which delegates the responsibility of reviewing Project Descriptions and EISs of non-ECPs to the Regional Offices of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). The EIA system is administered by the EIA Unit of the Environmental Management Bureau (EM B), DENR which provides overall direction and review of EISs of ECPs, and the DENR Regional Offices as mentioned above. When an EIS is approved, an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) is issued by the office which has reviewcd the EIS. The Regional Office may issue an exemption certificate after reviewing a Projcct Description when an EIS for the project is not required. In 1992, the Environmental Health Impact Assessment Division (EHIAD) was estahlished within the Environmental Health Service of the Department of Health (001'1). The main function of EHIAD is to provide guidelines and reviews of EHIA and accredit qualified consultants to conduct EHIA. The Memorandum of Agreement signed in Junc 1992 hy DENR and other relevant government agencies including DOH provides a basis of mutual cooperation in support of the goals and objectives of the EJA system and justifies the estahlishment of EHIAD in DOH. A DOH official is currently on EMB's EIA Rcvicw Committee whose main functions are to evaluate EISs and provide recommendations
.
-
- 24 Annex 5
regarding the issuance of ECCs, and to render professional service in matters atfecting the EIA system. EHIAD is at its infant stage of development, and requires substantial capacity huilding to provide the proposed services adequately.
H.
Viet Nam
Environmental management in Viet Nam has not received adequate attention until recently. In 1990, a national action plan for environment and sustainahle development was formulated, and the Ministry of Science, Technoloh'Y and the Environment was established in 1992. A draft legislation for environmental protection h,is been prepared, awaiting its suhmission to the National Assembly for approval. A number of regulatory programmes. including an EIA system, will he formulated and implemented. The environmental health programme of the Ministry of Health has focused its efforts on environmental sanitation activities to minimize health risks associated with communicable disease in rural areas. Because of the new government economic policies. industrial and urban development is gradually taking place, requiring urgent attention to environmental health problems of such development. Both EIA and HIA in Viet Nam suffer from the lack of strong legislative and administrative bases for carrying out activities. Technical expertise and experience are also limited. Funds to develop and implement EIA and \-IIA programmes need to be generated and allocated.