Is EIA part of the wind power planning problem?

This research evaluates the importance and effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) within wind farm planning debates, drawing on insights from case studies in Scotland. Despite general public support for renewable energy on the grounds that it is needed to tackle climate change and implement sustainable development, many proposed wind farms encounter significant resistance. The importance of planning issues and (EIA) processes has arguably been overlooked within recent wind farm social acceptability discourse. Through semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders and textual analysis of EIA documents, the characteristics of EIA are assessed in terms of its perceived purpose and performance. The data show that whilst respondents perceive EIA to be important, they express concerns about bias and about the inability of EIA to address climate change and wind farm decommissioning issues adequately. Furthermore, the research identifies key issues which impede the effectiveness of EIA, and reveals differences between theoretical and practical framings of EIA. The paper questions the assumption that EIA is a universally applicable tool, and argues that its effectiveness should be analysed in the context of specific development sectors. The article concludes by reviewing whether the recently amended EIA Directive (2014/52/EU) could resolve identified problems within national EIA practice.     

Testing an ex-ante framework for the evaluation of impact assessment laws: Lessons from Canada and Brazil

Scholars have been increasingly investigating legislative changes in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). However, most of the existing evaluation frameworks have been applied to ex-post scenarios, after EIA laws and respective policies and regulations had been implemented for some time. This article has a twofold objective: first, to propose an ex-ante framework for the evaluation of proposed EIA laws and, second, to test the application of the framework to bills C-69 and PL-3729, which target federal-level EIA reform in Canada and Brazil, respectively. The proposed framework is meant to indicate the extent to which proposed legislative changes meet 50 good practice criteria, thus providing a more balanced and transparent account of the issues that should be addressed effectively in the legislative process and in future regulations and guidelines. Results indicate very contrasting scope and potential effects of proposed legislative changes in the two countries. Brazil's bill is essentially intended to integrate existing regulations into a law that would make EIA faster, simpler and less frequent. Canada's bill, recently approved by Parliament, includes a new Impact Assessment Act that is expected to deliver more comprehensive and credible assessments. The ex-ante framework, by exposing how close or distant proposed EIA regimes are from good practices, can be particularly helpful in lawmaking and regulatory design. The article finally discusses limitations and highlights future avenues of research.     

Large-scale renewable energy project barriers: Environmental impact assessment streamlining efforts in Japan and the EU

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedures have been identified as a major barrier to renewable energy (RE) development with regards to large-scale projects (LS-RE). However EIA laws have also been neglected by many decision-makers who have been underestimating its impact on RE development and the stifling potential they possess. As a consequence, apart from acknowledging the shortcomings of the systems currently in place, few governments momentarily have concrete plans to reform their EIA laws. By looking at recent EIA streamlining efforts in two industrialized regions that underwent major transformations in their energy sectors, this paper attempts to assess how such reform efforts can act as a means to support the balancing of environmental protection and climate change mitigation with socio-economic challenges. Thereby this paper fills this intellectual void by identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the Japanese EIA law by contrasting it with the recently revised EIA Directive of the European Union (EU). This enables the identification of the regulatory provisions that impact RE development the most and the determination of how structured EIA law reforms would affect domestic RE project development. The main focus lies on the evaluation of regulatory streamlining efforts in the Japanese and EU contexts through the application of a mixed-methods approach, consisting of in-depth literary and legal reviews, followed by a comparative analysis and a series of semi-structured interviews. Highlighting several legal inconsistencies in combination with the views of EIA professionals, academics and law- and policymakers, allowed for a more comprehensive assessment of what streamlining elements of the reformed EU EIA Directive and the proposed Japanese EIA framework modifications could either promote or stifle further RE deployment.     

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.     

