Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction To Environmental Impact Assessment
Introduction To Environmental Impact Assessment
net/publication/335467191
CITATIONS READS
0 7,034
1 author:
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Zakaria Aissa Assia on 29 August 2019.
http://www.routledge.com/cw/nbe/
Regional Planning
John Glasson and Tim Marshall
Introduction to
Environmental Impact
Assessment
4th edition
CONTENTS vii
Some questions 141 Some questions 220
References 141 Notes 220
References 221
6 Participation, presentation and
review 144 9 Case studies of EIA in practice 224
6.1 Introduction 144 9.1 Introduction 224
6.2 Public consultation and 9.2 Wilton power station case study:
participation 145 project definition in EIA 225
6.3 Consultation with statutory consultees 9.3 N21 link road, Republic of Ireland:
and other countries 152 EIA and European protected
6.4 EIA presentation 153 habitats 230
6.5 Review of EISs 157 9.4 Portsmouth incinerator: public
6.6 Decisions on projects 159 participation in EIA 236
6.7 Summary 163 9.5 Humber Estuary development:
Some questions 164 cumulative effects assessment 241
Notes 164 9.6 Stansted airport second runway:
References 165 health impact assessment 245
9.7 Cairngorm mountain railway:
7 Monitoring and auditing: after mitigation in EIA 252
the decision 167 9.8 SEA of UK offshore wind energy
7.1 Introduction 167 development 255
7.2 The importance of monitoring and 9.9 SEA of Tyne and Wear local transport
auditing in the EIA process 168 plan 261
7.3 Monitoring in practice 169 9.10 Summary 268
7.4 Auditing in practice 173 Some questions 269
7.5 A UK case study: monitoring and References 269
auditing the local socio-economic
impacts of the Sizewell B PWR 10 Comparative practice 271
construction project 176 10.1 Introduction 271
7.6 A UK case study: monitoring the local 10.2 EIA status worldwide 272
impacts of the London 2012 Olympics 10.3 Benin 276
project 183 10.4 Peru 278
7.7 Summary 185 10.5 China 279
Some questions 187 10.6 Poland 282
Note 188 10.7 Canada 283
References 188 10.8 Australia and Western Australia 285
10.9 International bodies 289
10.10 Summary 291
PART 3
Some questions 291
Practice 191
References 292
8 An overview of UK practice to date 193
8.1 Introduction 193
PART 4
8.2 Number and type of EISs and
Prospects 297
projects 194
8.3 The pre-submission EIA process 198 11 Widening the scope: strategic
8.4 EIS quality 202 environmental assessment 299
8.5 The post-submission EIA process 204 11.1 Introduction 299
8.6 Legal challenges 208 11.2 Strategic environmental assessment
8.7 Costs and benefits of EIA 217 (SEA) 299
8.8 Summary 219 11.3 SEA worldwide 302
viii C O N T E N T S
11.4 SEA in the UK 306 Appendices
11.5 Summary 313 1 Full text of EC EIA Directive 345
Some questions 313 2 Town and Country Planning (EIA)
Note 313 Regulations 2011 – Schedule 2 359
References 313 3 Full text of EC’s SEA Directive 366
4 The Lee and Colley review package 374
12 Improving the effectiveness of 5 Environmental impact statement
project assessment 315 review package (IAU, Oxford Brookes
12.1 Introduction 315 University) 375
12.2 Perspectives on change 315 6 Selected EIA journals and websites 384
12.3 Possible changes in the EIA process:
overviews of the future agenda 317 Index 387
12.4 Possible changes in the EIA process:
more specific examples 319
12.5 Extending EIA to project implementation:
environmental management systems,
audits and plans 335
12.6 Summary 339
Some questions 340
Notes 341
References 341
CONTENTS ix
Preface to the first edition
There has been a remarkable and refreshing interest interest groups. EIA is on a rapid ‘learning curve’;
in environmental issues over the past few years. A this text is offered as a point on the curve.
major impetus was provided by the 1987 Report The book is structured into four parts. The first
of the World Commission on the Environment and provides an introduction to the principles of EIA
Development (the Brundtland Report); the Rio and an overview of its development and agency
Summit in 1992 sought to accelerate the impetus. and legislative context. Part 2 provides a step-by-
Much of the discussion on environmental issues step discussion and critique of the EIA process. Part
and on sustainable development is about the better 3 examines current practice, broadly in the UK and
management of current activity in harmony with in several other countries, and in more detail
the environment. However, there will always be through selected UK case studies. Part 4 considers
pressure for new development. How much better possible future developments. It is likely that much
it would be to avoid or mitigate the potential more of the EIA iceberg will become visible in
harmful effects of future development on the the 1990s and beyond. An outline of important
environment at the planning stage. Environmental and associated developments in environmental
impact assessment (EIA) assesses the impacts of auditing and in strategic environmental assessment
planned activity on the environment in advance, concludes the text.
thereby allowing avoidance measures to be taken: Although the book has a clear UK orientation,
prevention is better than cure. it does draw extensively on EIA experience
Environmental impact assessment was first worldwide, and it should be of interest to readers
formally established in the USA in 1969. It has from many countries. The book seeks to highlight
spread worldwide and received a significant boost best practice and to offer enough insight to
in Europe with the introduction of an EC Directive methods, and to supporting references, to provide
on EIA in 1985. This was implemented in the UK valuable guidance to the practitioner. For infor-
in 1988. Subsequently there has been a rapid mation on detailed methods for assessment of
growth in EIA activity, and over 300 environmental impacts in particular topic areas (e.g. landscape, air
impact statements (EISs) are now produced in the quality, traffic impacts), the reader is referred to
UK each year. EIA is an approach in good currency. the complementary volume, Methods of environ-
It is also an area where many of the practitioners mental impact assessment (Morris and Therivel,
have limited experience. This text provides a com- 1995, London, UCL Press).
