Phase 3: Scoping Stakeholder Engagement
in Greece West
1
INTRODUCTION
2.1
This Report
This report presents the stakeholder
engagement
undertaken as part of the scoping
process for the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) Project in Greece. This report forms part of the
overall Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP), which covers stakeholder engagement during
all project development phases.
ESIA scoping activities represent the third phase of stakeholder engagement for the project,
following Pre-Scoping and Route Refinement engagement activities (see
Table 1.1). The aim of this phase of engagement was to provide further detail regarding
the Project to stakeholders and generate feedback on the scope, approach, key issues and
other key stakeholders to be consulted during the ESIA phase.
Phase
Completed/ Planned
Phase 1: Pre-scoping
Completed
Phase 2: Route Refinement
Completed
Phase 3: ESIA Scoping
Completed
Phase 4: Main ESIA Phase
Planned
Phase 5: ESIA Finalisation and Disclosure
Planned
Phase 6: Ongoing Engagement
Planned
Table 1.1:
Phases of Stakeholder Engagement in Greece and Progress to Date
Scoping disclosure and consultation was carried out in June-July 2011.
It involved
revisiting the government and NGO stakeholders previously engaged during the route selection
process at a national, regional and municipal level along with representatives of
communities
of the 11 municipalities
local
crossed by the 2km corridor of the proposed
pipeline route.
In advance of the meetings, participants received copies of the scoping document.
During the meetings
project information
discussion and questions.
was presented
and time was allowed for
Local community representatives
were asked to make the
scoping report available at the local community level in advance of community meetings which
will be held in the next phase of engagement (Main ESIA Phase).
The mechanism for
community members to provide views and comments in advance of community meetings was also
explained. Information was also disseminated to local communities and to the general public via
media advertisements.
2.2
Background and Steps Leading to the Scoping Process
The scoping process was undertaken following completion of an alternatives assessment
in early 2011.
The alternatives assessment evaluated potential routes using technical,
environmental, socioeconomic and cultural heritage criteria with the aim of identifying
technically feasible pipeline route alternative with the least environmental,
and cultural heritage impacts.
the
socioeconomic
Once the preferred alternative had been identified and
validated by key stakeholders, TAP produced a Scoping Report for the chosen base case
route.
Due to the compressed time-schedule in Greece and to avoid stakeholder fatigue, a separate
route disclosure tour was not undertaken in addition to the scoping disclosure process.
Instead, official letters were sent to all relevant stakeholders along the S0 route (the route not
selected as the base case) informing them of the route alternative selection process
results and the reasons why the N1 Alternative was selected by the Project.
Key
stakeholders along the new base case route were similarly informed of the route selection
results in the letter introducing the scoping report. In addition, further discussion of the selected
route was included in the scoping disclosure meetings that followed.
2.3
Objectives of Stakeholder Engagement During ESIA Scoping Disclosure
The process of scoping allows key issues to be identified and addressed in the ESIA.
It
ensures that the ESIA phase is focused on the potentially significant environmental and social
impacts which may arise from the Project.
Scoping also takes into account the results of
engagement undertaken to date for the Project, ultimately facilitating and defining the
scope of work for the ESIA.
The objective
of engagement
during the ESIA Scoping
phase of the Project
was
therefore to provide further and more specific detail to stakeholders regarding the Project and
to enable stakeholders to feedback on the scope, approach and key issues that should be
further investigated in the ESIA.
The activities carried out during scoping disclosure engagement focused on national, regional
and local government authorities, NGOs and other interested parties at the national level.
Information was also disseminated to local communities and to the general public via
media sources and channels for their feedback were established via village heads. Appendix
C contains the disclosure materials distributed in advance and utilised during scoping
disclosure activities.
3
ESIA SCOPING DISCLOSURE PROCESS
3.1
Overview
The ESIA Scoping Phase of engagement involved revisiting the stakeholders contacted
during the route selection process at national, regional, municipal and local levels along the
chosen route.
Meetings were held separately in Athens with national government agencies, NGOs and other
interested parties (universities, research organisations, etc.).
Meetings were held with heads of regions on a face-to-face basis, as was the case in the
earlier phases of engagement.
Representatives from the 11 Municipalities and 39 local communities whose territory is
crossed by the 2 km corridor of the pipeline were invited to attend one of three local
scoping meetings along the pipeline route.
Issues raised during meetings were recorded and are summarized herein. Stakeholders were
also invited to submit follow -up questions and comments by post or through the Project
website.
3.2
Summary of Stakeholder Meetings
This section of the report describes the groups of stakeholders consulted during the
ESIA scoping disclosure process.
3.2.1 National Level Stakeholders
Meetings were held on 21 and 22 June in in Athens with national level institutions including
Ministries, governmental agencies and regulators as presented in Table 3.1.
