Standard Guide for Stakeholder Engagement on Environmental Risk Management and Climate

Available format(s)

Hardcopy , PDF

Language(s)

English

Published date

17-11-2022

Publisher

American Society for Testing and Materials

1.1This guide provides a series of steps to develop and execute an effective stakeholder engagement process for a broad spectrum of environmental projects including, but not limited to, site remediation and brownfields development, as well as local and regional climate resiliency and climate vulnerability initiatives. This guide does not apply to broad programmatic initiatives.

1.2Effective stakeholder engagement in site remediation, brownfields redevelopment, habitat restoration, climate resiliency, climate vulnerability, and flood prevention and control projects requires a process that is based on mutual education, effective communication about the project and its impacts, identification of the interests that will be affected, and open discussion about how to address those interests to the extent that is possible. The General Accountability Office suggests that core principles and strategic approaches enhance stakeholder participation (GAO 2006)(1)2. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported that stakeholders developed more robust mitigation measures that addressed multiple hazards when they integrated climate variability into vulnerability and risk assessments associated with flooding and other natural disasters in the East Bay area of California’s San Francisco Bay. (NOAA, 2021)(2).

1.3An effective stakeholder engagement process (see Fig. 1) can create benefits for large projects, including:3

FIG. 1 Stakeholder Engagement Process

Source: Eurofleets https://www.eurofleets.eu/stakeholders/

1.3.1Improved, sustainable outcomes, because the final project plan builds on local capacity and knowledge and considers local and regional issues that may require resolution in order to move forward.

1.3.2Shared understanding of perspectives, issues, challenges, alternatives, and how these influence the desired or necessary outcomes

1.3.3Credibility of and predictability for the project plan that comes from transparency

1.3.4Stakeholder support for the planning process through shared data, ideas, funding, and political support

1.3.5Strengthened relationships among affected parties for moving forward on the project.

1.3.6 Satisfying any legally-required public notice and participation requirements.

1.3.6.1Stakeholder engagement should not be confused with the public participation requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act codified in 40 CFR §6.203. because NEPA potentially does not involve stakeholders until later in the project development process. In addition, NEPA's public participation process is not as flexible as that described in this guide.

1.3.7Welp and Stoll-Kleeman (2006)(3) reported additional benefits of engaging stakeholders and affected parties in decisions regarding natural resources management. These benefits include:

1.3.7.1Enhanced understanding,

1.3.7.2Developing new options,

1.3.7.3Decreasing hostility among participants through improved dialog and discussion,

1.3.7.4Enlightening legal policy makers,

1.3.7.5Producing competent, fair, and optimized solutions,

1.3.7.6Accelerating the decision-making process.

1.4In order to identify prospective stakeholders, ISO 26000 clause 5.3.2 suggests that an organization should ask the following questions:

1.4.1To whom does the organization have legal obligations?

1.4.2Who might be positively or negatively affected by the organization’s decisions, activities, or anticipated outcomes?

1.4.2.1Mediators and facilitators are expected to be neutral parties.

1.4.3Who is likely to express opinions and concerns about the decisions and activities of the organization?

1.4.4Who has been involved in the past when similar concerns needed to be addressed?

1.4.5Who can help the organization address specific impacts?

1.4.6Who can affect the organization’s ability to meet its responsibilities?

1.4.7Who are the affected parties that would be disadvantaged if excluded from the engagement?

1.5Stakeholder prioritization criteria

1.5.1Identification of criteria to prioritize stakeholder engagement may be useful for some projects (Sharpe, 2021)(4). These criteria include, but are not limited to:

1.5.1.1Level of interest,

1.5.1.2Proximity, including nearby property owners,,

1.5.1.3Fairness,

1.5.1.4Magnitude of impact,

1.5.1.5Underrepresented and underserved populations,

1.5.1.6Probability of impact,

1.5.1.7Level of community influence,

1.5.1.8 Cost, and

1.5.1.9Time to implement a proposed project plan.

1.6This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

Committee	E 50
DocumentType	Guide
Pages	14
PublisherName	American Society for Testing and Materials
Status	Current

ASTM E 2348 : 2024	Standard Guide for Framework for a Consensus-based Environmental Decision-making Process
ASTM E 2348 : 2017	Standard Guide for Framework for a Consensus-based Environmental Decision-making Process