prehensive introduction to the various dimensions
of EIA. It has been written with the requirements John Glasson
of both undergraduate and postgraduate students Riki Therivel
in mind. It should also be of considerable value to Andrew Chadwick
those in practice – planners, developers and various Oxford Brookes University
The aims and scope of this fourth edition are operation in practice. For example, Chapter 8
unchanged from those of the first edition. However, includes much new material on the implication of
as noted in the preface to the first edition, EIA legal challenges in EIA. Chapter 9 includes some
continues to evolve and adapt, and any commen- new practice case studies. Most of the case studies
tary on the subject must be seen as part of a are UK-based and involve EIA at the individual
continuing discussion. The worldwide spread of project level, although two examples of SEA are also
EIA is becoming even more comprehensive. In discussed, plus new topics such as health impact
the European Union there is now over 25 years’ assessment. While it is not claimed that the
experience of the implementation of the pioneering selected case studies all represent best examples of
EIA Directive, including 10 years’ experience of the EIA practice, they do include some novel and
important 1999 amendments. There has been innovative approaches towards particular issues in
considerable interest in the development of the EIA, such as new methods of public participation
EIA process, in strengthening perceived areas of and the treatment of cumulative effects. They also
weakness, in extending the scope of activity and also draw attention to some of the limitations of the
in assessing effectiveness. Reflecting such changes, process in practice. Chapter 10 (Comparative
this fully revised edition updates the commentary practice) has also had a major revision, reflecting,
by introducing and developing a number of issues for example, growing experience in African
that are seen as of growing importance to both countries, China and countries in transition, and
the student and the practitioner of EIA. major reviews for some well-established EIA
The structure of the first edition has been systems in, for example, Canada and Australia.
retained, plus much of the material from the third Part 4 of the book (Prospects) has also been
edition, but considerable variations and additions substantially revised to reflect some of the
have been made to specific sections. In Part 1 (on changing prospects for EIA. Chapter 11 discusses
principles and procedures), the importance of an the need for strategic environmental assessment
adaptive EIA, plus the burgeoning range of EA (SEA) and some of its limitations. It reviews the
activity, are addressed further. In the EU context, status of SEA in the USA, European Union and
the implementation of the amended EIA Directive UNECE, and China. It then discusses in more
is discussed more fully, including the divergent detail how the European SEA Directive is being
practice across the widening range of Member implemented in the UK. It concludes with the
States. The specific new 2011 regulations and results of recent research into the effectiveness of
procedures operational in the UK are set out in the SEA Directive. Chapter 12 has been extensively
Chapter 3. In Part 2 (discussion of the EIA process), revised and extended. It includes, for example,
most elements have been updated, including more consideration of cumulative impacts, socio-
screening and scoping, alternatives, impact identi- economic impacts, health impact assessment,
fication, prediction, participation and presentation, equalities impact assessment, appropriate assess-
mitigation and enhancement, and monitoring ment, the new area of resilience thinking, and the
and auditing. vitally important topic of planning for climate
We have made major changes to Part 3 change in EIA, plus possible shifts towards more
(overview of practice), drawing on the findings integrated assessment. The chapter concludes
of important reviews of EIA effectiveness and with a discussion of the parallel and complemen-
xii P R E F A C E T O T H E F O U R T H E D I T I O N
Acknowledgements
Our grateful thanks are due to many people constructive review of our third edition, and to
without whose help this book would not have Shanshan Yang for advice on the evolving
been produced. We are particularly grateful for approach to EIA in China. We owe particular
the tolerance and moral support of our families. thanks in this edition for the willingness of Josh
Our thanks also go to Rob Woodward for his pro- Fothergill at IEMA, and Kim Chowns at DCLG, to
duction of many of the illustrations. In addition, provide advance copies of the IEMA 2011 Report
Louise Fox of Taylor and Francis, and copy-editor on UK EIA practice, and the new 2011 DCLG EIA
Rosalind Davies, and editorial assistant Aimee Regulations and Guidance. We are also grateful for
Miles have provided vital contributions in turning permission to use material from the following
the manuscript into the innovative published sources:
document. We are very grateful to our consultancy
clients and research sponsors, who have under- British Association of Nature Conservationists
pinned the work of the Impacts Assessment Unit (cartoons: Parts 2 and 3)
in the School of Planning at Oxford Brookes RPS, Symonds/EDAW and Magnox Electric
University (formerly Oxford Polytechnic). In (Plate 1.1)
particular we wish to record the support of UK EIA Review (Figure 1.9)
government departments (variously DoE, DETR, ENDS (Tables 3.1 and 3.2)
ODPM and DCLG), the EC Environment Direc- Scottish government (Figures 4.1 and 4.2)
torate, the Economic and Social Research Council Pattersons Quarries (Figure 4.3)
(ESRC), the Royal Society for the Protection of South Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority
Birds (RSPB), many local and regional authorities, (Figure 4.6)
and especially the various branches of the UK Scottish Power Systems (Figure 4.8)
energy industry that provided the original impetus IEMA (Figure 5.1 and 12.6, Tables 8.5, 12.4, 12.6
to and continuing positive support for much of our and 12.7)
EIA research and consultancy. EDF Energy, Southampton Daily Echo, Guardian
Our students at Oxford Brookes University on Newspaper (Figure 6.1)
both undergraduate and postgraduate programmes Metropolitan Council (Minneapolis/St Paul),
have critically tested many of our ideas. In this AREVA Resources Canada , Griff
respect we would like to acknowledge, in particular, Wigley, Evelop (Figure 6.2)
the students on the MSc course in Environmental University of Manchester, EIA Centre
Assessment and Management. The editorial and (Appendix 4)
presentation support for the fourth edition by the Olympic Delivery Authority (Figure 7.7)
staff at Taylor and Francis is very gratefully Highlands and Islands Enterprise (Figure 9.3)
acknowledged. We have benefited from the support John Wiley & Sons (Table 6.2)
of colleagues in the Schools of Planning and Baseline Environmental Consulting, West
