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.     

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.     

Discretionary Judgement in Local Planning Authority Decision Making: Screening Development Proposals for Environmental Impact Assessment

Screening is a critical decision-stage in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process and involves the determination of whether or not a development proposal will require EIA. This decision requires a discretionary judgement on whether the development has the potential to cause ‘significant environmental effects’, and consequently there is potential for diversity to exist in formal requests for EIA. Drawing upon a comprehensive survey of Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) in England and Wales, this paper explores the characteristics of LPA screening decision making since the introduction of revised EIA regulations in March 1999. The paper starts with a theoretical overview of rationality, decision making and planning theory, followed by a brief review of the regulatory context of EIA screening. The research approach is then outlined and the survey findings are presented, including a detailed consideration of organizational and individual level analyses set within the context of planning theory judgement debates. Comparisons with other European countries are briefly made, before drawing conclusions and recommendations.     

Beyond the Requirements: Improving Public Participation in EIA

Virtually every environmental planner at some time deals with environmental impact assessment (EIA). Public participation is required in most environmental impact assessment programmesaround the world. However, citizen involvement is often reduced to a procedural exercise instead of a substantive process to include the public in environmental decision making. This paper examines public participation in EIA and provides ways to improve its effectiveness. We first examine the rationales for public involvement and its institutionalization through EIA. Next, we analyse the shortcomings and strengths of common approaches to public involvement. Our analysis, supported by two case studies, suggests that going beyond the minimum requirements can benefit the public, the project proponent and the final plan. We conclude with practical steps to improve public participation programmes in environmental planning and decision making.     

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.     

Environmental Impact Assessment and Management: An Underexplored Relationship

In this paper the existing body of theory is reviewed to highlight the need for further attention to be paid to the EIA/management relationship. In particular it is shown that the majority of the literature to date has concentrated on the influence of EIA leading up to and including the decision to proceed or not with the proposed action. Less attention has been paid to the extension of the influence of EIA beyond this point to inform the process of ongoing environmental management. This relationship is then explored by reference to the Western Australian EIA system. One of the strengths of this system is its focus upon the implementation and management of proposed developments. The outcome of EIA is generally an approval to proceed with the development subject to meeting a suite of environmental design and management objectives.     

The role of environmental impact assessment in coal production and utilization

Large-scale exploitation of fossil fuels and nuclear power can have an adverse effect on the human and natural environment. That need not be the case, if the effect on the environment is carefully assessed to ensure the development of a sustainable approach. This paper examines the process of environmental impact assessment (EIA) for coal from an international perspective. The concept of EIA is not new. A formalized process of EIA was introduced in the USA in 1970, and more recently similar legislation has been implemented in other countries. The member states of the European Community are required to adopt EIA regulations, as set out in Directive 85/337/EEC. Elsewhere, in Japan and Australia, there are requirements for EIA and a growing need for the process can be seen in developing countries. A comparison is made of the EIA process for coal in the international arena, and exemplary procedures are highlighted. Potential problems such as delays, modifications and additional costs are analysed, and the benefits of EIA, both to industry and environment, are discussed. A database of coal-related EIA would facilitate an exchange of information on the subject.     

Environmental economic,political and ethical integration in a common decision-making framework

This article develops a decision-making framework for environmental management that integrates technical, economic, political and legal, and ethical decision levels. It attempts to show how these decision levels can be ordained, integrated and interconnected and postulates a hierarchic concentric sphere system that proposes an environmental management model for long-term solutions. This model can be used as a check list for environmental management decision-making and also as a guide for environmental conflict resolution where environmental problems necessitate several levels of decision making. It integrates various environmental ethical positions and evaluates political decisions into a comprehensive, broadly applicable multidisciplinary approach. The objective of this decision-making model is to interconnect into a simplified sequence different levels of environmental management processes in order to account for sustainability, efficacy, efficiency and the acceptability of environmental management processes in the long term. This is done by observing when an environmental problem needs to be solved within a certain sphere of solutions and when it requires wider frameworks, how these can be established and how this process proves that solidarity is the widest and most reasonable sphere.     

