Moussa Mbengue: Senegal Environmental Impact Assessment Transparency Criticized

• Moussa Mbengue of ADEPA criticizes Senegal's environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) process for its lack of transparency and quality.
• Key issues include project promoters choosing their own consultants, insufficient public consultation, and inaccessible, voluminous reports.
• Mbengue specifically cited concerns regarding ESIAs for fishmeal and fish oil factory projects.
• Bassirou Diarra of EJF urged journalists to verify environmental data and use the Global Charter for Fisheries Transparency as an investigative guide.
• Diarra suggested scrutinizing authorized fishing vessel lists and related data to improve transparency in the fisheries sector.

The arrangement where project promoters themselves choose the firms or individual consultants from a pre-approved list inherently compromises the independence and transparency of the assessment process.

Moussa Mbengue, the Executive Secretary of the West African Association for the Development of Artisanal Fisheries (ADEPA), has raised significant concerns regarding the transparency and quality of environmental and social impact assessments (ESIAs) in Senegal. During a recent meeting with journalists focused on transparency within the fisheries sector, Mbengue characterized the ESIA process as a "zone of non-transparency," highlighting numerous systemic flaws. His criticisms underscore a broader challenge for *Senegal environmental impact assessment transparency*, particularly in large-scale industrial projects.

Mbengue specifically pointed to issues ranging from how consultants are selected for these *études d'impact environnemental social Sénégal* to the limited involvement of local communities and the inaccessibility of final reports. He argues that these deficiencies collectively undermine the integrity and effectiveness of the assessments, leading to serious questions about their overall quality. The lack of clear oversight and public engagement in these crucial studies presents a significant hurdle for effective *environmental governance Senegal issues*.

A primary concern articulated by Mbengue revolves around the selection of consultants tasked with conducting ESIAs. He noted that project promoters themselves choose the firms or individual consultants from a pre-approved list maintained by the Ministry of Environment and Ecological Transition, specifically through its Directorate of Classified Establishments. This arrangement, according to Mbengue, inherently compromises the independence and transparency of the assessment process, as the entity commissioning the project also dictates who evaluates its potential impacts. This issue is particularly pronounced in projects such as the establishment of *fishmeal factory impact assessment Senegal*.

Furthermore, the process of *public consultation environmental studies Senegal* was identified as another critical weakness. Mbengue observed that affected populations are often engaged too late in the process and their involvement is frequently insufficient. He lamented that communities are typically brought into discussions only at advanced stages, rather than being genuinely integrated from the outset. Compounding these issues is the challenge of report accessibility; Mbengue cited an instance where he encountered a 600-page document during a sharing workshop in Saint-Louis, noting that its sheer volume and technical language render such reports largely incomprehensible and discouraging for the average citizen. He stressed that environmental information must be presented in a manner understandable to those directly impacted.

Given these observations, Moussa Mbengue expressed reservations about the current quality of environmental and social impact assessments as they are presently conducted across Senegal. His remarks suggest a need for a fundamental re-evaluation of the methodologies and oversight mechanisms in place. The perceived lack of rigor and public trust in these assessments could have far-reaching implications for sustainable development and community relations.

Echoing the call for greater accountability, Bassirou Diarra, the Country Manager for the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), emphasized the pivotal role journalists can play in improving transparency within the sector. Diarra urged reporters to move beyond merely noting the presence or absence of transparency, advocating instead for concrete verification of available data, its accessibility, and its currency. He proposed that the ten principles outlined in the Global Charter for Fisheries Transparency could serve as a framework for journalistic inquiry. Specific areas for investigation include the identity, authorization conditions, equipment, target species, and obligations of vessels permitted to fish in Senegalese waters, as well as data related to fleet activities, catches, controls, and management measures. Diarra highlighted lists of authorized fishing vessels as a tangible starting point for such investigations, providing a clear pathway to scrutinize *environmental governance Senegal issues*.

Lawyers and compliance officers advising on projects in Senegal, particularly in sectors like fisheries or large-scale development, should be aware of the heightened scrutiny and potential legal challenges related to the transparency and independence of Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs). This article signals increased regulatory and public risk for projects whose ESIA processes are perceived as lacking independence, public involvement, or report accessibility, necessitating rigorous due diligence and potentially more robust, independently verified assessment methodologies.

Source: Original reporting via French media reports