Environmental Impact Assessment Practice Research Articles

A Case Study Of The Environmental Impact Assessment Legislations In Sarawak, Malaysia

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a planning tool used to identify, predict, evaluate and mitigate the environmental effects of development projects. In Sarawak, EIA is governed by the both the State and the Federal EIA Orders. This leads to ambivalence in determining the legislation under which a prescribed activity demanding an EIA falls. This case study aims to investigate the implications associated with the coexistence of both EIA Orders in the state of Sarawak from the viewpoints of practicing environmental consultants. The case study reviews the EIA legislations governing EIA practices in the State and includes a qualitative survey involving practicing EIA consultants to gather feedback on the implications associated with the EIA practices and recommendations to resolve the problems identified. The study shows that even though a prescribed activity is defined by the EIA legislations, different stages of the prescribed activity eventually become prescribed activities on their own, which demand fulfillment of different EIA legislation. Unclear demarcation of EIA jurisdiction and different requirements on the scope of an EIA particularly for earthworks also contribute to doubts among environmental consultants interviewed. Consultation, involvement and effective communication with environmental protection as priority are crucial to minimize any uncertainty resulted from co-implementation of both the EIA legislations. Future study can look into comparing perceptions on the effectiveness of the State and the Federal EIA legislations. The case study delves into a crucial issue related to EIA practices in Sarawak, Malaysia which has persisted without being formally addressed in any previous studies.

EIA-driven biodiversity mainstreaming in development cooperation: Confronting expectations and practice in the DR Congo

Mainstreaming biodiversity in development cooperation activities is called for by scientists and policy-makers alike, as the current biodiversity crisis can only be mitigated if the linkages between biodiversity and human wellbeing are acknowledged. Reconciling biodiversity conservation and human development is a particularly topical challenge in highly biodiverse developing countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where the population is highly dependent on natural resources for their livelihood. This study combines expert interviews with an evaluation of environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports, in order to determine the current motivations, obstacles and effectiveness of biodiversity mainstreaming in the DRC and to assess the framing, the representation and use of biodiversity in recently conducted EIAs in the DRC. Our findings indicate that biodiversity mainstreaming in the DRC is considered challenging due to enduring contextual (e.g. governance) factors; and that there is a strong support base for EIA among the interviewed experts. Turning to actual EIAs that were recently performed in the DRC, the diversity of framings motivating the uptake of biodiversity is remarkable. Instrumental reasons do not thwart intrinsic motivations –which is indicative of a support base for the non-instrumental value of biodiversity. The use of biodiversity baseline data in mitigation measures is low, and the taxonomic resolution of the biodiversity data in EIAs is uneven. Despite these challenges, the potential of EIA in the DRC is considered high, and linkages between project-driven EIA practice and biodiversity data collection and dissemination should be strengthened.

Workshop: Making progress in Health Impact Assessment: from theory to practice

Abstract Nowadays, it is widely accepted that the causal pathway leading to an adverse health outcome does not depend on isolate risk factors but on the intricate relation of those elements with broader socioeconomic, cultural, environmental, and political conditions. This comprehensive approach was already acknowledged in the preamble of the constitution of the World Health Organization (WHO) when referring to the concept of “health”. The so-called social view of health generated under this new framework place also a great emphasis in addressing health inequalities within a population. Impact assessment (IA) is a discipline involving specific methods and technical tools for analysing the consequences of a planned intervention previously to the implementation phase. Its purpose is to support the decision-making process. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a form of IA applied to a wide range of public or private projects that are likely to pose a significant impact on the environment. The EIA Directive (2011/92/EU) was amended in 2014 (2014/52/EU), including explicitly “population, and human health” in the list of topics to be considered in an EIA. However, the amended directive does not provide a specific definition for any of the two terms, nor guidance on how to assess the potential health effects related to a project, or the necessary qualifications of professionals tasked with the assessment of these effects. To this respect, public health professionals are not likely to be routine contributors to EIA. In this sense, under a business-as-usual coverage, environmental specialists are the professionals developing standards and methods to assess all topics in EIA, including for population and human health. This runs the risk that EIA practice will lose much of its potential for improving human health. The International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) together with the European Public Health Association (EUPHA), and the WHO European Centre for Environment and Health (WHO-ECEH) are working on a reference document to support public health authorities and other health stakeholders in addressing human health within EIA as required by the Directive 2014/52/EU. The aim of this workshop is to present that document and discuss with participants about the above-mentioned gaps, for ensuring a consistent coverage of population and human health within the EIA process. Elements to be discussed: -Description of major changes introduced by the amended EIA directive, and its impact on public health-Institutional/political support needed for the institutionalization of health assessment within EIA-Role of the Public Health sector, and description of what likely or significant effect on health should be considered within EIA-Competencies required for assessing population and human health in EIA.-Gaining strength from the ‘Family of health assessments’ approach” Key messages A comprehensive approach to population and human health should be incorporated in the EIA procedure. Raise awareness for involving public health sector in addressing population and human health in EIA.