Revealing EIA process-related barriers in transport projects: The cases of Italy,Portugal, and Spain

The effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the transport field is increasingly being contested. Apart from technical issues (e.g., impacts measurements), the literature highlights process-related barriers as key obstacles to effective EIA implementation in transport projects (e.g., lack of collaborative work, transparency, etc.). Nevertheless, most academic efforts to date have focused on technical improvements, paying limited attention to the relevance of process-related barriers. To address this shortcoming, the paper aims to explore and compare how EIA is experienced and perceived by professionals in three South-European countries (Italy, Portugal, and Spain), providing additional insights into EIA process-related barriers in transport projects. The findings were obtained through an online survey of 294 professionals, representing two main stakeholder groups: environmental consultants and transport planners. The results reveal four main types of process problems shared in all three countries: (i) EIA timing, (ii) assessment of alternatives, (iii) monitoring system, and (iv) public participation. The highest divergences are seen in Spain, where 42% of identified process-related barriers are shared with the rest of countries, while Italian and Portuguese respondents agree in the perception of 68% of process-related barriers. The main differences between the barriers identified by transport planners and environmental consultants are related to their assessment of the need for more collaborative work between key actors. It is finally discussed the added value of this research to progress towards the homogenization of EIA processes across countries.     

Analysis of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive and the EIA decision in Turkey

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive first entered into force in the United States in 1969, and began to be implemented in many other countries by 1990. The first Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive in Turkey was published on February 7, 1993, under the Environmental Law No. 2872. The EIA Directive was revised seven times on June 23, 1997, June 6, 2002, December 16, 2003, July 17, 2008, October 3, 2013, and November 25, 2014. Several amendments were made during this process. The first EIA Directive dated 1993 was narrow in scope and its procedure was long, while the amendments in 2003, 2008, 2013, and 2014 widened the scope of the EIA, and shortened the EIA assessment procedures. In this study, the amendments to the Turkish EIA Directive were analysed, and their effect on the number of EIA decisions made was addressed. It was concluded that the uncertainties in EIA procedures were removed, procedures were shortened, and as a result, the number of EIA decisions increased thanks to the revisions made in line with harmonisation with European Union (EU) acquis.     

The influence of actor capacities on EIA system performance in low and middle income countries —Cases from Georgia and Ghana

In this paper, we aim to better understand the factors that contribute to the substantive performance of EIA systems in low and middle income countries. Substantive performance is defined as the extent to which the EIA process contributes to the EIA objectives for the long term, namely environmental protection or, even more ambitious, sustainable development. We have therefore developed a conceptual model in which we focus on the key actors in the EIA system, the proponent and the EIA authority and their level of ownership as a key capacity to measure their performance, and we distinguish procedural performance and some contextual factors. This conceptual model is then verified and refined for the EIA phase and the EIA follow-up phase (permitting, monitoring and enforcement) by means of 12 case studies from Ghana (four cases) and Georgia (eight cases), both lower–middle income countries. We observe that in most cases the level of substantive performance increases during the EIA phase but drops during the EIA follow-up phase, and as a result only five out of 12 operational cases are in compliance with permit conditions or national environmental standards. We conclude, firstly that ownership of the proponent is the most important factor explaining the level of substantive performance; the higher the proponent's level of ownership the higher the level of substantive performance. The influence of the EIA authority on substantive performance is limited. Secondly, the influence of procedural performance on substantive performance seems less important than expected in the EIA phase but more important during the EIA follow-up phase.In order to improve substantive performance we learned two lessons. Firstly, increasing the proponent's level of ownership seems obvious, but direct change is probably difficult. However, where international finance institutes are involved they can increase ownership. Despite the limited influence of the EIA authority, a proactive strategy of, for example, working together with international finance institutes has a slightly larger influence than a reactive strategy.     

