Search Results

This chapter provides an overview of freedom of information as it is practiced in Scotland, with particular emphasis on access to environmental information. Before the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA) was enacted, people already had certain statutory entitlements to environmental information. Comprehensive rights were delivered by the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs) first introduced in 1992 and amended in 1998 which gave the public the right to ask for information which ‘relates to the environment’. Access to environmental regime advanced still further when the UK signed the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making, and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (the Aarhus Convention) in 1998. There are three ‘pillars’ which form the key principles behind the Aarhus Convention: the rights of access to information, public participation in decision-making, and access to justice in environmental matters. In Scotland, the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 give the public rights of access to environmental information held by public authorities. All of the exceptions under the EIRs are qualified by being subject to a ‘public interest’ test.

This chapter focuses on the benefits and costs associated with the right of the public and stakeholders to participate in the decision-making process and the soundness of rationale of establishing public and stakeholder consultation in water management. It discusses the Aarhus Convention which has established the right of the public to environmental information.

This chapter starts by reviewing and elaborating the contributions of environmental circumstances to personal meanings. It then gives major attention to approaches that can be used to alter the nature of environmental sources of information. In particular, it focuses on methods for acquiring concrete resources, removing service barriers, and increasing clients' participation in the planning and delivery of services. Special emphasis is given to work with people who are the most vulnerable to psychosocial problems because of the complex nature of life in poverty-ridden, inner-city neighborhoods. Case examples and practical guidelines are offered to assist in the undertaking of this complicated person-environment work. For example, advice is given on how to avoid falling into common defensive patterns of stereotyping, blaming the client, focusing too narrowly on the dangers and deprivations in their clients' lives, or rushing into rescue clients from themselves and their deteriorating communities.

This chapter provides an overview of freedom of information (FOI) as it is practiced in Scotland, with particular emphasis on the issue of charging for information being requested. In Scotland, FOI laws and regulations which mandate up-front administrative fees or prohibitive charges for information can deter requests or exclude those with no capacity to pay. The fee-charging structure under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA) is strongly regulated and reasonably generous to the applicant. This chapter considers the approach used to charge for environmental information under the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs). It also discusses issues such as whether public authorities are entitled to charge, whether an authority has informed the public of its charging regime, or whether the charge is reasonable or excessive. Finally, it assesses the future of charging under FOISA, paying special attention to ‘deterrence’ charging, the likelihood that the cost of responding to a request for information would breach the upper limit, and the capacity to aggregate requests.

Occupational and environmental health covers a wide spectrum and presents many challenges and opportunities. This chapter describes categories of occupational and environmental hazards, the nature and magnitude of problems, the contexts in which occupational and environmental health problems occur, and the prevention of occupational and environmental disease and injury. In addition, the chapter covers the changing nature of work and the workforce, evolving roles of government, liability, climate change, new directions for research, and economic globalization. It also discusses additional challenges for low- and middle-income countries. A final section of the chapter describes disciplines and careers in occupational and environmental health sciences and basic sources of information.

This chapter provides an overview of how the Scottish Information Commissioner evaluates the country’s public authorities in terms of dealing with complaints from applicants requesting for information. The Commissioner may assess whether a public authority is following good practice; if not, he may give it a practice recommendation. An authority that fails to comply with the provisions in the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), such as not responding on time or failing to inform the applicant of the right of appeal, may be cited in the decision notice, even if the authority is not required to take any action in respect of that specific failure. In such cases, the Commissioner may conduct ‘technical investigations’ and require the authority to remedy the failing by complying with the request for information. The revised Code of Practice includes good practice guidance on both FOISA and the Environmental Information Regulations. This chapter discusses the Commissioner’s programme of practice assessments, or performance audits, of public authorities.

This chapter provides an overview of freedom of information as it is practiced in Scotland, with particular emphasis on the application of contents-based exemptions and exceptions. Many of the provisions in the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA) and the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs) which allow information to be withheld require authorities to demonstrate not only that the consequences of information being released into the public domain would be harmful, but that the nature and extent of the harm would be substantial. The question ‘Where is the harm in disclosure?’ has been at the core of many decisions. This chapter considers contents-based FOISA exemptions that apply only where disclosure ‘would or would be likely to prejudice substantially’. It also discusses the ‘harm’ test and the degree of harm that must be weighed against the likelihood of its occurrence, along with harm-based exemption in relation to ‘prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs’.