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。     

"以人为本"是房地产建设项目环境影响评价中的重要原则

房地产开发项目体现“以人为本”理念和对环境影响的双重性，在房地产建设项目环境影响评价中应以“以人为本”的原则加深其服务功能和环境保护目标的属性，实现房地产开发项目和谐共生的生态环境和可持续发展。     

Environmental Impact Assessment Under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty

US government actions undertaken in Antarctica are subject to the requirements of both the Protocol and the US National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). There are differences in the scope and intent of the Protocol and NEPA; however, both require environmental impact assessment (EIA) as part of the planning process for proposed actions that have the potential for environmental impacts. In this paper we describe the two instruments and highlight key similarities and differences with particular attention to EIA. Through this comparison of the EIA requirements of NEPA and the Protocol, we show how the requirements of each can be used in concert to provide enhanced environmental protection for the antarctic environment. NEPA applies only to actions of the US government; therefore, because NEPA includes certain desirable attributes that have been refined and clarified through numerous court cases, and because the Protocol is just entering implementation internationally, some recommendations are made for strengthening the procedural requirements of the Protocol for activities undertaken by all Parties in Antarctica. The Protocol gives clear and strong guidance for protection of specific, valued antarctic environmental resources including intrinsic wilderness and aesthetic values, and the value of Antarctica as an area for scientific research. That guidance requires a higher standard of environmental protection for Antarctica than is required in other parts of the world. This paper shows that taken together NEPA and the Protocol call for closer examination of proposed actions and a more rigorous consideration of environmental impacts than either would alone. Three areas are identified where the EIA provisions of the Protocol could be strengthened to improve its effectiveness. First, the thresholds defined by the Protocol need to be clarified. Specifically, the meanings of the terms “minor” and “transitory” are not clear in the context of the Protocol. The use of “or” in the phrase “minor or transitory” further confuses the meaning. Second, cumulative impact assessment is called for by the Protocol but is not defined. A clear definition could reduce the chance that cumulative impacts would be given inadequate consideration. Finally, the public has limited opportunities to comment on or influence the preparation of initial or comprehensive environmental evaluations. Experience has shown that public input to environmental documents has a considerable influence on agency decision making and the quality of EIA that agencies perform.     

Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Audit in Large-Scale Public Infrastructure Construction: The Case of the Qinghai–Tibet Railway

Large-scale public infrastructure projects have featured in China’s modernization course since the early 1980s. During the early stages of China’s rapid economic development, public attention focused on the economic and social impact of high-profile construction projects. In recent years, however, we have seen a shift in public concern toward the environmental and ecological effects of such projects, and today governments are required to provide valid environmental impact assessments prior to allowing large-scale construction. The official requirement for the monitoring of environmental conditions has led to an increased number of debates in recent years regarding the effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Governmental Environmental Audits (GEAs) as environmental safeguards in instances of large-scale construction. Although EIA and GEA are conducted by different institutions and have different goals and enforcement potential, these two practices can be closely related in terms of methodology. This article cites the construction of the Qinghai–Tibet Railway as an instance in which EIA and GEA offer complementary approaches to environmental impact management. This study concludes that the GEA approach can serve as an effective follow-up to the EIA and establishes that the EIA lays a base for conducting future GEAs. The relationship that emerges through a study of the Railway’s construction calls for more deliberate institutional arrangements and cooperation if the two practices are to be used in concert to optimal effect.     

Practitioner Perspectives on the Role of Science in Environmental Impact Assessment

A large body of literature addresses the role of science in environmental impact assessment (EIA) but less attention has been given to the views of practitioners themselves. In this research a survey of 31 EIA practitioners in Western Australia was undertaken to determine their perceptions of the quality and importance of science in EIA. The survey results are compared with previous theoretical, empirical, and survey studies of the role of science in EIA. Interview questions addressed the role of science in impact prediction, monitoring activities, mitigation and management, and EIA decision-making. It was clear from the interviews that many practitioners are satisfied with the quality of science currently used in EIA, but do not believe that it is given sufficient importance in the process. The quality and importance of science in the predecision stages of EIA was rated higher than in the postdecision stages. While science was perceived to provide the basis for baseline data collection, impact prediction, and mitigation design, it was seen to be less important during decision-making and ongoing project management. Science was seen to be just one input to decision-makers along with other factors such as sociopolitical and economic considerations. While time and budget constraints were seen to limit the scientific integrity of EIA activities, pressure from the public and regulatory authorities increased it. Improving the scientific component of EIA will require consideration of all these factors, not just the technical issues.     