A comparative evaluation of the environmental impact assessment legislation of South Africa and Zambia

This study evaluates the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) legislation of South Africa and Zambia against the modified criteria developed by Wood (1995) to determine the extent to which they follow “good practices” and incorporate emerging environmental issues into EIA. We modified the criteria of Wood due to new environmental issues that have emerged since their formulation. Some of these issues are in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). National Environmental Acts and EIA Regulations for the two countries were reviewed to evaluate the current legislation. We also used telephone interviews to gather additional information that was not in the documents. As a fundamental component of the EIA system, the legislation needs to be clear, concise and inclusive of all the major environmental issues that affect the performance of the EIA system. Literature reveals that the performance of the Zambian EIA system is generally low compared with that of some African countries such as South Africa and Ghana; especially in terms of the quality of EIA reports and substantive environmental protection. Therefore, we hypothesised that the Zambian legislation does not follow the good practice hence the low EIA system performance. Results, however, showed that the two countries are almost on a par in terms of meeting the criteria used in this study. Hence there is more to be done to improve the quality of both countries' EIA legislation. Nevertheless, compared with the previous evaluations by Wood (1999) and Harrison (2005), the results show that there is considerable improvement in the quality of the South African EIA legislation following a series of amendments.     

Framing effectiveness in impact assessment: Discourse accommodation in controversial infrastructure development

There is ongoing debate about the effectiveness of impact assessment tools, which matters both because of the threat to future practice of the tools which are frequently perceived to be ineffective, and because of the disillusionment that can ensue, and controversy generated, amongst stakeholders in a decision context where opportunities for meaningful debate have not been provided. In this article we regard debate about the meaning of effectiveness in impact assessment as an inevitable consequence of increased participation in environmental decision-making, and therefore frame effectiveness based on an inclusive democracy role to mean the extent to which impact assessment can accommodate civil society discourse. Our aim is to investigate effectiveness based on this framing by looking at one type of impact assessment – environmental impact assessment (EIA) – in two controversial project proposals: the HS2 rail network in England; and the A4DS motorway in the Netherlands. Documentary analysis and interviews held with key civil society stakeholders have been deployed to identify discourses that were mobilised in the cases. EIA was found to be able to accommodate only one out of four discourses that were identified; for the other three it did not provide the space for the arguments that characterised opposition. The conclusion in relation to debate on framings of effectiveness is that EIA will not be considered effective by the majority of stakeholders. EIA was established to support decision-making through a better understanding of impacts, so its ineffectiveness is unsurprising when its role is perceived to be broader. However, there remains a need to map discourses in different decision contexts and to analyse the extent to which the range of discourses are accommodated throughout the decision process, and the role of impact assessment in those processes, before recommendations can be made to either improve impact assessment effectiveness, or whether it is simply perceptions of effectiveness that need to be improved.     

The attractive concept of simplicity in environmental impact assessment: Perceptions of outcomes in southeastern Brazil

Pressures are mounting for the simplification of environmental impact assessment (EIA). This phenomenon is drawing increasing scholarly attention, but studies have not gone far beyond speculating what could happen as a result of recently implemented or proposed regulatory changes. This paper takes a more longitudinal look at simplified EIAs. The main objective was to analyze the perceived outcomes of a number of simplified EIA processes, using Brazil as the empirical context. More specifically, this paper aimed at understanding: 1) how simplified EIAs have been conceptualized and implemented in southeastern Brazil; and 2) how developers and civil servants in that region perceive the outcomes of simplified EIAs. This study adopted a sequential mixed method research approach. Data was collected through literature reviews, 261 telephone-based interviews and 10 face-to-face interviews. Degrees of EIA simplification can vary significantly within and across jurisdictions. In any case, simplification is often framed as a win-win solution to EIA ineffectiveness, through which regulatory and procedural changes are made to ease the process, while, at the same time, maintaining or providing better environmental protection. This approach is more frequently applied to potentially low-impact processes. Chi-square tests of the data collected through telephone interviews in the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais indicated that developers tend to perceive EIA processes as difficult and slow regardless of how simplified it is. Most civil servants, who were directly involved in the implementation of simplified EIAs in state environmental agencies, argued that simplified EIAs are driven mostly by environmental agencies, as these institutions have long been unable to cope with an ever-increasing load of license applications. Policy outcomes of simplified EIAs in the territory are not sufficiently monitored by state agencies. Civil servants revealed concerns about the potential long term effects of EIA simplification on the ground, as they have had limited resources for audits and inspections.     

