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.     

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.     

The European Directive on environmental impact assessment: Implementation at last?

Summary The Commission of the European Communities' directive on environmental impact assessment (EIA) finally came into force in July 1988. The main provisions of the Directive are described, together with the objectives it is intended to achieve and the key areas where member state legislation will need to be effective if the principal requirements of the Directive are to be properly implemented. These include adequate coverage of projects, sufficient information in EIA studies, and effective consultation and public participation. Most European countries have some experience with EIA but, as illustrated by the UK Channel Fixed Link reports, the quality of the studies undertaken is very variable. Recommendations are made for improvements in practice through more effective diffusion of best practice, better provision and use of EIA guidance, more focused EIA research, more effective consultation and closer collaboration between the different parties involved in the EIA process, and both quantitative and qualitative improvements in EIA training. The results of a recent survey of European EIA training activity indicate growing interest, but further progress in improving the provision of EIA training is needed before the Directive can be effectively implemented.Drs Christopher Wood and Norman Lee have both been involved on various Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) studies for the European Commission and have written widely on EIA and related topics. Both are Senior Lecturers at the University of Manchester and they are co-Directors of its EIA Centre. Christopher Wood teaches mainly in the Department of Town and County Planning, Norman Lee in the Department of Economics.     

Towards a more effective EIA in transport planning: a literature review to derive interventions and mechanisms to improve knowledge integration

A set of process-related barriers negatively determines the effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in transport planning. Recent research highlights the unstructured stakeholder involvement and inefficient public participation in earlier phases of EIA as key bottlenecks. While the academic literature has produced promising theories for addressing these barriers, they have rarely been translated into solutions applicable and testable in practice. In order to bridge this theory–practice gap, we present a systematic literature review of interventions and mechanisms aimed at facilitating the integration of different sources and types of knowledge during the scoping phase of EIA. This review explores if and how interventions and mechanisms have been conducted in practice; if and why they worked or did not work and how relevant they are for EIA in transport planning. Based on this review, we distil a set of three specific interventions and trigger mechanisms applicable in the context of EIA in transport planning.     

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.     

The role of public involvement in environmental impact assessment in Vietnam: towards a more culturally sensitive approach

This paper explores the extent to which Western approaches to public involvement in environmental impact assessment (EIA) have been transferred to Vietnam, constraints on their use, and their appropriateness for the Vietnamese context. The research is based on an analysis of the public involvement content found in 26 EIA reports from development banks and interviews with 26 key informants. The study found that public involvement in Vietnam is generally technocratic, expert-driven and non-transparent, similar to the early days of EIA in the West and emerging economies. Public involvement usually occurs through authorised state channels such as commune leaders, mass organisations and professional organisations. The lack of a participatory culture for EIA, the nascent nature of grassroots democracy in the country, and Vietnamese cultural norms regarding respect for authority provide a challenging context for involving the public in EIA. The paper concludes by offering a number of suggestions for culturally appropriate public involvement at a time when Vietnam has just introduced mandatory public consultation for EIAs.     

EIA,Decision-making Theory and Screening and Scoping in UK Practice

As an aid to decision making Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is seen as a rational and systematic process which is often held to be holistic and proactive in its approach to environmental protection (Glasson et al., 1999). The roots of EIA are firmly located within the 1960s' demand for a more systematic and objective approach to environmental decision making and hence within the rationalist model of decision making theory. This paper examines the key stages of the EIA process to assess how far EIA conforms to the rationalist model today. Most research in EIA decision making has focused on the project authorization process and not the crucial decisions made at the earlier stages of screening and scoping. This study examines those early stages within the context of UK EIA practice. From this examination the paper attempts to locate EIA within decision-making theory.     