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.     

Framework for environmental impact analysis—with special reference to India

This article reviews the present status of environmental impact analysis (EIA) with special reference to India. In India, legislation already exists that makes EIA mandatory for every new project proposal. Critically analyzing the shortcomings of the present EIA practices, this article proposes a new framework to conduct an EIA, emphasizing that it should be part of the environmental management of the area or region. Among other things, we suggest the following important points: (1) that a comprehensive database of the region be developed for use for conducting an EIA; (2) that emission standards for the proposed industry be set and the existing standards for old industries be reviewed; (3) that a directory of experts be developed; and (4) that the Department of Environment should take responsibility for conducting EIA studies by forming a study team and an evaluation team for every EIA study with members drawn from the directory of experts.     

回顾性环境影响评价程序及内容研究

回顾性环境影响评价是环境影响评价的一个分支,是继常规环境影响评价之后,为检验实际环境影响和减缓措施的有效性行为。其工作内容主要包括环境监测、检验与评估、环境管理及其他环境研究。它既是对原环境影响评价过程中所使用的预测模型和结果正确性的验证,又是对原工作内容进行重要的补充和修正,并提出更为合理和实用的环境保护措施及对策     

“三线一单”对重构环境准入体系的意义及关键环节

“放管服”背景下以环评为核心的环境准入体系面临工作周期长、制度效率低、结论可验证性差、社会认可度不高等诸多挑战。本文针对“三线一单”具有的早期介入和共享区域基础信息的工作特征,认为将“三线一单”纳入环境准入体系后可以更好地发挥系统性预防作用,提升政府的决策能力和环评工作效率,实现环境准入体系的高质量和高效率。在重构环境准入体系方面,提出了“三线一单”与规划环评和项目环评制度衔接的关键环节:明确三项制度不同的职责定位和责任主体、厘清三项制度的衔接环节,以及完善三项制度间的信息交互。     

浅论滇黔桂油田环境保护现状及对策

滇黔桂石油局把环境保护放在企业可持续发展的高度抓清洁生产,推行企业法人环保责任制和目标管理,开展清洁生产试点,生产环境友好产品,树立企业环保形象。文章就滇黔桂油田主要污染源现状、治理及管理措施进行了讨论并提出切合实际的建议。     

The significance of environmental impacts: an exploration of the concept

Since environmental impact assessment (EIA) is concerned primarily withsignificant environmental impacts, the concept of impact significance deserves to be defined and applied rigorously. In this article use of the term over the past 15 years in EIA documentation is reviewed. Some recent attempts at elucidating the concept are summarized. Four perspectives on impact significance that emerged from a series of workshops on the ecological basis for EIA are presented. These perspectives include (a) statistical (related to problems of isolating project-induced changes from natural variation), (b) ecological (related to the importance of project-induced changes from a purely ecological perspective), (c) social (related to the acceptability of project-induced changes in important environmental attributes), and (d) project (related to whether project-induced changes will indeed influence project decision making). The following synthesis is proposed: Any exercise in judging the significance of an environmental impact should thoroughly consider (a) the importance of the environmental attribute in question to project decision makers, (2) the distribution of change in time and space, (c) the magnitude of change, and (d) the reliability with which change has been predicted or measured. The implications of considering these factors are discussed.     

