Guidelines for the analysis of the inclusion of biodiversity in Environmental Impact Statements

Article 14 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) calls for the inclusion of impacts on biodiversity in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), which is a significant instrument for site-specific impact prediction. In view of the shortcomings reported for Environmental Impact Statements (EISs), guidelines with indicators could improve the consideration of biological diversity in EISs. This study aims to establish guidelines for the analysis of the inclusion of biodiversity in EISs using a systematic approach based on scientific papers, CBD, and a survey with 43 EIA practitioners from universities, government agencies, environmental consulting companies, business segment, and the third sector. The guidelines comprise 60 indicators arranged into eight categories about the project's characteristics, methods, baseline, impact assessment, alternatives, as well as mitigation, compensation, and monitoring measures. The guidelines also include the levels of biological diversity (ecosystem, species, and genetic diversity), the three elements of biodiversity (composition, structure, and key processes), and the main anthropogenic threats. Thus, the guidelines represent a methodological contribution to EIA that could support decision making and future systematic reviews of EISs.     

Biodiversity and bird surveys in Finnish environmental impact assessments and follow-up monitoring

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) that are applied in the planning phases of large land-use and construction projects are aimed at aiding decision-making and mitigating significant environmental impacts. In light of the global biodiversity crisis, conducting high-quality biodiversity impact assessments is important, as biodiversity information, among other factors, has the potential to influence how projects will be implemented in the end. We investigated the biodiversity and bird surveys conducted and the number of bird species of conservation concern in peat extraction and wind farm projects to which an EIA was applied to in 1995–2016 in Finland and compared whether these factors differed between the project types and between implemented and unimplemented projects. We also studied the availability of follow-up monitoring data of biodiversity impacts within the two project types. The number of nationally threatened breeding birds was significantly lower in implemented than in unimplemented peat extraction projects. The overall probability of being implemented was significantly negatively associated with the year the EIA began for both project types. All permitted peat extraction projects and 22% of wind farm projects conducted post-construction biodiversity monitoring; however, only some projects enabled before-after comparisons. Our results are in line with earlier findings that demonstrate the difficulty of showing the direct impacts of biodiversity information on EIA decision-making and to what extent it is related to project approval or rejection. The role of follow-up monitoring in the EIA and project development could also be strengthened.     

Environmental impact assessment system in Thailand and its comparison with those in China and Japan

This paper aims to find ways to streamline the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system in Thailand to increase its effectiveness by comparative analysis with China and Japan. This study is mainly focused on review, update and comparison of EIA systems between these three countries. It is intended to clarify fundamental information of the EIA systems and characteristics of the key elements of EIA processes (screening, consideration of alternatives, prediction or evaluation of impact, and public participation). Moreover, the number of the EIA projects that have been implemented in all the provinces in Thailand are presented. The results identified the similarities and differences of the EIA processes among the three aforementioned countries. The type of EIA report used in Thailand, unlike those in China and Japan, is an Environmental and Health Impact Assessment (EHIA), which is concerned with the health and environmental impacts that could occur from the project. In addition, EIA reports in Thailand are made available to the public online and the shortcomings of the process have details of barriers resulting from the projects to help future projects with reconsideration and improvements. In this study, it is pointed out that Thai's EIA system still lacks local EIA authority which needs to be empowered by implementing a set of laws or ordinance.     

Environmental economic impact assessment in China: Problems and prospects

The use of economic valuation methods to assess environmental impacts of projects and policies has grown considerably in recent years. However, environmental valuation appears to have developed independently of regulations and practice of environmental impact assessment (EIA), despite its potential benefits to the EIA process. Environmental valuation may be useful in judging significance of impacts, determining mitigation level, comparing alternatives and generally enabling a more objective analysis of tradeoffs. In China, laws and regulations require the use of environmental valuation in EIA, but current practice lags far behind. This paper assesses the problems and prospects of introducing environmental valuation into the EIA process in China. We conduct four case studies of environmental economic impact assessment (EEIA), three of which are based on environmental impact statements of construction projects (a power plant, a wastewater treatment plant and a road construction project) and one for a regional pollution problem (wastewater irrigation). The paper demonstrates the potential usefulness of environmental valuation but also discusses several challenges to the introduction and wider use of EEIA, many of which are likely to be of relevance far beyond the Chinese context. The paper closes with suggesting some initial core elements of an EEIA guideline.     