Biological and Molecular Sciences, and from the Berkeley, California (Figure 7.2)
wider community of EIA academics, researchers UK Department of Environment (Table 6.3)
and consultants, who have helped to keep us on UK Department of Communities and Local
our toes. We are grateful to Angus Morrison- Government (Tables 3.5, 3.6 and 3.7;
Saunders for some very useful pointers in his most Appendix 2)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xiii
Planning newspaper (cartoon: Part 4) West Australian Department of Health
Beech Tree Publishing (Figure 7.8) (Figure 12.2)
European Commission (Table 4.3, Box 11.1, Scott Wilson (Table 12.3)
Table 12.5) Dover District Council (Figure 11.3)
West Australian Environmental Protection Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
Agency (Table 10.2, Figure 10.5) (Box 11.2)
xiv A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
Abbreviations and
acronyms
xvi A B B R E V I A T I O N S A N D A C R O N Y M S
IEMA Institute of Environmental NEPA US National Environmental Policy Act
Management and Assessment NGC National Grid Company
IFI International Funding Institution NGO Non-governmental organization
IIA Integrated impact assessment NHS National Health Service
IMD Index of Multiple Deprivation NIMBY Not in my back yard
INEM International Network for NOx Nitrogen oxide
Environmental Management NPDV Net present day value
IOCGP Inter-organizational Committee on NPS National Policy Statement
Guidelines and Principles for Social NSIP Nationally significant infrastructure
Impact Assessment project
IPC Infrastructure Planning Commission NTS Non-technical summary
IPC Integrated pollution control ODA Olympic Delivery Authority
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ODPM UK Office of the Deputy Prime
Change Minister
IPHI Institute of Public Health in Ireland OECD Organisation for Economic
ISO International Organization for Co-operation and Development
Standardization OISD Oxford Institute for Sustainable
IWM Institute of Waste Management Development
JEAPM Journal of Environmental Assessment OJ Official Journal of the European
Policy and Management Communities
JNCC Joint Nature Conservancy Council OTP Operational Transport Programme
KSEIA Korean Society of Environmental PADC Project Appraisal for Development
Impact Assessment Control
kV Kilovolt PAS Planning Advisory Service
L10 Noise level exceeded for no more than PBS Planning balance sheet
10 per cent of a monitoring period PEIR Programme environmental impact
LB London Borough report
LCA Life cycle assessment PEIS Programmatic environmental impact
LNG Liquified natural gas statement
LPA Local planning authority PER Public Environmental Review (WA)
LT Lithuania PIC Partnerships in Care
LTP Local transport plan PL Poland
LTP3 Third local transport plan PM10 Particulate matter of less than 10
LULU Locally unacceptable land uses microns in diameter
LV Latvia PPG Planning Policy Guidance
MAFF UK Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry PPPs Policies, plans and programmes
and Fisheries PPPP Policy, plan, programme or project
MAUT Multi-attribute utility theory PPS Planning policy statement
MBC Metropolitan Borough Council PWR Pressurized water reactor
MCA Multi-criteria assessment QBL Quadruple bottom line
MCDA Multi-criteria decision analysis QOLA Quality of life assessment
MEA Manual of Environmental Appraisal RA Resilience Alliance
MMO Marine Management Organization RA Risk assessment
(UK) RMA Resource Management Act (NZ)
MoD UK Ministry of Defence RO Romania
MOEP Ministry of Environmental Protection ROD Record of decision
(China) RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of
MT Malta Birds
MW Megawatt RTPI Royal Town Planning Institute
NE Natural England S106 Section 106
xviii A B B R E V I A T I O N S A N D A C R O N Y M S
Part 1
Principles and
procedures
This page intentionally left blank
1 Introduction and
principles
Prediction of impacts
Evaluation and assessment of Public consultation
significance of impacts and participation
Identification of mitigating measures
Post-decision monitoring
Audit of predictions and mitigation
measures
Figure 1.1
Economic Environmental
prosperity protection
Sustainability
Social
advancement
Figure 1.3
Social systems
Economic systems
ECONOMIC
SOCIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
Figure 1.4
wastes, sewage, oceans and the atmosphere. For The Johannesburg Earth Summit of 2002
each of its 115 programmes, the need for action, re-emphasized the difficulties of achieving inter-
the objectives and targets to be achieved, the national commitment on environmental issues.
activities to be undertaken, and the means of While there were some positive outcomes – for
implementation are all outlined. Agenda 21 offered example, on water and sanitation (with a target
policies and programmes to achieve a sustainable to halve the number without basic sanitation –
balance between consumption, population and about 1.2 billion – by 2015), on poverty, health,
Earth’s life-supporting capacity. Unfortunately it sustainable consumption and on trade and
was not legally binding, being dependent on globalization – many other outcomes were much
national governments, local governments and less positive. Delivering the Kyoto Protocol on
others to implement most of the programmes. legally enforceable reductions of greenhouse gases
10 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
continued to be difficult; the results of the 2009 as well as physical environmental dimensions,
Copenhagen climate conference fell short of the although the focus is on four main priority issues:
EU’s goal of progress towards the finalization of tackling climate change, protecting nature and
an ambitious and legally binding global climate biodiversity, reducing human health impacts
treaty to succeed the Kyoto Protocol in 2013 from environmental pollution, and ensuring the
(Wilson and Piper 2010). Similarly, we hear regu- sustainable management of natural resources
larly of the continuing loss of global biodiversity and waste. It also recognized the importance of
and of natural resources, and on the challenges empowering citizens and changing behaviour, and
of delivering human rights in many countries. of ‘greening land-use planning and management
All, of course, is now complicated further by the decisions’.
severe challenges and uncertainties of the serious
global economic situation. Together, such problems The Community directive on EIA and (the
severely hamper progress on sustainable develop- then) proposal on SEA, which aim to ensure
ment. that the environmental implications of
Within the EU, four Community Action planned infrastructure projects and planning
Programmes on the Environment were imple- are properly addressed, will also help ensure
mented between 1972 and 1992. These gave rise that the environmental considerations are
to specific legislation on a wide range of topics, better integrated into planning decisions.
including waste management, the pollution of (CEC 2001)
the atmosphere, the protection of nature and EIA.
