A review of uncertainty research in impact assessment

This paper examines uncertainty research in Impact Assessment (IA) and the focus of attention of the IA scholarly literature. We do so by first exploring ‘outside’ the IA literature, identifying three main themes of uncertainty research, and then apply these themes to examine the focus of scholarly research on uncertainty ‘inside’ IA. Based on a search of the database Scopus, we identified 134 journal papers published between 1970 and 2013 that address uncertainty in IA, 75% of which were published since 2005. We found that 90% of IA research addressing uncertainty focused on uncertainty in the practice of IA, including uncertainty in impact predictions, models and managing environmental impacts. Notwithstanding early guidance on uncertainty treatment in IA from the 1980s, we found no common, underlying conceptual framework that was guiding research on uncertainty in IA practice. Considerably less attention, only 9% of papers, focused on uncertainty communication, disclosure and decision-making under uncertain conditions, the majority of which focused on the need to disclose uncertainties as opposed to providing guidance on how to do so and effectively use that information to inform decisions. Finally, research focused on theory building for explaining human behavior with respect to uncertainty avoidance constituted only 1% of the IA published literature. We suggest the need for further conceptual framework development for researchers focused on identifying and addressing uncertainty in IA practice; the need for guidance on how best to communicate uncertainties in practice, versus criticizing practitioners for not doing so; research that explores how best to interpret and use disclosures about uncertainty when making decisions about project approvals, and the implications of doing so; and academic theory building and exploring the utility of existing theories to better understand and explain uncertainty avoidance behavior in IA.     

Quality of Cultural Heritage in EIA; twenty years of experience in Norway

The aim of this paper is to clarify and discuss how quality, relevance, attitudes, beliefs and transfer value act as underlying driving forces in the development of the Cultural Heritage theme in EIAs. One purpose is to identify and discuss some conditions that can better environmental assessment in order to increase the significance of EIA in decision-making with regard to Cultural Heritage.The main tools used are different research methods designed for analyses of quality and quality changes, primarily based on the relevant opinions of 160 people occupied with Cultural Heritage in EIA in Norway. The study is based on a review of 40 types of EIAs from 1991 to 2000, an online questionnaire to 319 (160 responded) individuals from 14 different backgrounds, and interviews with three institutions in Sweden and Denmark.The study confirms a steadily increasing quality on EIRs over time, parallel with an improvement of the way in which Cultural Heritage is treated in EIA. This is supported by both the interviews and the qualitative comments regarding the survey. Potential for improvements is shown to be a need for more detailed background material as well as more use of adequate methods.The survey shows the existence of a wide variety of negative views, attitudes and beliefs, but the consequences of this are difficult to evaluate. However, most certainly, negative attitudes and beliefs have not been powerful enough to be detrimental to the quality of Cultural Heritage component, as nothing in the study indicates that negative attitudes and myths are undermining the system of EIA.The study shows the importance of having on-going discussions on quality and quality change over time by people involved in EIA, and how this is a necessary condition for successful implementation and acceptance. Beliefs and negative attitudes can also be a catalyst for developing better practice and advancing new methodology. In addition, new EIA countries must be prepared for several years of development and improvements after implementation. This is important in order to gain acceptance from the bureaucracy, especially from the Cultural Heritage authorities and local population.     

Uncertainty management in integrated assessment modeling: towards a pluralistic approach

Integrated Assessment (IA) is an evolving research community that aims to address complex societal issues through an interdisciplinary process. The most-widely used method in Integrated Assessment is modeling. The state of the art in Integrated Assessment modeling is described in this paper in terms of history, general features, classes of models, and in terms of the strengths and weaknesses, and the dilemmasand challenges modelers face. One of the key challenges is the issue of uncertainty management. The paper outlines the sources and types of uncertainty modelers are confronted with. It then discusses how uncertainties are currently managed inIntegrated Assessment modeling, on which evaluation it is argued that complementary methods are needed that allow for pluralistic uncertainty management. The paperfinalises with discussing pluralistic concepts and approaches that are currently explored in the IA community and that seem promising in view of the challenge to incorporate explicitly more than one hidden perspective in models.     

Consideration of climate change impacts and adaptation in EIA practice — Perspectives of actors in Austria and Germany

Current political discussions and developments indicate the importance and urgency of incorporating climate change considerations into EIA processes. The recent revision of the EU Directive 2014/52/EU on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) requires changes in the EIA practice of the EU member states. This paper investigates the extent to which the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) can contribute to an early consideration of climate change consequences in planning processes. In particular the roles of different actors in order to incorporate climate change impacts and adaptation into project planning subject to EIA at the appropriate levels are a core topic. Semi-structured expert interviews were carried out with representatives of the main infrastructure companies and institutions responsible in these sectors in Austria, which have to carry out EIA regularly. In a second step expert interviews were conducted with EIA assessors and EIA authorities in Austria and Germany, in order to examine the extent to which climate-based changes are already considered in EIA processes. This paper aims to discuss the different perspectives in the current EIA practice with regard to integrating climate change impacts as well as barriers and solutions identified by the groups of actors involved, namely project developers, environmental competent authorities and consultants (EIA assessors/practitioners). The interviews show that different groups of actors consider the topic to different degrees. Downscaling of climate change scenarios is in this context both, a critical issue with regards to availability of data and costs. Furthermore, assistance for the interpretation of relevant impacts, to be deducted from climate change scenarios, on the specific environmental issues in the area is needed. The main barriers identified by the EIA experts therefore include a lack of data as well as general uncertainty as to how far climate change should be considered in the process without reliable data but in the presence of knowledge about possible consequences at an abstract level. A joint strategy on how to cope with uncertain prognoses about main impacts on environmental issues for areas without reliable data requires a discussion and cooperation between EIA consultants and environmental authorities.     

Exploring the use of computer models in participatory integrated assessment – experiences and recommendations for further steps

Integrated assessment (IA) can be defined as a structured process of dealing with complex issues, using knowledge from various scientific disciplines and/or stakeholders, such that integrated insights are made available to decision makers (J. Rotmans, Enviromental Modelling and Assessment 3 (1998) 155). There is a growing recognition that the participation of stakeholders is a vital element of IA. However, only little is known about methodological requirements for such participatory IA and possible insights to be gained from these approaches. This paper summarizes some of the experiences gathered in the ULYSSES project, which aims at developing procedures that are able to bridge the gap between environmental science and democratic policy making for the issue of climate change. The discussion is based on a total of 52 IA focus groups with citizens, run in six European and one US city. In these groups, different computer models were used, ranging from complex and dynamic global models to simple accounting tools. The analysis in this paper focuses on the role of the computer models. The findings suggest that the computer models were successful at conveying to participants the temporal and spatial scale of climate change, the complexity of the system and the uncertainties in our understanding of it. However, most participants felt that the computer models were less instrumental for the exploration of policy options. Furthermore, both research teams and participants agreed that despite considerable efforts, most models were not sufficiently user-friendly and transparent for being accessed in an IA focus group. With that background, some methodological conclusions are drawn about the inclusion of the computer models in the deliberation process. Furthermore, some suggestions are made about how given models should be adapted and new ones developed in order to be helpful for participatory IA. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Risk management and integrated assessment

Integrated Assessment (IA) is the pursuit of a research program generated by the limitations of traditional forms of risk management. This claim can be justified by the following argument. Over the last decades, analysts and practitioners have brought to maturity a large array of tools for risk management. Most of them rely on combining judgments of utility with judgments of probability. This is the approach of the Rational Actor Paradigm (RAP). With many environmental problems, however, RAP‐based tools have run into considerable practical and theoretical difficulties. In response to these difficulties, a series of alternative approaches to practical risk management and to the theoretical understanding of risk have been elaborated. They try to embed the rational choices of individual actors studied by RAP into a broader framework of social rationality. This task can be approached by distinguishing situations where an actor holds unambiguous judgments of preference and probability from situations characterized by ambivalent judgments. RAP can handle the former, but not the latter. Problems whose management requires a combination of widely differing scientific disciplines are especially likely to involve ambivalent judgments of probability. The study of such problems constitutes the research program of integrated assessment. It involves three main tasks: developing IA models which can represent ambivalent expectations and evaluations, developing IA models which use such representations to study non‐marginal changes of social systems, and developing procedures of participatory IA which enable researchers to engage in an iterative exchange with various stakeholders. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Experiences of voluntary early participation in Environmental Impact Assessments in Chilean mining

Citizen participation should ideally occur as early as possible in a project, especially throughout the course of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study. In Chile, participation occurs after the EIA study has been completed and presented to authorities for evaluation. However, voluntary early participation has become an extended practice in large mining projects for financial and conflict-reduction reasons. The purpose of this study was to explore a variety of these early participation processes happening in large mining projects from 2001 to 2010 and analyze how well these practices measured up to standards and objectives defined in the EIA and participation literature. Beyond the legal implications of such practice, we sought to understand the role of this voluntary procedure within the EIA process and citizen engagement in projects. We found a wide range of objectives, approaches and results, primarily driven to facilitate approval and implementation of the ten projects analyzed. The underlying objective of voluntary participation processes analyzed (whether it seeks to inform, to note or to engage), determined the information presented, participants included, area of influence considered, time devoted to the process and influence of the information collected on EIA and project mitigation measures. Few of the principles for best practice in the literature were present in the ten projects examined. Moreover, given the voluntary and unregulated nature of these processes, purposes and outcomes were often mixed-up with the Indigenous Consultation required under ILO provision 169, or Corporate Social Responsibility programs. This finally revealed that contrary to expectations, an unregulated and early voluntary participation is not having a clear impact in the definition of projects mitigation measures, participants are at risk of being unsatisfied with the resulting agreements and moreover, it does not assure projects implementation or the avoidance of socio-environmental conflict.     

Evaluation of the environmental impact assessment system in Iran

EIA in Iran was formally introduced in 1994, but to date little EIA-related research has been undertaken in the country. In this paper, the authors provide an evaluation of the Iranian EIA system, focusing on EIA legislation, administration and process. Data was collected on the basis of a literature review, document analysis and semi-structured interviews. This involved some translation from Persian into English. Evaluation of the findings indicate that Iran has adopted the democratic tools of EIA and SEA, which considering its political context is encouraging. However, currently the Iranian EIA system does suffer from weaknesses such as inadequate screening and scoping, lack of alternative consideration, public participation, EIA implementation and follow-up. The paper proposes some initial recommendations based on international experiences and sets out the direction for future research.     

Framing effectiveness in impact assessment: Discourse accommodation in controversial infrastructure development

There is ongoing debate about the effectiveness of impact assessment tools, which matters both because of the threat to future practice of the tools which are frequently perceived to be ineffective, and because of the disillusionment that can ensue, and controversy generated, amongst stakeholders in a decision context where opportunities for meaningful debate have not been provided. In this article we regard debate about the meaning of effectiveness in impact assessment as an inevitable consequence of increased participation in environmental decision-making, and therefore frame effectiveness based on an inclusive democracy role to mean the extent to which impact assessment can accommodate civil society discourse. Our aim is to investigate effectiveness based on this framing by looking at one type of impact assessment – environmental impact assessment (EIA) – in two controversial project proposals: the HS2 rail network in England; and the A4DS motorway in the Netherlands. Documentary analysis and interviews held with key civil society stakeholders have been deployed to identify discourses that were mobilised in the cases. EIA was found to be able to accommodate only one out of four discourses that were identified; for the other three it did not provide the space for the arguments that characterised opposition. The conclusion in relation to debate on framings of effectiveness is that EIA will not be considered effective by the majority of stakeholders. EIA was established to support decision-making through a better understanding of impacts, so its ineffectiveness is unsurprising when its role is perceived to be broader. However, there remains a need to map discourses in different decision contexts and to analyse the extent to which the range of discourses are accommodated throughout the decision process, and the role of impact assessment in those processes, before recommendations can be made to either improve impact assessment effectiveness, or whether it is simply perceptions of effectiveness that need to be improved.     

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.     

The attractive concept of simplicity in environmental impact assessment: Perceptions of outcomes in southeastern Brazil

Pressures are mounting for the simplification of environmental impact assessment (EIA). This phenomenon is drawing increasing scholarly attention, but studies have not gone far beyond speculating what could happen as a result of recently implemented or proposed regulatory changes. This paper takes a more longitudinal look at simplified EIAs. The main objective was to analyze the perceived outcomes of a number of simplified EIA processes, using Brazil as the empirical context. More specifically, this paper aimed at understanding: 1) how simplified EIAs have been conceptualized and implemented in southeastern Brazil; and 2) how developers and civil servants in that region perceive the outcomes of simplified EIAs. This study adopted a sequential mixed method research approach. Data was collected through literature reviews, 261 telephone-based interviews and 10 face-to-face interviews. Degrees of EIA simplification can vary significantly within and across jurisdictions. In any case, simplification is often framed as a win-win solution to EIA ineffectiveness, through which regulatory and procedural changes are made to ease the process, while, at the same time, maintaining or providing better environmental protection. This approach is more frequently applied to potentially low-impact processes. Chi-square tests of the data collected through telephone interviews in the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais indicated that developers tend to perceive EIA processes as difficult and slow regardless of how simplified it is. Most civil servants, who were directly involved in the implementation of simplified EIAs in state environmental agencies, argued that simplified EIAs are driven mostly by environmental agencies, as these institutions have long been unable to cope with an ever-increasing load of license applications. Policy outcomes of simplified EIAs in the territory are not sufficiently monitored by state agencies. Civil servants revealed concerns about the potential long term effects of EIA simplification on the ground, as they have had limited resources for audits and inspections.     

Biodiversity offsets in EIA: Getting the timing right

Major developments can result in significant impacts on biodiversity, which the mandated process of environmental impact assessment (EIA) aims to mitigate. There has been a recent move towards the application of biodiversity offsets as a last-resort, compensatory measure when options at the earlier stages in the mitigation hierarchy of avoidance, minimisation and restoration have been exhausted. Guidance on biodiversity offset planning available in different jurisdictions, however, demonstrates a lack of consensus about when biodiversity offsets should be formally introduced into the EIA process, and previous research has highlighted the perceived risks associated with commencing detailed offset planning too early as well as too late. Here we explore the implications of how and when offset considerations are introduced within EIA. We do this by reviewing and synthesising best practice principles for biodiversity offsets from the international literature, and then exploring how and when offsets were considered in a number of case studies that draw on documentary analysis and interviews with key role players. Our case studies are based in South Africa where regional guidance on offsets exists, supporting a body of practice. The research finds that the timing of involvement of biodiversity specialists is critical in determining whether considering offsets early will reap the combined benefits of: transparency and stakeholder engagement; guaranteeing the offset before development commences; and offset enforceability without jeopardising adherence to the mitigation hierarchy. Bypassing the mitigation hierarchy was perceived as allowing proponents to ‘buy’ approvals for developments that might otherwise be found unacceptable, although there was no evidence for this in any of the case studies evaluated. Although some of our findings may be specific to the South African context, the approach taken using international best practice principles for biodiversity offsets as a benchmark can equally be applied to evaluate practice in other EIA systems. We confirm the utility of this approach by evaluating the recently released South African Draft National Biodiversity Offset Policy for its potential to support best practice biodiversity offsets in EIA.     

EIA and green procurement: Opportunities for strengthening their coordination

EIA plays an important role in enhancing the environmental performance of the construction sector. In recent years, the construction sector has been developing green procurement practices. Green procurement is a process that involves the incorporation of environmental requirements during the procurement of services and products. However, discussion on green procurement is rarely seen during the EIA phase. This paper addresses possible opportunities for improving the coordination between EIA and green procurement within the construction sector. The linking of EIA and green procurement has been postulated in the paper as an aid to strengthen the coordination between project planning and implementation. The paper is based on a literature review and is an outcome of an on-going research project concerning EIA and green procurement. This study indicated that it would be appropriate to introduce green procurement during the pre-decision phase of an EIA. In the present study, the opportunities for integrating green procurement at the stage of EIA are associated with the integration of project planning and EIA. Future research should investigate the mechanism through which the link can be established.     

An experiential approach to improving the integration of knowledge during EIA in transport planning

The integration of knowledge from stakeholders and the public at large is seen as one of the biggest process-related barriers during the scoping phase of EIA application in transport planning. While the academic literature offers abundant analyses, discussions and suggestions how to overcome this problem, the proposed solutions are yet to be adequately tested in practice. In order to address this gap, we test the effectiveness of a set of interventions and trigger mechanisms for improving different aspects of knowledge integration. The interventions are tested in an experiential study with two sequential cases, representing “close-to-real-life” conditions, in the context of two cities in Andalusia, Spain. In general terms, the participants perceived that the integration of knowledge improved during the simulation of the EIA scoping phase. Certain shortcomings were also discussed, fundamentally related to how the time spent during the scoping phase was crucial to lead an effective learning process between the involved people. The study concludes with a reflection on the effectiveness of the tested interventions according to similarities and differences obtained from the two experiential case studies, as well as with a discussion of the potential to generate new knowledge through the use of experiential studies in EIA practice.     

The effectiveness of environmental assessment in Flanders: An analysis of practitioner perspectives

The extent to which Environmental Assessment (EA) contributes to incorporating environmental values and objectives into decision-making (i.e. the effectiveness of EA) has been subject to much research. Still relatively little is known about how the effectiveness of EA is influenced by the specific features of EA systems and their context. International comparative research can shed more light on these relationships. In this paper we report on a survey of EA in Flanders, taking a similar approach as previous surveys in the Netherlands, UK and Denmark. We observe that the effectiveness of the Flemish project-based EA (EIA) is comparable to that in the other countries, whereas the Flemish plan-based EA (SEA) is more influential than the Dutch one (no data on Denmark and UK). As in the other countries, EA in Flanders has an influence on decision-making both before and after the EIA has been completed. According to respondents to the surveys, in all four countries the legal requirement is the main explanatory factor for EA effectiveness. The mechanisms by which EA characteristics and other factors contribute to EA effectiveness seem rather country-specific, however. Rather than trying to isolate the individual influence of factors we encourage more in-depth, qualitative and case-study based follow-up research in order to better understand the complex interplay between factors related to the EA system itself, how it is applied in practice and influenceds from its specific context.     

Environmental impact assessment in Estonia and Norway

Authorities in Eastern European countries are looking for the best available policy tools from the West, and policy instruments tailored for a Western context are being introduced massively in the former state socialist countries of Europe. This study examines some of the contextual factors that hamper the introduction of modern, Western tools of environmental management within previously state socialist countries. These are highlighted through a comparison of how environmental impact assessment (EIA) is put into practice in Estonia and Norway. Estonia and Norway belong to the same European Baltic-Nordic region, but the two countries have a dramatically different history for most of this century.     

An integrated assessment model for cross-country pipelines

The cross-country petroleum pipelines are environmentally sensitive because they traverse through varied terrain covering crop fields, forests, rivers, populated areas, desert, hills and offshore. Any malfunction of these pipelines may cause devastating effect on the environment. Hence, the pipeline operators plan and design pipelines projects with sufficient consideration of environment and social aspects along with the technological alternatives. Traditionally, in project appraisal, optimum technical alternative is selected using financial analysis. Impact assessments (IA) are then carried out to justify the selection and subsequent statutory approval. However, the IAs often suggest alternative sites and/or alternate technology and implementation methodology, resulting in revision of entire technical and financial analysis. This study addresses the above issues by developing an integrated framework for project feasibility analysis with the application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a multiple attribute decision-making technique. The model considers technical analysis (TA), socioeconomic IA (SEIA) and environmental IA (EIA) in an integrated framework to select the best project from a few alternative feasible projects. Subsequent financial analysis then justifies the selection. The entire methodology has been explained here through a case application on cross-country petroleum pipeline project in India.     

Ecosystem services in environmental assessment — Help or hindrance?

This paper presents a critical analysis of the potential role of ecosystem services within environmental assessment, including both strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and environmental impact assessment (EIA). It identifies some of the common problems with current environmental assessment practice and then explores whether integrating ecosystem services may be able to help address some of these problems. Case studies are included to illustrate different approaches to using ecosystem services within environmental assessment and to highlight how context (e.g. sector, scale, environmental situation) will influence the most appropriate way of integrating ecosystem services into environmental assessment practice. The analysis also reflects on how ecosystem services' potential role may, or may not, differ from previous integrated approaches to environmental assessment and what lessons can be learnt from their development.Two main approaches are recognised from the literature and the case studies to integrating ecosystem services within environmental assessment: firstly a comprehensive approach, where the assessment framework is entirely guided by ecosystem services; and secondly a philosophical approach that applies more of a light-touch ecosystems-thinking mind-set, helping to frame the assessment methodology rather than fundamentally defining it. Inevitably, there are variations between these two extremes, and benefits and criticisms of both.The authors conclude that ecosystem services provides a potentially valuable framing for environmental assessment, but that it requires a pragmatic, context specific consideration of how ecosystem services can be used to help address some of the common problems with current environmental assessment practice. There is also a need to recognise that at times it may just not be appropriate if it does not provide added value.     

A framework for guiding sustainability assessment and on-farm strategic decision making

Responding to future challenges and societal needs, various actions are taken in agriculture to evolve towards more sustainable farming practices. These actions imply strategic choices and suppose adequate sustainability assessments to identify, measure, evaluate and communicate sustainable development. However, literature is scarce on the link between strategic decision making and sustainability assessment. As questions emerge on how, what and when to measure, the objective of this paper is to construct a framework for guiding sustainability assessment and on-farm strategic decision making. Qualitative research on own experiences from the past and a recent project revealed four categories of actual needs farmers, advisors and experts have regarding sustainability assessment: context, flexibility, focus on farm and farmer and communication. These stakeholders' needs are then incorporated into a two-dimensional framework that marries the intrinsic complexity of sustainability assessment tools and the time frame of strategic decision making. The framework allows a farm-specific and flexible approach leading to harmonized actions towards sustainable farming. As this framework is mainly a procedural instrument to guide the use of sustainability assessment tools within strategic decision making, it fits to incorporate, even guide, future research on sustainability assessment tools themselves and on their adoption on farms.     

Deciding over nature: Corruption and environmental impact assessments

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) are an important analytic tool for identifying and potentially mitigating project risks and negative environmental and societal impacts. Their usefulness, however, depends on how they are implemented and on whether findings are used in public decision-making. Given the notorious vulnerability of public-private interactions to corrupt practices, we examine potential and actual corruption risks across four stages of a generic EIA process. Combined with case analysis of the EIA process in Albania, a Southeastern European context experiencing serious governance challenges, we reflect on the vulnerabilities of EIAs to various forms of corruption from a principal-agent perspective. We concur with earlier research suggesting that the fundamentally rationalist approach behind EIAs do not necessarily match the empirical realities of public environmental decision-making, particularly in less mature EIA systems. We conclude with suggestions for framing a future research agenda in this area and touch on tentative policy remedies.