The Access Initiative

Menu

Topics: Public Participation

Legislative Transparency

Published: 2008

This informational memo, by TAI partner, Dr. Csaba Kiss, outlines the benefits and theory behind legislative transparency. Additionally, it uses examples from existing practice in TAI countries. It is part of a larger series of informational memos on best practices and access rights.

The information memos are commissioned by the TAI Secretariat. They represent the ideas and thoughts of their respective authors and do not represent the official position of the Access Initiative or the TAI Secretariat. While the secretariat does its best to ensure the quality of these memos they are essentially the work of their respective authors who take full responsibility for their content. Please contact the TAI Secretariat if you have ideas for topics which are not covered in the current research.

New US Rule-Making Procedures Turn Participation Upside-Down

By Joseph Foti (Posted: June 16, 2009) 

Public participation in the U.S is changing. New procedures for regulatory changes are a positive step for public participation.This article in the Federal Times makes it clear that the entire process for crafting regulations is changing from a “notice and comment” model to a “co-creation” model.

The Administrative Procedures Act (1946), required the agency to notify the public that a rule would be changing and gave the public 60 days to comment on all rules made by federal agencies. This usually means that the government has posted the rules and that the public is allowed to comment on them. Agencies then have the option to respond to or incorporate comments.

Under the new process, the public will have a chance to collaborate on new rules and to propose solutions. While the administration will still have complete discretion about how to proceed, this means that the public will be able to comment at the earliest possible stages of the process.

Participatory administrative procedures, such as “notice and comment” rules, have always been something that we at the Access Initiative have pushed for. At a time when most countries still lack comprehensive participation rules for policy-making, it is good to see what I think will be an exciting experiment by the U.S. administration to make government even more open and transparent.

Are Access Rights the Next Victim of the Global Recession?

By Andrew Rizzardi (Posted: June 10, 2009) 

Environmental access rights could be threatened by government stimulus packages intended to counter the effects of the global recession. Several countries worldwide have proposed stimulus legislation that includes rollbacks of environmental impact assessments (EIAs).

The information made available by EIAs is fundamental to informing the public of development issues and promoting participation. A reduction to EIA procedures will inherently result in a decline in transparency and threaten public involvement in development projects.

A few countries such as Canada and Peru have already taken legislative steps weakening EIAs. Preliminary reports from the Access Initiative provide that similar measures are being considered in a number of countries worldwide. To date, only the United States has rebuffed calls to ease environmental regulations by including language that effectively protects the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Environmental impact assessments are an invaluable tool that advances public capacity to participate and impact development decisions. Reducing such standards poses a serious risk of alienating the public and allowing development projects to move forward unchecked by the affected communities. Economic recovery programs and increases in development need not come at the expense of access rights and environmental procedures. Safeguards for access rights should be a component of all stimulus legislation worldwide.

See WRI posting:

Tracking Environmental Impact Assessment Rollbacks

Join the discussion:

Discussion Group – Identifying Rollbacks in EIA

See also:

Canadians Debating to Lower Environmental Safeguards

Stimulus or Environment – Must we choose?

Indian Court Reminds Environment Tribunal About Its Duty to the Future Generation

Indian Court Reminds Environment Tribunal About Its Duty to the Future Generation

By Ritwick Dutta (Posted: June 7, 2009) 

Two significant ruling by the Delhi High Court in the month of April and May, 2009 delivered by Justice Ravindra Bhat has greatly helped the cause of access to Justice in India. These two judgments along with the Judgment on the functioning of the NEAA delivered by Justice A. P Shah and Justice S Muralidhar has laid down a framework for access rights for far as challenging environmental clearances are concerned.

Background:

The National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA), a Statutory Authority to hear appeals filed against approval granted by the Government to various industrial and infrastructure projects based on Environment Impact Assessment, dismissed two appeals filed before it. The first concerned approval of the Vedanta Aluminium Smelter Plant in Jhasrsuguda, Orissa and the second, a mine approved in Goa. The first Appeal was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner, Prafull Samantray did not have the loucus standi to file the Appeal since he was not an “aggrieved person”. The second was dismissed on grounds of delay since the petitioner did not, according to the NEAA have “sufficient cause” in filing the appeal late. The Delhi high Court quashed both the orders of the National Environmental Appellate Authority. In respect of Vedanta it imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 to be paid to the petitioner. The Courts clarified on the issue as to who can file an Appeal before the NEAA and held as follows:

•“Public hearings……. are organized to elicit comments from the members of public before granting clearance to a project in order to assess the nature of environmental damage, if any, due to the likely execution of project and its impact on the rights of inhabitants and the persons who depend on that area for livelihood or otherwise. A person who participates in the public hearing, and thus in the process of decision-making, potentially becomes an aggrieved person if his grievances are not properly addressed.