Explaining the political nature of environmental impact assessment (EIA): A neo-Gramscian perspective

Abstract Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a mandatory decision-support tool in every country of the world, developed 50 years ago to ensure the consideration of the environmental consequences of development decisions prior to approval decisions being made. Specifically, the aim of developing an EIA system was to make decision-making affecting the environment more accountable, through the use of objective scientific evidence. It remains the project decision-support tool of choice despite considerable research efforts failing to provide convincing evidence that it achieves this aim. Here we explain this apparent paradox by arguing that EIA supports neoliberal agendas by facilitating economic development. We present arguments based on a neo-Gramscian perspective that explains how apparent advances in the practice of EIA are sanctioned because they actually maintain the political nature of the EIA system, which continues to undermine attempts to use evidence objectively. We use a narratives of change approach to support this perspective. We conclude that EIA can only make decision-making more accountable if strategies to depoliticise it are employed, including emphasising substantive outcomes.

EIA Practices in the Natural Gas Extraction Sector in Tanzania: Does Local Community Contribution Matter?

Community participation is an important element for implementation of various development projects including Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) processes. However, involvement of the local community in contributing to the EIA processes is minimal. This paper sought to explore local community contribution in the EIA practices in the natural gas extraction sector in Tanzania. Household survey, in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and document review were employed in this study. Findings revealed that the majority of respondents have inadequate understanding of the EIA process and therefore undermine its significance, their role and contribution towards the exercise. Procedures for engaging the community were also lacking according to standard measure practices. Various factors emanating from policy implementers, EIA consultants and the community were attributed to low participation. Views and opinions of participants were not considered during implementation of the gas exploration and extraction project which left communities dissatisfied with implementers and practitioners. Therefore, implementation of the EIA policy in regard to procedures should be emphasised to ensure adherence for smooth and effective community participation in the EIA processes. This will guarantee respect for community contribution and mainstreaming of suggestions in the implementation of natural gas exploration and extraction projects to avoid adverse effects and reduce on mitigation consequences.

Perspectives from 2037—Can Environmental Impact Assessment be the Solution for an Early Consideration of Climate Change-related Impacts?

Consideration of climate change in environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a rather novel topic, which became partly mandatory through the revised EU Directive on EIA. Through a mixed-methods approach involving key-actors from EIA practice, decision making and climate adaptation planning, this study presents a transdisciplinary point of view on barriers and opportunities to tackle climate change adaptation in the environmental assessment of large-scale projects. It is based on both a retrospective ex-post evaluation of existing practices in Austria and Germany as well as prescriptive examination and development of outcomes for practice through the development of a climate-fit toolkit that supports the incorporation of climate change impacts into EIAs. The scenario analysis applied with a backcasting approach provided the opportunity to look beyond limitations related to legal compliance and partly lack of data identified by previous research. Three scenario narratives were elaborated based on nine key impact factors based on literature review, content analysis of EIA documents and interviews with EIA actors. The groups of actors carried out a prioritization of actions towards consideration of climate change in EIA. Finally, the actors were involved in co-production of an online tool-kit for Austrian and German EIA practice.

Effectiveness in NEPA decision making: in search of evidence and theory

ABSTRACTThe National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 requires federal agencies to analyze the environmental impacts of proposed actions that could impact the human environment, as well as consult the public before determining whether to proceed. Despite many thousands of environmental reviews over a 50-year history, there remains limited understanding of what NEPA has achieved and the factors that contribute to effective environmental review. While NEPA has been the subject of many empirical studies, this scholarship only rarely makes use of theories that would help scholars predict whether and why environmental impact assessment processes are effective. To aid scholars in the ongoing effort to assess NEPA’s effectiveness, we connect the literature on environmental impact assessment with social science concepts and theories that can improve scholars’ ability to explain whether and why environmental impact assessment practices are effective.