The Fifth Programme, ‘Towards sustainability’ The EC has not yet decided on the nature of a
(1993–2000), was set in the context of the possible Seventh Programme, including the key
completion of the Single European Market (CEC role of climate change – either as within the EU
1992). The latter, with its emphasis on major environmental policy or as having a more
changes in economic development resulting from overarching role in the Commission’s organiza-
the removal of all remaining fiscal, material and tion.
technological barriers between Member States, In the UK, the publication of This common
could pose additional threats to the environment. inheritance: Britain’s environmental strategy (DoE et
The Fifth Programme recognized the need for the al. 1990) provided the country’s first comprehen-
clear integration of performance targets – in sive White Paper on the environment. The report
relation to environmental protection – for several included a discussion of the greenhouse effect,
sectors, including manufacturing, energy, transport town and country, pollution control, and aware-
and tourism. EU policy on the environment would ness and organization with regard to environ-
be based on the ‘precautionary principle’ that mental issues. Throughout it emphasized that
preventive action should be taken, that environ- responsibility for our environment should be
mental damage should be rectified at source and shared between the government, business and the
that the polluter should pay. Whereas previous public. The range of policy instruments advocated
EU programmes relied almost exclusively on included legislation, standards, planning and
legislative instruments, the Fifth Programme economic measures. The last, building on work by
advocated a broader mixture, including ‘market- Pearce et al. (1989), included charges, subsidies,
based instruments’, such as the internalization market creation and enforcement incentives. The
of environmental costs through the application report also noted, cautiously, the recent addition
of fiscal measures, and ‘horizontal, supporting of EIA to the ‘toolbox’ of instruments. Subsequent
instruments’, such as improved baseline and UK government reports, such as Sustainable devel-
statistical data and improved spatial and sectoral opment: the UK strategy (HMG 1994), recognized
planning. the role of EIA in contributing to sustainable
The Sixth Programme, Our future, our choice development and raised the EIA profile among
(2001–12), built on the broader approach intro- key user groups. The UK government reports also
duced in the previous decade. It recognized that reflect the extension of the scope of sustainable
sustainable development has social and economic development to include social, economic and
• social progress which recognizes the needs of 1.4.1 The nature of major projects
everyone;
As noted in Section l.2, EIA is relevant to a broad
• effective protection of the environment;
spectrum of development actions, including
• prudent use of natural resources; and
policies, plans, programmes and projects. The focus
• maintenance of high and stable levels of
here is on projects, reflecting the dominant role of
economic growth and employment.
project EIA in practice. The strategic environmental
assessment (SEA) and sustainability appraisal
To measure progress, the UK government
(SA) of the ‘upper tiers’ of development actions
published a set of sustainable development indi-
are considered further in Chapter 11. The scope
cators, including a set of 15 key headline indica-
of projects covered by EIA is widening, and
tors (DETR 1999b). It also required a high-level
is discussed further in Chapters 3 and 4.
sustainable development framework to be pro-
Traditionally, project EIA has applied to major
duced for each English region (see, for example,
projects; but what are major projects, and what
A better quality of life in the South East, SEERA,
2001). criteria can be used to identify them? One could
Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1, DCLG take Lord Morley’s approach to defining an
2005) reinforced the commitment to sustainable elephant: it is difficult, but you easily recognize one
development. ‘Sustainable development is the when you see it. In a similar vein, the acronym
core principle underpinning planning. At the heart LULU (locally unacceptable land uses) has been
of sustainable development is the simple idea applied in the USA to many major projects, such
of ensuring a better quality of life for everyone, as in energy, transport and manufacturing, clearly
now and for future generations.’ This was further reflecting the public perception of the potential
reinforced and developed in an update of the negative impacts associated with such develop-
national strategy, Securing the future: delivering the ments. There is no easy definition, but it is possible
UK sustainable development strategy (DEFRA 2005), to highlight some important characteristics (see
in which the UK government introduced a revised Plate 1.1 and Table 1.2).
set of guiding principles, priorities for action and Most large projects involve considerable
20 key headline indicators, with a focus on deliv- investment. In the UK context, ‘megaprojects’ such
ery. The guiding principles are: as the Channel Tunnel and the associated Rail
Link, London Heathrow Terminal 5, the Olympic
• living within environmental limits; 2012 project, motorways (and their widening),
• ensuring a strong, healthy and just society; nuclear power stations, gas-fired power stations
• achieving a sustainable economy; and renewable energy projects (such as major
• promoting good governance; and offshore wind farms and the proposed Severn
• using sound science responsibly. Barrage) constitute one end of the spectrum. At the
other end may be industrial estate developments,
The good governance principle adds an import- small stretches of road, and various waste-disposal
ant fourth pillar to the other three pillars (environ- facilities, with considerably smaller, but still
mental, social and economic) of sustainable substantial, price tags. Such projects often cover
development, shifting from a triple to a quadruple large areas and employ many workers, usually in
bottom line (QBL) approach. Good governance, construction, but also in operation for some
at all levels from central government to the indi- projects. They also invariably generate a complex
vidual, is needed to foster the integration of the array of inter- and intra-organizational activity
three other pillars. Again, EIA can be a useful during the various stages of their lives. The devel-
vehicle for such integration. opments may have wide-ranging, long-term and
12 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
1 Kings Cross, London – urban redevelopment 2 Construction at London 2012 Olympics site
3 Olkiluoto nuclear power plant, Finland 4 The Oresund Bridge connecting Sweden and Denmark
Plate 1.1
Some examples of major projects Source: Magnox Electric (2002); RPS (2004); Symonds/EDAW (2004); Wikimedia.