•The world as we know is gravely imperiled by mankind’s collective folly. Unconcern to the environment has reached such damaging levels which threatens the very existence of life on this planet. If standing before a special tribunal, created to assess impact of projects and activities that impact, or pose potential threats to the environment, or local communities, is construed narrowly, organizations working for the betterment of the environment whether in form of NGOs or otherwise, would be effectively kept out of the discourse, that is so crucial an input in such proceedings. Such association of persons, as long as they work in the field of environment, possess a right to oppose and challenge all actions, whether of the State or private parties, that impair or potentially impair the environment.

•In cases where complaints, appeals etc. are filed bona fide by public spirited interested persons, environmental activists or other such voluntary organisations working for the betterment of the community as a whole, they are to be construed as “aggrieved persons” within the meaning of that expression under Section 11 (2) (c) of the Act (National Environment Appellate Authority Act)

•As a native American proverb goes, “We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children”; denial of access to meaningful channels to communities who can be affected by proposed projects would only leave them remediless, on the one hand, and allow unchallenged indiscriminate drawings from the future generations’ rights with impunity, thus gravely undermining the purpose of the Act.

•The kind of disputes that the Tribunal is expected to adjudicate upon is not really a lis between the litigating parties – it is necessarily a wider one whereby the impact of the State decisions to permit/promotion a kind of project, on the local community or the environment in general has to be considered. Viewed from this perspective, and the statement of objects of the enactment, this Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal has to in each case (where appeals are preferred before it), adopt a broad and liberal, rather than narrow and cribbed approach. The latter view, however, has appealed to the Tribunal. After all when the local community or a person entitled to move an appeal approaches a Tribunal as has happened in this case, the grievance is not the impact on the immediate parties alone, but on the wider community at large. The Tribunal has to keep that in mind.

•In a case like the present where environmental clearances’ impact on local population in terms of their environmental harm, has to be assessed the approach of the tribunal especially set up for this purpose should be liberal and not “hyper technical”

The two decisions of the Delhi High Court are truely landmark. These two, along with the earlier Judgment of Justice A.P Shah and Justice Muralidhar on the functioning of the NEAA could form the guiding force for affected communities and groups who wish to challenge destructive projects approved on the basis of faulty EIA.

Community Takes Oil Giant to Task: Demand Direct Role in Environmental Management of Drilling Project

By Eugene N. Nforngwa (Posted: June 4, 2009)

Limbe, SW – You know you are nearly there from the unending file of fuel trucks lining both sides of the winding double-carriage road.

“There is a perpetual risk of one crashing into these things,” complains Thomas Nche, deputy mayor of Idenau, who uses the road everyday. “There are no warning signs.”

The two-kilometre stretch outside the country’s lone petroleum refinery is only one example of how development could come with problems.

Since the creation of the National Oil Refinery (SONARA) 30 years ago, locals suspect gas flaring from the seaside facility is poisoning their air.

Beachgoers have reported spills and locals blame pollution of the shallow waters used by artisan fishermen for ever declining catch.

In addition to the perpetual risk of accidents, the arrival of hundreds of truckers every day has caused prostitution and, many suspect, HIV/AIDS to blossom around the refinery.

Nche and the nearly 7000 small-scale farmers, fishermen and hunters that make up his municipality, say they do not want to face the same fate.

Later this year, petroleum giant Total E&P plans to drill at least one offshore exploration well close to the municipality.

Major risks shown by an environmental impact study include potential oil spills, residual wastes, disruption of sea traffic and accidental situations, among others.

The well, on the Bomana block (Bomana South) would be located about 12km from the nearest coastline in a zone with water depth of just above 6m.

Ahead of the start of any works, community leaders and ordinary people are already asking a tough question: how would their environment and way of life be protected?

The question came up frequently at a public audience on the environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the project held in Idenau from 25 to 29 May.

