Environmental Assessment in Practice

Owen Harrop, Ashley Nixon

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2005
• eBook ISBN: 9781134729784
• Topic: Biological Sciences
• Subtopic: Environmental Science
• Index: Biological Sciences

This text explains what constitutes good practice in applying environmental assessment as an environmental management tool. A wide range of case studies and other student text features are employed to demonstrate how the different methods, techniques and disciplines of environmental assessment can be used. The authors address the key concepts for environmental assessment procedures: methods for using E.A.; techniques for impact prediction and evaluation; environmental risk assessment; EA consultation and participation; project management; environmental statement review and post-project analysis; and strategic environmental assessment. Worldwide case studies include: gas pipelines, hydroelectric power plants, gold mining, river crossings, waste-to-energy plants and gravel extraction in England, Scotland, Ireland, Canada, the USA, Venezuela, the Netherlands, Iceland, Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa and Ghana.

Chapter 1

Introduction to environmental assessment

Purpose and procedures

Introduction

Terminology

General principles of EA

International developments in EA

Costs and benefits of EA

Overview of the main stages in the EA process

Questions for thought

Introduction

Since the enactment of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the USA in 1970, around 200 systems for environmental assessment (EA) have been introduced in countries, states and international organisations around the world. EA may be described as an environmental management tool whose objective is to identify, predict and evaluate the potential biological, physical, social and health effects of a proposed development action and to communicate the findings in a way which encourages environmental concerns to be adequately addressed by stakeholders, including decisionmakers and communities prior to development decisions being made. It plays a crucial role in environmental protection and meeting the challenges of sustainable development, a view which was recognised within the provisions of the declaration of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), or the Earth Summit meeting, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992 and the recommendations made in the resulting global programme of action (Agenda 21). Principle 17 of the UNCED Declaration states that ‘Environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have significant adverse impacts on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent national authority’.

During its development over a period of almost 30 years, the methods and approaches to EA have been tried, tested and refined and, in what is perhaps one of the most important developments, its application has been extended from a project level to an assessment of the environmental implications of policies, plans and programmes (strategic environmental assessment, SEA). Improvements in practice have been achieved, yet it is also recognised that there are many opportunities for strengthening institutional capacity for EA, improving the design of EA systems and their implementation at an operational level to make the process more effective (United Nations Environment Programme 1992; Sadler 1996). In particular, these include: the ways in which issues for inclusion in EA studies are determined (scoping); the analysis of development alternatives; consideration of more complex environmental impacts, especially those which are of a cumulative and/or transboundary nature; improved quality control mechanisms; better public participation in the process; and, as stated above, the further application of EA beyond the project level. Recent and proposed major modifications to established systems for EA, for example in Canada, Hong Kong, New Zealand and the European Union (EU), have responded to some of these needs and recently developed new systems for EA have demonstrated a greater appreciation of their importance (e.g. Namibia, Ghana and Chile).

Terminology

The terms EA and environmental impact assessment (EIA) and environmental statement (ES) and environmental impact statement (EIS) are used respectively to describe the overall process and the written report arising from the studies. Regrettably, there is no real consensus on the use of these terms and they are often used interchangeably. Many countries have EIA systems, whereas the World Bank has procedures for EA. Within the UK, the preferred term has been EA, particularly chosen to avoid the impression that the process is restricted to the analysis of negative impacts, whereas the EU Directive on which the UK system is based consistently uses the expression EIA. The approach taken in this book is to use the term EA for all types of environmental assessment and the term SEA when referring exclusively to the assessment of policies, plans and programmes. When reference is made to the processes established by countries or international organisations, these are referred to by their original formal title, for example the Namibian EA policy or the EIA procedure of Ghana.

General principles of EA

The legal frameworks, procedures and guidelines for EA introduced in countries and organisations around the world follow some generally agreed principles, which have been described as a hierarchy of core values, guiding principles and operational principles (Sadler 1996). These principles are the product of over 25 years’ experience with EA, and in the case of operational principles, the inputs of practitioners arising from a series of workshops (for example, Centre for Environmental Management and Planning (CEMP) 1994) organised to feed into the international study of the effectiveness of EA, which took place between 1993 and 1996. These general principles constitute an essential guideline for the EA practitioner.

According to Sadler (1996) the core values of EA are:

Integrity. The EA process should conform to accepted standards and principles of good practice.

Utility. The process should provide balanced, credible information for decision making.

Sustainability. The process should promote environmentally sound development.

The same source gives the main guiding principles as:

A well-founded legislative base with clear purpose, specific requirements and prescribed responsibilities.

Appropriate procedural controls to ensure the level of assessment, scope and consideration and schedules for completion are relevant to the circumstances.

Incentive for public involvement with structured opportunities tailored to the issues and interests at stake.

Problem- and decision-orientation, concerned with the issues that matter, the provision of consequential information, and explicit linkage to approvals and condition-setting.

Follow-up and feedback capability, including compliance and effects monitoring, impact management, and audit and evaluation.

Sadler (1996) also sets out the main operational principles for effective EA practice.

EA should be applied:

to all development projects or activities likely to cause potentially significant adverse impacts or add to actual potential foreseeable cumulative effects;

as a primary instrument for environmental management to ensure that impacts of development are minimised, avoided or rehabilitated;

in a way that the scope of review is consistent with the nature of the project or activity and commensurate with the likely issues and impacts; and

on the basis of well defined roles, rules and responsibilities for key actors.

EA should be undertaken:

throughout the project cycle, beginning as early as possible in the concept design phase;

with clear reference to the requirements for project authorisation and follow-up, including impact management;

in accordance with established procedures, best-practice guidance and project-specific terms of reference; and

to provide appropriate opportunities for public involvement of communities, groups, and parties directly affected by or with an interest in the project and/or its environmental impacts.

EA should address, wherever necessary or appropriate:

other related and relevant factors, including social and health risks and impacts;

cumulative and long-term, large scale effects;

design, location and technological alternatives to the proposal being assessed; and

sustainability considerations, including resources productivity, assimilative capacity and biological diversity.

EA should result in:

accurate and appropriate information regarding the nature, likely magnitude and significance of potential effects, risks and consequences of a proposal and alternatives;

the preparation of an ES that presents this information in a clear understandable manner which is relevant for decision-making; and

an ES which identifies the confidence limits that can be placed on the predictions made, and which clarifies agreement and disagreement among the parties involved in the process.

EA should provide the basis for:

environmentally sound decision making in which terms and conditions are clearly specified and enforced;

the design, planning and construction of acceptable development projects that meet environmental standards and management objectives;

an appropriate follow-up process with requirements for monitoring, management, audit and evaluation;

follow-up requirements that are based on the significance of potential effects and on the uncertainties associated with prediction and mitigation; and

learning from experience with a view to making future improvements to the design of projects or the application of the EA process.

International developments in EA

Prior to EA, development projects were often assessed according to technical, economic and political cr...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• List of case studies
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Introduction to environmental assessment: purpose and procedures
• 2 Environmental assessment methods
• 3 Techniques for impact prediction and evaluation
• 4 Environmental risk assessment
• 5 Consultation and participation: the public role in environmental assessment
• 6 Managing the EA process
• 7 Quality assurance in EA: ES review and post-project analysis
• 8 Strategic environmental assessment
• 9 EA in practice
• The final word
• Further reading
• References
• Index