Rethinking human health impact assessment

Most EIA programs around the world require the consideration of human health impacts. Yet relatively few EIA documents adequately address those impacts. This article examines how, why, and to what extent health impacts are analyzed in environmental impact assessments in the U.S. An empirical study of 42 environmental impact statements found that more than half contained no mention of health impacts. In the others, health impacts were analyzed narrowly, if at all, using risk assessment to quantify the carcinogenic potential of a single substance over a single generation. This analytic focus overlooks other significant morbidity and mortality risks, cumulative and intergenerational effects, and broader determinants of health. This article investigates these problems and provides recommendations to improve human health impact assessment, using strategic environmental assessment, qualitative health data, health outcomes in addition to cancer, and a precautionary approach to risk.     

Can we infer about ecosystem services from EIA and SEA practice? A framework for analysis and examples from Portugal

Biodiversity, soil, water, air, climate, landscape and other components are typically analyzed in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) when looking for the effects of a given project on the biological and ecological components of the environment. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) tends to follow the same general pattern, when looking for the environmental effects of plans and programs. In both cases, ecosystem services are often not explicitly considered. We developed a framework to analyze environmental assessment (EA) practice and infer about ecosystem services based on existing evidence from EIA and SEA reports and supporting information. Our framework addresses the relations between ecosystem services and the environmental factors assessed in EIA and SEA, considering the relevant conceptual frameworks such as the ES cascade model and the DPSIR framework applied to ES provision. We base our proposals on results from a preliminary meta-analysis of recent EIA and SEA reports from several types of plans and projects in Portugal, in which implicit assessments of ES were clearly predominant. We discuss the implications of those results and the opportunities to infer about ecosystem services, and conclude on the need for more dedicated and explicit efforts to ecosystem services assessment in EIA and SEA.     

Understanding the long-term influence of EIA on organisational learning and transformation

This research is an attempt to verify the notion postulated by Robert Bartlett and Lynton Caldwell that the full benefits of environmental impact assessment (EIA) would take decades to be realized. While EIA is intended to directly influence decision-making regarding new development proposals, the process is also expected to lead to organisational learning and transformation over time. Our aim was to examine the influence of EIA on a single Western Australian proponent with sustained experience in the process to understand how EIA is used within the organisation and to seek evidence of transformation of the organisation's purpose and mission. The research reviewed literature in order to identify key influences of EIA on organisations, along with semi-structured staff interviews and document analysis for the case study organisation. Ascertaining causality that involvement in EIA processes influences or effects organisational learning and transformation is a challenge in the face of other societal events. Document analysis and interviewee data indicates that the action-forcing nature of EIA did influence proponent behavior through the creation of internal processes seeking to ensure robust design of new projects that would satisfy environmental protection expectations, without the need to trigger formal EIA. Evidence of EIA values and thinking were apparent within internal documentation, including the evolving mission statement. Our research indicates that participation in the EIA process can positively influence organisational learning and transformation by guiding internal change for decision-making.     

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.     

Appraising the role of relationships between regulators and consultants for effective EIA

The role of relationships between regulators and consultants engaged in environmental impact assessment (EIA) is explored. A Partnering Agreement between Western Australian regulators and consultants gave rise to a survey and interviews with representatives of these EIA practitioners to understand levels of cooperation between them and ways to improve EIA practice locally. A mixture of quantitative and qualitative responses are presented with an emphasis on practitioner comments reproduced in their own words and ‘voice’. The results suggest that while relationships are strained because of staff resources and levels of expertise brought about by a major resource boom in recent years, there is a great desire for cooperation and collaboration. Greater clarification and understanding of each stakeholder's purpose and role in the EIA process along with opportunities for EIA practitioners to interact, communicate and socialise are identified as positive ways forward. The value of establishing the relatively simple Partnering Agreement approach is demonstrated and is put forward as something that practitioners internationally might equally benefit from as a means of improving the effectiveness of EIA practice.     

