Section 2: Public Involvement and Experience Sharing in Areas of Concern (Annex 2)

Observation

Public involvement during the implementation phase of Remedial Action Plans enables community engagement and participation in remediation. Although new models of community collaboration are being developed and applied, the fiscal restraints of governments have reduced funding to some local committees, which has particularly affected the ability of community groups to enhance their expertise through the sharing of experiences. The Commission's 2001 Biennial Forum provided an example of the value of exchanging lessons learned about community-based restoration. It also showed that it can be valuable for participants in Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes to interact with their counterparts to the east in Quebec, who are facing similar challenges downstream in the St. Lawrence River.

Discussion

Public involvement and education facilitates a positive change in the culture and values of people, businesses and organizations in Areas of Concern. It is a long-range change toward better awareness and improved stewardship at the individual level. By changing the culture and values of those living in the community, a new set of sustainable behaviors can emerge. This can be one of the most subtle but powerful effects of broad public participation.

The Commission believes an active and engaged group of local citizens is critical to making progress in implementing a Remedial Action Plan and maintaining the viability of the process.¹ For this to emerge, communities need to mobilize leaders who can focus actions and activities toward a shared vision and common goals. Local advisory committees provide a mechanism for concerned citizens to become informed and, at the same time, provide government agencies a structured approach to consultation. Bringing together representatives from different committees for the transfer of information among Areas of Concern enables the cross-fertilization of ideas and approaches. It also provides a mechanism for the governments to work with them on shared topics such as new strategies.

During the 2001 Public Forum, the Commission heard that funding reductions for some local public committees both in Canada and the United States were purportedly impeding the ability of the public to play its role in the remediation of Areas of Concern. Some public committees in Areas of Concern are fully supported; others are not. The Commission recognizes that funding is not the only determinant of effective public involvement. For example, the groups need to have a legitimate role that is respected, and the planning horizon needs to be sufficiently tight to maintain momentum. Funding is required, however, to enable community members to interact across the basin so that they may share successes, challenges and solutions for sustaining community capacity through the period of Remedial Action Plan implementation.

A workshop held at the 2001 Public Forum enabled several Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River communities to learn about each other's programs and progress. Representatives from various groups could benefit from continued discussions on issues of mutual interest.