IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/jeapmx/v20y2018i04ns146433321850014x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of the EIA for the Site C Hydroelectric Dam Reconsidered: Nature of Indigenous Cultures, Rights, and Engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Bruce R. Muir

    (Nun wa dee Stewardship Society, 982498A Ave, Fort St John, BC V1J 1S2, Canada)

Abstract

Numerous publications have emerged relating to the Site C dam on the Peace River in northern British Columbia, Canada. This paper focuses on a recently published study that examined the effectiveness of Indigenous peoples’ participation in the environmental impact assessment of the dam. Although the study identifies several important deficiencies, it is incomplete with a number of inconsistencies and suggests a path that is unlikely to be a sufficient remedy. The objective of this paper is to address key shortcomings that could foster crucial misunderstandings. Environmental decisions and actions were organised based on the typologies of impact assessment for context and to identify interconnections and sources of ineffectiveness. Results confirm that the effectiveness framework has considerable utility and improves measurement accuracy. This paper also presents supplemental insights into engagement, consent, legitimacy as a dimension of impact assessment effectiveness when Indigenous peoples are involved, and concludes with suggestions for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruce R. Muir, 2018. "Effectiveness of the EIA for the Site C Hydroelectric Dam Reconsidered: Nature of Indigenous Cultures, Rights, and Engagement," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(04), pages 1-41, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:jeapmx:v:20:y:2018:i:04:n:s146433321850014x
    DOI: 10.1142/S146433321850014X
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S146433321850014X
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S146433321850014X?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tye Dubrule & D. L. Dee Patriquin & Glynnis A. Hood, 2018. "A Question of Inclusion: BC Hydro’s Site C Dam Indigenous Consultation Process," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Banks, Glenn, 2013. "Little by little, inch by inch: Project expansion assessments in the Papua New Guinea mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 688-695.
    3. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "Fair play in energy policy decisions: Procedural fairness, outcome fairness and acceptance of the decision to rebuild nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 292-300.
    2. Hogan, Jessica L. & Warren, Charles R. & Simpson, Michael & McCauley, Darren, 2022. "What makes local energy projects acceptable? Probing the connection between ownership structures and community acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. Songsore, Emmanuel & Buzzelli, Michael, 2014. "Social responses to wind energy development in Ontario: The influence of health risk perceptions and associated concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 285-296.
    4. Bauwens, Thomas, 2019. "Analyzing the determinants of the size of investments by community renewable energy members: Findings and policy implications from Flanders," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 841-852.
    5. Franks, Daniel M. & Brereton, David & Moran, Chris J., 2013. "The cumulative dimensions of impact in resource regions," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 640-647.
    6. Klein, Sharon J.W. & Coffey, Stephanie, 2016. "Building a sustainable energy future, one community at a time," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 867-880.
    7. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. József Kádár & Martina Pilloni & Tareq Abu Hamed, 2023. "A Survey of Renewable Energy, Climate Change, and Policy Awareness in Israel: The Long Path for Citizen Participation in the National Renewable Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Russell, Aaron & Bingaman, Samantha & Garcia, Hannah-Marie, 2021. "Threading a moving needle: The spatial dimensions characterizing US offshore wind policy drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    10. Zilliox, Skylar & Smith, Jessica M., 2017. "Memorandums of understanding and public trust in local government for Colorado's unconventional energy industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 72-81.
    11. John R. Owen & Deanna Kemp, 2024. "Corporate Responses to Community Grievance: Voluntarism and Pathologies of Practice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 189(1), pages 55-68, January.
    12. Sebastian Schär & Jutta Geldermann, 2021. "Adopting Multiactor Multicriteria Analysis for the Evaluation of Energy Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    13. García, Victoria Gómez & Bartolomé, Mercedes Montero, 2010. "Rural electrification systems based on renewable energy: The social dimensions of an innovative technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 303-311.
    14. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    15. Copena, Damián & Simón, Xavier, 2018. "Wind farms and payments to landowners: Opportunities for rural development for the case of Galicia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 38-47.
    16. Mouter, Niek & de Geest, Auke & Doorn, Neelke, 2018. "A values-based approach to energy controversies: Value-sensitive design applied to the Groningen gas controversy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 639-648.
    17. Mumtaz Derya Tarhan, 2015. "Renewable Energy Cooperatives: A Review of Demonstrated Impacts and Limitations," Journal of Entrepreneurial and Organizational Diversity, European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises, vol. 4(1), pages 104-120, August.
    18. Valentine, Scott Victor, 2010. "A STEP toward understanding wind power development policy barriers in advanced economies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 2796-2807, December.
    19. Lukanov, Boris R. & Krieger, Elena M., 2019. "Distributed solar and environmental justice: Exploring the demographic and socio-economic trends of residential PV adoption in California," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    20. Shan Zhou & Douglas S. Noonan, 2019. "Justice Implications of Clean Energy Policies and Programs in the United States: A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:jeapmx:v:20:y:2018:i:04:n:s146433321850014x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/jeapm/jeapm.shtml .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.