A quantitative method to analyze the quality of EIA information in wind energy development and avian/bat assessments

The environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been a tool for decision makers since the enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Since that time, few analyses have been performed to verify the quality of information and content within EIAs. High quality information within assessments is vital in order for decision makers, stake holders, and the public to understand the potential impact of proposed actions on the ecosystem and wildlife species. Low quality information has been a major cause for litigation and economic loss. Since 1999, wind energy development has seen an exponential growth with unknown levels of impact on wildlife species, in particular bird and bat species. The purpose of this article is to: (1) develop, validate, and apply a quantitative index to review avian/bat assessment quality for wind energy EIAs; and (2) assess the trends and status of avian/bat assessment quality in a sample of wind energy EIAs.This research presents the development and testing of the Avian and Bat Assessment Quality Index (ABAQI), a new approach to quantify information quality of ecological assessments within wind energy development EIAs in relation to avian and bat species based on review areas and factors derived from 23 state wind/wildlife siting guidance documents. The ABAQI was tested through a review of 49 publicly available EIA documents and validated by identifying high variation in avian and bat assessments quality for wind energy developments. Of all the reviewed EIAs, 66% failed to provide high levels of preconstruction avian and bat survey information, compared to recommended factors from state guidelines. This suggests the need for greater consistency from recommended guidelines by state, and mandatory compliance by EIA preparers to avoid possible habitat and species loss, wind energy development shut down, and future lawsuits.     

Subnational government and EIA in the developing world: Bureaucratic strategy and political change in Rio de Janeiro,Brazil

EIA has been instituted in developing countries in the last decade largely in response to outside pressures. Governments have been quick to initiate reforms rather than jeopardize projects that might be key to national development plans. At the subnational level, most projects are not financed by foreign aid. The application of EIA at this level is often the result of pressure exerted on policy elites by the bureaucracy. This paper describes the reorganization of environmental protection agencies in the state of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. This reorganization provided the setting for a bureaucratic initiative on EIA. The authors also analyze two cases in which EIA was applied unsatisfactorily and comment on the political realites of implementing EIA at the subnational level.     

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.     

Quality of Cultural Heritage in EIA; twenty years of experience in Norway

The aim of this paper is to clarify and discuss how quality, relevance, attitudes, beliefs and transfer value act as underlying driving forces in the development of the Cultural Heritage theme in EIAs. One purpose is to identify and discuss some conditions that can better environmental assessment in order to increase the significance of EIA in decision-making with regard to Cultural Heritage.The main tools used are different research methods designed for analyses of quality and quality changes, primarily based on the relevant opinions of 160 people occupied with Cultural Heritage in EIA in Norway. The study is based on a review of 40 types of EIAs from 1991 to 2000, an online questionnaire to 319 (160 responded) individuals from 14 different backgrounds, and interviews with three institutions in Sweden and Denmark.The study confirms a steadily increasing quality on EIRs over time, parallel with an improvement of the way in which Cultural Heritage is treated in EIA. This is supported by both the interviews and the qualitative comments regarding the survey. Potential for improvements is shown to be a need for more detailed background material as well as more use of adequate methods.The survey shows the existence of a wide variety of negative views, attitudes and beliefs, but the consequences of this are difficult to evaluate. However, most certainly, negative attitudes and beliefs have not been powerful enough to be detrimental to the quality of Cultural Heritage component, as nothing in the study indicates that negative attitudes and myths are undermining the system of EIA.The study shows the importance of having on-going discussions on quality and quality change over time by people involved in EIA, and how this is a necessary condition for successful implementation and acceptance. Beliefs and negative attitudes can also be a catalyst for developing better practice and advancing new methodology. In addition, new EIA countries must be prepared for several years of development and improvements after implementation. This is important in order to gain acceptance from the bureaucracy, especially from the Cultural Heritage authorities and local population.