14 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
Figure 1.5
Demonstration of need
Generalized planning and
development life cycle for
Area search (i.e. site, route) major projects (with particular
reference to impact
A assessment on host area)
PLANNING
BEFORE DECISION
Site selection
B
Consent procedure, conflict
CONFLICT
resolution (including EIA) RESOLUTION
Construction
Operation
• initial stages
D
• full operation OPERATION
• fluctuations in operation
• changes in use, extension of facility
E
Close down of facility/withdrawal CLOSE DOWN
site restoration
C
20 D2
E
D
30
D
D
40
E
50
E
E
60
70
A Planning D Operation D1 Gravel Extraction
C Construction
Physical environment
Air and atmosphere Air quality
Water resources and water bodies Water quality and quantity
Soil and geology Classification, risks (e.g. erosion, contamination)
Flora and fauna Birds, mammals, fish, etc.; aquatic and terrestrial vegetation
Human beings Physical and mental health and well-being
Landscape Characteristics and quality of landscape
Cultural heritage Conservation areas; built heritage; historic and archaeological sites; other material assets
Climate Temperature, rainfall, wind, etc.
Energy Light, noise, vibration, etc.
Socio-economic environment
Demography Population structure and trends
Economic base – direct Direct employment; labour market characteristics; local and non-local trends
Economic base – indirect Non-basic and services employment; labour supply and demand
Housing; transport; recreation Supply and demand
Other local services Supply and demand of services: health, education, police, etc.
Socio-cultural Lifestyles, quality of life; social problems; community stress and conflict
Source: adapted from DoE 1991; DETR 2000; CEC 2003a
16 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
local regional national beyond Figure 1.7
Environment: components,
scale and time dimensions
physical environment
2040
2025
socio-economic environment
now
aspect of environment under consideration and to guides to data sources. For all data it is important
the stage in a project’s life. However, some impacts to have a time-series highlighting trends in envir-
are more than local. Traffic noise, for example, onmental quality, as the environmental baseline
may be a local issue, but changes in traffic flows is constantly changing, irrespective of any develop-
caused by a project may have a regional impact, ment under consideration, and requires a dynamic
and the associated CO2 pollution contributes to the rather than a static analysis
global greenhouse problem. The environment also
has a time dimension. Baseline data on the state
of the environment are needed at the time a project
1.4.3 The nature of impacts
is being considered. There has been a vast increase
in data available on the Internet, from the local The environmental impacts of a project are those
to the national level (e.g. in the UK via local resultant changes in environmental parameters,
authority development plans and national statist- in space and time, compared with what would
ical sources, such as the e-Digest of Environ- have happened had the project not been under-
ment Statistics produced by the Department of taken. The parameters may be any of the type
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs). For some of environmental receptors noted previously:
areas such data may be packaged in tailor-made air quality, water quality, noise, levels of local
state-of-the-environment reports and audits. See unemployment and crime, for example. Figure 1.8
Chapters 5 and 12, and Appendix 6 for further provides a simple illustration of the concept.
environmental
parameter
with project
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT
without project Figure 1.8
project initiated
The nature of an
time environmental impact
18 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
We conclude on a semantic point: the words provide total certainty about the environmental
‘impact’ and ‘effect’ are widely used in the literature consequences of development proposals; they feel
and legislation on EIA, but it is not always clear that any projects carried out under uncertain or
whether they are interchangeable or should be risky circumstances should be abandoned. EIA and
used only for specifically different meanings. In the its methods must straddle such perspectives on
United States, the regulations for implementing weak and strong sustainability. EIA can be, and
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) now often is, seen as a positive process that seeks
expressly state that ‘effects and impacts as used a harmonious relationship between development
in these regulations are synonymous’. This inter- and the environment. The nature and use of EIA
pretation is widespread, and is adopted in this will change as relative values and perspectives also
text. But there are other interpretations relating change. EIA must adapt, and as O’Riordan (1990)
to timing and to value judgements. Catlow and very positively noted over 20 years ago:
Thirlwall (1976) make a distinction between effects
that are ‘the physical and natural changes resulting, One can see that EIA is moving away from
directly or indirectly, from development’ and being a defensive tool of the kind that
impacts that are ‘the consequences or end products dominated the 1970s to a potentially exciting
of those effects represented by attributes of the environmental and social betterment tech-
environment on which we can place an objective nique that may well come to take over the
or subjective value’. In contrast, an Australian 1990s . . . If one sees EIA not so much as a
study (CEPA 1994) reverses the arguments, technique, rather as a process that is con-
claiming that ‘there does seem to be greater logic stantly changing in the face of shifting
in thinking of an impact resulting in an effect, environmental politics and managerial capa-
rather than the other way round’. Other com- bilities, one can visualize it as a sensitive
mentators have introduced the concept of value barometer of environmental values in a com-
judgement into the differentiation. Preston and plex environmental society. Long may EIA
Bedford (1988) state that ‘the use of the term thrive.
