Commentary资料文件与下载

COMMENTARY 评论

This article, which I co-wrote with Louise Dunlap, explains a range of key ways in which nonobjective judgments, reflecting the values of those involved, are inherent in the implementation of EIAs. Two short segments, pages 335-337 and 363-366, are included here.

我与路易斯•邓拉普共同撰写的这篇文章说明了非客观性判断是环境影响评估实施过程中的固有内容，它能够反映所涉及人员的价值观念。这里包括其中两个简短的部分：第335-337页和第363-366页。

It is tempting to portray analytical tools such as environmental impact assessment (EIA) as entirely objective, rational devices for making decisions. These tools are often used by highly trained experts relying on advanced training in science, economics and engineering that lay-people may find difficult to question.

人们通常会将环境影响评估（EIA）等描绘成完全客观的、合理的决策分析工具，这么做的确很吸引人。这些工具通常由在科学、经济与工程方面颇有研究的专家使用，外行人可能难以入手。

In reality, though, all of these tools build on a series of nonobjective judgments. It is when practitioners do not acknowledge these judgments that analytical tools are likely to become controversial and less effective in promoting beneficial outcomes.

但实际上，所有这些工具都建立在一系列非客观判断之上。如果从业人员不承认这一点，那么，这些分析工具可能在促成有利结果方面的功效会大打折扣且颇具争议。

There are seven key aspects of EIAs that are shaped by nonobjective judgments:

环境影响评估包含七个由非客观性判断形成的主要方面：

●     Who should be included in the professional EIA team? 环境影响评估专家团队应该包括哪些人？

●     How should the work plan be structured and which aspects of the process should be emphasized? 工作计划应该如何制作，流程中的哪个方面应该着重强调？

●     How should the EIA process handle uncertainty where it arises? 当出现不确定性时，环境影响评估流程如何应对？

●     How to handle negative project impacts – should the process focus on substantively changing the project design, or simply working to mitigate the impacts that are foreseen? 如何处理负面的项目影响——该流程需要聚焦于彻底改变项目设计，还是仅缓和可预见的影响？

●     How and why to integrate public participation 如何以及为什么要融入公众参与？

●     How to handle data and forecasting – what is acceptable as a data source, and how precise do forecasts need to be 如何处理数据与预测——哪些数据源是可接受的，预测需要有多精确? 

●     How does EIA fit into the planning process – is it an integrated or parallel process, and should it be addressing basic problems or working to propose fundamentally different alternatives 环境影响评估如何融入计划流程——应将两个流程整合还是并驾齐驱？是应该着重解决基本方案的问题，还是努力提出完全不同的备选方案?

There are no technically correct answers to these questions. Experts must rely on their experience and use their best judgment to come up with answers.  What this means, though, is that other people’s judgments, besides that of the experts’, ought to be considered as well.

这些问题从技术上讲并没有正确的答案。专家们必须依靠他们的经验并做出最佳的判断才能提出答案。不过，这也意味着除了专家之外，其他人的判断也应该被考虑在内

Value-based or nonobjective judgments do not necessarily invalidate EIA findings. Rather, it is important that those implementing EIAs become more aware of the choices and judgments they are making, often unconsciously, and are transparent about these judgments so they can be discussed.

基于价值的或非客观的判断并不一定会使环境影响评估的结果无效。相反，环境影响评估的实施者过去可能往往是无意识地，但现在应该更加意识到他们所做的选择和判断应当保持公开透明，可供讨论。

Reflection questions 思考题:

1.   Do you think it would be difficult to persuade experts to acknowledge the subjectivity of many of the judgments they make that have an impact on the decisions for which they are responsible? Why might they be reluctant? 让专家承认他们所做判断的主观性可能会影响到他们所负责的决定，你觉得会很困难吗？他们为什么会不愿意？

2.   This week’s reading by Lohani et al. describes the emerging role of EIA in developing countries. How do you think the willingness to acknowledge nonobjective judgments in tools such as EIA might vary by culture? 本周阅读材料由洛哈尼等撰写，描述了环境影响评估在发展中国家日趋增长的地位。你觉得人们会承认这一工具的使用过程中存在非客观判断因素吗？比如环境影响评估可能因文化差异而不同？