What is needed after Hulu Klang

New Straits Times By G. Balamurugan 17/06/2006

THE landslide in Hulu Klang brought about a flurry of reactions from many parties. In line with what has become fashionable, tightening of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was again proposed. In fact, the concerned minister proposed that "all projects" (whatever that meant) shall be subject to EIAs. I, however, think that more EIAs will not solve the problem.

The EIA is only a small part of the development planning and approval. Monitoring of a project once it is approved and enforcing legislation is vital, which, if not done, will defeat the whole purpose of the EIA.

Most projects (even those that have been subjected to EIA) receive, at the most, one or two visits a year by relevant agencies.

Under these circumstances, most developers don’t feel the need or urgency to implement mitigation measures that have been proposed and thoroughly vetted in the EIA. The EIA, in circumstances like these, is useless.

The Department of Environment has tried to overcome this by imposing environmental management plans (EMPs) and the need to carry out environmental monitoring and audit on firms.

But without the regular presence of enforcement officials, the monitoring and audits (done by consultants) also lose their effectiveness. What we have successfully done over the years is generate huge quantities of monitoring and audit reports which I am not sure who reads or if they are read at all.

The DOE is not at fault. It has to deal with the increasing public demand for greater environmental protection. It has to deal with increasingly complex environmental issues brought about by technological development and globalisation. The DOE does not have enough resources to handle all these. Although the staff strength is being increased, recruitments are for entry-level positions and they will need many more years to gain experience and skills.

The DOE is struggling with the EIA workload. On the one hand, the Government says that EIAs need to be comprehensive and that they need to be thoroughly reviewed. On the other hand, there are calls for project approvals to be speeded up.

We cannot expect the DOE to review the EIA thoroughly yet do it quickly. Assigning more work to anyone or any organisation without giving them additional resources could lead to a worsening of the problem.

My suggestions to minimise some of the problems are:

1. The Prescribed Activities List (list of projects needing EIAs) needs to be reviewed, not to lengthen the list, and also to remove the need for EIAs for projects such as housing schemes on flat terrain and industries within an industrial park. These need not be subject to EIA as other safeguards in the planning and development are adequate.

The EIA should be needed only for complex projects and those in sensitive environments. But where EIAs are done, these should be done thoroughly and subject to stringent review.

2. Instead of making the EIA mandatory for projects as small as 20ha, the environmental component of the planning report (Laporan Cadangan Pembangunan) should be expanded. There are enough safeguards in the planning approval process (involving Town and Country Planning Department and local councils) to prevent development which is not environment-friendly.

3. The EIA approval conditions should be more carefully worded so that it is easier for the DOE to charge someone in court should the conditions be flouted. Key performance indicators should be specified for each project, failing which the DOE should prosecute the proponents. More quantifiable targets (besides the normal silt trap discharge limits) should be specified.

4. To improve the dissemination of information, the project proponents should be requested to provide executive summaries of their EIAs in portable document format (PDF) and these could be posted on the DOE’s website. This will allow greater access of project information to the public. Similarly, the website could be expanded to create a section where the public can post comments or suggestions. The review should include NGOs and industry representatives even for a preliminary EIA.

5. The Government could appoint independent experts to help it review (not undertake) EIA reports. A register of certified environmental professionals must be established. This will help maintain credibility of environmental professionals and weed out unscrupulous ones. The DOE or the ministry could play a greater role in facilitating the establishment of this professional register.

6. Many other agencies involved in planning and development such as the Town & Country Planning Department, Department of Irrigation and Drainage and Public Works Department have all started infusing environmental aspects in their work and most of them have done well despite the environment not being their core discipline (PWI has, in fact, obtained the ISO14001 certification for its road projects). Building up the environmental planning capacity in these departments will go a long way in helping the country achieve sustainable development.

Knee-jerk reactions to one problematic project are not the best way forward. The problems in Cameron Highlands and in Bukit Cerakah also led to similar reactions relating to the EIA requirements (the problems in Cameron Highlands and Bukit Cerakah have not gone away, people are just quieter for the time being).

We all need to understand that the EIA is only one cog in the wheel of development planning, approval and enforcement. More EIAs will not solve the problems until the support system for monitoring and enforcement is in place. Under the set-up, there is inadequate capacity within the DOE and other government agencies to monitor all projects on site. Until this is improved, EIAs will not serve their purpose, and will only contribute to the thousands of reports that adorn shelves all over the country.

The National Physical Plan, prepared by the Town and Country Planning Department, has addressed many of the environmental issues relating to land development, particularly with respect to sensitive areas.

The writer is an environmental consultant. He can be reached at gbm@ere.com.my.