Setting boundaries of participation in environmental impact assessment

Public participation processes are touted as an effective way to increase the capacity and legitimacy of environmental assessment and the regulatory process that rely on them. Recent changes to the Canadian environmental assessment process narrowed the criteria for who can participate in environmental assessments from any who were interested to those who were most directly affected. This article examines the potential consequences of this change by exploring other areas of Canadian regulatory law where a similar directed affected test has been applied. This new standard risks institutionalizing the long-understood representational bias confronted by more diffuse interest like environmental protection. Restricting participation to the “directly affected” is far too narrow a test for processes like environmental assessment that are designed to determine the public interest.     

The impact and effectiveness of health impact assessment: A conceptual framework

The use of health impact assessment (HIA) has expanded rapidly and there are increasing demands for it to demonstrate its effectiveness. This paper presents a conceptual framework for evaluating HIA and describes its development through (i) a review of the literature, (ii) a review of work undertaken as part of a major HIA capacity building project and (iii) an in-depth study of seven completed HIAs. The framework emphasises context, process and impacts as key domains in understanding and evaluating the effectiveness of an HIA. This new framework builds upon the existing approaches to evaluating HIA and extends them to reflect the broad range of factors that comprise and influence the effectiveness of HIAs. It may be of use in evaluating completed HIAs and in planning HIAs that are yet to be undertaken.     

Liveability as determinant of health: Testing a new approach for health impact assessment of major infrastructure

Major urban infrastructure projects are intended to alter the built, human ecology for the better. Even when they are not labelled as health projects, arguably they should produce public health benefits that are commensurate with their scale, particularly when they are publicly funded. Health impact assessment (HIA) is an established method of evaluating major infrastructure projects using a determinants of health equity lens. HIA explicitly puts health front and centre to ask, ‘How should the proposed infrastructure project be altered to improve the determinants of health equity?’ There are well-established HIA protocols, but few provide a framework for scoping possible impacts. Given interest in the concept of liveability we introduce an exhaustive, evidence-based framework of 11 liveability domains for HIA. We then test the framework by scoping the impacts of the Upfield Level Crossing Removal (LXR) project in Melbourne, Australia to hypothesise its impacts on health. Scoping this case study suggests that many domains will be affected in complex ways, some positively and some negatively, exemplifying the potential for the framework to detect major infrastructures' pervasive impacts on determinants of health. The paper includes a plan to validate the liveability framework with empirical research in the HIA assessment stage. The paper concludes with a discussion of the contribution and usefulness of the liveability domains as a framework for structuring HIA and for building its profile, thus advancing the discipline, and helping to ensure that all major infrastructures constitute a prudent investment in public health.     

Equity-focused health impact assessment: A tool to assist policy makers in addressing health inequalities

In Australasia (Australia and New Zealand) the use of health impact assessment (HIA) as a tool for improved policy development is comparatively new. The public health workforce do not routinely assess the potential health and equity impacts of proposed policies or programs. The Australasian Collaboration for Health Equity Impact Assessment was funded to develop a strategic framework for equity-focused HIA (EFHIA) with the intent of strengthening the ways in which equity is addressed in each step of HIA. The collaboration developed a draft framework for EFHIA that mirrored, but modified the commonly accepted steps of HIA; tested the draft framework in six different health service delivery settings; analysed the feedback about application of the draft EFHIA framework and modified it accordingly. The strategic framework shows promise in providing a systematic process for identifying potential differential health impacts and assessing the extent to which these are avoidable and unfair. This paper presents the EFHIA framework and discusses some of the issues that arose in the case study sites undertaking equity-focused HIA.     

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.     

