Having recently read the environmental impact assessment put up by the MRT Corporation for the Sungai Buloh to Kajang line, I wonder if the report provided sufficient analysis on the environmental issues that will be faced by the public with the existence of the project. Knowing very well that it is impossible for one report to analyse the entire spectrum of possibilities I propose to the readers a new way of thinking about environmental impact assessments. I propose the idea of adopting Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) in a humanitarian setting. This approach does not require adoption of new methods; it only requires minor adaptation to existing and commonly used methods.
An EIA gives the environment its due place in the decision-making process by clearly evaluating the environmental consequences of a proposed activity. We hope that each EIA comprehensively and succinctly predicts the long term environmental ramifications of the development activity because sustainable development depends on protecting the natural resources which is the foundation for environmental and economic development.
We often do not consider deeper health issues. How often does a report dwell on the risk of chemicals and debris? Most often we find that only issues that are quantifiable monetarily are discussed and written to demonstrate reduction in the costs and duration of project implementation, avoid treatment/clean-up costs, and comply with mandatory environmental laws and regulations.
Most EIAs highlight the potential problems but do not take into account the risk of environmental degradation. For example, if project planners are designing a water supply project for a community. An EIA will help to determine if drawing from the water source will negatively impact neighboring communities who may depend on it for health or livelihoods. A humanitarian based EIA can determine the environmental issues associated with using clay bricks as a building material. Project managers may discover that the local clay mine is contributing to landslides, water pollution, and negative impacts on local health.
Social impacts from employment are rarely if at all considered. Our construction industry relies heavily on the use of foreign workers. We also do not consider the higher volume of traffic flow which can damage main arteries in the road network. Rarely do we consider if there is adequate housing and effects to the local community from the presence of the foreign workers. Most importantly I have not found a report which tackles the issue of livelihood of the existing and migrants.
Emergency waste and operational management which is critical to some activities are not discussed and the public is often kept in the dark of the possibilities and risks involved. We often lose sight of the indirect damage to natural resources that support livelihood. These have a bearing on safety, sanitation and hygiene issues especially when large amounts of soil have to be removed and relocated to another site. This is typical of urban project where damage to the ecosystem is considered insignificant in an already built up environment. How will those at risk protect themselves without knowledge or insurance?
Most EIAs are only submitted once at the inception of a project. A short-term approach to the preparation of an EIA can fail to consider the broader aspects and impacts of a disaster. Such approaches are often justified by demands on time, resource availability and money.
Perhaps a good place to begin discussing change is in relation to one’s self. Think for a moment, how difficult it is to change one’s point of view (not just for the sake of being agreeable, but actually change one’s position on a matter), to change beliefs, to give up a habit, to change the way one approaches issues.