Progress with Implementing the Environmental Assessment Requirements of the Resource Management Act in New Zealand

The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) has introduced environmental impact assessment (EIA) into the operations of territorial authorities at the regional and district level in New Zealand. The system established by the RMA is not only devolved in administrative terms, it is also comprehensive in its application. This paper reports the findings of an interview-based survey of key personnel in selected regional and district councils, along with others from government departments, planning consultancies and law firms. The purpose is to assess the success of the councils in developing appropriate and workable procedures, and to identify the main problems likely to inhibit the development of an effective EIA system in New Zealand. Overall, the task of implementing the EIA requirements has been tackled positively by councils, but there are signs of major differences emerging in the EIA procedures they are developing. Key issues that need to be considered by councils include: the need for explanatory documentation for, and verbal advice to, resource consents applicants at the earliest stage possible; the lack of public involvement in the EIA activities and the need for council staff to encourage and facilitate such participation; and problems with ensuring the adequacy of EIA information in such a devolved and comprehensive EIA system.     

德国空间规划战略环境评价的法律界定以及对我国的启示

空间规划是国际上战略环境评价应用较为活跃的领域之一,但在我国,无论是空间规划还是空间规划环评,均处于探索和研究阶段。本文从德国空间规划法入手,着重分析空间规划法对战略环境评价的具体要求,旨在为我国今后空间规划开展战略环评提供制度上的参考。文章重点研究了screening、scoping、 层级评价、环境报告、部门咨询、公众参与、决策考虑和跟踪评价等8项有利于提高战略环境评价有效性的主要议题。研究认为,德国的空间规划战略环境评价通过制度保障实施,采用规划部门主导、其他相关部门辅助的模式,使得规划制定与战略环评实施可以有效结合,提倡经济型、节约型和务实性的环境评价,重视战略环评结果,倡导透明决策。     

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.     

环境行政公益诉讼诉前程序探究

诉前程序与诉讼程序既相互独立,又紧密衔接,在公益诉讼案件中起着督促和过滤的作用.但是目前我国公益诉讼还处在发展初期,行政公益诉讼诉前程序在实践运用中的诸多弊端也逐渐暴露出来:案件线索来源太过单一、行政机关履职标准不明确、检察建议的相关规定不完善等.以行政公益诉讼制度中的诉前程序为研究对象,通过梳理相关法律规定,并结合其...     

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 impact assessment of infrastructure projects: a governance perspective

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been promoted as an instrument for preventive environmental management in construction projects, but its performance in safeguarding the environment through influencing project decision-making is questioned. This paper probes the underlying reasons from a governance perspective as an important supplement to the regulatory and technical perspectives. A framework, with process integration, professional governance, and public engagement being its key components, is proposed to analyze the governance arrangements that enable or inhibit the effective functioning of EIA, based on which a comparative study of three infrastructure projects in China, the United States and Finland was conducted. The results reveal that, while the level of process integration and public engagement of EIA determines the degree to which EIA influences project decisions, it is the professional governance that controls the accountability of EIA. The paper has implications on institutionally where efforts should be directed to improve the performance of EIA.     

Post-development Auditing of EIA Predictive Techniques: A Spatial Analytical Approach

Despite widespread recognition that post-development auditing has the potential to provide feedback which could improve future Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), there remains a paucity of research which relates specifically to the evaluation of EIA predictive techniques, with even less progress in the development of audit methodologies. This paper describes a spatial analytical approach to post-development auditing that focuses upon the identification and analysis of the residual errors between the impacts predicted at a site using a particular predictive method and the actual impacts found to occur through monitoring. For three case studies, relevant impact predictions are tested (to determine the residual errors) and statistical models of the errors are developed in order to explore factors which may explain the performance of the predictive technique. The paper then considers the broader lessons and limitations that can be drawn out from the research both for auditing and EIA practice, including feedback on predictive techniques, the potential role of scoping decisions in generating errors in impact prediction, and the implications of uncertainty over future baseline conditions for auditing and impact prediction/interpretation.     