“impacts” connotes a value judgement’. This view
is supported by Stakhiv (1988), who sees a distinc- EIA must continue to adapt in our rapidly
tion between ‘scientific assessment of facts (effects), changing world, a world where there are serious
and the evaluation of the relative importance challenges to all the pillars of sustainability.
of these effects by the analyst and the public Climate change is now recognized by many
(impacts)’. The debate continues! governments as the most important challenge of
the twenty-first century, necessitating major
initiatives – yet progress is sporadic. In recent years
the world has also been on the edge of financial
1.5 Changing perspectives on meltdown, and has endured serious economic
EIA recession, leading to stimulus investment, often
through infrastructure projects, but also to drastic
measures for deficit reduction. Poverty and social
1.5.1 The importance of adaptive EIA inequalities persist and are deep-seated. But before
The arguments for EIA vary in time, in space and addressing the changing nature of the impact
according to the perspective of those involved. assessment family, we first consider EIA in its
From a minimalist defensive perspective, some theoretical context.
developers, and still possibly some parts of some
governments, might see EIA as a necessary evil, an
1.5.2 EIA in its theoretical context
administrative exercise, something to be gone
through that might result in some minor, often EIA must also be reassessed in its theoretical context,
cosmetic, changes to a development that would and in particular in the context of decision-making
probably have happened anyway. In contrast, for theory (see Lawrence 1997, 2000; Bartlett and
the ‘deep ecologists’ or ‘deep greens’, EIA cannot Kurian, 1999; Weston 2000, 2003). EIA had its
20 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
1.5.3 EIA in a rapidly growing Impact particularly important area of growth in recent
Assessment (IA) family years, evolving out of the socio-economic strand;
its focus is on the effects that a development
Over the last 40 years, EIA has been joined by a action may have on the health of its host
growing family of assessment tools. The IAIA uses population (IPHI 2009). A more recent area still is
the generic term of impact assessment (IA) to equality impact assessment (EqIA), which seeks to
encompass the semantic explosion; whereas Sadler identify the important distributional impacts of
(1996) suggested that we should view environ- development actions on various groups in society
mental assessment (EA) as ‘the generic process that (e.g. by gender, race, age, disability, sexual orienta-
includes EIA of specific projects, SEA of PPPs, and tion etc., Downey 2005). Vanclay and Bronstein
their relationships to a larger set of impact assess- (1995) and others note several other relevant
ment and planning-related tools’. Whatever the definitions, based largely on particular foci of
family name, there is little doubt that member- specialization and including, for example, transport
ship is increasing apace, with a focus on widening impact assessment, demographic impact assess-
the scope, scale and integration of assessment. ment, climate impact assessment, gender impact
Impact assessment now includes, for example, SIA, assessment, psychological impact assessment, noise
HIA, EqIA, TIA, SEA, SA, S&EIA, HRA/AA, EcIA, impact assessment, economic impact assessment,
CIA, plus a range of associated techniques such and cumulative impacts assessment (Canter and
as RA, LCA, MCA, CBA – and many more. Some Ross 2010).
of the tools have been led by legislation; others
have been more driven by practitioners from vari-
ous disciplines that have endeavoured to separate Scale
out and highlight the theme(s) of importance to Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) expands
their discipline, resulting in thematically focused the scale of operation from the EIA of projects to
forms of assessment. Dalal-Clayton and Sadler a more strategic level of assessment of programmes,
(2004) rightly observe that ‘the alphabet soup plans and policies (PPPs). Development actions
of acronyms [and terms] currently makes for a may be for a project (e.g. a nuclear power station),
confusing picture’. The various assessment tools are for a programme (e.g. a number of pressurized
now briefly outlined in terms of scope, scale and water reactor (PWR) nuclear power stations), for a
integration; most are discussed much further in plan (e.g. in the town and country planning
subsequent chapters. (T&CP) system in England) or for a policy (e.g. the
development of renewable energy). EIA to date
has generally been used for individual projects,
Scope
and that role is the primary focus of this book.
Development actions may have impacts not But EIA for programmes, plans and policies,
only on the physical environment but also on the otherwise known as SEA, has been introduced in
social and economic environment. Typically, the European Union (EU) since 2004 and is also
employment opportunities, services (e.g. health, used in many other countries worldwide (Therivel
education), community structures, lifestyles and 2010; Therivel and Partidario 1996; Therivel et al.
values may be affected. Socio-economic impact 1992). SEA informs a higher, earlier, more strategic
assessment or social impact assessment (SIA) is tier of decision-making. In theory, EIA should
regarded in this book as an integral part of EIA. be carried out in a tiered fashion first for policies,
However, in some countries it is (or has been) then for plans and programmes, and finally for
regarded as a separate process, sometimes paral- projects. The focus of SEA has been primarily
lel to EIA, and the reader should be aware of its biophysical, and there are close links with another
separate existence (Carley and Bustelo 1984; relatively new area of assessment, habitats regulation
Finsterbusch 1985; IAIA 1994; Vanclay 2003). assessment/appropriate assessment (HRA/AA), which
Some domains explicitly use S&EIA to denote is required in the EU for projects and plans that
Socio-economic and environmental impact assess- may have significant impacts on key Natura 2000
ment. Health impact assessment (HIA) has been a sites of biodiversity. In contrast, a wider approach
Sustainability
Integrated Assessment Assessment?
Strategic/
Broad focus
‘Triple Bottom Line’ Assessment
Strategic Assessment
STRATEGICNESS
of the focus & scope
Combined
Compared
S es
N EShem
Aligned/ D t
&
Connected TE es
RAniqu
G h
Project-specific/ TE ec
Narrow focus Separate IN he t
t
Bio-physical All SD-related of
‘Traditional’ environment only themes
EIA
COMPREHENSIVENESS
of the coverage
Figure 1.9
22 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
a new lease of life (see Hanley and Splash 1993; much to welcome; Gibson (2002) noted some
Lichfield 1996). Environmental auditing is the worldwide trends in EIA, such as that it is earlier
systematic, periodic and documented evaluation in the process, more open and participative, more
of the environmental performance of facility comprehensive (not just biophysical environ-
operations and practices, and this area has seen the ment), more mandatory, more closely monitored,
development of procedures, such as the inter- more widely applied (e.g. at various levels), more
national standard ISO 14001. integrative, more ambitious (regarding sustain-
Multi-criteria decision assessment (MCDA) covers ability objectives) and more humble (recognizing
a collection of approaches, often quantitative, that uncertainties, applying precaution). Yet such pro-
can be used to help key stakeholders to explore gress is variable, and has not been without its
alternative approaches to important decisions problems. A number of the current issues in EIA
by explicitly taking account of multiple criteria are highlighted here and will be discussed more
(Belton and Stewart 2002); it is quite widely used. fully in later chapters.