Documentation of cumulative impacts in environmental impact statements

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations in the United States require federal agencies to apply an environmental impact assessment (EIA) in decision-making related to their actions. One aspect requires an examination of direct, indirect and cumulative impacts (CIs). Historically, cumulative impact assessment (CIA) has been given limited attention in EIA and resultant environmental impact statements (EISs), not because of its lack of importance, but owing to limitations in methodologies and procedures, including documentation consistency. The objectives of this study were to identify deficiencies in the documentation of CIs and CIA in EISs and to formulate appropriate recommendations (potential solutions) related to such deficiencies. The study involved the systematic review of 33 EISs (11 each from the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Forest Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration). The results indicate that improvements have been made in documentation practices since 1990; however, inconsistencies and inadequacies still exist. Therefore, the following recommendations were developed: (1) CIs should be reported in a separate part of the “Environmental Consequences” section, and they should be addressed for each pertinent environmental resource; (2) a summary of CIs should be included; (3) any CIs considered not significant should be mentioned plus the reason(s) for their non-significance; (4) spatial and temporal boundaries addressed within the CIA process should be defined for pertinent environmental resources; and (5) utilized guidelines and methodologies should be described.     

How does stakeholder involvement affect environmental impact assessment?

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) processes are grounded on the assumption that producing information about environmental impacts will yield better environmental decisions. Despite the ubiquity of EIA as a policy tool, there is scant evidence of its environmental, social, or economic impacts. Focusing on Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) prepared for water and energy-related projects under the US National Environmental Policy Act, this analysis addresses two questions: (1) What is the balance of environmental impacts associated with infrastructure decisions?; and (2) How does the content of stakeholder feedback received during the review phase differ from draft EIS content, and does this correspond to any changes in the final EIS? We demonstrate the use of automated text mining approaches to identify the distribution of impacts, measure the content of public comments, and observe whether values reflected in comments are associated with a shift in emphases between the draft and final EIS. EISs are shown to convey evenly distributed focus across multiple impact areas. However, we observe no substantive change in focal emphasis between draft and final issuances. This calls into question assumptions about the role that public participation plays in bringing new information to light or changing the course of action.     

Auditing the precision and accuracy of environmental impact predictions in Australia

Our understanding of natural ecosystems can be measured by our ability to predict their responses to external disturbances. Predictions made during environmental impact assessment (EIA) for major development projects are hypotheses about such responses, which can be tested with data collected in environmental monitoring programmes. The systematic comparison of predicted and actual impacts has been termed environmental impact audit. Ecosystem disturbances associated with major resource developments, though of lesser magnitude than those associated with natural cataclysms, are generally of far greater magnitude than those which can be applied experimentally. Environmental audit can hence provide critical tests of theory in a number of natural sciences. It is also needed to improve the scientific content of EIA. Audits of 4 and 29 EISs respectively have been carried out previously in the UK and USA, but this is the first national scale audit for any country. It is also the first attempt to select, from the many vague statements in EISs, only those predictions that are scientifically testable, and to determine and analyse their quantitative accuracies. Its principal results are as follows. The average accuracy of quantified, critical, testable predictions in environmental impact statements in Australia to date is 44%±5% s.e. Predictions where actual impacts proved more than expected were on average significantly (p<0.05) less accurate (33%±9%) than those where they proved as or less severe (53%±6%).     

On the indiscriminate use of imported emission factors in environmental impact assessment: A case study in Chile

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) aims to determine if the environmental effect of an activity or project complies with standards and regulations. A primary component of the environment to evaluate is air and the effect that various activities can have on its quality. To this end, emission factors (EFs), which are empirical coefficients or mathematical relationships, are normally used. The present research critically analyzes the implications and consequences of using imported EFs in environmental impact studies (EISs), taking as case of study the situation in Chile. Among the main results, the widespread use of EFs in EISs in the country and the lack of assessments of their actual applicability stand out. In addition, the official guidelines related to emissions estimation that are used for EIA in the country mostly include EFs derived elsewhere, without considering the recommendations or restrictions that the original sources indicate for their use. Finally, the broad use of default values defined for the Metropolitan Region in Central Chile, is highly questionable for a country that extends north-south along more than 35° of latitude, with wide variability in climate, traffic conditions, population, soil types, etc. Finally, it is very likely that situations similar to those observed in the present work occurs in other countries with young environmental impact assessment systems, and therefore, that the results herein presented should be of general interest and relevance.     

