EIA in a risk society

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was developed and introduced in the 1960s during a time that was dominated by three key societal influences. These were the growth of modern environmental concern, the drive for more rational, scientific and objective environmental decision making and a desire for more public involvement in environmental decision making. The legitimacy of EIA, as a tool to aid decision making, lies in its ability to meet the requirements of all three demands, the chief among these being its ability to be a systematic scientific and rational approach to decision making. Yet today we live in a society that no longer accepts the rationalist model as either possible or desirable. The deference to ‘the expert’ and our trust in science and technology has steadily declined during the period of EIAs development and widespread use. Today, EIA still depends for its legitimacy on its claim to provide a systematic and scientific approach to assessments, while society has moved on. This paper examines this growing divergence and argues that it is time for a major re‐evaluation of the role of EIA in environmental decision making.     

环境影响评价中的公众参与

介绍了环境影响评价中公众参与的发展和现状,论述了公众参与在环境影响评价中的地位作用,分析了我国环境影响评价中公众参与存在的问题,并从宏观法制保障、公众环境素质和技术操作程序三个层面提出了完善公众参与制度和提高公众参与有效性的对策.     

海洋油气开发工程环评中公众参与探讨

根据我国环境影响评价公众参与现状和海洋油气开发工程公众参与实践,对海洋油气开发工程环评中公众参与进行初步探讨。目前海洋油气开发工程公众参与存在的问题主要有:相关公众界定较难、公众主要是在环评机构主导下的被动参与、信息不对称使公众难以正确表达意见、相关公众中个人的环境素养和法制意识不高。根据存在的问题,建议通过以下方法提高海洋油气开发工程环评公众参与水平:研究制定海洋工程公众参与技术方法规范;掌握好公众参与时机,尽早启动,调动公众主动参与;科学确定公众范围,选择好公众参与对象;结合实际选择公众参与方式。     

Environmental impact assessment: An international evaluation

Experiences with environmental impact assessment (EIA) in a number of countries are discussed in the light of both explicit and implicit goals and objectives. Adequate environmental information is not always available to decision makers because of failure to apply EIA to all relevant decisions, the continuing inadequacies of prediction and evaluation techniques, the failure to consider alternatives adequately, and the bias of some EISs. EIA frequently results in changes to proposals and may result in stricter environmental management conditions in some cases, but some people regard it as a failure because it has not stopped development. Generally, EIA leads to better integration of environmental factors into project planning. Open procedures and freedom of information encourage responsiveness to EIA procedures, which can be weakened by discretionary powers and lack of access to the courts by public interest groups. However, legal standing may have side effects that offset its advantages. EIA can encourage cooperation and coordination between agencies but does not ensure them. Similarly, it can have a limited role in coordinating interstate and international policies. In the long term, the success of EIA depends on adequate monitoring, reassessment, and enforcement over the life of the project. EIA has generally opened up new opportunities for public participation, and may help to reduce conflict. EIA procedures need to be integrated with other environmental protection and development control programs, and various means exist for reducing its cost to developers and the public.     

From Poole to Fulham: A Changing Culture in UK Environmental Impact Assessment Decision Making?

This paper examines the role of environmental impact assessment (EIA) in project authorization decision making and the way in which the courts have interpreted its role. The purpose of the paper is to establish whether or not that role has changed over the period between the introduction of EIA in 1988 and 2001. From the evidence reported here, it is argued that while the procedural stages of EIA have been very much strengthened over that period, the importance of EIA as a tool to aid planning authorization decision making remains largely peripheral.     

简析公众参与环境影响评价制度

文章主要从公众参与主体范围、公众参与形式、公众参与信息公开、法律保障、公众参与意见等方面指出我国公众参与环境影响评价制度需要完善之处,并针对性地提出:明确公众参与的主体范围、完善公众参与形式、完善环境信息公开制度、建立环境公益诉讼制度、重视公众意见的反馈等完善公众参与的措施。     

提高公众参与环境影响评价有效性的研究

公众参与是促进决策科学化和民主化的重要手段。针对当前我国公众参与环境影响评价存在的诸多问题,本文剖析了问题存在的原因,并从立法、确定利益相关者、完善公众参与方式和内容、提高信息交流透明度、完善公众参与监督体系、完善公众意见筛选与评价方法、提高公众环保知识等方面提出了完善公众参与体系,提高公众参与有效性的建议。     

An approach to integrate impact scoping with environmental impact assessment

Impact scoping is the process of identifying important issues of a proposal and focusing the environmental impact assessment (EIA) on the high-priority issues. Although impact scoping in one form or another has been inherent to EIA for some time, documentation of its development and discussion of refinements to impact scoping processes have not been forthcoming. This article traces the development of impact scoping through time and highlights the need for such processes in EIA. A focused environmental assessment (FEA) approach to impact scoping that is suitable for implementation in an EIA is presented here and advantages of its use are delineated. FEA is a three-staged process that encourages impact scoping through progressive steps including impact identification, assessment and management planning. FEA combines a suite of EIA methods including: issues matrices, impact hypotheses, valued ecosystem components, and stakeholder participation sessions to effectively integrate impact scoping with EIA.     

