182. An assessment of the environmental impact of business ventures and projects demands
transparent political processes involving a free exchange of views. On the other hand, the forms of
corruption which conceal the actual environmental impact of a given project, in exchange for favours,
usuallyproduce specious agreementswhich fail to inform adequatelyand to allow for full debate.
183. Environmental impact assessment should not come after the drawing up of a business
proposition or the proposal of a particular policy, plan or programme. It should be part of the process
from the beginning, and be carried out in a way which is interdisciplinary, transparent and free of all
economic or political pressure. It should be linked to a study of working conditions and possible
effects on people’s physical and mental health, on the local economy and on public safety. Economic
returns can thus be forecast more realistically, taking into account potential scenarios and the eventual
need for further investment to correct possible undesired effects. A consensus should always be
reached between the different stakeholders, who can offer a variety of approaches, solutions and
alternatives. The local population should have a special place at the table; they are concerned about
their own future and that of their children, and can consider goals transcending immediate economic
interest. We need to stop thinking in terms of “interventions” to save the environment in favour of
policies developed and debated by all interested parties. The participation of the latter also entails
being fully informed about such projects and their different risks and possibilities; this includes not just
preliminary decisions but also various follow-up activities and continued monitoring. Honesty and
truth are needed in scientific and political discussions; these should not be limited to the issue of
whether or not aparticular project is permitted by law.
184. In the face of possible risks to the environment whichmay affect the common good now and in
the future, decisions must be made “based on a comparison of the risks and benefits foreseen for the
various possible alternatives”.
131
This is especially the casewhen aprojectmay lead to a greater use of
natural resources, higher levels of emission or discharge, an increaseof refuse, or significant changes to
the landscape, the habitats of protected species or public spaces. Some projects, if insufficiently
studied, can profoundly affect the quality of life of an area due to very different factors such as
unforeseen noise pollution, the shrinkingof visual horizons, the loss of cultural values, or the effects of
131
PONTIFICALCOUNCILFOR JUSTICEANDPEACE,
Compendiumof the SocialDoctrineof theChurch
, 469.