Rethinking human health impact assessment

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

Health impact assessment and health equity in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review

BackgroundNatural resource extraction projects can have positive but also negative effects on the health of affected communities, governed by demographic, economic, environmental, physical and social changes. Negative effects often prevail and these might widen existing health inequities. Health impact assessment (HIA) is a decision-support tool that aims at maximizing benefits and minimizing negative impacts on people's health. A core value of HIA is equity; yet, little is known about health equity in the frame of HIA, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.MethodologyWe conducted a scoping review to determine whether and to what extent HIA in sub-Saharan Africa addresses health equity. We included peer-reviewed publications and guidelines pertaining to HIA, environmental impact assessment (EIA) and social impact assessment (SIA). Health equity was investigated by identifying (i) how health considerations were addressed and (ii) whether health was stratified by subgroups of the community.ResultsOut of 1′640 raw hits, we identified 62 articles (16 HIA, 36 EIA, one SIA and nine integrated assessments), 32 of which specifically addressed health. While 20 articles focused on a specific health topic, 12 articles used a more comprehensive approach to address health. In 15 articles there were specific subgroup analyses (e.g. mothers, children or marginalized groups) as a measure of health equity. Another 12 papers referred to the community in a more general way (e.g. affected). Without exception, health was an integral part of the nine included guidelines. HIA guidelines addressed health systematically through environmental health areas, risk assessment matrix or key performance indicators.ConclusionsWe found evidence that previously conducted HIA in sub-Saharan Africa and current guidelines address health equity. However, there is a need to stratify community subgroups more systematically in order to determine health differentials better. Future HIA should consider community heterogeneity in an effort to reduce health inequities by “leaving no one behind”, as suggested by the Sustainable Development Goals.     

Quantitative health impact assessment methodology for societal initiatives: A scoping review

Health initiatives are increasingly situated outside the institutionalised public health sector. The intersectoral character of societal initiatives, along with indirect relationships between initiatives and health, makes making projections of reach, impact and goal achievement complex. This scoping review of the peer-reviewed literature searches for appropriate methods to conduct quantitative health impact assessment for such initiatives. Database searches were done in PubMed and Web of Science, as well as a reference list search. Studies were then selected in a systematic manner. The review includes 64 studies. Most studies made estimates using simulation methods, notably with Monte Carlo, Markov and system dynamics modelling. Inputs for the models such as transition probabilities and price elasticities were taken from census, register and survey data, evidence from previous (scientific) studies and sometimes outcomes from stakeholder participation. Of different health outcome measures, the number of deaths was most frequently used, followed by QALYs and DALYs and life years. Health effect distribution is frequently mentioned, but not often estimated. Scientific methodological publications on HIAs focusing on civil society initiatives are relatively sparse, indicating possibilities for further methodological advancement. Estimating health effect distributions and incorporating stakeholder participation could make meaningful additions to standard practice.     

A new approach to criteria for health risk assessment

Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a developing component of the overall impact assessment process and as such needs access to procedures that can enable more consistent approaches to the stepwise process that is now generally accepted in both EIA and HIA. The guidelines developed during this project provide a structured process, based on risk assessment procedures which use consequences and likelihood, as a way of ranking risks to adverse health outcomes from activities subjected to HIA or HIA as part of EIA.The aim is to assess the potential for both acute and chronic health outcomes. The consequences component also identifies a series of consequences for the health care system, depicted as expressions of financial expenditure and the capacity of the health system.These more specific health risk assessment characteristics should provide for a broader consideration of health consequences and a more consistent estimation of the adverse health risks of a proposed development at both the scoping and risk assessment stages of the HIA process.     

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.     

Climate impact on social systems: the risk assessment approach

A novel approach to the problem of estimating climate impact on social systems is suggested. This approach is based on a risk concept, where the notion of critical events is introduced and the probability of such events is estimated. The estimation considers both the inherent stochasticity of climatic processes and the artificial stochasticity of climate predictions due to scientific uncertainties. The method is worked out in some detail for the regional problem of crop production and the risks associated with global climate change, and illustrated by a case study (Kursk region of the FSU). In order to get local climatic characteristics (weather), a so-called statistical weather generator is used. One interesting finding is that the 3% risk level remains constant up to 1.0–1.1°C rise of mean seasonal temperature, if the variance does not change. On the other hand, the risk grows rapidly with increasing variance (even if the mean temperature rises very slowly). The risk approach is able to separate two problems: (i) assessment of global change impact, and (ii) decision making. The main task for the scientific community is to provide the politicians with different options; the choice of admissible (from the social point of view) critical events and the corresponding risk levels is the business of decision makers.     