The role of public involvement in environmental impact assessment in Vietnam: towards a more culturally sensitive approach

This paper explores the extent to which Western approaches to public involvement in environmental impact assessment (EIA) have been transferred to Vietnam, constraints on their use, and their appropriateness for the Vietnamese context. The research is based on an analysis of the public involvement content found in 26 EIA reports from development banks and interviews with 26 key informants. The study found that public involvement in Vietnam is generally technocratic, expert-driven and non-transparent, similar to the early days of EIA in the West and emerging economies. Public involvement usually occurs through authorised state channels such as commune leaders, mass organisations and professional organisations. The lack of a participatory culture for EIA, the nascent nature of grassroots democracy in the country, and Vietnamese cultural norms regarding respect for authority provide a challenging context for involving the public in EIA. The paper concludes by offering a number of suggestions for culturally appropriate public involvement at a time when Vietnam has just introduced mandatory public consultation for EIAs.     

Progress with Implementing the Environmental Assessment Requirements of the Resource Management Act in New Zealand

The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) has introduced environmental impact assessment (EIA) into the operations of territorial authorities at the regional and district level in New Zealand. The system established by the RMA is not only devolved in administrative terms, it is also comprehensive in its application. This paper reports the findings of an interview-based survey of key personnel in selected regional and district councils, along with others from government departments, planning consultancies and law firms. The purpose is to assess the success of the councils in developing appropriate and workable procedures, and to identify the main problems likely to inhibit the development of an effective EIA system in New Zealand. Overall, the task of implementing the EIA requirements has been tackled positively by councils, but there are signs of major differences emerging in the EIA procedures they are developing. Key issues that need to be considered by councils include: the need for explanatory documentation for, and verbal advice to, resource consents applicants at the earliest stage possible; the lack of public involvement in the EIA activities and the need for council staff to encourage and facilitate such participation; and problems with ensuring the adequacy of EIA information in such a devolved and comprehensive EIA system.     

Environmental impact assessment in the People's Republic of China

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedures have been in existence in the People's Republic of China over the last decade. The impetus for China's introduction of EIA was provided by the Environmental Protection Law of the People's Republic of China, which was adopted by the Fifth National People's Congress in 1979. The EIA process, which is administrative and not statutorily mandated, has been applied primarily to construction projects. Four stages are typically involved in an EIA investigation: design of the investigation, evaluation of background environmental quality, prediction of environmental impacts, and an assessment and analysis of the environmental impacts. A variety of approaches is used for predicting and analyzing environmental impacts, ranging from ad hoc methods to fairly sophisticated mathematical models. The results of the EIA investigation are compiled in an environmental impact statement, which is used as the basis for decision making by personnel in environmental protection departments. The EIA process does not include provisions for citizen notification or involvement. Views differ concerning the effectiveness of the EIA program in protecting China's natural, social, and cultural environments. Some hold that the EIA program has brought about improvement in environmental protection, while critics contend that the program has had little effect in the prevention of pollution. However, most, if not all, observers seem to feel that the program should be continued and improved. A major avenue for improvement is to place the evaluation of a particular project in a regional context. An earlier version of this paper was distributed at a workshop on Environmental Assessment Development Planning held in conjunction with the VII Annual Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Brisbane, Australia, July 5–8, 1988.     

战略环境影响评价中公众参与方法研究与案例分析

公众参与有效性是衡量战略环境影响评价质量的一个重要指标,它对于提高环境管理水平具有重要的意义。本文在对比项目环境影响评价的基础上,系统阐述了战略环境影响评价公众参与的内容、对象、方式、时机、实施主体、数据处理及信息反馈,初步建立了战略环境影响评价公众参与的方法与体系,并结合典型案例进行了战略环境影响评价公众参与的过程分析。     

Environmental Impact Assessment Under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty

US government actions undertaken in Antarctica are subject to the requirements of both the Protocol and the US National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). There are differences in the scope and intent of the Protocol and NEPA; however, both require environmental impact assessment (EIA) as part of the planning process for proposed actions that have the potential for environmental impacts. In this paper we describe the two instruments and highlight key similarities and differences with particular attention to EIA. Through this comparison of the EIA requirements of NEPA and the Protocol, we show how the requirements of each can be used in concert to provide enhanced environmental protection for the antarctic environment. NEPA applies only to actions of the US government; therefore, because NEPA includes certain desirable attributes that have been refined and clarified through numerous court cases, and because the Protocol is just entering implementation internationally, some recommendations are made for strengthening the procedural requirements of the Protocol for activities undertaken by all Parties in Antarctica. The Protocol gives clear and strong guidance for protection of specific, valued antarctic environmental resources including intrinsic wilderness and aesthetic values, and the value of Antarctica as an area for scientific research. That guidance requires a higher standard of environmental protection for Antarctica than is required in other parts of the world. This paper shows that taken together NEPA and the Protocol call for closer examination of proposed actions and a more rigorous consideration of environmental impacts than either would alone. Three areas are identified where the EIA provisions of the Protocol could be strengthened to improve its effectiveness. First, the thresholds defined by the Protocol need to be clarified. Specifically, the meanings of the terms “minor” and “transitory” are not clear in the context of the Protocol. The use of “or” in the phrase “minor or transitory” further confuses the meaning. Second, cumulative impact assessment is called for by the Protocol but is not defined. A clear definition could reduce the chance that cumulative impacts would be given inadequate consideration. Finally, the public has limited opportunities to comment on or influence the preparation of initial or comprehensive environmental evaluations. Experience has shown that public input to environmental documents has a considerable influence on agency decision making and the quality of EIA that agencies perform.     

