| Summary: | Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is often portrayed as a policy measure that can mitigate the environmental influence of corporate and government projects through objective, systematic, and value-free assessment. Simultaneously, however, research has also shown that the larger political context in which the EIA is embedded is crucial in determining its influence on decision-making. Moreover, particularly in the case of mega-projects, vested economic interests, rent-seeking, and politics may provide them with a momentum in which the EIA risks becoming a mere formality. To substantiate this point, the article examines the EIA of what is reportedly Asia’s largest dam outside China: the Bakun Hydro-electric Project (BHP) in Malaysia. The study is based on mixed methods, particularly, qualitative research (semi-structured interviews, participatory observation, and archival study) coupled to a survey conducted in 10 resource-poor, indigenous communities in the resettlement area. It is found that close to 90% of the respondents are dissatisfied with their participation in the EIA, while another 80% stated that the authorities had conducted the EIA without complying to the procedures. The findings do not only shed light on the manner in which the EIA was used to legitimize a project that should ultimately have been halted, but are also testimony to the way that the BHP has disenfranchised the rights of indigenous people to meaningfully participate in the EIA. © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
|
|---|