Page images
PDF
EPUB

social and natural mechanisns that lead to trouble.
Before advanced nations undertake such transfers,
therefore, they should try to anticipate the
unwanted, potentially damaging side effects of their
actions.

Because of the relatively embryonic state of our
ecological science, not even the advanced nations can
always predict such side effects. But our knowledge,
our experience, and our resources vastly exceed those
of underdeveloped nations and through NEPA the
United States can provide access to the considerable
ecological expertise it does possess.'

Charles Warren's list can be updated. Foreign aid is currently

being criticized for inducing environmental problems such as those

involving Livestock Production for Botswana or the Yangtze River's

Three Gorges Dan in the Peoples Republic of China.

[blocks in formation]

demonstrated that it wants to help legitimate socio-economic

development abroad.

It will not stand for aid dollars being siphoned

away through corruption nor will it stand for spending on projects

which undermine sustainable development.

The Continuing Resolution

for FY 1988 adopted last December'' provides that the multilateral

development banks should continue to reform their environmental

procedures, and that the Treasury Department should encourage such

reform."

This reaffirms Section 539 of Public Law 99-591, and

Treasury's mandate to encourage reform.

The pace of reform in international financial institutions has

been laborious and slow.

There is no sound reason why the World Bank

and other multilateral development banks have not drawn on the EIA

expertise in agencies in nations such as the USA, Australia, Canada

or the Netherlands, in order to establish their own EIA procedures.

[blocks in formation]

Congress has several options which it could pursue to accelerate

the pace of refors in the aultilateral development banks.

These

[blocks in formation]

year in advance, there is adequate time to prepare an EIS.

Alternatively, assign all such EIS preparation to AID or Treasury or

State.

(c)

Legislate To Leverage

Require that the federal agency

representing the United States in any international financial

assistance organization select one or more projects or programs for

preparation of a programmatic EIS by the agency.'s

Payment of U.S.

aid would be conditioned on completing the programmatic EIS and the

adoption of generic measures for bitigation of adverse environmental

effects.

The U.S. could do this jointly with nations such as The

Netherlands which have efficient EIA procedures like NEPA.

Once the organization agreed to do an analysis equivalent to an

EIS, the federal agency would be relieved of its EIS responsibility

so long as the international financial organization met minimal

competency tests in performing its own EIA.

(d)

Legislate To Expand E.0. 12114

Siaply direct that Treasury

coaply with NEPA Section 102(2)(C) for each vote on proposed actions

of aultilateral development banks such as the International Monetary

Fund.

This would require a phase-in period since bany development

projects are in late stages of development.

It should also aake some

provision to defer to any EIS prepared by the relevant international

financial institution so as to avoid unnecessary duplication.

Treasury could be directed to use AID's procedures,

or be left to

do its own rule-baking to establish agency procedures on how to

[blocks in formation]

personnel in order to establish EIA procedures and actually undertake

initial environmental impact assessment procedures.

Alternatively,

provide such help directly to foreign developing nations through AID.

(f)

Punt

Leave further evolution of the applicability of NEPA

abroad to the President and/or the courts.

In conclusion, we have seen that compliance with NEPA is an

established fact for most federal agencies, and that the foreign

affairs

agencies are no exception. All agencies were reluctant to

retool initially; once experienced in EIA techniques, agencies

realize the many benefits of the process which Congress created

through NEPA.

It would be a small, but probably an effective step

for Congress to mandate the preparation of programmatic environmental

impact statements as proposed in Option "C" above.

That escalates

the pressure on multilateral development banks to establish EIA

procedures, with a minimum of cost to U.S. taxpayers.

The fact that

the U.S. would be scrutinizing the environmental sufficiency of projects of international financial institutions would probably propel them to establish their own EIA procedures as soon as

possible.

This result would be encouraged by authorizing the U.S.

federal agency to rely on the multilateral EIA whenever such is done

consistent with u.s. standards under NEPA.

As the world's population grows and more projects are begun, it is

critical that they be completed in a sound environmental context. We

do not have enough time or money to do the projects twice, originally

and then by way of repair or revision once the environmental flaws

[blocks in formation]

There is no reason for either the foreign affairs agencies or the

international financial institutions to avoid employing routine EIA

procedures.

In Senator Jackson's words, 'The global character of

ecological relationships must be the guide for domestic

activities."

I wish you success in your deliberations following these hearings.

I shall be pleased to provide any further information you may need on

[blocks in formation]

Annotations To Testimony

1.42 USC 4321, et seg.

2. ECC Council Directive of 27 June 1985, 'On the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment,' 85/337/EEC, 175 Official J. of the European Communities 41 (July 7, 1985).

3. N.2. Cabinet Decision of 7 August 1972, and EIA procedures effective 1 March 1974 promulgated by the Commission for the Environment.

4. See D.A.R. Williams, Chap. VIII, 'Environmental Impact Assessment and Reporting,' in ENVIRONMENTAL LAW at 234 and 237-8 (Butterworth, Wellington, N.2. 1980).

5. Canada, Cabinet Decision of 20 December 1977, "Environmental Assessment and Review Process,' modified by Cabinet Decision of 15 February 1977, and strengthened by guidelines issued by Order in Council, in June of 1984. See B. Sadler (ed.), Audit and Evaluation in Environmental Assessment and Management: Canadian and International Experience (Environment Canada, 1987).

6. Progress Report on Implenentation of Environmental Reform in Multilateral Development Banks, transmitted to Senator Robert W. Kasten, Jr., by John K. Meagher, Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs, U.S. Department of the Treasury, February 5, 1988.

7. 'Environmental Impact Assessment in The Netherlands,' Ministry of Housing. Physical Planning and Environment (The Hague, 28 August; 1984).

8. Report of the Legal Advisory Committee To The President's Council on Environmental Quality, Whitney North Seymour Jr., Chairman (December, 1971).

9. NY State Environmental Quality Review Act ('SEORA'), Article 8, Environmental Conservation Law, 17% McKinney's Consol. L. of N.Y.

10. Environmental Law Institute, NEPA IN ACTION: ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICES IN NINETEEN FEDERAL AGENCIES (October, 1981).

11. M.T. Farvar, J.P. Milton, The Careless Technology: Ecology and International Development (National History Press, 1972).

12. Op. cit., supra note 8, at p. 14.

13. See my article, N.A. Robinson, "Extraterritorial Environmental Protection Obligations of the Foreign Affairs Agencies: The Unfulfilled Mandates of NEPA,' 7 N.Y.U.J. INT'L L. and POL. 257

« PreviousContinue »