1. Compensation Integrated into Infrastructure Planning and EIA in Finland Case: Europe E18 Motorway Turku-Vaalimaa Tiina Kähö Finnish Consulting Engineers SITO Ltd FINLAND IAIA07, Seoul, Korea

2. 2 This presentation Background The study The case E18 Motorway Early Conclusions – the way onwards

3. 3 Background Compensation does not exist as such as in other European countries Compensation in often seen as the “last means of mitigation” and “buying off harmful impacts” No tradition and not much research around the subject

4. 4 The Study Financed by The Ministry of the Environment and Ministry of Transport and Communications (2006-2008) In cooperation with SITO Ltd and University of Joensuu Methodologies: -Analysis of case studies -Motorway A20 (Germany) -Land Use Plan in Malmö (Sweden) -E18 Europe motorway Turku-Vaalimaa (Finland) -Interviews, questionnaires -Discussions and seminars -Analysis of Finnish legislation  How do we define Compensation in Finland?  Is it needed and how?  Identifying the need for more research

5. 5 Case: E18 Europe motorway Turku-Vaalimaa Part of the Nordic Triangle ~330 km Planning since 1960’s Construction on the way Ongoing EIA process

6. 6 Environmental challenges faced in the project Social impacts Impacts to the Nature (flying squirrel etc.) Complains, claims for refund Long appeal procedures (EU) Massive Environmental Mitigation Measures (up to 20% of total costs)

7. 7 Compensation in planning processes Traffic system planning Maintenance Construction Road planning process From General plans to detailed plans Regional Land Use Planning Master Plans Detailed Land Use Plans EIA SEA MITIGATION FOLLOW UP Important to integrate compensation into Strategic and Land Use Planning in the early stage Identifying the “no go areas”!

8. 8 Some early conclusions – Where do we go next in Finnish infrastucture planning? Compensation should be integrated into Strategic Traffic and Land Use Planning -The critical compensation “spots” -The “no go areas” -Compensation measures should be planned together with local Land Use planners Different approach needed for Nature Compensation and Social Compensation Focus on good practices -Good planning -A part of Planning toolbox, guidelines for planners -Legislation? -Especially Social Compensation could be seen as “extra” together with mitigation and avoidance  win-win -Social Compensations should be planned together with the local communities

9. 9 Thank you! Tiina Kähö tiina.kaho@sito.fi www.sito.fi More info: http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?conte ntid=202612&lan=en