This title illustrates the impact of HIV/AIDS on electoral processes in South Africa and provides evidence of the influence of the pandemic on the democratic process. It is part of an ongoing Africa-wide study by the Governance and AIDS programme of the institute for democracy in South Africa (IDASA). It does not equate elections with democracy nor does it reduce HIV/AIDS to a vote. Instead it provides empirical evidence of the effect of the biggest challenge facing Africa today and how it may shape the dynamics of our politics. It demonstrates that HIV/AIDS is not just a health crisis, but a pandemic that has implications for political and social processes. The analysis and results presented in this title show that HIV/AIDS may undermine the democratic project in South Africa and Africa by destabilising electoral systems; reducing political party support bases and the ability to compete; decreasing the participation in public policy processes of citizens infected and affected by the pandemic; and potentially undermining the capacity of electoral management bodies (EMB)s to conduct elections effectively.

The workshop attracted wide participation from relevant Russian and western organizations. International expertise from several related fields went together to produce a thorough understanding of the present status and how to develop the use of overall risk assessments and environmental impact assessments to ensure a sound use of resources when carrying out the tremendous work that must be carried out to clean up the cold war legacy. Important conclusions and recommendations have been produced and set out in the main report, providing a good basis for further development.

Such development should note that safety and environmental performance can be addressed at three levels:

1. Compliance-focused;
2. Beyond compliance, towards best practice; and
3. Continuous improvement.

The aim is to progress from a) to b) and eventually reach c). The levels refer both to operatorsa (TM) performance and regulatorsa (TM) and other stakeholdersa (TM) expectations.

Fundamentally, compliance cannot be achieved without the application of environmental impact assessment and risk assessment a" to judge whether protection objectives have been met. Major progress has been made towards developing common methodologies, although there are still improvements to be made, including a common understanding of objectives and interpretation of results. In addition, improved assessment capabilities are required to help distinguish multiply characterised options within a process of options assessment. In turn, this has to rely on broader holistic understanding of the issues as well as wide stakeholder involvement.

From the viewpoint of the proponents ofany new development, the preparation of an environmental statement in parallel with project design provides a useful framework within which environmental considerations and design development can interact. Environmental analysis may indicate ways in which the project can be modified to avoid possible adverse effects, for example through considering more environmentally friendly alternatives. Taking these steps is likely to make the formal regulatory and planning approval stages run more smoothly.

The workshop attracted wide participation from relevant Russian and western organizations. International expertise from several related fields went together to produce a thorough understanding of the present status and how to develop the use of overall risk assessments and environmental impact assessments to ensure a sound use of resources when carrying out the tremendous work that must be carried out to clean up the cold war legacy. Important conclusions and recommendations have been produced and set out in the main report, providing a good basis for further development.

Such development should note that safety and environmental performance can be addressed at three levels:

1. Compliance-focused;
2. Beyond compliance, towards best practice; and
3. Continuous improvement.

The aim is to progress from a) to b) and eventually reach c). The levels refer both to operatorsa (TM) performance and regulatorsa (TM) and other stakeholdersa (TM) expectations.

Fundamentally, compliance cannot be achieved without the application of environmental impact assessment and risk assessment a" to judge whether protection objectives have been met. Major progress has been made towards developing common methodologies, although there are still improvements to be made, including a common understanding of objectives and interpretation of results. In addition, improved assessment capabilities are required to help distinguish multiply characterised options within a process of options assessment. In turn, this has to rely on broader holistic understanding of the issues as well as wide stakeholder involvement.

From the viewpoint of the proponents ofany new development, the preparation of an environmental statement in parallel with project design provides a useful framework within which environmental considerations and design development can interact. Environmental analysis may indicate ways in which the project can be modified to avoid possible adverse effects, for example through considering more environmentally friendly alternatives. Taking these steps is likely to make the formal regulatory and planning approval stages run more smoothly.