Developing a simplified river landscape assessment model: Examples from the Chungkang and Touchien rivers, Taiwan

Currently, river landscape evaluations cannot be conducted by the general public, due to their lack of professional training. However, consulting professionals is time consuming and costly. The research conducted addresses both problems by (1) developing suitable criteria for assessing river environments, and (2) formulating a strategy for using the proposed criteria, thereby creating an effective method for river management by non-professionals. This research was carried out, in accordance with Visual Resource Management theory, at 12 survey sites along the ChungKang River. The landscape quality sequences acquired were then evaluated using a revised and simplified assessment model. The same process was repeated on the Touchien River to verify its feasibility. This research developed both specific criteria as well a method for evaluating river landscapes, which can be employed by non-professional river project managers. Ultimately, the aim of this research is to develop and promote sustainable river resource management.     

Who plans for health improvement? SEA,HIA and the separation of spatial planning and health planning

This study examines whether there is active planning for health improvement in the English spatial planning system and how this varies across two regions using a combination of telephone surveys and focus group interviews in 2005 and 2010. The spatial planning profession was found to be ill-equipped to consider the health and well-being implications of its actions, whilst health professionals are rarely engaged and have limited understanding and aspirations when it comes to influencing spatial planning. Strategic Environmental Assessment was not considered to be successful in integrating health into spatial plans, given it was the responsibility of planners lacking the capacity to do so. For their part, health professionals have insufficient knowledge and understanding of planning and how to engage with it to be able to plan for health gains rather than simply respond to health impacts. HIA practice is patchy and generally undertaken by health professionals outside the statutory planning framework. Thus, whilst appropriate assessment tools exist, they currently lack a coherent context within which they can function effectively and the implementation of the Kiev protocol requiring the engagement of health professionals in SEA is not to likely improve the consideration of health in planning while there continues to be separation of functions between professions and lack of understanding of the other profession.     

Conceptualizing strategic environmental assessment: Principles,approaches and research directions

Increasing emphasis has been placed in recent years on transitioning strategic environmental assessment (SEA) away from its environmental impact assessment (EIA) roots. Scholars have argued the need to conceptualize SEA as a process designed to facilitate strategic thinking, thus enabling transitions toward sustainability. The practice of SEA, however, remains deeply rooted in the EIA tradition and scholars and practitioners often appear divided on the nature and purpose of SEA. This paper revisits the strategic principles of SEA and conceptualizes SEA as a multi-faceted and multi-dimensional assessment process. It is suggested that SEA can be conceptualized as series of approaches operating along a spectrum from less to more strategic – from impact assessment-based to strategy-based – with each approach to SEA differentiated by the specific objectives of SEA application and the extent to which strategic principles are reflected in its design and implementation. Advancing the effectiveness of SEA requires a continued research agenda focused on improving the traditional SEA approach, as a tool to assess the impacts of policies, plans and programs (PPPs). Realizing the full potential of SEA, however, requires a new research agenda — one focused on the development and testing of a deliberative governance approach to SEA that can facilitate strategic innovations in PPP formulation and drive transitions in short-term policy and initiatives based on longer-term thinking.     

Just so that we don't miss it: A critical view on the meaning of decision in IA

Impact assessment (IA) tools are targeted at decisions and decision-making in theory and in practice. Often described as decision support instruments, most IA are driven by the grand purpose of providing for informed decision-making. In practice this often means IA tends to be more concerned with the information to be provided than with the outcomes of IA and its relevance to the decision(s), and decision-makers(s) to which it should be targeted. Decisions and decision-making are, however, understood in many different ways, and actors involved in decision-making may therefore act widely different with diverse results. Therefore, distinguishing which decisions, and to which decision-makers IA are targeted at, is arguably indispensable to enhance IA effectiveness. Based on an overview of decision-making theory, this paper searches for the understanding of decision and decision-making in IA by exploring how it is conceived in guidance documents. Guidance documents have a prominent role in defining IA practice, and the explicit and implicit recognition of decision-making in guidance is therefore relevant to investigate in order to understand how IA relates to decision-making. With a focus on guidance documents related to the European Union Directive on environmental assessment of plans and programmes, this paper scrutinises four guidance documents and discusses the implications of the identified understandings of decision-making to the practice of IA. The key finding of this paper is that legislation-oriented guidance documents appear to miss to reflect the different forms of decision-making, and primarily depicts decision-making as a single, often timeless and faceless moment. The implications for practice are discussed including reflection on how to describe the nature of decision-making in guidance documents.     