Meeting date and
No of
venue
attendees
st
21
June 2011,
5
Participating Stakeholders
•
Athens
Project Engineer, Ministry of Environment/
Special Service of Environment (EYPE)
•
Representative, Ministry of Environment
(Directorate of Air Pollution & Noise)
•
Project Engineer, General Planning
Directorate, Ministry of Environment
•
Forester Engineer, Forest Protection Division &
Natural Environment
•
Project Forester, Ministry of Environment,
Forest Protection
st
21
June 2011,
1
Athens
•
Representative, Ministry of Environment, Fuel
Policy (MEECC General Directorate of Energy)
22nd June 2011,
4
•
Athens
Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities Hellenic
Ministry of Culture
•
Director, Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities
Hellenic Ministry of Culture
Table 3.1:
•
Archaeologist, Large Project Department
•
Archaeologist, Large Project Department
Summary of National Level Meetings
The Scoping Report was sent to ministry representatives with a letter inviting them to
participate in a scoping meeting in Athens. The scoping disclosure meetings represented an
opportunity to provide them with a project update and to identify key areas to address in the
ESIA.
3.2.2 Engagement with NGOs and Other Interested Organisations
The Scoping Report was sent to NGOs based in Athens (acting on a national and international
level) with a letter inviting them to participate in a scoping meeting in Athens.
In
addition to NGOs, representatives from research organisations, universities and other relevant
and interested organisations were sent the document and invited to attend.
Meeting date Stakeholder Groups Invited
No of
and venue
attendees Participants
Stakeholder
• Researcher,
23 June
• WWF Greece
2011, Athens
• Greenpeace Greece
Hellenic Centre
• Hellenic Ornithological Society
of Marine
• Hellenic Society for the Protection
Research
3
of Environment and Cultural
Heritage
National
• MEDITERRANEAN SOS Network
Technical
• Laboratory of Environmental
University of
Research of National Centre of
Scientific Research
‘DEMOKRITOS”
• National Polytechnic University
• Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
• University of Ioannina
• Greek Biotope / Wetland Centre
• Hellenic Centre for Marine
Research - Institute of Inland
Waters
• National and Kapodistrian
University of Athens
Table 3.2:
• Professor,
Summary of NGO & Other Interested Parties Meeting
Athens
• Energy
Campaigner,
MED-SOS
In addition to the Athens meeting, local and regional NGOs were invited to participate in the
local scoping meetings held in Kastoria, Ptolemeida and Koufalia. Organisations invited
included:
•
Callisto – environmental organisation for wildlife and nature;
•
Club of the Friends of the Environment Group (Kastoria);
•
ARCTUROS (Florina, Thessaloniki); and
•
Management Body of Axios Loudias Aliakmonas National Park.
3.2.3 Engagement with Regional Authorities
sent the ESIA Scoping Report in Greek to the authorities with a covering letter inviting them
to face to face meetings. Table 3.3 presents an overview of meetings held for scoping
disclosure engagement.
Meeting date
and venue
th
12 July 2011,
Hotel Nikopolis
Stakeholder Groups Attending
No of
attendees
12
Region of Central Macedonia (Thessaloniki)
• General Directorate of Planning and Environmental
Policy/Decentralized Administration of Macedonia
Thraki, General Director
• Department of Environment and Spatial Planning
Central Macedonia/ Decentralized Administration of
Macedonia Thraki, Director
• Division of Water Central Macedonia/ Decentralized
Administration of Macedonia Thraki, Director
• Department of Environment and Spatial Planning
Central Macedonia/ Decentralized Administration of
Macedonia Thraki, Supervisor
• Department of Environment and Spatial Planning
Central Macedonia/ Decentralized Administration of
Macedonia Thraki, Employee
• Department of Environment and Spatial Planning
Central Macedonia/ Decentralized Administration of
Macedonia Thraki, Employee
• Department of Environment and Spatial Planning
Central Macedonia/ Decentralized Administration of
Macedonia Thraki, Employee
• Management Body of Axios Loudias Aliakmonas
National Park, President
• Management Body of Axios Loudias Aliakmonas
National Park, Forester
• General Directorate of Forestry & Rural Affairs/
Decentralized Administration of Macedonia Thraki,
Employee
• General Directorate of Forestry & Rural Affairs/
Decentralized Administration of Macedonia Thraki,
Director
• General Secretary of Decentralized Administration of
Macedonia Thraki, Counsellor of General Secretary
Meeting date
and venue
th
13 July 2011,
Hotel Ermionio
Table 3.3:
3.2.4
Stakeholder Groups Attending
No of
attendees
19
Region of West Macedonia (Kozani)
• West Macedonia Region, Executive Secretary
• West Macedonia Region, General Directorate