Outcomes and contextual aspects of strategic environmental assessment in a non-mandatory context: the case of Brazil

ABSTRACTWithin the ample body of literature devoted to strategic environmental assessment (SEA) outcomes and the assessment of its effectiveness, it is accepted that the performance of SEA systems is influenced by contextual aspects. Procedural aspects, objectives, guidance, approach, timing, amongst others, are reported as key components of the different dimensions of SEA effectiveness but their linkage to SEA outcomes is yet to be adequately investigated. In this paper, contextual aspects and related outcomes of a non-mandatory SEA system were identified through systematic literature review and personal interviews with key actors of SEA, aiming at the identification of the influence of contextual factors on SEA effectiveness. The findings indicate three main aspects that may explain the lengthy process of introduction of SEA in plan- and policy-making in the country: (i) lack of proper SEA legislation, (ii) the influence of Environmental Impact Assessment practice and (iii) the influence of the environmental licensing culture. Nevertheless, SEA contributes to improving communication between stakeholders along the planning process and to providing a better level of information for lower tiers of decision-making. In spite of the minor influences on the nature of the strategic action, valuable lessons credited to SEA have been learnt.

The quality of environmental impact reports for projects with the potential of affecting wetlands in South Africa

In South Africa certain development activities, which may have a substantial detrimental effect on the environment, require an environmental impact assessment (EIA), including projects with the potential of affecting wetlands. A key element of the EIA process is the submission of an environmental impact report (EIR) for review in order to determine whether the report is adequate and / or whether a greater quantity of information is required before the project can be authorised. The information available to decision-makers in the EIR is a major determinant in the outcome of wetland protection and / or destruction. The quality of 4 environmental impact reports of large projects with the potential of impacting on wetlands was assessed using an EIA report quality review checklist. It is concluded that the quality of the 4 reports was generally satisfactory but certain areas were found to be poorly performed, i.e. identification and evaluation of impacts to the potential detriment of the wetlands for which the EIAs were performed. To improve the quality of the reports for projects with the potential of affecting wetlands it is recommended that a quality review checklist be used by EIA practitioners and authorities as an additional tool to the EIA regulations and the integrated environmental management series. This should assist in ensuring that key aspects are addressed before submission to the relevant authority, and will also contribute to establishing a baseline of EIR quality for evaluation of wetlands EIA practice under the new regulations promulgated in 2006.

Knowledge coproduction in environmental impact assessment: Lessons from the mining industry in Panama

AbstractThis paper explores questions concerning knowledge coproduction as applied to the extractive sector through an ex‐post evaluation of an environmental impact assessment (EIA) process for a proposed copper and gold mine in Panama. Theoretical underpinnings of knowledge are highlighted, and barriers or enablers to knowledge coproduction are explored, including syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic boundaries and trust building. Reflection is based on the authors' participation as EIA practitioners on the project. Knowledge sharing between the EIA project team and stakeholders are placed in the context of knowledge coproduction theory and application. Different types of knowledge—fast and slow, tacit and explicit, and traditional and expert—are integrated into an adapted version of Nonaka's knowledge spiral model, illustrating the progression of knowledge coproduction through various activities and actors in EIA. Findings support the contention that explicitly designing and implementing knowledge coproduction into EIA practice can help improve environmental governance in the extractive sector.

Некоторые вопросы реализации процедуры оценки воздействия на окружающую среду в арктическом регионе

There is a trend that recently the effectiveness of the Environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been called into question throughout the world, and this is especially evident in the Arctic region. We identify, reveal and actualize the priority areas in the field of Arctic EIA. To one of the areas under consideration we assign the development of more meaningful and re-gionally specific social and economic indicators to support the practice of EIA. In addition, we indicate the need for increased attention to the direction consisting in a thorough study of the working and administrative relations between agreements concluded privately (for example, agreements on the benefits of exposure) and the processes governing EIA. We state that despite the fact that the eight arctic states adopted the Guidelines for EIA, they were not fully integrated into the national EIA systems. A separate area should be the study of the consequences of recent changes in the processes, regulations and legislation in the field of EIA. We conclude that environmental assessment should play a key role in planning the impact of environmental, social, and economic changes and in developing response measures that will allow Arctic communities in the best way take into account new opportunities and deal with the inevitable major changes.