Environmental impact assessment in the People's Republic of China

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedures have been in existence in the People's Republic of China over the last decade. The impetus for China's introduction of EIA was provided by the Environmental Protection Law of the People's Republic of China, which was adopted by the Fifth National People's Congress in 1979. The EIA process, which is administrative and not statutorily mandated, has been applied primarily to construction projects. Four stages are typically involved in an EIA investigation: design of the investigation, evaluation of background environmental quality, prediction of environmental impacts, and an assessment and analysis of the environmental impacts. A variety of approaches is used for predicting and analyzing environmental impacts, ranging from ad hoc methods to fairly sophisticated mathematical models. The results of the EIA investigation are compiled in an environmental impact statement, which is used as the basis for decision making by personnel in environmental protection departments. The EIA process does not include provisions for citizen notification or involvement. Views differ concerning the effectiveness of the EIA program in protecting China's natural, social, and cultural environments. Some hold that the EIA program has brought about improvement in environmental protection, while critics contend that the program has had little effect in the prevention of pollution. However, most, if not all, observers seem to feel that the program should be continued and improved. A major avenue for improvement is to place the evaluation of a particular project in a regional context. An earlier version of this paper was distributed at a workshop on Environmental Assessment Development Planning held in conjunction with the VII Annual Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Brisbane, Australia, July 5–8, 1988.     

Beyond the Requirements: Improving Public Participation in EIA

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

Policy And Practice Environmental Assessmentand Planning: A Chronology of Development in England and Wales

The development of regulations to implement Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in England and Wales occurred initially as a response to European Community Directive obligations. Since then, a proliferation of regulations has resulted from the need to meet those obligations which were not covered successfully by the first tranche of legislation; the desire to extend the range of project types requiring EIA beyond those specified in the Directive; and the need to respond to changes brought about by privatization.As a result, current regulations relating to EIA are extremely complex and are in a constant state of flux. This inevitably causes problems for those responsible for their implementation. Ten years after the 1985 Environmental Impact Assessment Directive was notified to the Member States, it has undergone a review and the European Commissionhas reached a common position on the proposedamendments.The implementation date for Member States to meet the requirements of the amended Directive is 31 December 1997 (ENDS, 1996). However, the 1985 Directive has yet to be fully implemented in the UK.     

Evolution of environmental impact assessment as applied to watershed modification projects in Canada

This article reviews the application of environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedures and practices to three watershed modification projects situaled in western Canada. These ventures were justified for accelerating regional economic development, and cover the period during which public concerns for protecting the environment rapidly made their way into the national political agenda. An historical account and analysis of the situation, therefore, seems desirable in order to understand the development of EIA processes, practices, and methodologies since the start of construction of the first project in 1961. This study concludes that there has been good progress in predicting and evaluating environmental and related social impacts of watershed modification proposals. However, a number of obstacles need to be overcome before EIA can firmly establish itself as an effective planning tool. These difficulties include jurisdictional confusions and conflicts, division of authority and responsibility in designing and implementing appropriate mitigative and monitoring measures, lack of tested EIA methodologies, and limited availability of qualified human resources. A number of conclusions and suggestions are offered so that future watershed modification proposals may be planned and implemented in a more environmentally sustainable fashion. These include: (1) EIA processes must be completed before irrevocable decisions are made. (2) Any major intrusion into a watershed is likely to impact on some major components of the ecosystem(s). (3) Mitigation costs must form part of the benefit-cost analysis of any project proposal. (4) Interjurisdictional cooperation is imperative where watersheds cross political boundaries. (5) The EIA process is a public process, hence public concerns must be dealt with fairly. (6) The role of science in the EIA process must be at arms length from project proponents and regulators, and allowed to function in the interest of the protection of the environment and public health and safety. The views expressed here are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect those of FEARO and/or other government agencies and officials involved in the review of these projects.     

The role of environmental impact assessment in coal production and utilization

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

海洋油气开发工程环评中公众参与探讨

根据我国环境影响评价公众参与现状和海洋油气开发工程公众参与实践,对海洋油气开发工程环评中公众参与进行初步探讨。目前海洋油气开发工程公众参与存在的问题主要有:相关公众界定较难、公众主要是在环评机构主导下的被动参与、信息不对称使公众难以正确表达意见、相关公众中个人的环境素养和法制意识不高。根据存在的问题,建议通过以下方法提高海洋油气开发工程环评公众参与水平:研究制定海洋工程公众参与技术方法规范;掌握好公众参与时机,尽早启动,调动公众主动参与;科学确定公众范围,选择好公众参与对象;结合实际选择公众参与方式。