Applying Ecological Risk Principles to Watershed Assessment and Management

Considerable progress in addressing point source (end of pipe) pollution problems has been made, but it is now recognized that further substantial environmental improvements depend on controlling nonpoint source pollution. A watershed approach is being used more frequently to address these problems because traditional regulatory approaches do not focus on nonpoint sources. The watershed approach is organized around the guiding principles of partnerships, geographic focus, and management based on sound science and data. This helps to focus efforts on the highest priority problems within hydrologically-defined geographic areas. Ecological risk assessment is a process to collect, organize, analyze, and present scientific information to improve decision making. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sponsored three watershed assessments and found that integrating the watershed approach with ecological risk assessment increases the use of environmental monitoring and assessment data in decision making. This paper describes the basics of the watershed approach, the ecological risk assessment process, and how these two frameworks can be integrated. The three major principles of watershed ecological risk assessment found to be most useful for increasing the use of science in decision making are (1) using assessment endpoints and conceptual models, (2) holding regular interactions between scientists and managers, and (3) developing a focus for multiple stressor analysis. Examples are provided illustrating how these principles were implemented in these assessments.     

Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation in Hong Kong and Shanghai: A Cross-city Analysis

Cross-city analysis in environmental regulation within non-democratic political systems is a neglected area. Taking policy convergence and styles of regulation as the focus, this paper has taken an initial step to compare the environmental impact assessment (EIA) regulation in Hong Kong and Shanghai. In this comparative exercise, it is identified that policy convergence occurs more explicitly in policy ideology and policy consequences, whereas divergence takes place in policy content, regulatory process and public consultation. Convergence, however, is only superficial whereas divergence is substantial. Indeed EIA systems of these two jurisdictions have displayed contrasting styles of regulation. The formal EIA system in Shanghai is dominated by the environmental agency, which regulates informal politics in the EIA process within a legal format. The informal EIA system in Hong Kong is co-ordinated by the environmental agency, which seeks active co-operation with the clients in a consultative EIA process in an informal and discretionary manner. What makes the Hong Kong system superior to the Shanghai system is the existence of institutional channels for public consultation. Within a non-democratic political setting, the EIA process in Hong Kong is more transparent and the EIA system is more accountable to the public, whereas the EIA process in Shanghai is lacking in transparency and the EIA system is under tight bureaucratic control.     

Environmental Impact Evaluation Model for Industrial Processes

This paper proposes a model to evaluate the environmental impact of manufacturing processes. This model uses the potency factor approach to classify environmental impacts into five ecological health impact groups and uses their toxicological, cancer, and physical effects as the bases to rate the seven groups of human health impacts. The environmental impacts in each impact group are reported, and their hazard scores on ecological and human health are determined. The model also generates a single score for the overall environmental impacts of a process. This single score system helps to identify, among all the viable processes, which is the most environmentally friendly process. This model can serve as a tool to highlight the potential environmental hazards of process operations and to provide information about environmental performance for decision making. The model has been developed into a computer software program, Environmental Impact Evaluation System, and is demonstrated by using the processes employed for the manufacture of paper bags.     

Ten Years On: An Empirical Analysis of UK Environmental Statement Submissions since the Implementation of Directive 85/337/EEC

Regulations to implement Directive 85/337/EEC have been in operation in the UK for over 10 years. Implementation of the amended Directive (97/11/EC) in March 1999 marked the start of a new phase in environmental impact assessment (EIA), and so a review of the impact of the original Directive upon EIA activity is timely. This paper examines the implementation of the Directive in the UK through an empirical analysis of the publication of environmental statements (ESs) between July 1988 and April 1998. ES submissions are analysed under Annexes I and II of the Directive and under the main UK regulations, and then development control decision outcomes are considered. The implications of selected legislation and policy initiatives for ES submissions are then investigated in detail for four types of project. The Directive has been a major force in stimulating the development and growth of EIA in the UK, although the interaction of policies and legislation (environmental and otherwise) can exert an important influence upon trends in ES submissions.     

INCORPORATING UNCERTAINTY IN THE DESIGN OF STREAM CHMNEL MODIFICATIONS1

ABSTRACT: The designs of stream channel naturalization, rehabilitation, and restoration projects are inherently fraught with uncertainty. Although a systematic approach to design can be described, the likelihood of success or failure of the design is unknown due to uncertainties within the design and implementation process. In this paper, a method for incorporating uncertainty in decision‐making during the design phase is presented that uses a decision analysis method known as Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA). The approach is applied to a channel rehabilitation project in north‐central Pennsylvania. FMEA considers risk in terms of the likelihood of a component failure, the consequences of failure, and the level of difficulty required to detect failure. Ratings developed as part of the FMEA can provide justification for decision making in determining design components that require particular attention to prevent failure of the project and the appropriate compensating actions to be taken.     