• West Macedonia Region, Deputy Head of the Region
• Environment and Urban Planning Directorate of
Decentralized Administration of West Macedonia,
Director
• Environment and Urban Planning Directorate of
Decentralized Administration of West Macedonia,
Employee
• Environment and Urban Planning Directorate of
Decentralized Administration of West Macedonia,
Employee
• Elected Region of West Macedonia, Office of Head of
the Region, Employee
• Region of West Macedonia, Directorate of Technical
Projects, Director
• Deputy Head of the Region of West Macedonia
• General Director of West Macedonia Region
• Directorate of Environment and Urban Planning,
Region of West Macedonia, Director
• Region of West Macedonia, representative
• Region of West Macedonia, representative
• Hunting Federation of West Macedonia, representative
• Technical Chamber of West Macedonia, Energy Team
member
• Technical Chamber of West Macedonia, Energy Team
member
• Technical Chamber of West Macedonia, Energy Team
member
• Directorate of Forest,Region of West
Macedonia,Employee
• Forestry of Kozani, Employee
Summary of Regional Level Meetings
Municipal and Local Authorities
Municipal and local government stakeholders were invited together to participate in one of
three local scoping meetings organised by TAP. In preparation for the meetings, TAP sent
the Scoping Report to representatives from all 11 municipalities and 39 local communities
crossed by the 2 km corridor, along with a covering letter inviting them to the scoping
meeting in their respective regions.
Table 3.4 presents an overview of meetings held for scoping disclosure engagement.
Meeting
date and
venue
12th July
2011,
Koufalia
No of
attendees Municipality
13
Skydra**
13th July
2011,
Kastoria
17
Kastoria**
Kalivia*
Aspro
Petrea
Plevroma
Rizo*
Loutrochori
Naousa*
Polla Nera
Edessa
Agia Fotini
Ano Grammatiko
Kato Grammatiko
Chalkidona** Nea Mesimbria
Gefira
Valtochori
Parthenio
Mikro Monastiri
Pella**
Agios Loukas
Liparo
Orestida**
14th July
5
2011,
Ptolemaida
Stakeholder Groups Invited
Local Communities
NGOs / Other
Nestorio**
Eordea**
Amyntaio
Kleisoura
Verga
Korrisos
Dispilio *
Poria
Tsakoni
Chiliodentro*
Mesopotamia
Oik.Pallinostounton
Kalochori*
Akontio
Pteria*
Kato Pteria
Lithia
Vasileiados*
Militsa
Ampelokipi*
Agia Kiriaki
Pentavrussos*
Perdikas
Galateia*
Drosero
Variko
Antigonos
• Life project in
Kastoria, Project
Manager
• Arcturos,
Director
• Deputy Mayor of
Ptolemeida
* One representative present; ** Multiple representatives present;
Table 3.4:
Summary of Municipal and Local Authorities Meetings
At the meetings, a presentation of the project and of the scoping report was made prior to opening
the meeting to questions and comments.
Participants were also able to submit follow-up
questions and comments through comments sheets or subsequently send them by post or via
the Project web site.
3.2.5
Engagement with Local Communities
The main
channel
of communication
with
local
communities
was
through
local
authorities.
Heads of Local Communities participated in regional scoping meetings to represent
their constituencies and disseminate information on the project and copies of the ESIA Scoping
Document to individual stakeholders. In preparation for the meetings, TAP sent the ESIA
Scoping Report in Greek to the heads of all local communities located within the 2km corridor
along with a covering letter inviting them to the meetings. It was also requested that the report be
made available at local community centres.
In addition to the full report, a shorter leaflet with information about the ESIA Scoping Process was
distributed to all Heads of Local Communities who attended the meetings. The participants were
asked to place the leaflets in an accessible place in each settlement (i.e. communal
premises, school building).
In total, 39 Heads of Local Communities (HLCs) were invited to participate in the scoping
consultation meetings and 10 HLCs attended. The level of interest and willingness to travel to a
central meeting location, as well as other potential factors (e.g. the time of day and the voluntary
nature of the position as compared to paid employees at the municipal level) contributed to the
relatively poor attendance of local representatives. An extensive stakeholder engagement effort is
planned at the settlement level in the ESIA phase, with open community meetings planned for
every settlement along the base case route.
3.2.6
General Public
Advertisements were placed in newspapers and on radio stations to help inform community
members and other interested parties locally about the Project and the ESIA Scoping process and
to provide information on the mechanism for providing comments. The Scoping Document was
also placed on the Project website with an email address for submitting comments.
