Abstract
During the 1970s, environmental impact statements (EISs) became the focal point of significant federal decisions regarding natural resources. The legal requirements of environmental assessment assume a technically sophisticated EIS that conforms to the rational-comprehensive model of decision making. The authors of this study examine the accuracy and descriptive characteristics of EIS forecasts in a sample of 29 nationally representative projects. Using data on actual post-project impacts, they evaluate the accuracy of over 200 predictions, finding that although most EIS predictions on environmental impacts fall short of the model's ideal, the outcomes of EIS assessments turn out to be reasonably prescient - that is, few impacts are inconsistent with EIS forecasts and almost no significant impacts are wholly unanticipated by EIS writers. The book concludes with suggested ways of redefining the EIS process so as to diminish false expectations and to enhance the practical strengths of the National Environmental Policy Act.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