The exercise, a requirement of the Cameroonian law, gave members of the public the opportunity to browse the project’s EIA report and make their comments in writing.

Elsewhere and a few years back, the operation would have been a formality. But the people of Idenau were ready and got fully involved.

Idenau is perhaps the first community that has received training on grassroots participation in EIA processes in Cameroon.

A workshop led by the organisation Bioresources Development and Conservation Programme Cameroon in December 2008 also resulted in the setting up of environmental governance committees.

The committees, spread across half a dozen villages and made up of ordinary people, now act as local environmental watchdogs.

“The training has helped us a lot because today we can identify some pitfalls in the [EIA] documents,” said Orgen Motome, an eviromental governenace committee focal point from Bibunde village.

“Those things that they have neglected or that they are informing us that are not very significant, we have seen that they are very significant, especially our absence in some of the operations.

“We are asking that we should be included in the operation so as to check these areas.”

One significant issue pointed out by the locals is the plan to find an alternative measure to deposit barite, a bi-product of the drilling process, into the sea.

“The Report recommends an alternative method to be put in place but we are not there to see that this alternative method has been put in place,” Motome said.

“We need to be there to check the alternative method and [ensure] that it is operational.”

Motome adds: “The report is not very bad, but the worries are that the technical document, which is a thick volume, can only be consulted on the spot. The villagers cannot take it home and have a thorough look at it. What is free for them is the summery, which does not give the very technical details of all the operations.

“Also, in the stakeholders’ consultation meeting, we said since our area is largely English speaking both the summery and the technical document should be in English. But we are surprised that the reporter for the BOMANA South is in French.

“BOMANA is very close to Idenau. The population of BOMANA came and because the document is in French, the went back because they could not exploit the document. That is a major handicap.”

By: Eugene N. Nforngwa theQuail Newspaper PO Box 25284 Yaounde, Cameroon Tel: 00 237 22 03 63 46 Mobile: 00 237 75 11 43 96 Fax: 00 237 22 31 99 53

Memoria: Taller regional de las Coaliciones de Acceso de Centroamérica

San José, Costa Rica. 2009

Last April 29th and 30th, representatives from TAI Coalitions from Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Costa Rica gathered in regional workshop to create a common Action Plan to strengthen their work on the implementation of Principle 10.

The Action Plan has three sections:

A) Challenges and commitments of the leader organizations in each coalition: This point is related with the strengthening of the following aspects: 1) National coalitions to promote the Access Rights. 2) Information channels within the coalitions and between the coalitions. 3) Fundraising for national coalitions projects. 4) the inclusion of the Dominican Republic and Panama in the regional process. 5) Establishing a regional partnership that consolidates common work strategies and get funding for regional projects. 6) Political context challenges in each country. B) Regional Agenda: This point refers to issues related with: 1) access to information and communications between governments and civil society, 2) Legal framework on access rights. 3) Proceedings and institutional structures of public participation. 4) Education and training on access rights. 5) Funding for public participation and access to information. C) Building a regional partnership: It contains the actions defined to create a regional partnership of TAI Coalitions in Central America.

As part of the program, the meeting had two spaces to tend other topics: Daniel Barragán, from TAI Ecuador, presented the hemispheric strategic plan of Latin America Access Coalitions. Aldo Palacios and Diego Cooper from PP10Secretariat presented the components and the work of the Partnership for Principle 10.

This workshop is an activity of the project “Partnership 10 Central America” which is funded by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and executed by Foundation for Peace and Democracy(FUNPADEM).

Further information please contact Luis Diego Segura from Foundation for Peace and Democracy, FUNPADEM. Email sociedadcivil@funpadem.org or +506 2283 9435.

La Inciativa de Acceso en Centro America

San José, Costa Rica. 2009

Last April 29th and 30th, representatives from TAI Coalitions from Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Costa Rica gathered in regional workshop to create a common Action Plan to strengthen their work on the implementation of Principle 10.