Social Impact Management Plans: Innovation in corporate and public policy

Social Impact Assessment (SIA) has traditionally been practiced as a predictive study for the regulatory approval of major projects, however, in recent years the drivers and domain of focus for SIA have shifted. This paper details the emergence of Social Impact Management Plans (SIMPs) and undertakes an analysis of innovations in corporate and public policy that have put in place ongoing processes – assessment, management and monitoring – to better identify the nature and scope of the social impacts that might occur during implementation and to proactively respond to change across the lifecycle of developments. Four leading practice examples are analyzed. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards require the preparation of Environmental and Social Management Plans for all projects financed by the IFC identified as having significant environmental and social risks. Anglo American, a major resources company, has introduced a Socio-Economic Assessment Toolbox, which requires mine sites to undertake regular assessments and link these assessments with their internal management systems, monitoring activities and a Social Management Plan. In South Africa, Social and Labour Plans are submitted with an application for a mining or production right. In Queensland, Australia, Social Impact Management Plans were developed as part of an Environmental Impact Statement, which included assessment of social impacts. Collectively these initiatives, and others, are a practical realization of theoretical conceptions of SIA that include management and monitoring as core components of SIA. The paper concludes with an analysis of the implications for the practice of impact assessment including a summary of key criteria for the design and implementation of effective SIMPs.     

Logical chains in territorial impact assessment

In a way similar to the established impact assessment system (e.g. EIA, SEA), territorial impact assessment (TIA) explores the causal links between proposed actions and impacts. TIA constitutes a case of special interest in impact assessment as it operates at an uncommonly high tier of proposed action – e.g. EU directives – with a wide reach of potential outcomes, at various scales. Recent TIA developments have been using a causality analysis technique known as ‘logical chains’, and it is precisely here that a recent experimental application of TIA encountered shortcomings capable of compromising TIA itself. The article reports on these shortcomings, conceptual and practical resolutions, as well as case-study feedback from stakeholders.     

Cumulative effects in strategic environmental assessment: The influence of plan boundaries

Cumulative effects (CE) assessment is lacking quality in impact assessment (IA) worldwide. It has been argued that the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) provides a suitable IA framework for addressing CE because it is applied to developments with broad boundaries, but few have tested this claim. Through a case study on the Danish mining sector, this article explores how plan boundaries influence the analytical boundaries applied for assessing CE in SEA. The case was studied through document analysis in combination with semi-structured group interviews of the responsible planners, who also serve as SEA practitioners. It was found that CE are to some extent assessed and managed implicitly throughout the planning process. However, this is through a focus on lowering the cumulative stress of mining rather than the cumulative stress on and capacity of the receiving environment. Plan boundaries do influence CE assessment, though all boundaries are not equally influential. The geographical and time boundaries of the Danish mining plans are broad or flexible enough to accommodate a meaningful assessment of CE, but the topical boundary is restrictive. The study indicates that collaboration among planning authorities and legally appointed CE leadership may facilitate better practice on CE assessment in sector-specific SEA contexts. However, most pressing is the need for relating assessment to the receiving environment as opposed to solely the stress of a proposed plan.     

Enhancing Indigenous impact assessment: Lessons from Indigenous planning theory

Impact assessment faces a number of key challenges. One area singled out as needing attention is community-based impact assessment. Impact assessment related to Indigenous communities is a particular case in point. We lend an Indigenous voice to this conversation. The emerging field of Indigenous impact assessment is under-developed compared to other forms of IA, particularly in terms of its theoretical foundation. In the article we address that gap by highlighting the current conundrum in Indigenous practice, exemplified in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand. Then we base our deliberation in an Indigenous worldview, applying Indigenous planning theory to impact assessment. Indigenous planning theory has an explicit decolonising agenda that supports communities to reclaim traditional planning approaches. We provide key parameters for establishing a theoretical and practical space for Indigenous IA, and for conceptualising the relationship between Indigenous IA other forms of IA. We argue for a ‘third space’ that facilitates co-existence of different forms of IA activity rather than integration of Indigenous endeavours into broader IA types. In doing so, we demonstrate the potential of Indigenous planning theory to connect international dialogue and case studies on Indigenous impact assessment, and to broaden and deepen IA theory and practice.     

