Protest uprising organized by tractor users in November 2016 on Eastern roadsides of Esfahan Province (IRAN) and their clash with police has been always a headline in newspapers. This phenomenon has been referred to as in only one of the numerous decisions affecting lifes of people radically. Why such decisions have been adopted? and why farmers have been faced so many crisis is the main questions posed by Public. This Article seeks to study the nature and role of "Public Participation" in preserving water sources, as well as capacity of internal law and administrative system of Islamic RePublic of Iran for promoting Public Participation in regulating and adoption of administrative decisions and their implementation for protection of environment in general and especially preserving rare and vital water resources. It seems that failure to respect the Principle of Public Participation as one of the most important elements of governance is one of the important obstacles to realizing sustainable development. Participation of beneficiaries of a given decision in adapting Public decisions, which directly affect their lives, through negotiation of people and union representatives, Public survey, research and seeking non-governmental organizations' opinions not only can prevent adoption of arbitrary decisions and guarantees transparency of administrative decisions, it also promotes the culture of organizational transparency and contributes to the promotion of Public culture and guarantee active Participation of citizens in enforcement of decisions which protects rights of future generations and will guarantee sustainable development.

A double ambiguity has been charged against Rawls’s difference Principle (DP). Is it Maximin, Leximin, or something else? Usually, following A. Sen, scholars identify DP with the so-called Leximin. One argues here that one has to distinguish 1° the Leximin, 2° the Maximin (as rule of justice formally analogous to the maximin rule of decision), represented by the figure in L of the perfectly substitutable goods, and 3° the genuine DP. When the augmentation of inequality benefits the worse off, only Pareto-strong improvements are permitted. Leximin would also permit Pareto-weak improvements too (after the first maximum D), where only the richest improves: from (2, 3) to (2, 5), say. This is forbidden by DP. With two classes, unlike Maximin, DP has no curve of indifference and is always decisive, as Leximin is. For undecisive Rules of Justice, which admit indifferent curves, I propose to add a lexically secondary rule, to break ties. That move is able to clarify the links and the differences between on the one hand Maximin alone, with its typical indifference curves in L, and on the other hand, the DP properly understood and the Leximin, which both have no indifferent curves. With two classes of persons (best off/worse off), DP appears more egalitarian than Leximin, because it's secondary rule is MinIn (Minimization of Inequality). But the intuition behind the distinction is that it cannot possible “fair” that only the best off improves in a productive social cooperation.

Implementing the Principle of Public Participation in oil disputes requires the Participation of individuals or groups of Public who are not parties to arbitration. This Participation can be realized through the presentation of written submission, access to important arbitration documents and attendance in arbitration hearings. The rules of international arbitration in the recent reforms and bilateral investment treaties in the new generation have taken the course of implementing this Principle. This article seeks to analyze implementation of the Principle of Participation in the framework of arbitration proceedings. In this paper, two petroleum cases has been reviewed; One has been ruled by a arbitration tribunal to enforce the Principle of Public Participation and the other have rejected this Principle. The study indicates, firstly, the importance of stipulating the Principle of Participation in arbitration rules and investment treaties, and secondly demonstrates tribunals’ lack of willingness to implement the rule of article 31(3) of the Vienna Convention. In LonePine v. Canada, despite the investor's disagreement, tribunal accepted the written submission of the two NGOs based on ICSID Article 37 and NAFTA's statement. However, in Chevron v. Ecuador, the Public were not allowed to participate. The silence of the Ecuador-US BIT as well as the implicit authority set forth in Article 15 of UNCITRAL (1976) could be regarded as grounds for this rejection.

One of the most common ways of maintaining societal security in the third world communities is the use of forcible factors. Security, however, is easy to maintain in such a way but this is not a permanent one.Security is stabilized just by institutionalizing it in society and boosting the sense of Public Participation and responsibility.In this article, writer discusses some issues such as Public Participation barriers, Participation typology, interpretation of conceptual contex of societal security and so on.lt is, indeed, stated that societal security is a social product which has a close relationship with Public Participation and interaction. In fact, social interaction of people with police in security affairs has a lot of covert and overt functions, such as social cohesion and order and, affective relationship of police and people.

Social innovations in response to solving social problems and needs are new and innovative solutions that are more effective, more efficient, or even fairer than previous ones. Charities and NGOs are just one of the actors of social innovation. The nature of their innovations is altruistic. These innovation need to more Public Participation to be success. Successful engagemnt of people in social innovations depends on how and why people participate in these event. In this regard, the present study has examined the sociology, psychology and social biology in the field of altruism, as well as interviewing by the experts with Participation in the good and innovative charities, using the method of thematic analysis to identify the dimensions of Public Participation in social innovation. In the end, the main dimentions of Public Participation were introduced in social innovation, awareness-raising, strengthening the identity and social cohesion of the community, facilitating and attracting voluntary Participation, learning and enhancing skills, building trust and improving interaction and communicating between main actors as the main dimensions of Public Participation.

The Participation Principle is considered as one of the key features of international environmental law. It plays an important role in participatory democracy in this field. One of the solutions for redressing international law failures is the Participation of all actors including citizens and NGOs.The Rio Declaration, the Aarhus Convention, the Agenda 21 and other documents on participatory democracy emphasize on the role of major groups in the realization of social objectives, policies and administrative mechanisms. The realization of this Principle requires some components such as the right of access to environmental information, Public Participation in decision- making, access to administrative and judicial authorities. This article studies the vital role of this Principle in international environmental law as well as the analysis of the above components.

This paper presents Participation of faculties and Heads of Department (HODs) in environmental education. For this purpose 60 HODs/faculties from polytechnic colleges of Tamilnadu, India and 100 HODs/ faculties from Associate Degree Level Technical Institutions in Iran from civil engineering branch were selected. Several hypotheses were formulated to achieve certain objectives of the study. The results revealed that there are significances between Iranian and Indian HODs/faculty on arrangement of industrial visits/field trips for students; laboratory resources for practical works and also teaching environmental subjects. The results also show a good agreement on students undertaking project work on environmental topics, teaching prevention of pollution and protection of environment in theory classes and evaluation of environmental related programs.