Risk assessment is another term sometimes found
associated with EIA. Partly in response to events
1.6.1 The nature of methods of
such as the chemicals factory explosion at Flix-
assessment
borough (UK), and nuclear power station acci-
dents at Three Mile Island (USA) and Chernobyl As noted in Section 1.2, some of the main steps in
(Ukraine), RA developed as an approach to the the EIA process (e.g. auditing and monitoring) may
analysis of risks associated with various types be missing from many studies. There may also be
of development. Calow (1997) gives an overview problems with the steps that are included. The
of the growing area of environmental RA and man- prediction of impacts raises various conceptual
agement, and Flyberg (2003) provides a critique and technical problems. The problem of estab-
of risk assessment in practice. While these tools lishing the environmental baseline position has
tend to be more technocentric, they can be seen already been noted. It may also be difficult to
as complementary to EIA, seeking to achieve a establish the dimensions and development stages
more integrated approach. Thus Chapter 5 explores of a project clearly, particularly for new technology
the potential role of CBA and MCA approaches projects. Further conceptual problems include
in EIA evaluation; Chapter 12 develops further establishing what would have happened in the
the concept of integrated assessment, and explores relevant environment without a project, clarifying
the role of environmental auditing and LCA in the complexity of interactions of phenomena, and
relation to environmental management systems especially making trade-offs in an integrated way
(EMSs). (i.e. assessing the trade-offs between economic
This brief discussion on changing perspectives, apples, social oranges and physical bananas). Other
on the theoretical context, associated tools and technical problems relate to data availability and
processes, emphasizes the need to continually re- the tendency to focus on the quantitative, and
assess the role and operation of EIA and the often single, indicators in some areas. There may
importance of an adaptive EIA. This will be also be delays and gaps between cause and effect,
developed further in several chapters – especially and projects and policies may discontinue. The
in Part 4. lack of auditing of predictive techniques limits
the feedback on the effectiveness of methods.
Nevertheless, innovative methods are being
developed to predict and evaluate impacts,
1.6 Current issues in EIA ranging from simple checklists and matrices to
complex mathematical models and multi-criteria
Although EIA now has over 40 years of history in approaches. It should be noted however that these
the USA, elsewhere the development of concepts methods may not be neutral, in the sense that the
and practice is more recent. Development is more complex they are, the more difficult it
moving apace in many other countries, including becomes for the general public to participate in the
the UK and the other EU Member States. There is EIA process.
24 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
procedural/narrow approach would focus on how 1.6.6 Managing the widening scope and
well EIA is being carried out according to its own complexity of IA activity
procedural requirements in the country of concern;
a procedural/wider approach might consider the As noted in Section 1.5, the IA family has grown
extent to which EIA is contributing to increased apace, especially in recent years. How can this
environmental awareness and learning among the complexity be managed? For example, what should
array of key stakeholders. These dimensions are be the norm for the content of a contemporary EIS?
partly covered in the preceding sections (1.6.1– There is a strong case for widening the dimensions
1.6.3). However, more fundamental, in relation of the environment under consideration to include
to EIA core purposes, are substantive approaches. socio-economic impacts more fully. The trade-off
For example, a substantive/narrow approach between the often adverse biophysical impacts of
would concentrate on whether EIA is having a a development and the often beneficial socio-
direct impact on the quality of planning decisions economic impacts can constitute the crucial
and the nature of developments. A substantive/ dilemma for decision-makers. Coverage can also be
wider approach would focus on the fundamental widened to include other types of impacts only
question of whether EIA is maintaining, restor- very partially covered to date. Should the EIS
ing, and enhancing environmental quality; is it include social, health and equality elements as
contributing towards more sustainable develop- standard, or should these be separate activities, and
ment? These issues of EIA effectiveness are exam- documents? In a similar vein, which projects
ined in various sections, and particularly in should have EIAs? For example, project EIA may
Chapter 8. be mandatory only for a limited set of major
projects, but in practice many others may be
included. Case law is now building up in many
1.6.5 Beyond the decision countries, but the criteria for the inclusion or
Many EISs are for one-off projects, and there may exclusion of a project for EIA may not always be
be little incentive for developers to audit the clear.
quality of the assessment predictions and to As also noted in Section 1.5, the SEA/SA of PPPs
monitor impacts as an input to a better assessment represents a logical extension of project assessment.
for the next project. Yet EIA up to and no further SEA/SA can cope better with cumulative impacts,
than the decision on a project is a very partial alternatives and mitigation measures than pro-
exercise. It is important to ensure that the ject assessment. But what is the nature of the
required mitigation and enhancement measures relationship between the different scales of impact
are implemented in practice. In some areas of assessment? Strategic levels of assessment of plans
the world (e.g. California, Western Australia, the and programmes should provide useful frameworks
Netherlands, and Hong Kong to mention just a for the more site-specific project assessments,
few), the monitoring of impacts is mandatory, and hopefully reducing workload and leading to more
monitoring procedures must be included in an concise and effective EIAs. But the anticipated
EIS. It is also important to take the opportunity tiered relationship may be more in theory than
for a cyclical learning process, auditing predicted practice, leading to unnecessary and wasteful
outcomes as fully as possible – to check the duplication of activity.
accuracy of predictions. The relationship with
environmental management processes is another
vital area of concern; EISs can effectively lead to
environmental management plans for project
1.7 An outline of subsequent
implementation – but, again, good practice is parts and chapters
patchy. The extension of such approaches con-
stitutes another significant current issue in the This book is in four parts. The first establishes the
project-based EIA process. context of EIA in the growth of concern about
environmental issues and in relevant legislation,
with particular reference to the UK and the EU.
26 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
SOME QUESTIONS
The following questions are intended to help the reader focus on the important issues of this chapter,
and to start building some understanding of the principles of EIA.
