1) If presentations or discussion in your session touched on the conference theme, key messages on "Misinformation, Disinformation, Communication, & Impact Assessment":

a. Key challenges or emerging trends related to misinformation and disinformation identified in your session*:
n contested project settings, competing expert reports are frequently seen as biased or selectively framed, leading to an erosion of credibility even where the underlying technical analysis is robust.
A key challenge identified is the persistence of “expert battles”, in which opposing parties rely on separate studies that reinforce pre-existing positions rather than converge on shared understanding. This dynamic contributes to confusion, polarisation, and the proliferation of competing narratives about project impacts.
An emerging trend is the recognition that credibility alone is insufficient: technical quality must be complemented by process legitimacy, including transparency, inclusiveness, and stakeholder participation in knowledge generation.

b. Practical strategies or tips discussed for credible and effective communication in impact assessment*:
A central strategy discussed was the use of collaborative processes—particularly joint fact-finding (JFF)—to co-produce knowledge that is both technically sound and socially accepted.
Key practical takeaways included:

Engaging stakeholders early in defining research questions, scope, and methodologies
Joint selection of experts and agreement on terms of reference
Involving stakeholders in data collection, validation, and interpretation, including participatory monitoring and fieldwork
Communicating findings in accessible formats, including translation into non-technical language

Participants emphasised that using collaborative approaches at different scales—from community-based monitoring to large expert panels—can help build shared ownership of information and reduce mistrust.

c. Please state any related issues you want to capture not covered by the above questions*:
The session emphasised that expert reports may be technically robust yet lack legitimacy if they are not developed through inclusive and participatory processes.
A key insight was that process design is central: how knowledge is produced shapes whether it is trusted, understood, and used. Even high-quality evidence may be dismissed if stakeholders feel excluded from the process.

2) Messages/lessons from your session for impact assessment overall?*
Impact assessment is not only about generating accurate information, but about building a shared understanding of facts among stakeholders
Adversarial expert dynamics undermine effective decision-making, even when supported by strong technical evidence
Collaborative approaches such as joint fact-finding can transform technical analysis from a source of conflict into a tool for dialogue and agreement
The timing of engagement matters: applying such approaches earlier in the project cycle can help prevent escalation and conflict
Effective impact assessment requires integrating technical rigour with participatory and communicative processes

3) What recommendations would you offer to impact assessment practitioners based on the discussions in your session?*
Move beyond commissioning standalone expert studies towards designing inclusive knowledge-generation processes
- Invest in process design: clearly define scope, roles, expectations, and limitations from the outset
- Ensure joint ownership of key decisions, including expert selection and methodology
- Build capacity for participation by supporting less technically experienced stakeholders
- Prioritise clarity and accessibility of findings, including the use of plain language and visual tools
- Recognise that joint processes are not a “quick fix” and require time, facilitation, and trust-building

4) What recommendations emerged from your session for policymakers and other key stakeholders? (Please specify the type of stakeholder, where possible.)*
Policymakers and regulators:
- Create incentives and frameworks for participatory and collaborative approaches in impact assessment
- Encourage or require early stakeholder engagement in knowledge generation, not only consultation on final reports
- Provide guidance on minimum standards for transparency and inclusiveness in expert processes

Development finance institutions:
- Promote the use of joint fact-finding in dispute resolution and project preparation
- Allocate resources for facilitation, stakeholder participation, and capacity-building

Project developers and operators:
- Engage proactively in collaborative processes to build trust and reduce the risk of conflict
- Recognise that legitimacy of studies is as important as technical quality

1) If presentations or discussion in your session touched on the conference theme, key messages on "Misinformation, Disinformation, Communication, & Impact Assessment":

a. Key challenges or emerging trends related to misinformation and disinformation identified in your session*:
We raised the following points: The important role played by the clear, transparent and informative engagement of the traditional communities; misinformation can be a powerful tool to manipulate EIA process and harm cumulative impact assessment process and monitoring.

b. Practical strategies or tips discussed for credible and effective communication in impact assessment*:
We need to provide a clear understanding of cumulative impacts; define clear roles and responsabilities; engage the communities early and over all project life cycle.

c. Please state any related issues you want to capture not covered by the above questions*:
—

2) Messages/lessons from your session for impact assessment overall?*
Show lessons learned in the Global South revealed that: (i) we are evolving and learning in implementing CEA in the Global South; (ii) serious matters of institutional fragmentation arises; (iii) the importance of legal recognition of community-led impact and monitoring assessments.

3) What recommendations would you offer to impact assessment practitioners based on the discussions in your session?*
Provide guidance and lessons learned even in a emerging context practice is highly valuable to reflect next steps and improvements.

