The needs of nomadic-pastoral land users with respect to EIA theory,methods and effectiveness: What are they and does EIA address them?

The aim of this article is to examine the needs of nomadic-pastoral land users with respect to EIA theory, methods and effectiveness based on literature review by applying Retief (2010)’s framework. The article intends to identify these needs and analyse whether EIA addresses them sufficiently and appropriately. Retief (2010)’s framework defines theory, methods (quality) and effectiveness as three main interrelated themes of environmental assessment. Our review was guided by these three themes and moreover, using nomadic pastoralism as a test case, we attempted to expand this broad framework into a four-step approach that can be used to systematically examine EIA literature. The approach first adopts the Retief (2010)’s framework and secondly, identifies issues of nomadic-pastoral land use which matter the most with respect to Retief (2010)’s themes. The next step selected 156 articles for literature review considering the issues identified previously and the fourth step examined the selected articles using a concept-centric review and a content analysis. Nomadic-pastoral land users need EIA theory to incorporate irrational logic and complex and unpredictable socio-ecological features of nomadic-pastoral land use. Decisions made based on the rational decision-making model in EIA cannot sufficiently incorporate the needs of nomadic-pastoral land use due to uncertainties associated with rational decision-making and different power, values and interests of stakeholders in pasture land resources. Furthermore, the needs of nomadic-pastoral land users with respect to EIA methods are related to impact pathways and dynamic character of land use. EIA methods systematically address impact pathways. However, the current EIA methods primarily focus on static land use, and do not address sufficiently and appropriately dynamic nature of land use. For nomadic-pastoral land users, maintaining land quality in nomadic pastoralism and participation in EIA are the most important issues with respect to effectiveness of EIA. However, empirical data are needed to examine whether these needs are addressed in EIA. Nevertheless, the current frameworks for evaluation of effectiveness of EIA are sufficient for assessment of EIA's capacity for addressing the needs of nomadic-pastoral land users. Further studies should aim at incorporating the nature of socio-ecological interaction and dynamics into EIA theories and developing suitable models on herding mobility and strategy for impact prediction in EIA.     

Public participation modes in China's environmental impact assessment process: An analytical framework based on participation extent and conflict level

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) serves as a gatekeeper to prevent environmental pollution, and public participation is a legal requirement in the EIA process that ensures people's awareness of activities that may jeopardize the environment. Recently, with the elevated awareness of environmental protection and increasing environmental sensitivity, EIA has evolved as a means for the public to show their attitudes towards environmental issues. More frequently, public protests against not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) facilities have become a significant challenge in the government's decision-making process. Government officials and EIA practitioners continue to look for a more effective way of public participation and aim to establish a platform that can involve related stakeholders. However, current research on public participation is limited to individual case studies or lacks a systematic approach to analysing diversified modes of public participation, which may differentiate levels of acceptance by the government in the EIA process and consequently lead to different effects. Therefore, from the perspectives of the participation extent and conflict level, this paper aims to establish an integrated framework to categorize different public participation patterns in EIA practices and to analyse their characteristics, such as preferences and the action logic arising from different stakeholders, including the government and public. The paper concludes that collaborative public participation is a possible way to strengthen the effectiveness of public involvement within the Chinese context.     

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.     

Public participation in environmental impact assessment: why,who and how?

Even a cursory glance at the literature on environmental impact assessment (EIA) reveals that public participation is being considered as an integral part of the assessment procedure. Public participation in EIA is commonly deemed to foster democratic policy-making and to render EIA more effective. Yet a closer look at the literature unveils that, beyond this general assertion, opinions of the precise meaning, objectives and adequate representation of public participation in EIA considerably diverge. Against this background, in this article we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the academic debate on public participation in EIA concerning its meaning, objectives and adequate level of inclusiveness. In so doing, we hope to stimulate a more focused debate on the subject, which is key to advancing the research agenda. Furthermore, this paper may serve as a starting point for practitioners involved in defining the role of public participation in EIA practice.     