Policy and Practice

Saudi Arabia has recently begun to implement its General Environmental Regulations. The main purpose is to ensure that environmental considerations are taken into account at all levels of planning with an emphasis on incorporating EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) into development activities. However, there is a need to develop a broad framework of SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) for the proper integration of sustainability into decision‐making processes. This paper reviews and discusses a framework for ensuring sustainability in Saudi Arabia, particularly at the local level. The paper develops guidelines and a framework for implementing the principles of sustainability in Saudi municipalities through SEA.     

中国环评制度的发展历程及展望

环评制度作为中国知名度最高的环境管理手段之一,在环保工作中发挥了重要作用,但近年来也暴露出众多问题,广为社会关注。特别是十八大以来,关于环评改革的呼声日益高涨。本文系统回顾了环境影响评价制度在中国的发展历程,以环评重大事件为分水岭,首次将环评发展历程划分为成长期、发展期、壮大期和问题高发期。以此为基础,总结了当前环评制度的主要问题,并剖析了其深层次原因,包括制度设计失当、体系运行失效、公众意识觉醒等,最后针对这些问题为环评制度的优化与发展提出了建议。     

战略环境影响评价的发展与应用

本文介绍了SEA的发展背景，现有项目EIA在PPPs决策层次上的缺陷和可持续发展理论如何导致SEA的发展，新发展的SEA比较传统的项目EIA所具有的优点，以及当前对SEA的认识和理解，在实践中所采用的形式，和成功的SEA必具备的特征，同时对在当前形势下SEA的实践方式进行了一定的评价，发现SEA的增值效应是SEA实施的先决条件。     

A Framework for Understanding and Improving Environmental Decision Making

This paper presents a framework for understanding and improving public sector environmental decision making. Within the framework, four interrelated components are discussed: (1) the environmental and cultural context-understanding this context includes understanding what people consider to be environmental problems, the goals and values that they bring to environmental problems and decision processes, specialized and common knowledge about environmental problems, and the institutional settings within which problems are addressed; (2) planning and appraisal activitiesthese activities include forecasting and monitoring exercises, evaluations of past decisions, and decisions that processes ought to be launched to solve specific environmental problems; (3) decision-making modes-these include six typical ways of conducting an environmental problem-solving process, modes which, in the framework, are called emergency action, routine procedures, analysis-centred, elite corps, conflict management and collaborative learning; (4) decision actions-these include five generic steps that are undertaken, formally or intuitively, in virtually any decision-making situation: issue familiarization; criteria setting; option construction; option assessment; and reaching a decision. In the course of describing the framework, we show a decision-making process can be adapted to incorporate sustainability concerns, including fostering sustainable environmental and social systems, meeting obligations to future generations, and searching for robust and reasonable (rather than rigidly optimal) decisions. The framework also helps to illuminate intriguing questions regarding institutional responsibility, decision process complexity and paradigms for environmental decision making.     

MAKING SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DECISIONS1

ABSTRACT: This paper outlines a sound, practical approach for making more informed decisions about environmental policy choices. It emphasizes the importance of using a structured decision process to specify and organize values, use these values to create alternatives, and assess tradeoffs to help achieve a desired balance across key objectives. Although these decision making steps are based on common sense, they are often neglected or poorly carried out as part of the complex evaluations of natural resource options. We discuss several reasons for this frequent neglect of decision making principles and provide examples from recent water use planning projects to demonstrate some of the benefits of using a structured, decision focused approach: new and better solutions, increased and more productive participation by stakeholders, and greater defensibility and acceptance of the resource management evaluation process and its conclusions.     

Building Consensus in Environmental Impact Assessment Through Multicriteria Modeling and Sensitivity Analysis

Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) increasingly is being applied in environmental impact assessment (EIA). In this article, two MCDA techniques, stochastic analytic hierarchy process and compromise programming, are combined to ascertain the environmental impacts of and to rank two alternative sites for Mexico City’s new airport. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the probability of changes in rank ordering given uncertainty in the hierarchy structure, decision criteria weights, and decision criteria performances. Results demonstrate that sensitivity analysis is fundamental for attaining consensus among members of interdisciplinary teams and for settling debates in controversial projects. It was concluded that sensitivity analysis is critical for achieving a transparent and technically defensible MCDA implementation in controversial EIA.