4) What recommendations emerged from your session for policymakers and other key stakeholders? (Please specify the type of stakeholder, where possible.)*
Elaborate legislations and enforcements that consider a proper cumulative impact assessment definition and enforcements mechanisms

1) If presentations or discussion in your session touched on the conference theme, key messages on "Misinformation, Disinformation, Communication, & Impact Assessment":

a. Key challenges or emerging trends related to misinformation and disinformation identified in your session*:
—

b. Practical strategies or tips discussed for credible and effective communication in impact assessment*:
—

c. Please state any related issues you want to capture not covered by the above questions*:
—

2) Messages/lessons from your session for impact assessment overall?*
Litigation is an important part of the EIA process.

3) What recommendations would you offer to impact assessment practitioners based on the discussions in your session?*
—

4) What recommendations emerged from your session for policymakers and other key stakeholders? (Please specify the type of stakeholder, where possible.)*
—

1) If presentations or discussion in your session touched on the conference theme, key messages on "Misinformation, Disinformation, Communication, & Impact Assessment":

a. Key challenges or emerging trends related to misinformation and disinformation identified in your session*:
Communication challenges and strong narratives around nuclear that are not founded in facts but in feelings.

b. Practical strategies or tips discussed for credible and effective communication in impact assessment*:
1- early engagement and capacity building
2- listen first and don’t lead conversations with facts but connect on connection and feelings
3- be open and bring accessible information

c. Please state any related issues you want to capture not covered by the above questions*:
None

2) Messages/lessons from your session for impact assessment overall?*
Integrated approach between licensing and impact assessment.

3) What recommendations would you offer to impact assessment practitioners based on the discussions in your session?*
Misinformation spreading based on fear cannot be addressed through facts and information. Connection and relationship helps to compat misinformation.

4) What recommendations emerged from your session for policymakers and other key stakeholders? (Please specify the type of stakeholder, where possible.)*
N/a

1) If presentations or discussion in your session touched on the conference theme, key messages on "Misinformation, Disinformation, Communication, & Impact Assessment":

a. Key challenges or emerging trends related to misinformation and disinformation identified in your session*:
Need for clear, informed governance systems for the benefit of IA and CEA that affected people can trust.
Observation of regulatory fear of transparent public engagement.

b. Practical strategies or tips discussed for credible and effective communication in impact assessment*:
Restructure governance systems and public engagement approaches to build trust in decision making processes. Create value-centric regulatory instruments where CEA can be accountably conducted.

c. Please state any related issues you want to capture not covered by the above questions*:
—

2) Messages/lessons from your session for impact assessment overall?*
Trust in IA governance is failing in many jurisdictions. IA without trust is ineffective and needs to be addressed with priority.

3) What recommendations would you offer to impact assessment practitioners based on the discussions in your session?*
More focus needed on developing and promoting governance systems that can be effective in addressing current and future issues. Building trust in governance is critical.

4) What recommendations emerged from your session for policymakers and other key stakeholders? (Please specify the type of stakeholder, where possible.)*
Restructure governance systems with IA and CEAM as primary function.

1) If presentations or discussion in your session touched on the conference theme, key messages on "Misinformation, Disinformation, Communication, & Impact Assessment":

a. Key challenges or emerging trends related to misinformation and disinformation identified in your session*:
The session focused on challenges and recommendations for spreading the deliberative approach to impact assessment and decision-making. The key identified challenges are:
- CHECK-APPROACH: proponents often approach stakeholder engagement as a checkbox to be ticked, without extra efforts to make it deliberative.
- LEGISLATION: if deliberation is not recognised by the law, its implementation is more difficult and it adds onto the LACK of WILLINGNESS of proponents and regulators, which often forget the risk (and financial risk) of not doing proper stakeholder engagement.
- TIME AND BUDGET: deliberative processes (and stakeholder engagement in general) sometimes require a long time, especially when engaging certain communities (e.g. indigenous peoples, fishermen etc.).
- CULTURAL and LANGUAGE BARRIERS: in some contexts, there may be barriers due to religion, gender etc. or due to linguistical barriers.
- FATIGUE: many people do not have time for long conversations, and for getting informed on technical content. The process may be overwhelming for them. They do if they're interested, and this is linked to proper stakeholder mapping.
- DISTRUST: people can refuse to engage, due to communication and trust issues and have a negative attitude towards IA and deliberative approaches. The fact that they are never going to be 100% happy is discouraging.
- FRAGMENTATION of approaches and LACK OF CAPACITY of IA practictioners, in addition to lack of defined criteria for when to use deliberative approaches.

b. Practical strategies or tips discussed for credible and effective communication in impact assessment*:
/

c. Please state any related issues you want to capture not covered by the above questions*:
/