4
OUTCOMES OF ENGAGEMENT
4.1
Summary of Outcomes of Phase 3 Scoping Disclosure Engagement
During scoping disclosure
consultation,
issues which were raised during the route
selection phase were reiterated, especially those relating to land acquisition and compensation,
economic development and employment. The impact of the Project on landowners and natural
resources were
also
stressed
as key concerns. The main comments raised during the
meetings were the following:
•
Acceptance of the proposed
Project:
The Project has been widely accepted by
stakeholders due to the expectation that it will bring economic growth and development to
Greece and in particular due to the prospect of employment opportunities for communities
along the route.
•
Support and participation of institutions in the ESIA: A number of representatives from
government departments offered their support and expertise in providing baseline data on
the status of the area and environment to facilitate any impact assessments or better
inform the detailed route planning at a later stage.
•
Concerns regarding compensation: A key concern raised in all scoping meetings at the
municipal and local level was how TAP will compensate landowners – currently, the
land may be fields, pastures or uncultivated land but it has an intrinsic value due to the
fact that the land can be developed at a later stage.
•
Concerns
regarding
land acquisition: Detailed
questions
on procedures for land
acquisition, negotiations with landowners and “what if” scenarios were further key issues
raised in all municipal meetings.
The main concern was how TAP is going to acquire
land if good faith negotiations fail and what will be the legal framework for such
acquisitions, as it is a private project (ie not owned by the Government of Greece).
•
Concerns regarding water abstraction for hydro testing: Directorate
of
Water
emphasized that quantities, sources, procedure and management of water to be used in
the hydro testing of the pipeline should be defined. Additionally, the representatives of
Axios- Loudias-Aliakmonas National Park Management Authority expressed their opinion
that water abstraction should be from and to equal ecosystems. Timing of water
abstraction is critical.
•
Concerns regarding natural resources and forests: Technical details and river crossings
should
be
carefully
Representatives from
designed
the
to minimize
Forest
any damage to
Directorate
riparian vegetation.
of Central Macedonia Decentralized
Administration suggested that camping sites or pipe yards should be avoided in forested
areas. TAP explained that this will be avoided.
•
Compatibility with other infrastructure: One participant asked if the presence of pipeline
in a field is compatible with solar panels. A representative of the Technical Departments
expressed his concern about potentially higher costs of developing underground pipe
networks (e.g water pipes) in the future as they will have to be installed deeper
underground due to the presence of the TAP Project.
•
Options for compressor stations and pollution: One participant in the Kastoria municipality
meeting advised that TAP should consider installing the metering station close to Kastoria
to raise employment opportunities during the project life time. Additionally, there was a
concern expressed about potential air pollution from the compressor station located in
Albania, and the trans-boundary impacts.
•
Employment opportunities for local communities during the construction period: In all
municipal meetings, the issue of employment opportunities for local people during
construction and details on how TAP is going to ensure that the contractor hires from
local communities was key concern.
•
Other benefits in local communities: In Ptolemaida municipality the local perception is
that PPC has not supported local communities and municipalities, despite its long lasting
presence in the area. An idea was expressed that TAP could potentially sponsor some
municipal activities and that the way of ensuring benefits to local communities should be
clearly described and identified early in the project.
•
Regional Frameworks for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development: During the
meetings with the Regional authorities from both Central and West Macedonia, it was
highlighted that Regional Frameworks are currently under revision by the Ministry. The
authorities suggested following up with the Planning Directorate
of the Ministry of
Environment to define appropriate procedures and monitor any developments regarding
regional planning.
5
EVALUATION OF ENGAGEMENT
An evaluation
of
engagement
was carried
out at the end of Scoping
Disclosure
Engagement. A questionnaire was provided to the all attendees, including those at the
national level meetings in Tirana, which included questions on whether the meetings were
viewed to be:
•
free of manipulation, interference, coercion, and intimidation, and
•
conducted on the basis of timely, relevant, understandable and accessible information in a
culturally appropriate format.
In total, 53 participants out of 79 completed the evaluation questionnaire.
The results of the evaluation suggest that the stakeholders were satisfied with the overall
consultation
maximum
process
and that the meetings
number of participants
were organised
effectively
allowing
the
to attend. Additionally, the great majority of stakeholders
felt that the process was managed in way that was free of intimidation and not influenced by
others to be supportive of the project. Nonetheless, the results show that participants feel they
need more information in order to gauge the severity of the impacts of the Project on affected
communities, especially in relation to land based livelihoods.
As the development of the project is still at an early stage, the level of detail that can be
provided to stakeholders regarding the TAP project is currently limited.
It will however
increase in due course with the progress of the activities in subsequent phases.
TAP will continue to monitor and evaluate engagement activities throughout the project to
maximise effectiveness.