begin header

#sub-chapters:

Introduction; The questions; The answers; Methodology to follow (For each question/answer)

end header

It was important to gather a vast set of standard-questions, either anticipating questions that could arise during the EIA review (in the review commission and in the public consultation), or questions that would allow the explanation of concepts, the exposition of points of view and stances (GO or NGO), etc. Following this line of thought, it was desirable to gather several answers per question whenever possible, so as to show different points of view, either complementary or contradictory .

This document contains a brief guideline for the question / answer compilation work. Contribution could be focused on one or more of the following aspects:

2. The questions:

Suggesting more questions, (from the collaborator's professional point of view, and also regarding different audiences of the EIA review process ); Criticizing the wording of questions they disagree (giving options or corrections); Suggesting improvements in the question grouping structure (offering new categories and sub-categories of questions, moving questions into another category); Within each sub-category, suggesting a question hierarchy, for instance, from general to particular, from comprehensive to specific (or also suggest other questions to anyone who wants to dig deeper into a part of the theme).

3. The answers:

Providing answers (either on a personal basis or as an entity); Identifying specific parts of the EIA related with each question; Suggesting support documents to each answer (articles, books or books' chapters, regulations, photographs, videos, etc.); Identifying entities that have responsibility in each answer's theme; Suggesting names of experts and decision makers as possible source for answering the questions.

"1. Indicate, on a 1 to 3 scale, the technical difficulty degree of each question, in your opinion. Identify the category or sub-category to which the answer should belong to. Indicate which other questions should be previous and posterior to it Suggest names (1 a 3) of other possible answer sources.

2. Identify answer point of view, possibly rewording the question , that is, for instance (standard cases):

a) private, particular interests

b) common-good, collective interests

c) consultant responsible for the EIA

d) project developer / promoter

e) central and regional administration (MA, DGA, DRARN, etc.)

f) municipal administration (Municipalities, Juntas de Freguesia)

g) NGO’s

h) independent expert / scientist (e.g. Universities, etc.)

3. Choose the kind of answer, i.e;

a) answer based on the EIA (summary and specific index of which pages/paragraphs/people);

b) answer with critical opinion or stance, on a private basis or as an entity (in this case, indicate which position within the entity);

c) conditional technical answers, not implying EIA knowledge (ex. "if the situation is this and that, then we should consider this and that and there may be these and those consequences"), and with advice as to which questions should be made as to clarify a given theme ;

d) strictly technical or processual answer with background knowledge: description of the present situation (state of things), explanation of concepts, models, methodologies, norms, processes, etc.

4. Choose the answer format, i.e.:

a) in writing (some paragraphs with answer summary, and possible enclosed extended document, photos, videos, recommended bibliography, etc.);

b) video interview, or voice recording;

c) fraction of the EIA or Non-Technical Sumary that contains the answer;

d) list of sub-questions to ask so as to reach the desired answer.

5. Each answer must always have an identified main author (the selected standard-questions in the system are my responsibility). All authors had the opportunity to revise their questions before the system was put to use."