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.     

Advancing the practice of health impact assessment in Canada: Obstacles and opportunities

Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is recognized as a useful tool that can identify potential health impacts resulting from projects or policy initiatives. Although HIA has become an established practice in some countries, it is not yet an established practice in Canada. In order to enable broader support for HIA, this study provides a comprehensive review and analysis of the peer-reviewed and gray literature on the state of HIA practice. The results of this review revealed that, although there is an abundance of publications relating to HIA, there remains a lack of transparent, consistent and reproducible approaches and methods throughout the process. Findings indicate a need for further research and development on a number of fronts, including: 1) the nature of HIA triggers; 2) consistent scoping and stakeholder engagement approaches; 3) use of evidence and transparency of decision-making; 4) reproducibility of assessment methods; 5) monitoring and evaluation protocols; and, 6) integration within existing regulatory frameworks. Addressing these issues will aid in advancing the more widespread use of HIA in Canada.     

Cross-border cooperation in inner Scandinavia: A territorial impact assessment

The use of territorial impact assessment procedures is gaining increasing relevance in the European Union policy evaluation processes. However, no concrete territorial impact assessment tools have been applied to evaluating EU cross-border programmes. In this light, this article provides a pioneering analysis on how to make use of territorial impact assessment procedures on cross-border programmes. More specifically, it assesses the main territorial impacts of the Inner Scandinavian INTERREG-A sub-programme, in the last 20 years (1996–2016). It focuses on its impacts on reducing the barrier effect, in all its main dimensions, posed by the presence of the administrative border. The results indicate a quite positive impact of the analysed cross-border cooperation programme, in reducing the barrier effect in all its main dimensions. The obtained potential impact values for each analysed dimension indicate, however, that the ‘economy-technology’ dimension was particularly favoured, following its strategic intervention focus in stimulating the economic activity and the attractiveness of the border area.     

Application of data envelopment analysis in environmental impact assessment of a coal washing plant: A new sustainable approach

The main problem of traditional methods of environmental impact assessment (EIA) is that in most of the existing algorithms and methods, such as Leopold, Folchi and RIAM, the main attention is to the destructive effects of the proposed plan, and the advantages of the industrial project are less noticeable. This has led to a permanent challenge between environmental organizations and industrial stakeholders. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a new approach of assessing the industrial units. Besides, it considers the positive economic and social impacts of the project and provides a comprehensive assessment of the industrial unit. With this approach, the environmental impacts of an industrial unit have been considered as “inputs” and its positive economic and social impacts considered as the “outputs” of the DEA models. Therefore, the problem of impact assessment changes into a DEA model. In the present study, the Alborz Sharghi Coal washing plant in northern Iran has been considered as a case study for implementing the DEA-EIA approach, and 19 plant activities and 11 environmental components have been used to evaluate the environmental effects of the plant. To solve the EIA problem, two commonly used DEA approaches, called CRS (constant returns to scale) and VRS (variable returns to scale), have been used. The DEA results identified the critical environmental components of the plant that should be considered seriously. Also, drawing the “potential improvement” diagram in the DEA method is an effective tool for determining the high risk activities of the factory and applying them in development plans. Besides, using the VRS model with maximize-output approach showed that some of the plant activities had the most differences with optimal mode and these components should be considered in future development plans. Finally, it can be concluded that, assessing the environmental impacts of the mineral industries with VRS maximize-output approach, is closer to the concept of sustainable development and cost-benefit analysis.