Environmental impact assessment (‘EIA’) processes are ubiquitous across global approvals regimes as a key mechanism for achieving sustainable development. However, in recent decades, the integrity of the EIA process has been threatened by streamlining efforts undertaken by governments to reduce the cost of EIA. One such streamlining mechanism that has been under-evaluated by EIA literature is the potential prevalence and impact of post-approval condition-setting. That is, condition-setting that shifts some, or all, of the impact analysis and mitigation stages of EIA to the post-approval stage.This study addresses that gap by undertaking an empirical review of the prevalence and impact of a subset of post-approval conditions, namely, post-approval biodiversity offset conditions in Australia across two study periods, 2011–2017 and 2021. The study finds that over 48% of all development approvals pursuant to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth)22“Cth” is the accepted abbreviation for “Commonwealth” and indicates that the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 was enacted by the federal Australian government. during those periods utilise post-approval condition-setting. Through the lens of EIA theory, this study argues that such condition-setting practices cause information gaps and limits stakeholder engagement during the EIA process. Post-approval condition-setting therefore has significant implications for the integrity of the EIA process and its capacity to deliver ecologically sustainable development outcomes.