Stakeholder perceptions of Environmental Management Plans as an environmental protection tool for major developments in the UK

Insufficient implementation and the lack of legislative requirements for follow-up measures following the approval of projects are consistently highlighted as major shortcomings of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Although adopted over 15 years ago by the World Bank, Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) were only semi-formalised in the UK in 2008 and arguably provide a continuous link or ‘bridge’ between the EIA process pre-consent and an Environmental Management System (EMS) post-consent. Drawing on twenty-one semi-structured interviews with stakeholders and thematic analysis of their responses, and a broad-scale practitioner survey, this study aimed to assess the effectiveness of EMPs as an environmental protection tool across the project lifecycle for major developments. The findings revealed a mixed picture of EMP effectiveness in practice, with EMPs only partially fulfilling a bridging role between EIA and EMS. There is no ‘gold standard’ terminology for EMPs, all having slightly different uses, thus presenting different focuses to different stakeholders and further enhancing variation in practice. For many stakeholders, the effectiveness was simply not known, due to the lack of communication and follow-up that still exists. EMP–EMS linkages were shown to be effective from the developer's perspective when a single organisation has involvement across all project phases, though weaknesses occur when multiple parties are involved. Among other stakeholders, knowledge varied significantly; whilst some were in agreement that the linkages worked, many were unaware of the connections and thought of them as two quite separate tools. Stakeholders advocated for the need to make EMPs a legal requirement; for improved communication between stakeholders during EMP implementation and increased documentation of project outcomes; and for EMPs to be consistently written by environmental professionals. Furthermore, weak links in the current process may be improved by providing detailed guidance for organisations on the potential for EMP–EMS linkages, with the additional aim of encouraging stakeholders to broaden their current specialist knowledge on environmental protection tools.     

Environmental assessment in The Netherlands: Effectively governing environmental protection? A discourse analysis

Environmental assessment (EA) aims to enhance environmental awareness and to ensure that environmental values are fully considered in decision-making. In the EA arena, different discourses exist on what EA should aim for and how it functions. We hypothesise that these discourses influence its application in practice as well as its effectiveness in terms of achieving the above goals. For instance, actors who consider EA as a hindrance to fast implementation of their projects will probably apply it as a mandatory checklist, whereas actors who believe that EA can help to develop more environmentally sound decisions will use EIA as a tool to design their initiatives. In this paper we explore discourses on EA in The Netherlands and elaborate on their implications for EA effectiveness. Based on an innovative research design comprising an online survey with 443 respondents and 20 supplementary semi-structured interviews we conclude that the dominant discourse is that EA is mainly a legal requirement; EAs are conducted because they have to be conducted, not because actors choose to do so. EA effectiveness however seems reasonably high, as a majority of respondents perceive that it enhances environmental awareness and contributes to environmental protection. However, the ‘legal requirement’ discourse also results in decision-makers seldom going beyond what is prescribed by EA and environmental law. Despite its mandatory character, the predominant attitude towards EA is quite positive. For most respondents, EA is instrumental in providing transparency of decision-making and in minimising the legal risks of not complying with environmental laws. Differences in discourses seldom reflect extreme opposites. The ‘common ground’ regarding EA provides a good basis for working with EA in terms of meeting legal requirements but at the same time does not stimulate creativity in decision-making or optimisation of environmental values. In countries characterised by less consensual political cultures we may expect more extreme discourses on EA, the consequences of which are reflected upon in this paper.     

An inquiry into the concept of SEA effectiveness: Towards criteria for Chinese practice

The importance of improving the effectiveness of Plan EIA and SEA-type evaluations in China cannot be overstated: at a time when the country's economy is being boosted by a stimulus package worth over RMB 400 trillion – largely for infrastructure – the pressure on China's already strained environment and resource base is bound to increase. The aim is to propose the criteria for plan EIA's effectiveness to raise the awareness of the need to strengthen the performance of the assessment and maximize its potential benefits. The authors first review critically the discourse on the effectiveness of the impact assessment, identifying three dimensions: substantive, procedural and incremental. The resulting conceptual framework allows them to interpret the weaknesses of the Chinese discourse on the effectiveness and of the practice of the Plan EIA to date. The result is the identification of a clear gap, both in terms of the breadth of the concept, and in terms of the quality of the existing criteria, which tend to be very generic to the point of inapplicability. The analysis also reveals a need for transitioning from formal models of the Plan EIA to more strategic approaches, in a gradual manner that is consistent with context-specificities. The proposal of a set of preliminary criteria for effectiveness is therefore structured on three levels. This framework is meant to input into the ongoing debate on how to improve the practice of PEIA and the SEA-type evaluations in China, and provide ideas for a government strategy aimed at maximizing the positive impact of PEIAs on planning, as well as on the context of application.     