To what extent are threatened plant species considered in impact assessment decision-making? Insights from southeastern Brazil

The world's declining plant biodiversity depends on the efficacy of many policy tools, including Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). While scholars have long been trying to understand how biodiversity information affects EIA decision-making, very few studies have addressed the specific challenges associated with threatened plant species. Based on content analysis of 83 EIA processes that proposed vegetation removals in the southeastern Brazilian state of Minas Gerais, this study evaluated the extent to which threatened plant species were considered in decision-making. The study found that the developers of 31 projects (37% of the 83 analyzed EIA projects) disclosed the occurrence of threatened plant species in the potentially affected areas. The detailed content analysis of their respective Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) review reports revealed that the majority of the identified impacts and respective compensation programs targeted tree habits, and under a variety of rationales. Developers' proposed compensation rates of impacted tree species varied from 1:1 to 50:1. The reviewing process reported issues related mostly to the baseline conditions. Overall, the study found that EIA, in Minas Gerais state, has been functioning mainly as a diagnostic and compensation tool for the removal of tree species. The study calls for improvements in existing legislation and the development of technical guidance and capacity-building programs for EIA stakeholders.     

Environmental Impact Assessment in the Visegrad Group countries

The Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (EIA Directive) has created a reference framework for the implementation of the system of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) into the legal systems of the Member States of the European Union, including the countries belonging to the Visegrad Group (V4): Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Hungary. The Directive was the basis for the introduction of compulsory stages of the EIA process in the V4. The stages were then adapted to national requirements, including thresholds of the qualifying criteria of projects at the screening and scoping stages. The EIA system in the analysed countries has been growing, changing and being modified together with the political and economic changes of the last 30 years. Although all Visegrad Group countries are members of the EU and should harmonize the provisions of the EIA Directive and its amendments, there still exist singularities in each country's national EIA legislation, in terms of complementarities among the V4 countries, access to information resources, protection of natural resources, mitigation of socio-environmental impacts, or transboundary impact assessment. The article compares and evaluates the EIA systems in the four countries, specifies similarities and differences in the implementation of administrative proceedings and points out opportunities to strengthen the system. It presents selected results of a study conducted in 2013 within the framework of the international project “Assessment of the quality of the environment in the V4 Countries” (AQE V4). This paper indicates examples of good practice in the EIA systems and the obtained results are compared regarding the amendments to the current European Union EIA Directive.     

Project justification and EIA: Anything goes?

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) incorporates environmental aspects into decision-making, but sometimes it is not effective in rejecting projects with dubious justification, significant impacts and little social utility, especially when they have political support. EIA is expected to achieve sustainable development, but without calling development into question; however, it should be able to ask the question of whether development is really necessary. Although EIA is political, as a part of the decision-making process, politicization must be limited to prevent it from becoming a mere instrument for giving an “environmental veneer” to development. Some measures thar can help avoid unjustified projects are: adopting administrative justice approach to EIA; minimising politicization of EIA agencies; improving transparency in decision-making and proportionality of EIA procedures; carrying out pre-feasibility studies; increasing the scope of SEA; allowing more than one SEA or EIA procedure for the same development throughout the planning process; strengthening the justification of the project in EIA documents; or making the scoping phase mandatory at least for major projects.     

Environmental impact assessment (EIA): an overlooked instrument for sustainable development in Pakistan

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a policy tool used for evaluating a project proposal from physical and socioeconomic environmental perspectives. Its aim is to reduce the impact of development on environment, hence, ensuring environmental sustainability. It is mandatory to submit an Environmental Impact Statement before starting a mega project as required by Environmental Protection Act of 1997 and Environmental Policy of Pakistan. Public consultation plays a key role in an EIA system, identifying the likely aspects and impacts of a development activity. This aspect has been ignored in effective enactment of environmental legislation in Pakistan. Sufficient legislative instruments are there to support EIA system in the country but the agencies responsible for the enforcement of environmental regulations have failed to do so. The current research gives an insight into the actual status of EIA system in Pakistan along with the feedback of EIA specialists and university teachers of the concerned departments. A new index has been devised on the basis of questionnaire response to work out the overall performance of EIA system in Pakistan or any other country. The weaknesses and deficiencies of each EIA stage have been worked out for Pakistan and elaborated with the help of the controversial Zero point Interchange Project in the capital city of Pakistan.     