The Action Plan has three sections:

A) Challenges and commitments of the leader organizations in each coalition: This point is related with the strengthening of the following aspects: 1) National coalitions to promote the Access Rights. 2) Information channels within the coalitions and between the coalitions. 3) Fundraising for national coalitions projects. 4) the inclusion of the Dominican Republic and Panama in the regional process. 5) Establishing a regional partnership that consolidates common work strategies and get funding for regional projects. 6) Political context challenges in each country. B) Regional Agenda: This point refers to issues related with: 1) access to information and communications between governments and civil society, 2) Legal framework on access rights. 3) Proceedings and institutional structures of public participation. 4) Education and training on access rights. 5) Funding for public participation and access to information. C) Building a regional partnership: It contains the actions defined to create a regional partnership of TAI Coalitions in Central America.

As part of the program, the meeting had two spaces to tend other topics: Daniel Barragán, from TAI Ecuador, presented the hemispheric strategic plan of Latin America Access Coalitions. Aldo Palacios and Diego Cooper from PP10 Secretariat presented the components and the work of the Partnership for Principle 10.

This workshop is an activity of the project “Partnership 10 Central America” which is funded by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and executed by Foundation for Peace and Democracy(FUNPADEM).

Further information please contact Luis Diego Segura from Foundation for Peace and Democracy, FUNPADEM. Email sociedadcivil@funpadem.org or +506 2283 9435.

El Principio 10 en Costa Rica: Situación y desafíos

San José, Costa Rica. 2009

Last April 29th and 30th, representatives from TAI Coalitions from Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Costa Rica gathered in regional workshop to create a common Action Plan to strengthen their work on the implementation of Principle 10.

The Action Plan has three sections:

A) Challenges and commitments of the leader organizations in each coalition: This point is related with the strengthening of the following aspects: 1) National coalitions to promote the Access Rights. 2) Information channels within the coalitions and between the coalitions. 3) Fundraising for national coalitions projects. 4) the inclusion of the Dominican Republic and Panama in the regional process. 5) Establishing a regional partnership that consolidates common work strategies and get funding for regional projects. 6) Political context challenges in each country. B) Regional Agenda: This point refers to issues related with: 1) access to information and communications between governments and civil society, 2) Legal framework on access rights. 3) Proceedings and institutional structures of public participation. 4) Education and training on access rights. 5) Funding for public participation and access to information. C) Building a regional partnership: It contains the actions defined to create a regional partnership of TAI Coalitions in Central America.

As part of the program, the meeting had two spaces to tend other topics: Daniel Barragán, from TAI Ecuador, presented the hemispheric strategic plan of Latin America Access Coalitions. Aldo Palacios and Diego Cooper from PP10 Secretariat presented the components and the work of the Partnership for Principle 10.

This workshop is an activity of the project “Partnership 10 Central America” which is funded by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and executed by Foundation for Peace and Democracy(FUNPADEM).

Further information please contact Luis Diego Segura from Foundation for Peace and Democracy, FUNPADEM. Email sociedadcivil@funpadem.org or +506 2283 9435.

U.S. Bill to Limit Corporate Influence in Congressional Elections

By David Heller (Posted: March 27, 2009)

The U.S. Congress is set to introduce legislation designed to reinvigorate participatory democracy by implementing a small-donor approach to congressional campaign finance, challenging the status quo where elections are largely fueled by corporate- and lobby- based contributions. The Access Initiative (TAI) has long noted the value of keeping regular citizens at the heart of the democratic process. This legislative effort is commendable for its commitment to promoting an array of democratic principles.

But because of its radical departure from the engrained Beltway precedents of big money and special interest politics, the bill’s passage is far from guaranteed.

Called ‘The Durbin-Specter Fair Elections Now Act,’ the bill would establish a voluntary system of ‘Fair Elections’ funding for qualified congressional candidates who decline corporate funding and raise only small donations from their constituents.

The scheme that the bill proposes is ambitious but not impractical. First, candidates seeking to participate would have to collect a certain number of $5-$100 contributions from their constituents. After raising a given amount of money – signifying their viability as a candidate – they would be provided with a publicly-funded “Start-Up Grant” to launch a primary campaign, as well as matching funds of $4 for every $1 raised through constituents.

Candidates who receive their party’s nomination in the primary election are then eligible to receive a competitive public grant for use in the general election.

Because the system is voluntary, additional provisions ensure that the candidate opting into it will be competitive with candidates who do not, and choose to remain reliant on larger, more traditional sources of donations.