四川省水电行业环境监理试点工作实践与探讨

长期以来,我国对水电工程建设的环境管理实行环境影响评价和"三同时"制度,主抓环保审批和竣工验收两个环节,在工程施工阶段的环境管理相对薄弱,因此在水电资源开发的同时,也带来了一定程度的环境污染和生态破坏。为实现水电开发与环境保护的协调可持续发展,本文作者以某梯级电站为例,结合所参与的水电建设项目,对水电建设环境监理进行梳理和探讨,以期为水电建设项目环境监理的发展提供一定的理论及技术支持。     

Mainstreaming environmental impact assessment as a tool for environmental management in Ethiopia: Current challenges and directions for future improvements

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was first entered into force in the United States of America in 1969 through the National Environmental Policy Act. Since then, the EIA was implemented in many other countries. In Ethiopia, EIA was formally introduced in 2002 by Proclamation No. 299/2002 after the establishment of the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in 1995 and the formulation of the Environmental Policy of Ethiopia (EPE) in 1997. This study, which is based on a document review, interviews, and the application of a survey questionnaire, analyzes the procedures and practices of the Ethiopian EIA system, seeks to clarify fundamental information regarding the EIA system and characteristics of the key elements of EIA processes, and finally, offers suggestions that could improve EIA practices in the country. The overall result of this study shows that Ethiopia adopted EIA procedures that are similar to western models; however, despite approximately 15 years of experience, its implementation is still poor to the point that the use of EIA as an instrument of environmental management could be questioned. The challenges identified by this study include institutional, organizational, and professional capacity gaps, which, in turn, have resulted in constraints ranging from improper screening, scoping, and production of EIA reports to ineffective review, monitoring, and post‐project evaluation. Additional challenges to the system include poor governance and corruption, rapid economic growth, and the mushrooming of micro‐ and small‐scale enterprises that cause pollution and environmental degradation. This article also provides comprehensive suggestions to improve EIA practices in Ethiopia.     

Environmental impact assessment: An international evaluation

Experiences with environmental impact assessment (EIA) in a number of countries are discussed in the light of both explicit and implicit goals and objectives. Adequate environmental information is not always available to decision makers because of failure to apply EIA to all relevant decisions, the continuing inadequacies of prediction and evaluation techniques, the failure to consider alternatives adequately, and the bias of some EISs. EIA frequently results in changes to proposals and may result in stricter environmental management conditions in some cases, but some people regard it as a failure because it has not stopped development. Generally, EIA leads to better integration of environmental factors into project planning. Open procedures and freedom of information encourage responsiveness to EIA procedures, which can be weakened by discretionary powers and lack of access to the courts by public interest groups. However, legal standing may have side effects that offset its advantages. EIA can encourage cooperation and coordination between agencies but does not ensure them. Similarly, it can have a limited role in coordinating interstate and international policies. In the long term, the success of EIA depends on adequate monitoring, reassessment, and enforcement over the life of the project. EIA has generally opened up new opportunities for public participation, and may help to reduce conflict. EIA procedures need to be integrated with other environmental protection and development control programs, and various means exist for reducing its cost to developers and the public.     

Environmental management systems and sustainable development

The idea of sustainable development was first brought to widespread attention as a global issue; however, it is increasingly being applied at more local levels down to that of individual companies. This raises the potential danger that sustainable development will come to be predominantly identified with the preservation of the organisation involved. A likely outcome is that management decision-making will tip the balance too far in favour of people-centred interests as against environmental interests. An initial step in preventing this is to make any bias in the balance of interests transparent to management. To do this, a model of sustainability is set up in terms that provide a context for the implementation of a quality based environmental management system such as that specified by the International Standard, ISO 14001. In response to inherent uncertainty, a precautionary approach is adopted. The implications of this model for the structuring of critical environmental management system elements are then discussed and a way to generate an indicator of bias proposed. The content of an audit, which would measure the extent to which an organisation has a management system competent to measure and monitor this bias, is also discussed and proposed as another useful indicator.     

