Abstract
Impact assessments determine facts: what happened, where and when. These facts can then be used. But they must flow to decision-makers, and they must be perceived as the facts they are. If acted upon, predictable new situations develop from facts.
“A variety of submitters appeared, some carefully meeting the terms of the Inquiry, while others were marginal in details but had relevant points to make and issues to raise. In addition, someone succeeded in drawing attention of the media to claimed impacts out of control, conflicts of interest by inquiry personnel and submitters, and misuse of provincial university facilities. Such diversions from the fact-finding are not unusual in public hearings. They need documenting objectively to show how they affect the assessment of environmental risk.”
“Real issues of social impact, and consequent long-term financial profitability important to shareholders, underlie many of the questions raised at the AGMs. But in 1982–4, not one of the questioners, not even the closely reasoning lawyers present, was able to raise such issues in ways which provided much useful information to potentially sympathetic shareholders. Without proper information about the social and environmental impact of their company’s actions, share-holders who might be sympathetic to enlightened policies at the expense of some profit reduction in the immediate future (but maintenance of long-term profitability) are unlikely to influence their Board of Directors.”
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anon (1988) Feedback. New Sci 1615:87
Case 1. A Public Hearing — Mining(Canada)
Anon (1974) Pollution control objectives for the mining, mine-milling and smelting industries of British Columbia. Pollut Control Board, 25 pp
Anon (1979) Pollution control objectives for the mining, smelting and related industries of British Columbia. Pollut Control Board, 15 pp
Bradley MD (1983) The scientist and engineer in court. Am Geophys Union, Water Resourc Monogr 8:111 pp
Cole HA (1983) Pollution and the public. Mar Pollut Bull 14(8):312–313
CSA — Consumers’ Association of Canada (ed) (1979) Costs awards in regulatory proceedings. A manual for public participants. Consumers’ Assoc Can, 70 pp
Ellis DV (1985a) The public hearing. Mar Pollut Bull 17(3):81–82
Ellis DV (1985b) Taxonomic sufficiency and pollution assessment. Mar Pollut Bull 16(12):459
Ellis DV (1986) Career hazards for pollution scientists. Mar Pollut Bull 17(6):235
Ellis DV (1987) A decade of environmental impact assessment at marine and coastal mines. Mar Min 6:385–417
Ellis DV (1988) Quality control of biological surveys. Mar Pollut Bull 19(10):506–512
Fournier S (1978a) Mining clash dominates pollution. Vancouver Sun, Jan 16, p 17
Fournier S (1978b) Marine life ‘destroyed by pollution from mine’. Vancouver Sun, Jan 20 p 1, 8
Fournier S (1978b) Marine life ‘destroyed by pollution from mine’. Vancouver Sun, Jan 20 p 1, 8
Fournier S (1978c) Scientists unwilling to predict. Vancouver Sun, Jan 21, p 1, 12
Goyette D, Nelson H (1977) Marine environmental assessment of mine waste disposal into Rupert Inlet, British Columbia. Environ Protect Serv Rep EPS PR-77–11, 93 pp
Hume S (1978a) Industry versus ecology at probe into B.C. Mines. Daily Colonist, Jan 21, p 48
Hume S (1978b) Anti-pollution probe panelists received mining firm money. Daily Colonist, Jan 24, P 1–2
Hume S (1978c) Probe for conflicts, smelter union urges. Daily Colonist Jan 27, p 20
Hume S (1978d) UBC ‘launders’ industry funds. Greenpeace flays mine firm aid. Daily Colonist, Jan 28, p 12
Hume S (1978e) Monitor team not ours. President denies UVic involved in pollution issue. Daily Colonist, Feb 4, p 26
Hume S (1978f) Petch hints of Utah Mines research. Daily Colonist, Feb 28, p 28
Hume S (1978g) Uvic compensated-Petch. Daily Colonist Mar 2, p 38
Klapow LA, Lewis RW (1979) Analysis of toxicity data for California marine water quality standards. J Water Pollut Contamin Fed 51(8):2954–2070
Moore PA (1974) The administration of pollution control in British Columbia: a focus on the mining industry. PhD Thesis, Univ British Columbia, Vancouver
Roman AJ (1977) Guidebook on how to prepare cases for administrative tribunals. Cons Assoc Can 157 pp
SGEAHP — Study Group on Environmental Assessment Hearing Procedures (1988) Public review: neither judicial, nor political, but an essential forum for the future of the environment. Study group on environmental assessment hearing procedures. Min Supply Serv Can, 71 pp (English and French)
Waldichuk M (1978) Disposal of mine wastes into the sea. Mar Pollut Bull 9(6): 141–143
Waldichuk M, Buchanan RJ (1980) Significance of environmental changes due to mine waste disposal into Rupert Inlet. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa, and British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Victoria 56 pp
Case 2. A Multinational AGM — Rio Tinto Zinc PLC(England)
Ellis DV (1982) Kitsault, B.C. — technical communication in a non-technical world. Mar Pollut Bull 13(3):78–80
Roberts A (no date) The Rossing file. Namibia Support Committee, London, 68 pp
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ellis, D. (1989). Fact-Finding and Social Input — a Public Hearing (Mining, Canada) and a Multinational AGM (Rio Tinto Zinc, England). In: Environments at Risk. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-74772-4_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-74772-4_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-51180-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-74772-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive