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.     

Theory and practice of EIA implementation: A comparative study of three developing countries

This article offers a conceptual framework for analyzing institutional processes and performance outcome of EIA implementation for developing countries. Eight classes of participants in the EIA process are identified: (1) responsible agency; (2) action proponent; (3) preparer; (4) review agency; (5) rule-setting agency; (6) concerned agencies; (7) general public; and (8) licensing agency. Five types of performance outcome are suggested that may follow the introduction of EIA into a national planning system. These include EIA as (1) a fully internalized element of the planning process, (2) a support for a position of advocacy for the environment, (3) a process of adjustment among conflicting goals, (4) a process to remedy prior environmental damage, and (5) a perfunctory endorsement of public or private actions. Using these categories, the EIA system of the Philippines, Korea, and Brazil are analyzed. Three aspects of EIA implementation are compared: national development planning and environmental goals; institutional structure; and performance evaluation. Based on this analysis, the author concludes that while EIA in developing countries is being hampered in its early stages by institutional factors, there are some specific policies that, if adopted by national governments and international aid agencies, would enhance the integration of EIA into the planning and decision-making process and make EIA a more effective tool for environmental protection in the developing world.     

Promoting system-level learning from project-level lessons: An analysis of donor-driven ‘indirect’ learning about EIA systems in Ghana and the Maldives

A growing number of low and middle income nations (LMCs) have adopted some sort of system for environmental impact assessment (EIA). However, generally many of these EIA systems are characterised by a low performance in terms of timely information dissemination, monitoring and enforcement after licencing. Donor actors (such as the World Bank) have attempted to contribute to a higher performance of EIA systems in LMCs by intervening at two levels: the project level (e.g. by providing scoping advice or EIS quality review) and the system level (e.g. by advising on EIA legislation or by capacity building). The aims of these interventions are environmental protection in concrete cases and enforcing the institutionalisation of environmental protection, respectively. Learning by actors involved is an important condition for realising these aims. A relatively underexplored form of learning concerns learning at EIA system-level via project level donor interventions. This ‘indirect’ learning potentially results in system changes that better fit the specific context(s) and hence contribute to higher performances. Our exploratory research in Ghana and the Maldives shows that thus far, ‘indirect’ learning only occurs incidentally and that donors play a modest role in promoting it. Barriers to indirect learning are related to the institutional context rather than to individual characteristics. Moreover, ‘indirect’ learning seems to flourish best in large projects where donors achieved a position of influence that they can use to evoke reflection upon system malfunctions. In order to enhance learning at all levels donors should thereby present the outcomes of the intervention elaborately (i.e. discuss the outcomes with a large audience), include practical suggestions about post-EIS activities such as monitoring procedures and enforcement options and stimulate the use of their advisory reports to generate organisational memory and ensure a better information dissemination.     

The influence of actor capacities on EIA system performance in low and middle income countries —Cases from Georgia and Ghana

In this paper, we aim to better understand the factors that contribute to the substantive performance of EIA systems in low and middle income countries. Substantive performance is defined as the extent to which the EIA process contributes to the EIA objectives for the long term, namely environmental protection or, even more ambitious, sustainable development. We have therefore developed a conceptual model in which we focus on the key actors in the EIA system, the proponent and the EIA authority and their level of ownership as a key capacity to measure their performance, and we distinguish procedural performance and some contextual factors. This conceptual model is then verified and refined for the EIA phase and the EIA follow-up phase (permitting, monitoring and enforcement) by means of 12 case studies from Ghana (four cases) and Georgia (eight cases), both lower–middle income countries. We observe that in most cases the level of substantive performance increases during the EIA phase but drops during the EIA follow-up phase, and as a result only five out of 12 operational cases are in compliance with permit conditions or national environmental standards. We conclude, firstly that ownership of the proponent is the most important factor explaining the level of substantive performance; the higher the proponent's level of ownership the higher the level of substantive performance. The influence of the EIA authority on substantive performance is limited. Secondly, the influence of procedural performance on substantive performance seems less important than expected in the EIA phase but more important during the EIA follow-up phase.In order to improve substantive performance we learned two lessons. Firstly, increasing the proponent's level of ownership seems obvious, but direct change is probably difficult. However, where international finance institutes are involved they can increase ownership. Despite the limited influence of the EIA authority, a proactive strategy of, for example, working together with international finance institutes has a slightly larger influence than a reactive strategy.     

Integrating environmental impact assessment with master planning: lessons from the US Army

The US National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires agencies to consider environmental impacts in the early stages of planning and decision-making. Despite this mandate, agencies typically conduct EIA for projects, rather than for earlier and more strategic decisions, such as plans. This research investigated the extent to which a large federal agency, the US Army, has integrated NEPA analyses with master planning for their installations. Using in-depth case studies of 16 installations, we investigated how and why EIA was (or was not) integrated with planning, and identified the factors that promote or impede integration. Typically, integration has been regarded as concurrence, meaning that the EIA and planning processes are conducted together. Results of this research show, however, that integration can occur, even if the NEPA documents and master plans are not concurrently prepared. In this sense, integration can be viewed as the influence of the EIA process on agency planning and decision-making. Results also indicate that regulations are only one factor, and that several other factors influence the extent of integration, such as agency leadership and organizational incentives. Lessons from this study can help improve both the integration and the substantive implementation of EIA.     

Taking an environmental ethics perspective to understand what we should expect from EIA in terms of biodiversity protection

As a globally mandated decision-support tool, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has the potential to contribute to the protection of biodiversity, which is increasingly under threat because of human activities. Concern over its ability to do this, however, has led to the addition of trade-off rules, Ecosystem Services Assessment (ESA), and biodiversity offsets. But given that EIA is set in a political decision-making context, what is reasonable to expect of EIA? In this paper we seek to explore what level of biodiversity protection we can expect EIA to support (and therefore whether these additions are worthwhile). Our point of departure is that EIA supports its political context and associated societal goals, and those goals typically (explicitly or implicitly) reflect some form of sustainable development. Given that the appropriate level of biodiversity protection is a moral consideration, we take an environmental ethics perspective to explain how different levels of protection are associated with different ethical positions on a spectrum from anthropocentrism (where only humans have intrinsic rights) through to ecocentrism (where all individuals of all species have intrinsic rights). We then investigate how different sustainable development discourses, one economic (on a spectrum from weak to strong sustainability) and one ecological (on a spectrum from shallow to deep ecology) map against the environmental ethics spectrum. We find that the economic discourse on sustainable development, which tends to prevail in political decision-making, is heavily anthropocentric, whereas an ecological discourse has some potential to deliver ecocentrism, but only where a deep ecology interpretation is adopted. We then show that the practise of EIA (with or without the addition of other approaches) maps against, and is bounded by, an economic discourse on sustainable development. The reality is, therefore, that EIA can do no more than contribute to delaying incremental biodiversity loss. If EIA were legislated to protect biodiversity using a deep ecology discourse, then only brownfield development would be possible.     

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.     

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.     

Biodiversity and bird surveys in Finnish environmental impact assessments and follow-up monitoring

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) that are applied in the planning phases of large land-use and construction projects are aimed at aiding decision-making and mitigating significant environmental impacts. In light of the global biodiversity crisis, conducting high-quality biodiversity impact assessments is important, as biodiversity information, among other factors, has the potential to influence how projects will be implemented in the end. We investigated the biodiversity and bird surveys conducted and the number of bird species of conservation concern in peat extraction and wind farm projects to which an EIA was applied to in 1995–2016 in Finland and compared whether these factors differed between the project types and between implemented and unimplemented projects. We also studied the availability of follow-up monitoring data of biodiversity impacts within the two project types. The number of nationally threatened breeding birds was significantly lower in implemented than in unimplemented peat extraction projects. The overall probability of being implemented was significantly negatively associated with the year the EIA began for both project types. All permitted peat extraction projects and 22% of wind farm projects conducted post-construction biodiversity monitoring; however, only some projects enabled before-after comparisons. Our results are in line with earlier findings that demonstrate the difficulty of showing the direct impacts of biodiversity information on EIA decision-making and to what extent it is related to project approval or rejection. The role of follow-up monitoring in the EIA and project development could also be strengthened.     

An evaluation of a risk-based environmental regulation in Brazil: Limitations to risk management of hazardous installations

The environmental regulation of hazardous projects with risk-based decision-making processes can lead to a deficient management of human exposure to technological hazards. Such an approach for regulation is criticized for simplifying the complexity of decisions involving the economic, social, and environmental aspects of the installation and operation of hazardous facilities in urban areas. Results of a Brazilian case study indicate that oil and gas transmission pipelines may represent a threat to diverse communities if the relationship between such linear projects and human populations is overlooked by regulatory bodies. Results also corroborate known challenges to the implementation of EIA processes and outline limitations to an effective environmental and risk management. Two preliminary topics are discussed to strengthen similar regulatory practices. Firstly, an effective integration between social impact assessment and risk assessment in EIA processes to have a more comprehensive understanding of the social fabric. Secondly, the advancement of traditional management practices for hazardous installations to pursue a strong transition from assessment and evaluation to management and control and to promote an effective interaction between land-use planning and environmental regulation.     

Project justification and EIA: Anything goes?

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) incorporates environmental aspects into decision-making, but sometimes it is not effective in rejecting projects with dubious justification, significant impacts and little social utility, especially when they have political support. EIA is expected to achieve sustainable development, but without calling development into question; however, it should be able to ask the question of whether development is really necessary. Although EIA is political, as a part of the decision-making process, politicization must be limited to prevent it from becoming a mere instrument for giving an “environmental veneer” to development. Some measures thar can help avoid unjustified projects are: adopting administrative justice approach to EIA; minimising politicization of EIA agencies; improving transparency in decision-making and proportionality of EIA procedures; carrying out pre-feasibility studies; increasing the scope of SEA; allowing more than one SEA or EIA procedure for the same development throughout the planning process; strengthening the justification of the project in EIA documents; or making the scoping phase mandatory at least for major projects.     

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.     

Evaluating public participation in Chinese EIA. An integrated Public Participation Index and its application to the case of the New Beijing Airport

In recent years, China's government authorities have devoted increasing attention to the role of public participation processes in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The capacity of these processes to influence decision-making remains widely debated. This paper aims at appraising the institutional rationale informing the implementation of public participation in China's EIA, benchmarking it against three conceptualisations: (1) Normative, based on objectives of empowerment and democratisation; (2) Substantive, where participation is pursued mainly to improve quality of decisions; (3) Instrumental, seeking participation as an instrument to legitimise decision-making processes. The appraisal is carried out by means of a new integrated index (Public Participation Index, PPI), which is applied to a case study representative of latest advancements in EIA public participation practices in China, namely the “New Beijing Airport Project”. Located 46 km south of downtown Beijing, the project was approved in 2014 and it is currently under construction. Results of the PPI application to this case study indicate that, despite progress made in recent years, the implementation of public participation in Chinese EIA still largely responds to an instrumental rationale, with limited capacity for the public to affect decisions.     

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.     

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.     

Window on the Pentagon: EIA and defense decision making

Two sources of difficulty complicate tying EIA to decision making at the Department of Defense: the nature of the federal EIA process and the DOD decision-making process. Several steps, focused on each of the problem sources, are suggested that would enable DOD to enhance its existing leadership in doing EIA for its projects.     

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) as collaborative learning process

A collaborative problem-solving approach was applied to environmental impact assessment of regional waste management strategy in Pirkanmaa, Finland. Various actors—interest groups, authorities, and experts—were invited to engage in joint fact finding and to exchange their views on the goals of alternative waste management strategies. The experiences of these encounters suggest that collaborative EIA can serve as a learning and civic discovery process where people can act together and find new solutions. During the process, the participants were able to reflect on their preferences and factual beliefs and to create a previously unconsidered waste management strategy that most parties found acceptable. The potential for learning and finding mutually acceptable solutions depended, however, on the legitimacy and institutional settings of the process: to what extent different perspectives were considered in the process, not only included, and how EIA was connected to a political decision-making process.     

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.     

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.     

Comparison of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law with the European Union (EU) EIA Directive

In this paper, we first review the development of China’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system in the past 30 years. Then we compare the framework and operational procedures of China’s new EIA law with those of the EU EIA Directive. We also compare public participation, as well as sanctions and control in the two EIA systems. In addition, we identify where the processes in both EIA systems are similar or different from one another. By comparison, we noted that there are at least three obvious weaknesses in China’s EIA system: (1) the application of new models for EIA legislation; (2) the improvement of EIA guidance and education; and (3) the enhancement of public participation in EIA process. Our study indicates that these three major shortcomings should be overcome and improved in China’s EIA system, when compared with the EU EIA system.