The new IAA in Canada: From revolutionary thoughts to reality

Federally, Canada entered a new chapter of review and revision of its impact assessment law in 2015. On the path to reform, the Federal government undertook a number of activities that spanned almost two years before introducing legislation. Efforts included striking an ‘expert panel’ to consult Canadians and establishing a multi-stakeholder Ministerial advisory committee. A new impact assessment Bill was eventually introduced to the House of Commons in early 2018. Key provisions of the Bill include a sustainability orientation, an early planning stage, a climate test, and a gender-based assessment requirement. Despite these positive changes, the IAA draws heavily on the flawed existing federal process (CEAA 2012) for its basic structure and approach and falls well short of what Canadians told the Expert Panel should be reflected in a new bill (and what the Panel itself recommended). The new Act falls even further short of what the literature suggests are the key elements of IA legislation.     

EIA training courses organized by the centre for environmental management and planning,University of Aberdeen: An analysis of experience

In 1980, the World Health Organization (Regional Office for Europe) invited The Centre for Environmental Management and Planning (CEMP) to organize a two-week training course on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to provide a comprehensive introduction to EIA with emphasis on methods and techniques for impact identification, prediction and assessment. Not suprisingly the topic of environmental health impact assessment was to be a major focus. Since 1980, the course has been held each year at the University of Aberdeen. An analysis of participation in the course during its first five years yields several impressions about the success of this training effort and the ways in which it might be improved.     

growing pains: a conceptual framework for considering integrated assessments

Policy concerns related to the environment have grown in the past decadesfrom relatively local and well-defined problems to increasingly complex andglobal issues. With this has grown the need to develop the capacity tointegrate, reconcile, organize, and communicate knowledge across scientificdisciplines, as well as to make this knowledge available and useful for policy-makers. One response to this has been the growing field ofIntegrated Assessment (IA). Our goal in this paper is to reflect on the purpose and valueof IA in principle. We propose a conceptual framework within whichindividual IA studies, and the practice of IA as a whole, can be placed andevaluated. The framework addresses both the integrative nature of IAs andtheir policy usefulness, including a self-awareness of their role and capabilities. We illustrate several stages in the evolution of integrated assessments: fromlinear to more complex chains of analysis, from non-adaptive to perfectly-adaptive to realistically-adaptive agents, from simplistic to sophisticated to pluralistic consideration of alternative underlying development paths, from strictly quantitative to quantitative and qualitative analyses, from science-driven to policy-driven, and from analyses that dictate to users to those that involvethose users in the actual assessment process. By so doing, we argue for botha richer form and process of IA. Ultimately, we feel that it may also benecessary to reconsider the framing of the questions that IAs have been askedto address, perhaps leading to the consideration of the use of other forms of mandated science.     

Understanding why impact assessment fails; a case study of theory and practice from Wafi-Golpu,Papua New Guinea

From an instrumental or management perspective, impact assessment (IA) is a process of identifying impacts, finding solutions and achieving project approval. A recipient community, however, has a completely different perspective. For them the IA is about living with impacts, individually and collectively, perhaps over generations, and contested processes of self-determination, consultation and exclusion. IA practitioners live in a third space, usually bound to the proponent but also aware of responsibilities to communities and eco-systems. Seeking to better understand how IA is practiced and experienced, we explore the proposed Wafi-Golpu mine, located in the Morobe Province of Papua New Guinea. Determinably focused on local effects we situate the proposed mine within the context of the national mining experience and discuss how IA practices see local and/or Indigenous communities. We find that the Wafi-Golpu IA is blind to local ways of being and seeing the world, with an opaque and arbitrary assessment that reflects its technical and Western basis and bias. We finish with observations about the proposed Wafi-Golpu mine and IA that is relevant to the approval process, as well as making a decolonial, Southern contribution to IA theory and practice, extractive industry regulation and mining-affected communities elsewhere.     