我国环境影响评价与社会稳定风险评估制度关系的思考

环境影响评价制度和社会稳定风险评估制度作为预防和控制环境影响、创新社会风险管理的重要制度,实施以来发挥了重要作用,但也出现了工作边界和内容范围交叉的问题。尤其是近年来,环境污染焦虑引发社会风险事件的建设项目不断增多,导致两者的"天然联系"愈发紧密,工作存在模糊地带的问题愈发凸显,致使建设项目行政审批繁复、执行力差。在梳理环评、稳评的发展历程和存在问题的基础上,深入分析了环评和稳评的法律地位、适用范围、评价目标、评价内容、实施主体和程序上的异同,剖析了两者在制度设计和内容衔接方面的关系,并从理清工作边界职责、环境社会风险评估结果共享、强化稳评公众参与等方面提出了环评和稳评政策衔接的建议,为政府有效实施建设项目环境、社会监管提供决策参考。     

我国现行环境影响评价制度面临的问题与对策

环境影响评价制度在我国经过近30年的发展与完善,在有效加强环境管理,从源头上防止环境污染和生态环境破坏方面起到了重要作用。但从现实看,其并未能从根本上遏制我国生态环境的恶化,各级政府的发展观、环境职能部门的独立性和公正性、评价机构的中立性、环境报告编制的技术性缺失和环境影响评价制度的缺憾等问题都严重制约着环境影响评价的作用发挥,只有解决这些问题,通过完善制度、科学评价,公正审批和有效监督才能让环境影响评价真正成为环境的守护神,实现经济社会发展与自然的和谐。     

Screening for EIA in India: Enhancing effectiveness through ecological carrying capacity approach

Developing countries across the world have embraced the policy of high economic growth as a means to reduce poverty. This economic growth largely based on industrial output is fast degrading the ecosystems, jeopardizing their long term sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has long been recognized as a tool which can help in protecting the ecosystems and aid sustainable development. The Screening guidelines for EIA reflect the level of commitment the nation displays towards tightening its environmental protection system. The paper analyses the screening process for EIA in India and dissects the rationale behind the exclusions and thresholds set in the screening process. The screening process in India is compared with that of the European Union with the aim of understanding the extent of deviations from a screening approach in the context of better economic development. It is found that the Indian system excludes many activities from the purview of screening itself when compared to the EU. The constraints responsible for these exclusions are discussed and the shortcomings of the current command and control system of environmental management in India are also explained. It is suggested that an ecosystem carrying capacity based management system can provide significant inputs to enhance the effectiveness of EIA process from screening to monitoring.     

PROFILE: Integrating Sustainability and Environmental Impact Assessment

/ Environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been identified as an important instrument for facilitating sustainability. However, to do so requires the integration of sustainability into EIA theory and practice. The sustainability concept is a valid and important environmental management perspective. However, many issues and obstacles need to be addressed further if the concept is to be translated into practical strategies. Sustainability can potentially infuse EIA with a clearer sense of direction, an ethical foundation, a mechanism for establishing priorities and assessing choices, and a means of linking EIA to other environmental management instruments. Conceptually, EIA and sustainability can be integrated, but frameworks should be refined, adpated to context, and linked to related initiatives. Sustainability should be explicitly incorporated into EIA legislation, guidelines, and institutional arrangements. An experimental approach to testing, assessing, and sharing experiences is suggested.A framework is first presented that defines and characterizes the sustainability concept. A further framework is then described for integrating sustainability into EIA at the conceptual level. The integration of sustainability and EIA at the regulatory level is next addressed through an overview of sustainability initiatives in EIA requirements in Canada. The Canadian examples include many promising initiatives but these and other experiences will need to be monitored, shared, and integrated into comprehensive environmental management strategies. Finally, means of incorporating sustainability into each activity in the EIA planning process are identified.KEY WORDS: Sustainability; Environmental impact assessment     

An approach to integrate impact scoping with environmental impact assessment

Impact scoping is the process of identifying important issues of a proposal and focusing the environmental impact assessment (EIA) on the high-priority issues. Although impact scoping in one form or another has been inherent to EIA for some time, documentation of its development and discussion of refinements to impact scoping processes have not been forthcoming. This article traces the development of impact scoping through time and highlights the need for such processes in EIA. A focused environmental assessment (FEA) approach to impact scoping that is suitable for implementation in an EIA is presented here and advantages of its use are delineated. FEA is a three-staged process that encourages impact scoping through progressive steps including impact identification, assessment and management planning. FEA combines a suite of EIA methods including: issues matrices, impact hypotheses, valued ecosystem components, and stakeholder participation sessions to effectively integrate impact scoping with EIA.