Importance of Public Acceptability for Assessing the Best Practicable Environmental Options (BPEO)
The British Government’s Perspective
The British government’s decision to approve the Royal Dutch Shell company plan to sink the Brent Spar did not take into account public acceptability. Even though the British government, through its Energy Minister was keen on ensuring that the Royal Dutch Shell provided research on the environmental impact the plan would result in, there lacked adequate evaluation of the issue. This is because the government did not conduct any independent research on its own and took Shell’s decision as the sole truth (Passow, 1997). While additional analysis after Greenspace came into play revealed that Shell’s assessment was accurate, there still lacked public acceptability (Passow, 1997). The continued disapproval of plans to sink the Brent Spar despite research showing it would have little to no environmental effects illustrates the critical role public acceptability plays in assessing the best practicable environmental options (Passow, 1997).
After the government decided to consider incorporating public acceptability, it became clear that the public was against the plan, whether it had any environmental effects or not. This is because there continued to exist conflicting reports on the impact sinking the Brent Spar would have on the seabed (Passow, 1997). Additionally, towing the Brent Spar to shore and have it dismantled there sounded like the most viable option according to the public. This is because allowing Shell to sink the Brent Spar would set a bad example that would encourage other oil companies to sink their storage units in the ocean once they were no longer viable (Passow, 1997). Based on the backlash the British government received, it is evident that public acceptability is a critical aspect for assessing the best practicable environmental options.
Reference
Passow, S. (1997). Sunk Cost: The Plan to Dump the Brent Spar. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.