1. REGIONAL REPORT. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION TAI Regional Meeting in Budapest 26.10.2006 Helen Poltimäe, SEI-Tallinn

2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION CASES Decision-making on policy level strategies, policies, plans, programs, laws 35 cases assessed in 9 countries Decision-making on project level execution of construction works or of other installations, and other interventions in the natural surroundings and landscape 16 cases from 8 countries

3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON POLICY LEVEL

4. CASES

5. AVAILABILITY AT PUBLIC REGISTRIES No registry accessible (6%) Accessible in one public location (23%) Accessible in more than one public location (60%) NA (11%)

6. COMMUNICATION TOOLS USED Public was not notified (9%) Only one communication tool used (20%) Several communication tools used (29%) NA (42%)

7. DURATION OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS No public comment period (11%) Reasonable time (43%) NA (46%)

8.  NO EFFORTS TO CONSULT MARGINALIZED GROUPS No consultations (57%) NA (43%)

9.  INCORPORATION OF PUBLIC INPUT Documents do not discuss public input (34%) Documents mention public input (26%) Documents discuss how public input was incorporated (6%) NA (34%)

10. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON PROJECT LEVEL

11. CASES Energy & mining TransportWater Planning Waste

12. PLANNED AND SYSTEMATIC EFFORTS TO CONSULT PARTIES No consultations (6%) At least one consultation (44%) Planned and systematic efforts (44%) NA (6%)

13. QUALITY OF INFORMATION SUPPORTING PARTICIPATION No relevant information (13%) One to three “elements of quality” (43%) Four or more “elements of quality” (44%)

14.  COMMUNICATION OF INFO TO MARGINALIZED GROUPS No documents or meetings targeted at marginalized groups (62%) NA (38%)

15.  PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN RENEWAL OF THE PROJECT No process for PP established (31%) A process for PP has been established (13%) A process for PP has been established and info actively provided (6%) NA (50%)

16. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

17. CONCLUSIONS Constitutional rights for PP are vague PP functions mainly as an opportunity for the public to comment on draft decisions PP is regarded as expert consultations The communication channel most often used is Internet Lack of transparency

18. RECOMMENDATIONS PP should be made possible at the earliest stage where all opportunities are still open A clear obligation to answer all comments Documents should contain summery of public input Capacity building