Evaluation of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) of Chinese EIA in Myanmar: Myitsone Dam, the Lappadaung Copper Mine and the Sino-Myanmar oil and gas pipelines

ABSTRACTThe economic relationship between China and Myanmar is regarded as a win–win cooperation. However, Chinese investments, especially in extractive and natural resource sectors, are associated with a number of unwanted environmental consequences. Moreover, the environmental impact assessment (EIA) quality of Chinese enterprises has often been criticized. EIA identifies adverse impacts to the environment through evidence-based decision making. On this basis, this paper provides an evaluation of Chinese EIA performance within the natural resources sector through a structured review of 15 environmental impact statements (EISs). This research also evaluates the EISs of the three largest and most controversial projects, the Myitsone Hydropower Dam, Lappadaung Copper Mine and Sino-Myanmar oil and gas pipelines. The findings reveal several omissions, inadequacies and deficiencies in all the projects with a significant number of EISs falling short of satisfactory quality. Through the analysis, the paper summarizes the factors affecting the EIA performance and proposes feasible recommendations to improve EIA practices in Chinese development projects in Myanmar.

Challenges and Prospects for Integrating the Assessment of Health Impacts in the Licensing Process of Large Capital Project in Brazil.

Brazil was one of the first countries in Latin America to institutionalize a National Environmental Policy in 1981, including the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process of economic activities with anticipated impacts on the environment. Today, EIA practice in Brazil comes with a number of limitations: it is constrained by its environmental advocacy role; application is strongly oriented towards large capital projects; and social responsibility considerations are only partially included. Consequently, EIA studies mainly address issues connected to localised and direct environmental impacts, largely ignoring any socio-economic and health impacts. This perspective paper highlights limitations of current EIA practice in Brazil with a focus on health considerations in impact assessment. While recognizing the positive impact to municipalities where large capital projects are being developed and operated, adverse impacts on health are a reality with measurable evidence in Brazil. Therefore, we argue that specificities on how to systematically assess and monitor potential health impacts cannot remain invisible in the Brazilian legislation, as currently seen in the reformulation of the licensing process in the country. The process of better integrating the assessment of health impacts in the licensing process of large capital project in Brazil must, however, not be based on the imposition of an external model but should be promoted by internal stakeholders from the environmental and health sector, incorporating the experiences gained in various case studies from all over the country.

Sufficiently capable for effective participation in environmental impact assessment?

Where environmental procedures do not adequately include affected parties in decision-making, particularly those from vulnerable and marginalized sectors of society, environmental justice cannot be realized. Further, the practice of EIA will likely perpetuate the negative and disproportionate distribution of environmentally associated harms on vulnerable persons. Thus, this paper explores the potential merits of the capabilities approach for establishing sufficiency grounds for public participation in environmental impact assessment (EIA). The paper identifies shared principles of justice in decision-making between the practice of EIA and the capabilities approach by highlighting key ethical and theoretical concepts of the latter as a means to fortify this weakness in the participation practice of EIA. Capability probes explore individual stakeholder's opportunity, ability and constraints to participation. The findings of four South African (EIA) case studies are discussed, highlighting the instrumental relationship between participatory actions, potentials and entitlements as they are mediated by empowering or disempowering procedural mechanisms. Cases exhibiting convincing stakeholder empowerment demonstrate the value of sufficient support for participatory achievement. Instances of disempowerment in the cases underscore the dangers of insufficient and inequitable participation. Reflecting on the findings, the work applies the recent notions of capability ‘sufficiency’ (Nielsen and Axelsen, 2016) to outline what can be delimited, and later contextually specified, for support provisions in EIA building towards more meaningful, and perhaps more just, public participation processes.

Evidence of learning processes in EIA systems

Learning is recognized as an important component of environmental impact assessment (EIA) in particular, due to its potential to transform individual, social, and organizational values, standards and practices to support a sustainable development. Nevertheless, only a few models developed to describe learning processes in EIA systems seem to be grounded on the combination of both theoretical aspects and empirical evidence of learning, which requires further investigation. This paper is based on the development of a conceptual model to understand learning processes through the practice of EIA, and evidence-gathering of learning in EIA systems focused on the role played by the leading organization. The outcomes were based on literature review and empirical research using two EIA regulatory agencies in Brazil as case studies. Data collection and analysis were supported by participant observation, personal interviews and qualitative content analysis. Although specific to the context, the evidence produced have corroborated the implicit feature of learning in EIA systems and, we believe, reinforced the relevance of the conceptual model as developed in the paper.

