Impacts of Community Science to Environmental Monitoring and Enforcement: Case Studies of Mining Pollution in Thailand

Ashijya Otwong

Document Type

Dissertation

Publication Date

2022

Abstract

Science is important in environmental regulatory systems for providing an authoritative source of environmental information and bringing legitimacy to decision-making processes. Public participation in scientific research (PPSR) can make science more transparent, accountable and responsive. This thesis analyzes the development of community science as one of the PPSR models and how this concept has been applied in Thailand through two case studies of mining pollution. It focuses on the implications of community science for environmental regulatory enforcement and addressing the legal barriers to more widespread use of community science. In the case studies, ineffective compliance assurance mechanisms and limited space for community engagement in the government’s typical regulatory mechanisms pushed the affected community to initiate their own community science approaches. The case studies revealed that the degrees of public participation in scientific studies/environmental monitoring led by the government or government-hired experts are lower than the degree in the research collaboratively done by the community scientists and NGOs/public-interest scholars. The results of the studies between the former and the latter also differed considerably. The selection process for hiring professional scientists to conduct either government-led scientific studies or studies of non-profit groups is as significant as the level of public participation.

Communities faced challenges at all stages, including information collection, availability and accessibility of related information, community scientists’ ability to identify types of information they needed, and how to organize the information they obtained from authorities. One legal barrier to the effective use of community science, for example, is the lack of public participation mechanisms in mining-related project designs. Local communities thus have limited channels for gathering or providing information into the process, and must heavily rely on external sources of information, particularly from NGOs and activists. In one of the case studies, the mining company brought a number of SLAPP lawsuits to try to block community-based data collection and dissemination. Although community scientists found significant flaws in the professional experts’ studies relied on by the governments, use of the community-generated data is limited due to the existing enforcement system where the government officials have a high level of discretionary authority. Community scientists thus had to rely on alternative grievance mechanisms and court, rather than conventional legal mechanisms, in order to demand stronger enforcement actions.

The study proposes six key recommendations to enable more effective use of community science and improve quality of environmental compliance and enforcement: (1) incorporation of the human right to science in the Thai Constitution as a foundational stepping stone to establish the concept of community science in the legal system; (2) passage of a law that requires the government to clarify the ownership of scientific information that involves community members in the research process; (3) adoption of guidelines on the legal standard for scientific information proposed in environmental decision-making process and how a community science project will achieve the information quality requirements; (4) increase the roles of research institutions in providing technical supports to affected communities; (5) pass an Anti-SLAAP bill; and (6) take steps to encourage community involvement in compliance monitoring, enforcement, and implementation of court judgement.

Link to Full Text
COinS