First, the system is structured so that candidates will receive funding support consistent with the amount raised by elected politicians in previous campaigns. So, participating candidates will not be disadvantaged by a lack of funds. Also, candidates are eligible to receive discounted fares for costs incurred by campaign communications, like T.V. and radio advertisements.

But despite earning bipartisan sponsorship in both houses of the Congress and strong support from a broad base of issue-specific communities including environmental, faith, and labor groups, there has been pessimism expressed about the bill’s passage.

Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), one of the bill’s co-sponsors, said that the proposal would be “hard politically.”

Representatives are notorious for engaging in behind-the-scenes efforts to oppose ethics and campaign finance overhauls in initial stages, but then overwhelmingly supporting them if and when a public vote occurs.

Ultimately, the political costs associated with severing ties to resourceful lobbyists should not blind politicians from recognizing the principled benefits that the bill’s passage will incur.

Fundamentally, it will strengthen the frayed link between representatives and their constituents– the people whose interests representatives are intended to reflect in legislative action. If electoral funding does not come from particular interest groups, but the general public, then representatives will be more likely to support policies that are in the public interest, as opposed to the interest of a particular industry.

This will improve policy decisions generally, because politicians would have an incentive to base them on the objective merits of particular cases – and how they may affect their constituency’s wellbeing – as opposed to the reaction of more parochial funding organizations.

Other byproducts of this democratic commitment include the bill’s encouragement of getting the public – both potential candidates and regular citizens – involved in politics. Candidates will no longer remain beholden to the wealthiest interest groups. Instead, a successful campaign can be run on the broad based support of individual people. This could lead to a more diverse and competitive representative body, comprised of intelligent and hard-working people who lack influential ties to particular industries.

Likewise, the bill will create an environment in which networks of grassroots organizations – manned by individual citizens – will be empowered to lead candidates through election cycles.

Examples of the effectiveness of small donor-based campaign financing abound. While the bill will not initially apply to presidential elections, the unprecedented campaign of Barack Obama demonstrates the ability of grassroots networks to win elections and increase overall political involvement, as people showed up to the polls and contributed money during this election in record numbers.

Likewise, five U.S. states have already implemented similar small donor programs for their state-level elections, and they’ve been widely viewed as successful.

Should the U.S. Congress pass the bill, not only would it advance the state of democracy in the U.S., but it would send a broader message to the rest of the world about the importance – and political feasibility – of abiding by democratic principles.

La Iniciativa de Acceso en el proceso de la V Cumbre de las Américas / The Access Initiative in the V Summit of the Americas…

By Daniel Barragan (Posted: March 9, 2009) 

Del 17 al 19 de abril de 2009 se realizará la V Cumbre de las Américas en Puerto España, Trinidad y Tobago, enfocada a “Asegurar el futuro de nuestros ciudadanos promoviendo la prosperidad humana, la seguridad energética y la sostenibilidad ambiental”.

Como parte del proceso de Cumbres, la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA) ha venido promoviendo la participación de la sociedad civil de las Américas a través de una serie de foros subregionales en Puerto España (octubre 2008), San Salvador (diciembre 2008) y Lima (febrero 2009); y un foro hemisférico en Washington D.C.(marzo 2009).

Estos espacios de participación para la sociedad civil fueron muy importantes para poder analizar y debatir la propuesta de resolución que adoptarán los gobiernos del continente en abril próximo, y definir propuestas concretas para enriquecer esta declaración.Justamente en estos espacios ha sido relevante el rol de las organizaciones miembros de la Iniciativa de Acceso, que han logrado incidir en este proceso en dos vías:

(i) Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental (CEDA), AC Consorcio Desarrollo y Justicia y Corporación Participa, incidieron para incorporar en las recomendaciones del Foro Subregional de América del Sur (Lima), a los derechos de acceso, ya no como un reconocimiento expreso por parte de los gobiernos, sino como una garantía por parte de los Estados para su implementación. La propuesta insertada en el párrafo 44 del documento de recomendaciones dice:

“También trabajaremos en aras de promover una gobernabilidad ambiental sana, mediante el refuerzo de las leyes ambientales nacionales y creando capacidad institucional para la gestión democrática de los recursos naturales, garantizando el acceso de los ciudadanos a la información ambiental, a la participación en los procesos de toma de decisiones y a mecanismos de justicia ambiental. De igual forma, los gobiernos nos comprometemos a desarrollar un sistema de indicadores ambientales orientados a monitorear la información y justicia ambiental, en coordinación con la sociedad civil.”