Analysis of environmental impact assessment practices and legislation in Turkey

In Turkey, as a developing country, environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a critical key for environmental protection. EIA is not regulated in Turkey by means of law, but through a decree put into force on the basis of the relevant provision of the Environmental Law. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) System, which embodies the “prevention principle” of the environmental law, is an important tool for environmental protection. This tool has a private importance for Turkey since it is a developing country, and it entered the Turkish law in 1983 with the Environmental Law. Besides, the EIA Regulation, which shows the application principles, became effective in 1993. Because Turkey is a candidate for European Union (EU), the EIA Regulation has been changed due to the EU compliance procedure, and its latest version became valid in 2014. This study aims to emphasize The EIA system in Turkey to supervise the efficiency of this procedure and point the success level.According to the methods, firstly In the introduction part, general EIA concept, its importance, and some notations are mentioned. Following that, the legislation, which builds the EIA system, has been analyzed starting from the 1982 Turkish Constitution. Then, the legislation rules are explained due to the basic steps of the EIA procedure and analysed court decisions. In order to shed light upon the application, the EIA final decisions given until today, the results, and their distributions to the industries are assessed.

The mitigation hierarchy upside down – a study of nature protection measures in Danish infrastructure projects

This paper presents a Danish study of mitigation directed at nature protection in environmental impact assessment (EIA) of infrastructure projects. The study is based on a document analysis of EIA reports, a workshop held with EIA professionals, and a study of two cases. The paper takes a point of departure in the mitigation hierarchy as a central conceptual framework, identifies which mitigation measures have been suggested in the EIA reports, and compares this to the mitigation hierarchy. Further, the paper explores the dynamics behind which mitigation measures are chosen and later implemented. The findings point to a discrepancy between the prevention principle embedded in the mitigation hierarchy and the actual EIA practice with increased use of nature compensation. Further, the research reveals significant variation in the design of mitigation measures, e.g. in the level of detail used in describing them and the level of clarity as to aims and actions.

Rwandan environmental impact assessment: practices and constraints

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to review the Rwandan Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) practice and identify the possible constraints faced by EIA practitioners in Rwanda. The results presented here will help to highlight strengths and weakness of the Rwandan EIA practice.Design/methodology/approachThe EIA practice was evaluated by a self-administered questionnaire survey for respondents including approved EIA experts in Rwanda, government agencies involved in EIA process and corporate which have received environmental clearance. The aspects of practices and challenges were evaluated and include the suitability of institutional arrangements, the scientific methodological bases of EIA, the conduct of EIA, the effectiveness of EIA with respect to influence decision making, overall results and EIA as a learning process. These aspects were rated on different scales by the respondents to identify where the Rwandan EIA practice stands now in terms of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints.FindingsThe institutional arrangements of EIA were judged to be good overall by the respondents with main strengths being seen in the policy and legal base, and the scope of application. Only the marginal weaknesses are seen in the monitoring. The scientific and empirical basis for assessment was judged to stand moderately strengthened during the last five years. The performance of key activities is more than satisfactory. A majority of Rwandan EIA stages are good and excellent to some extent.Originality/valueThis paper identifies some of the constraints and challenges faced by the Rwandan EIA practitioners. It will contribute to an understanding of EIA practice and robust practices across the globe.

Present Situation of Wind Turbine in Major European Countries and Outlook of Wind Turbine in Japan

The Renewable energy is a key driver of generating clean energy because it continuously lower air pollution. In particular, the development of wind power energy has been remarkable, and it currently accounts for approximately one-third of renewable electricity. Germany has the largest onshore wind deployment. On the other hand, the United Kingdom is most highly expected to develop offshore wind power. Germany and Denmark have assessed the usefulness of wind turbines, and they benefited from wind energy. Execution of not only environmental impact assessment (EIA) but also health impact assessment (HIA) is an obligation in the United Kingdom, the practice of EIA and HIA is important for the successful construction of wind turbine facilities. We in Japan should learn the method of handling renewable energy systems from major European countries.

Investigating the effectiveness of mandatory integration of health impact assessment within environmental impact assessment (EIA): a case study of Thailand

The effectiveness of the integration of health impact assessment (HIA) and environmental impact assessment (creating an environmental and health impact assessment’ (EHIA) process) is investigated, drawing on an example of a mandatory requirement in the power plant project sector in Thailand. The analytical framework is based on that outlined in by the authors in 2013, focusing on procedural, substantive, transactive and normative effectiveness criteria, and the evaluation served also to critique this framework in practice. Using documentary analysis and interviews, it was found that a sample of EHIAs are partially effective from the four perspectives of effectiveness. The findings suggest that integrating HIA and EIA still has a long way to go to achieve effective practice. Insufficient resources have been allocated to deliver the level of public participation expected in the regulations, or a sufficient standard of EHIA practice and monitoring. The existing analytical framework was found to be inadequate for transactive effectiveness, and a new criterion added: T5 – Availability of human resource in EHIA practice. Recommendations are provided to support the practical integration of HIA into EIA practice in Thailand.