Negotiating river ecosystems: Impact assessment and conflict mediation in the cases of hydro-power construction

In this paper we discuss how the legitimacy of the impact assessment process is a key issue in conflict mediation in environmental impact assessment. We contrast two EIA cases in hydro-power generation plans made for the Ii River, Finland in different decades, and evaluate how impact assessment in these cases has contributed to the creation, mediation and resolution of conflicts. We focus on the elements of distributional and procedural justice that made the former EIA process more legitimate and consensual and the latter more conflictual. The results indicate that it is crucial for conflict mediation to include all the values and interests of the parties in the goal-setting process and in the definition and assessment of alternatives. The analysis also indicates that procedural justice is the most important to help the people and groups involved to accept the legitimacy of the impact assessment process: how different parties and their values and interests are recognized, and how participation and distribution of power are organized in an impact assessment process. It is confirmed in this article that SIA may act as a mediator or a forum providing a process through which competing knowledge claims, various values and interests can be discussed and linked to the proposed alternatives and interventions.