ASTM E3356-22
(Guide)Standard Guide for Stakeholder Engagement on Environmental Risk Management and Climate
Standard Guide for Stakeholder Engagement on Environmental Risk Management and Climate
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Stakeholder engagement, in the climate vulnerability context, most often refers to the meaningful involvement of affected parties in planning or decision-making efforts in order to integrate their knowledge and values with a particular project’s more specialized knowledge and purpose. In turn, stakeholders are often broadly defined as those people who are affected by or can affect a decision and range from the “average” citizen to groups of highly interested or invested decision-makers.
5.2 It is important that stakeholders understand the role they are invited to play in a public engagement program. This will help provide clarity to the process and help avoid misunderstandings. Stakeholder roles may naturally evolve over the period that they are engaged in a public process, and as transition occurs, it is wise to redefine these roles. When an advisory committee or partnership between public agencies is established, it is helpful to develop a charter or other memo of understanding that describes the roles and responsibilities of all involved.
5.3 EPA’s Public Involvement Spectrum (2015)(6) can provide useful tools. Fig. 2 illustrates a spectrum of public involvement options that may be appropriate.
FIG. 2 EPA Public Involvement Spectrum.
Source: U.S. EPA’s Public Involvement Spectrum
SCOPE
1.1 This 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.
1.2 Effective 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).
1.3 An 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/
1.3.1 Improved, 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.
1.3.2 Shared understanding of perspectives, issues, challenges, alternatives, and how these influence the desired or necessary outcomes
1.3.3 Credibility of and predictability for the project plan that comes from transparency
1.3.4 Stakeholder support for the planning process through shared data, ideas, funding, and political support
1.3.5 Strengthened relationships among affected parties for moving forward on the project.
1.3.6 Satisfying any legally-required public notice and participation requirements.
1.3.6.1 Stakeholder 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 descr...
General Information
Standards Content (Sample)
This 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.
Designation: E3356 − 22
Standard Guide for
Stakeholder Engagement on Environmental Risk
1
Management and Climate
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E3356; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope 1.3.3 Credibility of and predictability for the project plan
that comes from transparency
1.1 This guide provides a series of steps to develop and
1.3.4 Stakeholder support for the planning process through
execute an effective stakeholder engagement process for a
shared data, ideas, funding, and political support
broad spectrum of environmental projects including, but not
1.3.5 Strengthened relationships among affected parties for
limited to, site remediation and brownfields development, as
moving forward on the project.
well as local and regional climate resiliency and climate
1.3.6 Satisfying any legally-required public notice and
vulnerability initiatives. This guide does not apply to broad
programmatic initiatives. participation requirements.
1.3.6.1 Stakeholder engagement should not be confused
1.2 Effective stakeholder engagement in site remediation,
with the public participation requirements of the National
brownfields redevelopment, habitat restoration, climate
Environmental PolicyAct codified in 40 CFR §6.203. because
resiliency, climate vulnerability, and flood prevention and
NEPA potentially does not involve stakeholders until later in
control projects requires a process that is based on mutual
the project development process. In addition, NEPA’s public
education, effective communication about the project and its
participation process is not as flexible as that described in this
impacts, identification of the interests that will be affected, and
guide.
open discussion about how to address those interests to the
3) reported additional
1.3.7 Welp and Stoll-Kleeman (2006)(
extent that is possible. The General Accountability Office
benefits of engaging stakeholders and affected parties in
suggests that core principles and strategic approaches enhance
2 decisions regarding natural resources management. These ben-
stakeholder participation (GAO 2006)(1) . The National Oce-
efits include:
anic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reported that
1.3.7.1 Enhanced understanding,
stakeholders developed more robust mitigation measures that
1.3.7.2 Developing new options,
addressed multiple hazards when they integrated climate vari-
ability into vulnerability and risk assessments associated with 1.3.7.3 Decreasing hostility among participants through im-
flooding and other natural disasters in the East Bay area of proved dialog and discussion,
California’s San Francisco Bay. (NOAA, 2021)(2).
1.3.7.4 Enlightening legal policy makers,
1.3.7.5 Producing competent, fair, and optimized solutions,
1.3 An effective stakeholder engagement process (see Fig.
3
1.3.7.6 Accelerating the decision-making process.
1) can create benefits for large projects, including:
1.3.1 Improved, sustainable outcomes, because the final
1.4 Inordertoidentifyprospective stakeholders,ISO26000
project plan builds on local capacity and knowledge and
clause 5.3.2 suggests that an organization should ask the
considers local and regional issues that may require resolution
following questions:
in order to move forward.
1.4.1 To whom does the organization have legal obliga-
1.3.2 Shared understanding of perspectives, issues,
tions?
challenges, alternatives, and how these influence the desired or
1.4.2 Who might be positively or negatively affected by the
necessary outcomes
organization’s decisions, activities, or anticipated outcomes?
1.4.2.1 Mediators and facilitators are expected to be neutral
1
ThisguideisunderthejurisdictionofASTMCommitteeE50onEnvironmental parties.
Assessment, Risk Management and CorrectiveAction and is the direct responsibil-
1.4.3 Who is likely to express opinions and concerns about
ity of Subcommittee E50.05 on Environmental Risk Management.
the decisions and activities of the organization?
Current edition approved Oct. 1, 2022. Published November 2022. DOI:
10.1520/E3356–22
1.4.4 Who has been involved in the past when similar
2
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to a list of references at the end of
concerns needed to be addressed?
this standard.
3
1.4.5 Who can help the organization address specific im-
Adapted from Udall Foundation. Principles for Effective Stakeholder Engage-
ment in Infrastructure Permitting and Review Processes. 2020 p
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.