An Integrated Ecosystem Assessment of the Interior Columbia Basin

Driven by the need to replace interim direction, address recent species listings as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act, and break the gridlock of implementing actions, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (FS) and the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), initiated an effort to develop a scientifically-sound, ecosystem-based strategy for lands they administer in the Interior Columbia Basin. The effort included an integrated assessment of 58.3 million ha in seven states describing the Basin's current conditions and risks associated with different management strategies. The assessment provides the foundation for environmental impact statements outlining management direction for 31 million hectares of FS and BLM administered lands. The process produced a framework for ecosystem management, ecosystem component (social, economic, landscape, terrestrial, and aquatic) assessments, and estimates of ecological integrity and socioeconomic resiliency.     

The adequacy of training for EIA in the United States of America

The well-established environmental impact assessment requirements in the United States have given rise to a number of training needs within federal and state agencies. Requirements for training vary for EIA project managers, technical specialists, senior managers and others involved in EIA. Information needs about EIA vary also, but include general awareness, procedural knowledge, substantive methodological knowledge and technical knowledge. While EIA training is provided in short courses, on the job, and in universities there remain deficiencies in the training of specialists, senior managers, and others. Proposals are made here to help overcome these. This paper examines the needs and provisions for training in environmental impact assessment (EIA) in the USA federal system and in the system created by the California Environmental Quality Act. The investigation is based on the very limited literature on training, on responses to letters, on the printed material requested from agencies and, most importantly, on the results of a series of interviews of personnel in various federal agencies at central and regional levels, in California, and elsewhere. A recent report by the Environmental Law Institute (1981) furnished invaluable background information on EIA training in the federal agencies. The list of liaison officers printed by the Council on Environmental Quality (1982a) was used to request interviews and information.     

Beyond distribution and participation: A scoping review to advance a comprehensive environmental justice framework for impact assessment

Concepts of justice are implicit to impact assessment (IA) procedures and policies. A closer examination of the academic literature on environmental justice reveals plural meanings and practices. We present data from a scoping review of the academic literature on IA guided by a trivalent definition of environmental justice encompassing distribution of environmental harms, recognition of diverse ways of knowing, and representation of plural perspectives through democratic procedures. We use this trivalent framework to assess how justice is defined in English language IA journal articles from 2000 to 2019. Findings show an emphasis on distributive and procedural dimensions of justice, with significantly less attention given to issues of recognition and framing. Broad definitions of environmental justice can assist IA scholars in attending to justice-seeking claims across various IA practices and settings, including implications for how IA addresses the concerns of marginalized groups.     

Can environmental impact assessments alone conserve freshwater fish biota? Review of the Chilean experience

Chile was one of many countries that initiated environmental impact assessments in the 1990s, and has relied on their use for species conservation and territorial planning without the use of larger-scale environmental and ecological planning. The capacity of Chile's environmental impact assessment system (SEIA) to evaluate resident freshwater fishes and the potential impacts of water projects and aquaculture activities – two categories of projects that create direct threats to freshwater fishes – are assessed. Of the 3997 such submissions to the SEIA, only 0.6% conducted any freshwater fish assessment, and only 0.1% conducted any quantitative assessment of expected impacts from the associated project. The small number of assessments was characterized by poor study design, inconsistent sampling methodology, and species misidentification. Traditional assessments failed to include freshwater fish ecology in the general assessment framework. The new strategic environmental evaluation system only underscores the need for vastly improved field sampling protocols and assessment methodologies.     