Environmental impact assessment of infrastructure projects: a governance perspective

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been promoted as an instrument for preventive environmental management in construction projects, but its performance in safeguarding the environment through influencing project decision-making is questioned. This paper probes the underlying reasons from a governance perspective as an important supplement to the regulatory and technical perspectives. A framework, with process integration, professional governance, and public engagement being its key components, is proposed to analyze the governance arrangements that enable or inhibit the effective functioning of EIA, based on which a comparative study of three infrastructure projects in China, the United States and Finland was conducted. The results reveal that, while the level of process integration and public engagement of EIA determines the degree to which EIA influences project decisions, it is the professional governance that controls the accountability of EIA. The paper has implications on institutionally where efforts should be directed to improve the performance of EIA.     

EIA,Decision-making Theory and Screening and Scoping in UK Practice

As an aid to decision making Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is seen as a rational and systematic process which is often held to be holistic and proactive in its approach to environmental protection (Glasson et al., 1999). The roots of EIA are firmly located within the 1960s' demand for a more systematic and objective approach to environmental decision making and hence within the rationalist model of decision making theory. This paper examines the key stages of the EIA process to assess how far EIA conforms to the rationalist model today. Most research in EIA decision making has focused on the project authorization process and not the crucial decisions made at the earlier stages of screening and scoping. This study examines those early stages within the context of UK EIA practice. From this examination the paper attempts to locate EIA within decision-making theory.     

The significance of environmental impacts: an exploration of the concept

Since environmental impact assessment (EIA) is concerned primarily withsignificant environmental impacts, the concept of impact significance deserves to be defined and applied rigorously. In this article use of the term over the past 15 years in EIA documentation is reviewed. Some recent attempts at elucidating the concept are summarized. Four perspectives on impact significance that emerged from a series of workshops on the ecological basis for EIA are presented. These perspectives include (a) statistical (related to problems of isolating project-induced changes from natural variation), (b) ecological (related to the importance of project-induced changes from a purely ecological perspective), (c) social (related to the acceptability of project-induced changes in important environmental attributes), and (d) project (related to whether project-induced changes will indeed influence project decision making). The following synthesis is proposed: Any exercise in judging the significance of an environmental impact should thoroughly consider (a) the importance of the environmental attribute in question to project decision makers, (2) the distribution of change in time and space, (c) the magnitude of change, and (d) the reliability with which change has been predicted or measured. The implications of considering these factors are discussed.     

Institutional Challenges for EIA Implementation in China: A Case Study of Development Versus Environmental Protection

This paper provides a complete case study analysis of environmental impact assessment (EIA) implementation in China from planning to legal challenge, which is typical but rarely reported. The analysis takes an historical perspective on the regulatory and institutional structures through which EIA has been implemented in China, in order to evaluate the extent to which EIA has matured over the last 10 years. The case study relates to a proposed recreation/tourist development at Dianshan Lake, a protected water resource for Shanghai. Legal and administrative challenge began in 1993, when the case was initiated with a letter from the public, and concluded in 1996, when the case was decided in a court judgment. More recent follow-up research indicates that many issues have continued to be problems for EIA implementation in China. Policy implications in terms of regulatory structure, institutional arrangement, EIA procedure, EIA practitioners, and public participation can be drawn, and lessons learned for both the government and the developers. The study emphasizes the problem of relying on reorientation of existing institutions to promote new (environmental) priorities.     

学习实施环境影响评价法

讨论了环评法涉及的环评主管部门、规划建设单位和环评机构三个主要对象之间的关系，规划环评、跟踪评价、后评价、公众参与，以及环境评价与环境工程等内容。     

完善环境影响评价制度的思考

文章分析了环境影响评价制度的价值,我国环境影响评价制度存在的缺陷。提出我国环境影响评价制度的完善措施应为:拓宽环境影响评价对象范围,引进可替代方案,确保公众有效参与。     

Strategic environmental assessment as a tool of environmental governance: Scotland's extension of the European Union SEA Directive

The coverage of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) has been extended to all public sector policies, plans and programmes subject to Scottish jurisdiction. Evaluation of the arguments advanced by the Scottish Executive for using environmental assessment as a tool for environmental governance requires an exploration of some of the contested interpretations of the function of environmental assessment at a strategic level. The paper examines the implications of this extension of the European Union SEA Directive in the context of current arrangements to fit environmental assessment into the UK tradition of integrated policy appraisal. It considers the methodological implications of using SEA explicitly for improving public sector decision making at all levels and across all activities. This enables environmental effects to be taken into account at an early stage in the formulation of government policy, through a transparent system of assessment which encourages public participation.