genuinely getting people involved

[Bonnie Nixon Gardiner <b.nixon@pamsf.com>]

Hi folks, how are you today?  One comment on the process. I am working all day and am not getting home till night on the west coast. It would be great if you could let us post until midnight so that my comments could be included in the summary. I would prefer to wait on the summary a bit and have it be more inclusive for all of us on the west coast. 

As a public outreach specialist I have a lot of thoughts and concerns about thorough and meaningful participation on the part of the public, the public that is genuinely impacted and interested. Since the early 70s when many of the environmental laws got introduced, we got comfortable with notification and right to know. Quite frankly, I do not believe that many agencies, project proponents, political leaders and corporations have ever gotten beyond the review and comment mentality that exists for so many processes that are described as public participation.  Meaningful participation means that we take the time and money to talk to people in their terms and language and help them understand the same tradeoffs we are being asked to consider.  

There is nothing easy about it, it requires patience and it sometimes means the project takes a lot more time. To listen and demonstrate responsiveness, those are the real keys.  We need to be more sophisticated in our ability to use and translate technical terms and tools into laymans language.  In my experience, I have found the EPA and most branches of the federal government including the military, DOE, NRC, DOT and DOI produce products and presentations that are so focused on legal protection and scientific accuracy that they totally miss the human element.  Documents and presenters often come across as cumbersome, patronizing, distancing and alienating to the average person.  

We as public participation professionals have an obligation to help people understand their role, the potential impacts to them, how to dialogue and debate issues and more importantly, how to weigh and measure tradeoffs and community priorities.  

To be even more concrete, it is important that we meet with key stakeholders early on, help define and clarify roles, clearly define the decision making process, agree on operational norms and communication processes and be up front with each other on negotiables and non-negotiables. Everyone needs to start with and be clear about their boundaries.  Once trust is built and an environment of mutual respect is created - minds open, opportunites present themselves and people work together to find innovative solutions.

EPA can better notify the public and the public can better notify EPA by going to where the people are.  Don't expect them to come to you.  They will only come when they are unhappy and that is never the basis of a good long term relationship.  And like it or not, we are in long term relationships with most of our stakeholders. The art of war is a good book to read to remind ourselves of basic human behavior and instincts when we feel threatened or have the need to protect or defend ourselves, our families and our property.  It also provides some basic information and strategy on relationship management. 

Environmental Justice:  I have worked on projects in poor minority communities and have had direct experience with them not wanting to participate because of other more pressing issues. Some successful efforts have included combining the meeting with other social interest topics, reaching out to churches,hospitals and city centers and locations that are frequented by underrepresented to disenfranchised publics. 

I have also had success with participation by raffling off turkeys or other items of necessity. Finally, taking the time to listen, going to living rooms, knocking on front doors and calling them on the phone has been the most successful methods I have used.  

I also think it is extremely important to recognize and respect the different cultural needs, methods of communication and sensitivities.  Some cultures such as the hispanic communities may use the radio as a means of communicating while other cultures have sacred tribunals or meetings with the elders.  In working with some asian cultures, I have found that symbols are extremely important and that simple written messages and presentations can often be insulting.  

As it relates to environmental justice, one of the most important things we can do is to recognize that people and groups will more likely associate and identify with communicators that are closely aligned with their cultural, ethical and religious beliefs and backrounds.  Like seeks like and generally people will feel more comfortable and willing to share with people they believe they have something in common with.  For that reason, don't send a white woman into a Chinese Chamber of Commerce or a baptist church. She may be bold or believe she is equal, but she is not likely to deliver the goods.  Going back to the basics of relationship management. 

In the last few years my colleagues and I have had the opportunity to work with EPA on its environmental justice requirements for major transportation projects. The science of determining disproportionate impacts is extremely inexact particularly as it relates to corridors or broad geographic areas rather than specific sites.  We created some innovative approaches that were rational and intelligent.  I think that the general and accepted approach to EJ is to honor the spirit of the Executive Order, to try to involve people by notifying them.  Whether we really give them a role in key decisions that will affect their lives is still up for debate.  I am not sure we take the time and energy to help people undertand and participate in the science and more importantly recognize the art of communicating the science.  

Sorry this is so long, got on a roll.  Have a nice night.  

Bonnie