Social impact assessment and stakeholder engagement in the Russian Federation: Representativeness,deliberativeness and influence

We analyse two approaches to social impact assessment (SIA) – traditional SIA and participatory SIA – in the context of a large project in the Russian Federation. The key difference between these approaches is the level and depth of stakeholder engagement in the impact assessment process and project. Participatory SIA seeks to observe the three principles of participatory democracy: representativeness, deliberativeness and influence. We identify the requirements for stakeholder engagement in the Russian impact assessment process, and analyse implementation practice by reviewing the stakeholder engagement activities undertaken for the South Stream gas pipeline project, according to national requirements and international best practice (e.g. the International Finance Corporation Performance Standards). We conclude that the Russian process reflects traditional SIA. Its main weaknesses are poor stakeholder identification and planning of engagement activities. The Russian SIA/EIA process is not consistent with the principles of representativeness, deliberativeness and influence and does not enable people to adequately participate in or influence decision-making.     

Comparing the quality of draft environmental impact statements by agencies in the United States since 1998 to 2004

Since the creation of the National Environmental Policy Act in 1970, the United States has required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to rate draft environmental statements (DEISs) for both information adequacy and the impact of the preferred alternative on the environment. In a previous study by Tzoumis and Finegold (2000), these ratings were found to be declining from 1970 to 1997. This current study investigates if that trend continued from 1998 to 2004. In addition, the top producing agencies (the Forest Service, the Federal Highway Administration, Army Corp of Engineers, and the Bureau of Land Management) are compared for the achievement of DEIS ratings. The results show that when the ratings are disaggregated for these agencies, the results indicate that there continues to be weak performance. The DEISs continue to have insufficient and sometimes inadequate information. Agencies continue to propose projects that have environmental concerns and sometimes objections. The agencies have some similarities in not being able to achieve the highest ratings on a consistent basis over time. However, more disturbing is the profile of agencies that have episodic peaks of achieving the lowest ratings. Conclusions and recommendations are focused on the agencies who submit that DEISs and EPA. One major conclusion is to better track the ratings and make them collectively available for the public. Agencies are encouraged to develop a best management practice in preparing DEISs to promote agency learning.     

Inclusion of uncertainty in Environmental Impact Assessment in Greenland

Uncertainty is an inherent part of impact assessment (IA), and can vary in type and source. However, according to previous research, uncertainty is rarely explicitly acknowledged and handled in IA, indicating that it is a challenging issue in practice. This paper adds to the current research body a study of EIA in Greenland, which includes a document study of EIA reports as well as white papers and summaries from public hearings. The study findings are in line with previous results, finding a limited explicit acknowledgement of uncertainty, although uncertainty is indicated through implicit language use. The study also finds that various tools are applied, which could be used for handling uncertainty, including sensitivity analysis, monitoring and worst-case estimates. However, often these tools are not used systematically, and it is not transparent whether they are targeted at handling uncertainty. Regarding the examination of materials from hearing processes, there is little evidence that uncertainty is part of the discussions. These results initiate discussions of how choices of whether and how to acknowledge and handle uncertainty are made, and how consciously participants in the process make these choices.     

A knowledge brokerage approach for assessing the impacts of the setting up young farmers policy measure in Greece

This study explores Knowledge Brokerage (KB) aspects of an ex-post Impact Assessment (IA) for the Rural Development Programme (RDP) measure of setting up young farmers, under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), at the regional level in Northern Greece. The measure supports the entry of young farmers in agriculture by moving land from older to younger farmers. The aim of the study was to test a set of KB tools for improving the interaction between researchers and policy makers. Our analysis mainly focused on a suite of IA Support Modules to guide practitioners, and on a technical tool kit, a web-based contextualisation platform, to support the IA of the specific test case. Offering a structured approach towards IA, both the Support Modules and LIAISE-KIT allow framing the context, organisation, scheduling and method selection in the light of KB objectives. The evaluation of how IA Support Modules influence the Science Policy Interface (SPI), in the case of the ex-post assessment, demonstrated the high relevance of KB activities for facilitating the interaction between researchers and regional policy makers. The assessment bridges the gap between knowledge producers developing scientific output to be applied in a specific context, and knowledge users, who want clear messages regarding the policy challenges they face. Other conclusions include the need for specific guidelines and training for knowledge users, especially with regard to the use of tools. According to our findings, a consequent application of KB activities is a crucial pre-condition for successfully implementing IAs in future RDP measures.