Evaluating the effectiveness of integrating the environmental impact assessment and mine closure planning processes

Integration of environmental assessment tools has long been promoted as best practice with the potential to bring environmental benefits. In this research, we set out to evaluate the effectiveness of integration of environmental impact assessment (EIA) and mine closure planning using a simple effectiveness criteria framework, applied to current regulatory provisions and practices in Western Australia. The effectiveness criteria for the integration of EIA and mine closure planning, compiled from existing reviews of integration and effectiveness concepts in the impact assessment literature, considers procedural, transactive, substantive effectiveness and overall process legitimacy. Data analysis consisted of a literature review, examination of regulatory and guidance material and interviews with 12 experienced EIA and/or mine closure practitioners with an industry or regulatory focus. The results provide strong, positive examples of procedural, transactive and substantive effectiveness due to the integrated framework. These include behavioural changes, improved knowledge and learning and better provision for closure at an early stage of mine planning. A trajectory of improvement was noted by everybody interviewed. However, a key driver for effectiveness is the enthusiasm of key facilitations, and tension exists due to the different motivations of the two lead regulatory agencies which poses a challenge for the integrated framework. While it can reasonably be argued that the effectiveness of early mine closure planning cannot yet be realised, due to a paucity of completely closed mines in Australia this study nevertheless demonstrates clear benefits and opportunities result from early stage integration of EIA with mine closure planning.     

A window on urban sustainability: Integration of environmental interests in urban planning through ‘decision windows’

Sustainable urban development requires the integration of environmental interests in urban planning. Although various methods of environmental assessment have been developed, plan outcomes are often disappointing due to the complex nature of decision-making in urban planning, which takes place in multiple arenas within multiple policy networks involving diverse stakeholders. We argue that the concept of ‘decision windows’ can structure this seemingly chaotic chain of interrelated decisions. First, explicitly considering the dynamics of the decision-making process, we further conceptualized decision windows as moments in an intricate web of substantively connected deliberative processes where issues are reframed within a decision-making arena, and interests may be linked within and across arenas. Adopting this perspective in two case studies, we then explored how decision windows arise, which factors determine their effectiveness and how their occurrence can be influenced so as to arrive at more sustainable solutions. We conclude that the integration of environmental interests in urban planning is highly dependent on the ability of the professionals involved to recognize and manipulate decision windows. Finally, we explore how decision windows may be opened.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Elements of an SEA framework— improving the added-value of SEA

Debate across the impact assessment community has been significantly influenced by the emergence of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in the past few years. Although there are still difficulties regarding the understanding of its nature and technicalities, the need for it was acknowledged, and practice is taking place in diverse forms. Such diversity of approaches to SEA, while enriching debate, are critically confusing the relationship of SEA with other planning and impact assessment tools. In this paper it is argued that the value of SEA is a function of the extent it influences, and adds value, to decision making. Following that rationale, the paper suggests that SEA should be conceptualized as a framework, defined by core elements, that are incrementally integrated into policy and planning procedures and practices, whatever decision-making system in place. It is believed that in this way SEA may better satisfy one of its acknowledged aims and benefits, which is to help achieve sustainable development by changing the way decisions are made.     

Regulators' perceptions of environmental impact assessment (EIA) benefits in a sustainable development context

The costs of conducting Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) are well known. Yet the benefits of EIA are much more intangible, leading to a situation where some question its value as the tool of choice for informing decision makers of the sustainability consequences of their actions. Exponents of EIA have thus called for more research on the benefits of EIA in order to provide better evidence on its costs versus benefits, and therefore its value as a decision-making tool. This paper contributes to this evidence by exploring the perceived potential benefits and perceived realised benefits of EIA from a regulators' perspective in the context of sustainable development. Using South Africa as a case study, one third of all the officials responsible for EIA review and decision-making (referred to in this paper as the “regulator”) were surveyed to identify their perceptions of the benefits of EIA, and their ideas on how to bridge the gap between potential benefits and realised benefits. The paper contributes suggestions for the analysis of benefits in a sustainable development context, and identifies some additional benefits currently missing from the literature. In a South African context, the key potential and realised benefits as perceived by regulators are the protection of biodiversity, public participation, access to information, mitigation of environmental impacts, and legal compliance and enforcement.     