Land take and the effectiveness of project screening in Environmental Impact Assessment: Findings from an empirical study

Land take is emerging as a global environmental concern, and is particularly critical in intensively developed and land-scarce regions. This paper seeks to understand the effectiveness of the screening stage of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in addressing land take. Screening is the stage where a decision is made as to whether an EIA is required for a project. In many jurisdictions, screening results in three pathways: full EIA directly, preliminary EIA only, or preliminary EIA followed by full EIA. We compared the land take of 217 projects triggering the different pathways in a study region in Italy over a 15-year time interval. Land take was quantified by overlaying the footprint of the projects with a land cover map.The results show that while more attention was given to projects with larger land take impacts overall, the cumulative land take from smaller projects not triggering full EIA was considerable (40% of overall land take). The case-by-case examination conducted through the preliminary EIA was found to work better for some project types (ski areas and small urban development), than for others (quarries). Our findings lead us to advocate improvements in current screening procedures to ensure that the land take impacts are quantified and made explicit in preliminary EIA reports. Our evidence-based approach to determining land take in EIA provides a compelling basis for understanding ways to improve EIA policies, guidance and practice.     

Experiences of voluntary early participation in Environmental Impact Assessments in Chilean mining

Citizen participation should ideally occur as early as possible in a project, especially throughout the course of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study. In Chile, participation occurs after the EIA study has been completed and presented to authorities for evaluation. However, voluntary early participation has become an extended practice in large mining projects for financial and conflict-reduction reasons. The purpose of this study was to explore a variety of these early participation processes happening in large mining projects from 2001 to 2010 and analyze how well these practices measured up to standards and objectives defined in the EIA and participation literature. Beyond the legal implications of such practice, we sought to understand the role of this voluntary procedure within the EIA process and citizen engagement in projects. We found a wide range of objectives, approaches and results, primarily driven to facilitate approval and implementation of the ten projects analyzed. The underlying objective of voluntary participation processes analyzed (whether it seeks to inform, to note or to engage), determined the information presented, participants included, area of influence considered, time devoted to the process and influence of the information collected on EIA and project mitigation measures. Few of the principles for best practice in the literature were present in the ten projects examined. Moreover, given the voluntary and unregulated nature of these processes, purposes and outcomes were often mixed-up with the Indigenous Consultation required under ILO provision 169, or Corporate Social Responsibility programs. This finally revealed that contrary to expectations, an unregulated and early voluntary participation is not having a clear impact in the definition of projects mitigation measures, participants are at risk of being unsatisfied with the resulting agreements and moreover, it does not assure projects implementation or the avoidance of socio-environmental conflict.     

Terrestrial vertebrate fauna surveys for the preparation of environmental impact assessments; how can we do it better? A Western Australian example

The Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in 2002 released Position Statement, No. 3, Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an Element of Biodiversity Protection outlining how terrestrial fauna survey data are to be used and interpreted in the preparation of environmental impact assessments (EIA). In 2004, the EPA released its Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors, Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia, No. 56. This paper briefly assesses the adequacy of recent terrestrial fauna surveys undertaken to support publicly released EIAs and indicates that the EPA is not always adhering to its own position and guidance statements. This paper argues that the current fauna survey guidelines are in need of improvement. The approach and requirements of some other Australian states are briefly assessed to identify similarities and where improvements can be made to the Western Australian (WA) guidelines. This paper concludes with suggestions on how the process and the guidelines in WA can be revised to more adequately assess the impact of developments on terrestrial vertebrate biodiversity and ecosystem function. These suggestions may have relevance for other areas where fauna surveys are undertaken to support EIAs.     