De igual forma esta propuesta fue apoyada y promovida por los socios TAI presentes en el Foro Hemisférico (Washington D.C.) realizado el pasado 3 y 4 de marzo: World Resources Institute (Estados Unidos), Corporación Participa(Chile), Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental (Ecuador), AC Consorcio Desarrollo y Justicia (Venezuela) y FUNPADEM (Costa Rica); logrando que conste en el documento de recomendaciones de este Foro.

(ii) Adicionalmente, la Iniciativa de Acceso estuvo presente en dos espacios en el Foro Hemisférico de la Sociedad Civil (Washington D.C.). El primer espacio estuvo dentro del panel de Seguridad energética y sostenibilidad ambiental, en el que Linda Shaffer difundió la Iniciativa de Acceso y habló sobre los fundamentos de la gobernabilidad ambiental que son el corazón de nuestro proceso.

El segundo espacio tuvo lugar en la Sesión Especial de la Comisión de Gestión de Cumbres Interamericanas y Participación de la Sociedad Civil en las actividades de la OEA, en donde el Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental presentó a la Iniciativa de Acceso y el trabajo que desarrollamos como un mecanismo de apoyo al seguimiento de los mandatos de cumbres en los temas ambientales.

Fue muy importante la presencia de la Iniciativa de Acceso en estos espacios, a través de sus miembros presentes, no solo para reforzar nuestra presencia institucional y liderazgo en los procesos de gobernabilidad ambiental, sino para poder incidir en foros políticos y procesos de desarrollo de políticas públicas.

The Access Initiative in the V Summit of the Americas process

From April 17 to 19, 2009 will be held the V Summit of the Americas in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, aimed at “Securing Our Citizens’ Future by Promoting Human Prosperity, Energy Security and Environmental Sustainability”.

As part of the Summit, the Organization of American States (OAS) has been promoting the participation of civil society in the Americas through a series of subregional forums in Port of Spain (October 2008), San Salvador (December 2008) and Lima (February 2009) and a hemispheric forum in Washington DC (2009 March).

These spaces for civil society were very important to analyze and discuss the proposed resolution to adopt the governments of the continent in April, and define concrete proposals to enhance this statement. Precisely in these areas has been relevant the role of TAI members, who influenced this process in two ways:

(i) Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental (CEDA), AC Consorcio Desarrollo y Justicia and Corporación Participa influenced to incorporate in the recommendations of the Sub-Regional Forum of South America (Lima), the access rights, not as an explicit recognition by governments, but as a guarantee by the States for their implementation. The proposal inserted on paragraph 44 of the document reads:

“We will also work towards promoting sound environmental governance by strengthening national environmental laws and building institutional capacity for the democratic management of natural resources, guaranteeing citizens access to environmental information, to participation in decision-making processes, and to mechanisms for environmental justice. In addition, the governments commit to developing a system of environmental indicators geared toward monitoring environmental information and justice, in coordination with civil society.”

The proposal was also supported and promoted by TAI partners in the Hemispheric Forum (Washington DC) held on March 3 and 4: World Resources Institute (Estados Unidos), Corporación Participa (Chile), Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental (Ecuador), AC Consorcio Desarrollo y Justicia (Venezuela) y FUNPADEM (Costa Rica); achieving the inclusion in the document of recommendations of this Forum.

(ii) Additionally, the Access Initiative was present at two spaces in the Civil Society Hemispheric Forum (Washington DC). The first space was on the panel on Energy security and environmental sustainability, in which Linda Shaffer introduced the Access Initiative and spoke about the foundations of environmental governance that are the heart of our process.

The second space was in the Special Session of the Committee on Inter-American Summits Management and Civil Society Participation in OAS Activities, in which the Ecuadorian Center of Environmental Law (Centro Ecuatoriano de Derecho Ambiental) presented the Access Initiative process and the work we develop as a support mechanism to follow the summits mandates on environmental issues.

It was very important the presence of the Access Initiative in these spaces, through its members present, not only to strengthen our institutional presence and leadership in environmental governance processes, but in order to influence policy forums and of public policy development processes.

Más información / more information:
http://www.civil-society.oas.org/Default.htm
http://fifthsummitoftheamericas.org/home/