An inquiry into the concept of SEA effectiveness: Towards criteria for Chinese practice

The importance of improving the effectiveness of Plan EIA and SEA-type evaluations in China cannot be overstated: at a time when the country's economy is being boosted by a stimulus package worth over RMB 400 trillion – largely for infrastructure – the pressure on China's already strained environment and resource base is bound to increase. The aim is to propose the criteria for plan EIA's effectiveness to raise the awareness of the need to strengthen the performance of the assessment and maximize its potential benefits. The authors first review critically the discourse on the effectiveness of the impact assessment, identifying three dimensions: substantive, procedural and incremental. The resulting conceptual framework allows them to interpret the weaknesses of the Chinese discourse on the effectiveness and of the practice of the Plan EIA to date. The result is the identification of a clear gap, both in terms of the breadth of the concept, and in terms of the quality of the existing criteria, which tend to be very generic to the point of inapplicability. The analysis also reveals a need for transitioning from formal models of the Plan EIA to more strategic approaches, in a gradual manner that is consistent with context-specificities. The proposal of a set of preliminary criteria for effectiveness is therefore structured on three levels. This framework is meant to input into the ongoing debate on how to improve the practice of PEIA and the SEA-type evaluations in China, and provide ideas for a government strategy aimed at maximizing the positive impact of PEIAs on planning, as well as on the context of application.     

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.     

Public participation in China's EIA process and the regulation of environmental disputes

This article reconsiders the role that public participation in the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process plays in China. Whilst some commentators have found that public participation has largely failed to make an impact in China, this article argues that it has been an important focal point during environmental disputes over siting decisions. The principles of transparency and public participation embodied in EIA legislation have been prominent frames used to legitimize public action against locally-unwanted-land-uses when decisions are taken unilaterally without sufficient public input or notification. In this sense, the EIA becomes a lightning rod for citizen claims-making in relation to siting disputes. At the same time, these principles help depoliticize contention by channeling it within state-approved discourses, enabling officials to buy time and defuse tension. Here, EIA serves as a shock absorber, helping contribute to social stability when disputes break out. By showing how public participation regulations are closely intertwined with contentious politics, this article highlights the paradoxical and contradictory nature of public participation in China.     

Integrating ecosystem services into environmental impact assessment: An analytic–deliberative approach

Analytic–deliberative techniques have been suggested as a promising approach to ecosystem service (ES) valuation but are still at an experimental stage. This paper contributes to the development of ES valuation in the environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedure by introducing an analytic–deliberative approach to assessing restoration options for a regulated river in Finland. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) with a value-focused approach was applied and compared with a desktop application of the ES-focused MCDA approach. We found out that the concept of ES could bring added value to the assessment process by: 1) enabling the framing and valuing especially of provisioning services — final ecosystem services, such as salmon catch in a more understandable way for the stakeholders, and 2) taking into account ecosystem processes and supporting services more precisely. However, some potential dangers of using the ES-based approach could include ES's appearing as a distant mode of thinking to affected groups and other stakeholders, and neglect of the trade-offs between ES and other relevant value and impact categories. Thus, although the ES framework is promising, it should not form a rigid ‘checklist’ way of making assessments but should rather be used to widen perspectives about potential issues in linking ecosystem properties to human benefits and values. It is argued that by combining the ES framework with the interactive MCDA approach, we can form a comprehensive and integrated approach to incorporating ESs into EIA.     

Theorising EIA effectiveness: A contribution based on the Danish system

Considerable attention has been given to the effectiveness of environmental impact assessment (EIA) since the 1970s. Relatively few research studies, however, have approached EIA as an instrument of environmental governance, and have explored the mechanisms through which EIA influences the behaviour of actors involved in planning processes. Consequently, theory in this area is underspecified. In this paper we contribute to theory-building by analysing the effectiveness of a unique EIA system: the Danish system. In this system the competent authority, instead of the project proponent, undertakes EIA reporting. Additionally, the public, rather than experts, play a central role in quality control and the Danish EIA community is relatively small which influences community dynamics in particular ways. A nation-wide survey and expert interviews were undertaken in order to examine the views of actors involved in EIA on the effectiveness of this anomalous system. The empirical data are compared with similar studies on governance mechanisms in other countries, especially the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, as well as with earlier evaluations of EIA effectiveness in Denmark. The results indicate that the more extensive role attributed to the competent authority may lead to higher EIA effectiveness when this aligns with their interests; the influence of the public is amplified by a powerful complaints system; and, the size of the EIA community appears to have no substantial influence on EIA effectiveness. We discuss how the research findings might enhance our theoretical understanding of the operation and effectiveness of governance mechanisms in EIA.