Theresa Rodriguez-Moodie | What public participation really means

In Jamaica, public consultations on projects with significant environmental and socio-economic impacts often feel like an afterthought — a box-ticking exercise rather than a genuine effort to involve the public in decision-making.

These meetings typically include a presentation in support of the project, a technical discussion of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), and a tightly moderated, brief Q&A session. Meetings are rarely hybrid, that is, online as well as in person. Public objections may be noted, but they rarely influence outcomes. This kind of performative approach erodes trust and undermines legitimacy.

Public consultations for projects which potentially have environmental impacts are not legally mandated in Jamaica. There are guidelines for EIAs but the decision to require an EIA — and, by extension, any consultation — is at the discretion of the Natural Resources Conservation Authority (NRCA), the statutory body responsible for environmental management in Jamaica. The National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA) serves as its technical and administrative arm.

This means that very often, major developments — like The Pinnacle, a luxury housing project with four 28-storey towers partially within the Montego Bay Marine Park, are approved without an EIA and without meaningful public consultation. Projects that do not require an EIA are subject to little or no public engagemen t— and, when done, are also a box-ticking exercise.

Consider the case of Special Mining Lease 173, which involved a proposal to mine bauxite in the Cockpit Country for up to 30 years. When the first draft EIA was released in December 2020, an unprecedented number of individuals and civil society groups submitted comments — a clear signal of widespread concern. Yet, when the final draft was published later in 2021 on NEPA’s website, many of the serious issues raised in earlier submissions had not been meaningfully addressed, raising questions about the integrity of the consultation process. Then, after the environmental permit was granted, the bauxite company, Noranda Jamaica Bauxite Partners II, now known as Discovery Bauxite Partners, held its first community sensitisation session in Barnstaple, a rural farming area in St Ann. The meeting was marked by a heavy security presence, including eight security guards and two heavily armed policemen — an intimidating atmosphere for what was supposed to be a public information session about the mining plans.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CERTAIN TERMS

Terms like ‘public consultation’, ‘public engagement’, and ‘public participation’ are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same. Consultation typically gathers input from stakeholders, groups or communities after key decisions have already been shaped, while engagement goes further by including a wider range of voices, fostering dialogue and understanding. Participation, however, empowers the public to help shape decisions from the outset. That last one — participation — is essential to a healthy democracy, especially in matters that affect the environment and public health.

WHAT MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT LOOKS LIKE

According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), public participation is “any process that directly engages the public in decision-making and gives full consideration to their input”. Meaningful participation involves a genuine commitment to collaboration, equity, and accountability. It requires:

1. Timely – Engagement must begin before decisions are finslized. Retroactive consultations are insincere.

2. Accessible – Meetings should be at convenient times and venues, materials in easily understood language, and allow for both in-person and online participation.

3. Responsive – Feedback must be acknowledged and addressed. If a suggestion is rejected, an explanation should follow.

4. Understandable – Risks, impacts, and technical details should be communicated clearly, enabling the public to make informed contributions.

5. Context awareness – Who is affected, and how, must inform the process.

6. Stakeholder mapping and dialogue – Engagement should be informed, ongoing, and equitable.

WHY THE ESCAZÚ AGREEMENT MATTERS

This is where the Escazú Agreement becomes critical. As the only legally binding treaty in Latin America and the Caribbean that promotes environmental democracy, it includes three key pillars: access to information, public participation in decision-making, and access to justice in environmental matters. Crucially, the agreement places special emphasis on the rights of vulnerable and marginalised communities. It also mandates protections for environmental defenders — people who often face intimidation, threats, or worse, for speaking up.

Jamaica signed the agreement in 2019 but, five years later, it remains unratified. Without ratification, the agreement is not enforceable.

The Jamaica Environment Trust (JET) is currently implementing a project which is supported by the UNDP-implemented Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme — to build public awareness of the Escazú Agreement and ultimately petition the Government of Jamaica to ratify it. This includes working with environmental defenders, civil society groups and individuals, and the wider public to highlight the value of participation and the urgent need for legal reform.

While recent promises by the Government of Jamaica to ratify the agreement — tied to amendments to the Access to Information Act — signal some progress, not having a clear timeline means the gap between commitment and action continues to grow.

The need for governance reform — specifically, how the Jamaican state engages its citizens in environmental and development decision-making — is not just a call being made by civil society. It is acknowledged as an issue in Jamaica’s own national development blueprint - Vision 2030. Specifically, the Governance Sector Plan under Vision 2030 highlights that citizen participation remains low, in part due to narrowly defined mechanisms for public involvement. To address this, the plan recommends several actions, including effectively infusing participatory processes into government operations, the national policy framework, and investment processes. This calls for a shift from consultation-as-performance to genuine collaboration in shaping Jamaica’s future.

NATIONAL POLICY ON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Ratifying the Escazú Agreement is an essential step, but it must be part of a broader shift. Jamaica needs a national policy on public participation in environmental and development decision-making. That policy should include:

- Clear, enforceable standards for participation across sectors.

- Minimum expectations for planning, documenting, and responding to consultations.

- Transparent publication of consultation outcomes — what was heard, and how it was used.

- Monitoring tools to track compliance and effectiveness.

- Training for both public officials and civil society groups and concerned individuals.

PARTICIPATION BUILDS RESILIENCE

Ultimately, when done right, public participation is not only fair, but also strategic. In an era of deepening climate crises, economic shocks, and social unrest, governments should not act alone. Community voices bring local knowledge, creativity, and legitimacy to the table, leading to, in most cases, better decisions.

Ratifying the Escazú Agreement would also bring Jamaica closer to fulfilling our own Vision 2030, which promises a Jamaica where citizens are empowered, governance is effective, and the environment is protected. Ratifying the agreement -- alongside developing a national policy for public participation — is the logical next step in creating a future that’s inclusive, just, and resilient.

Theresa Rodriguez-Moodie, PhD, is an environmental scientist and chief executive officer of Jamaica Environment Trust. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com