The environmental impact assessment in Chile: Overview,improvements, and comparisons

In this study, we carried out a comparative analysis of the Chilean Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system using evaluation criteria compared against three countries to allow for an objective evaluation within the growing demand of society for a more creditable and trustable EIA system.A total of 18 evaluation criteria were selected from the literature, and four new criteria for comparing EIA systems were proposed. The Chilean EIA system was compared to that of Brazil, Spain, and Canada using the following four evaluation criteria categories: EIA Legislation (four criteria), EIA Administration (four criteria), EIA Process (eleven criteria), and After EIA (three criteria). A Hierarchical Agglomerative Cluster Analysis for assessing similarity among the EIA systems of Chile, Canada, and Spain was performed: the similarity being 88%. A Principal Component Analysis shows that only 13 of the selected 22 criteria contribute to the variability of the selected EIA systems. The main strengths of the Chilean EIA system are the existence of Specialized Environmental Courts for the resolution of disputes and Appeal options before execution. The identified weaknesses are an EIA system with high centralization at the national level, the absence of consideration of project alternatives, no requirement for scoping, and that the process of Strategic Environmental Assessment is not binding.Modifications to the Environmental Impact Assessment System Regulation are proposed by authors as feasible improvements particularly in relation to, Decentralization of the EIA system, Alternatives for design, Scoping incorporation, Register of reviewers of baseline information, and the public information process and post-evaluation.The method used seeks out to serve as guidance for countries with similar environmental and social contexts, as well as environmental legislation improvement needs.     

Four conceptual issues to consider in integrating social and environmental factors in risk and impact assessments

In the last twenty years, both the increase in academic production and the expansion of professional involvement in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) have evidenced growing scientific and business interest in risk and impact analysis. However, this growth has not brought with it parallel progress in addressing the main shortcomings of EIA/SIA, i.e. insufficient integration of environmental and social factors into development project analyses and, in cases where the social aspects are considered, technical-methodological failings in their analysis and assessment. It is clear that these weaknesses carry with them substantial threats to the sustainability (social, environmental and economic) of projects which impact on the environment, and consequently to the local contexts where they are carried out and to the delicate balance of the global ecosystem. This paper argues that, in a sociological context of complexity and dynamism, four conceptual elements should underpin approaches to socio-environmental risk and impact assessment in development projects: a theoretical base in actor–network theory; an ethical grounding in values which are internationally recognized (though not always fulfilled in practice); a (new) epistemological-scientific base; and a methodological foundation in social participation.     

The assessment of aesthetic and perceptual aspects within environmental impact assessment of renewable energy projects in Italy

The main aim of this paper is to explore how perceptual and aesthetic impact analyses are considered in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), with specific reference to Italian renewable energy projects. To investigate this topic, the paper starts by establishing which factors are linked with perceptual and aesthetic impacts and why it is important to analyze these aspects, which are also related to legislative provisions and procedures in Europe and in Italy. In particular the paper refers to renewable energy projects because environmental policies are encouraging more and more investment in this kind of primary resource. The growing interest in this type of energy is leading to the realization of projects which change the governance of territories, with inevitable effects on the landscape from the aesthetic and perceptual points of view. Legislative references to EIA, including the latest directive regarding this topic show the importance of integrating the assessment of environmental and perceptual impacts, thus there is a need to improve EIA methodological approaches to this purpose. This paper proposes a profile of aesthetic and perceptual impact analysis in EIA for renewable energy projects in Italy, and concludes with recommendations as to how this kind of analysis could be improved.     

Application of network method as a tool for integrating biodiversity values in Environmental Impact Assessment

Highway construction or expansion projects are among major activities of economic development especially in developing countries. However, road development consistently can lead to major damages to the environment, including habitat fragmentation and ecological instabilities and a considerable threat to fauna and flora. At this point, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in road developments is needed to address and evaluate the ecological issues in decision-making. The object of this study is to strengthen the consideration of ecological issues, i.e., biodiversity in the existing EIA tools. This paper regards a network method as a means to make informed planning decisions by the lessons from a case study. The results indicate that network method is well suited to be applied in ecological impacts assessment. However, some limitations such as complexity and time consumed make casual networks unpopular. Also, impact of traffic noise on acoustic communication (wildlife and human) was performed. It has been shown that sound level for human is much higher than admissible standards. Finally, the study expresses some mitigation measures to improve the acquisition for environmental impact assessment process.