ENVIRON IMPACT ASSESS REV 1991;11:195-196 195

NOTES ON THE AUTHORS

The Viewpoint for September, 1991 comes from Dr. Roderich Hettwer, of the University of Law and Administration in Potsdam, formerly in East Germany. He addresses the unique needs of "environmental diplomacy," which differ fundamentally from traditional diplomatic efforts designed to maximize one nation's interest at the expense of another and reinforced with the possible recourse to armed conflict. Dr. Hettwer points out that environmental negotiations must be approached not only with the knowledge that each nation's interest is inextricably bound up with those of its neighbors but also with the recognition that war, in an age of weapons of mass destruction, will destroy the environment and those who depend upon it. Dr. Hettwer emphasizes the need for a new code of environmental ethics which must underlie international decision making for the environment. He calls upon all nations to work toward redressing the balance between the drain of wealth, based on the exploitation of natural resources, from southern regions of the world, and the profligate use of the world's resources by western and northern regions.

The feature for this issue, "Strategies for Managing Uncertainties Imposed by EIA: Analysis of a Kenyan River Development Authority," is coauthored by Leonard Ortolano, Professor of Civil Engineering at Stanford University, and Rafic Hirji, Senior Engineer at James M. Montgomery Consulting Engineers, Inc. of Sacramento, California. Through case studies, they demonstrate how the authority involved has been able to use the EIA process to legitimate its own activities and positions, and how it has managed the process to minimize the influence of EIA on the authority's decisions. They conclude that Kenya's Na- tional Environment Secretariat (NES) has been unable to make the independent authority comply with national EIA requirements, even when environmental assessment is required by a donor, such as the World Bank. Ortolano and Hirji write "Unless NES and the multilateral and bilateral agencies develop counter- vailing strategies" they are unlikely to succeed in making the authority "account fully for the environmental impacts of its projects."

In the Environmental Policy Making department for this issue, Chris Zeiss, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering at the University of Alberta, offers a paper on "Setting Priorities for Impact Assessment at Waste Facilities." The paper identifies five factors that are pivotal in community decision making. The research tests an approach to the planning process that identifies and integrates residents' priorities for impact management. Dr. Zeiss, whose interests lie in waste management and community decision making, believes that this approach

@ 1991 Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc. 655 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10010 0195-9255/91/$3.50

196 NOTES ON THE AUTHORS

"empowers the community to produce a more acceptable product and results in better community acceptance."

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is the topic of the Ecological Impact As- sessment department for September. Ambuj D. Sagar, a graduate student in MIT's Technology and Policy Program, discusses this ecologically sound alter- native to the currently widespread strategy of chemical control of agricultural pests as well as of insect vectors for human disease. He writes that in the long run, "extensive pesticide use results in adverse human health and environmental effects." Mr. Sagar is strongly in favor of IPM in all regions of the world, especially for developing countries "where pesticide-related problems often take on acute dimensions." He suggests that international agencies may be effective in making the transition to IPM.

Professor Rabel J. Burdge of the Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, reviews "How to Prevent and Re- solve Public Controversy," an instructional video and 190-page manual by Des- mond M. Connor, principal of Connor Development Services Ltd. of Victoria, British Columbia. The materials are designed to familiarize proponents of de- velopment policies or projects with the public involvement process when project approval requires citizens' approval. The reviewer feels that while "the presen- tation comes off as pro-project and pro-proponent," it also "puts public involve- ment in a good light." The video and manual provide an analysis of public attitudes toward project development, a "strategy for public involvement" based on an understanding of the community involved, and a discussion of how to use different techniques and procedures to avoid intractable controversies between project proponents and citizens.

Teresa Hill Editor