2) Messages/lessons from your session for impact assessment overall?*
/

3) What recommendations would you offer to impact assessment practitioners based on the discussions in your session?*
PROCESS DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT
- Plan more deliberative forums, allocate dedicated time for them, and ensure multistakeholder engagement (not just ad hoc private meetings)
- Do proper stakeholder mapping to ensure the deliberative forum is engaging the correct people and do groundwork on stakeholders
- Design a clear pathway to achievable solutions
- Ensure early and continuous engagement through the process. It must start before design and be mandated by regulators and lenders, like for SEA.
- Work to reach binding, joint agreements among all stakeholders (not just the community)
- Monitor and adapt the management of deliberative processes to integrate useful revisions based on upcoming needs
COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES
- Use embassadors of positive case studies to increase trust
- Identify innovative approaches for communicating project design and IA findings
- Step-down technical gibberish to reach relatable language
SELECTING STAKEHOLDERS WITHIN THE SE PROCESS
- Coordinate with governments
- Identify non-partisan facilitators
- Consult the community in the identification of the experts that will be involved in the deliberative process / IA

4) What recommendations emerged from your session for policymakers and other key stakeholders? (Please specify the type of stakeholder, where possible.)*
- Develop a guidance on deliberation in impact assessment (recommendation for lenders/ regulators, involving experts on deliberation in IA).
- Offer capacity development on deliberative approaches for IA practictioners (recommendation for lenders/ regulators/ public authoritis / professional associations)

1) If presentations or discussion in your session touched on the conference theme, key messages on "Misinformation, Disinformation, Communication, & Impact Assessment":

a. Key challenges or emerging trends related to misinformation and disinformation identified in your session*:
Misinformation can come from anyone - no-one is inherently more trustworthy than someone else just by virtue of their role or stake holding.

b. Practical strategies or tips discussed for credible and effective communication in impact assessment*:
Fun and humour are engaging.

c. Please state any related issues you want to capture not covered by the above questions*:
Positive feedback from participants on session concept and format.

2) Messages/lessons from your session for impact assessment overall?*
Question everything. Maintain healthy scepticism always.

3) What recommendations would you offer to impact assessment practitioners based on the discussions in your session?*
See above.

4) What recommendations emerged from your session for policymakers and other key stakeholders? (Please specify the type of stakeholder, where possible.)*
See above.

1) If presentations or discussion in your session touched on the conference theme, key messages on "Misinformation, Disinformation, Communication, & Impact Assessment":

a. Key challenges or emerging trends related to misinformation and disinformation identified in your session*:
Project timeline uncertainty.
Lack of time to engage appropriately and IA too late in the process.
Historical distrust.
Regulatory environments allow for fragmented development applications so communities are having to engage on multiple but unrelated projects leading to fatigue and disengagement.
Inclusion of end-of-project-life considerations at the start of a project (helpful in the long run), like land-use planning.
IA needs to be tailored to each circumstance (self-evident but traditional methods may not get the best outcomes).

b. Practical strategies or tips discussed for credible and effective communication in impact assessment*:
Change up the way engagement is undertaken (particularly to avoid stakeholder fatigue and for stop-start projects which evolve over time).
Due diligence early to understand context like historical mistrust and key information brokers in local communities
Frank and fearless advice to clients about the information they communicate being honest and transparent, tempering client expectations.
Allow communities to engage on their own terms (e.g. through digital tools).
Work with local governments to sync stories from prominent institutions and local partners who know the area.
Earlier information sharing can shape intensity downstream.

c. Please state any related issues you want to capture not covered by the above questions*:
Misinformation is a material impact pathway for projects.

2) Messages/lessons from your session for impact assessment overall?*
Issues are similar across the board - misinformation once spread (however it is spread) - heightens distrust.
Genuine attempts to communicate and engage with communities by IA practitioners are getting hijacked by misinformation.
If you can, allow time - slow down to speed up. Assists later in the project cycle.
Give communities more choice in how they engage. Be sensitive to striking a balance in quantity versus quality of engagement.

3) What recommendations would you offer to impact assessment practitioners based on the discussions in your session?*
Change up the way engagement is undertaken (particularly to avoid stakeholder fatigue and for stop-start projects which evolve over time).
Due diligence early to understand context like historical mistrust and key information brokers in local communities and enable tailored/varied engagement.
Frank and fearless advice to clients about the information they communicate being honest and transparent, tempering client expectations.
Allow communities to engage on their own terms (e.g. through digital tools).
Work with local governments to sync stories from prominent institutions.
Earlier information sharing can shape intensity downstream.

4) What recommendations emerged from your session for policymakers and other key stakeholders? (Please specify the type of stakeholder, where possible.)*
Advocate to regulators/authorities/policymakers that IA comes much earlier in the development process.
Better articulate the benefits of IA to policymakers and proponents so it is not just a tick box exercise and has real value.