1 Revisit the definitions of EIA given in this chapter. Which one do you prefer and why?
2 Some steps in the EIA process have proved to be more difficult to implement than others.
From your initial reading, identify which these might be and consider why they might have
proved to be problematic.
3 Taking a few recent examples of environmental impact statements for projects in your
country, review their structure and content against the outline information in this chapter.
Do they raise any issues on structure and content?
4 What are the differences between (i) project screening and project scoping, and (ii) impact
mitigation and impact enhancement?
5 Review the purposes for EIA, and assess their importance from your own perspective.
6 Apply the characteristics of major projects set out in Table 1.2 to two major projects with
which you are familiar. Are there any important variations between the applications? If so,
can you explain why?
7 Similarly, for one of the projects identified in Q6, plot the likely stages in its life cycle –
applying approximate timings as far as possible.
8 What do you understand by a multi-dimensional approach to the environment, in EIA?
9 What is an impact in EIA? Do you see any difference between impacts and effects?
10 What do you understand by (i) irreversible impacts, (ii) cumulative impacts and (iii)
distributional impacts, in EIA?
11 Why should it be important to adopt an adaptive approach to EIA?
12 This question may be a little deep at this stage of your reading, but we will ask it all the
same: do you think it is reasonable to consider the EIA process as a rational, linear scientific
process?
13 What are the main differences between EIA and SEA?
14 What might be some of the reasons for the widening scope of EIA?
15 What do you understand by ‘beyond the decision’ in EIA?
16 How might we measure (i) the efficiency, and (ii) the effectiveness of EIA?
28 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
DoE (Department of the Environment) 1989. Environ- Healey, P. 1996. The communicative turn in planning
mental assessment: a guide to the procedures. theory and its implication for spatial strategy making.
London: HMSO. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design
DoE et al. 1990. This common inheritance: Britain’s 23, 217–34.
environmental strategy (Cmnd 1200). London: Healey, P. 1997. Collaborative planning: shaping
HMSO. places in fragmented societies. Basingstoke:
DoE 1991. Policy appraisal and the environment. London: Macmillan.
HMSO. HMG, Secretary of State for the Environment 1994.
DoE 1996. Changes in the quality of environmental impact Sustainable development: the UK strategy. London:
statements. London: HMSO. HMSO.
Downey, L. 2005. Assessing environmental inequality: HMG 2008. Planning Act 2008. London: Stationery
how the conclusions we draw vary according to the Office.
definitions we employ. Sociological Spectrum, 25, Holmberg, J. and Sandbrook, R. 1992. Sustainable
349–69. development: what is to be done? In Policies for a
EEA (European Environment Agency) 2010. European small planet, J. Holmberg (ed), 19–38. London:
environment: state and outlook 2010. EEA: Earthscan.
Copenhagen. IAIA (International Association for Impact Assessment)
Etzioni, A. 1967. Mixed scanning: a ‘third’ approach to 1994. Guidelines and principles for social impact
decision making. Public Administration Review 27(5), assessment. Impact Assessment 12 (2).
385–92. IAIA 2009. What is impact assessment? Fargo, ND:
Faber, N., Jorna, R. and van Engelen, J. 2005. A Study IAIA.
into the conceptual foundations of the notion of IOCGP (Inter-organizational Committee on Guidelines
‘sustainability’. Journal of Environmental Assessment and Principles for Social Impact Assessment)
Policy and Management, 7 (1). 1994. Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact
Faludi, A. (ed) 1973. A reader in planning theory. Oxford: Assessment, 12 (Summer), 107–52.
Pergamon. IOCGP 2003. Principles and guidelines for social impact
Finsterbusch, K. 1985. State of the art in social impact assessment in the USA, Impact Assessment and
assessment. Environment and Behaviour 17, Project Appraisal 21 (3), 231–50.
192–221. IPHI (Institute of Public Health in Ireland) 2009. Health
Flyberg, B. 2003. Megaprojects and risk: on anatomy impact assessment guidance. Dublin and Belfast:
of risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. IPHI.
Forester, J. 1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley, Jay, S., Jones, C., Slinn, P. and Wood, C. 2007.
CA: University of California Press. Environmental impact assessment: retrospect and
Friend, J. and Jessop, N. 1977. Local government and prospect. Environmental Impact Assessment Review
strategic choice, 2nd edn, Toronto: Pergamon Press. 27, 287–300.
Gibson, R. 2002. From Wreck Cove to Voisey’s Bay: Jones, C., Lee, N., Wood, C.M. 1991. UK environmental
the evolution of federal environmental assessment in statements 1988–1990: an analysis. Occasional
Canada. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal Paper 29, Department of Planning and Landscape,
20 (3), 151–60. University of Manchester.
Glasson, J. 1999. EIA – impact on decisions, Chapter 7 in Kaiser, E., Godshalk, D. and Chapin, S. 1995. Urban land
Handbook of environmental impact assessment, use planning, 4th edn. Chicago: University of Illinois
J. Pettes (ed), vol. 1. Oxford: Blackwell Science. Press.
Habermas, J. 1984. The theory of communicative action, Kennedy, W. V. 1988. Environmental impact assessment
vol. 1: Reason and the rationalisation of society. in North America, Western Europe: what has worked
London: Polity Press. where, how and why? International Environmental
Hacking,T. and Guthrie,P. 2008. A framework for Reporter 11 (4), 257–62.
clarifying the meaning of triple bottom line, integrated Kirkby, J., O’Keefe, P. and Timberlake, L. 1995. The
and sustainability assessment. Environmental Impact earthscan reader in sustainable development.
Assessment Review 28, 73–89. London: Earthscan.
Hanley, N.D. and Splash, C. 1993. Cost–benefit Lawrence, D. 1997. The need for EIA theory building.
analysis and the environment. Aldershot: Edward Environmental Impact Assessment Review 17,
Elgar. 79–107.
Hart, S.L. 1984. The costs of environmental review. Lawrence, D. 2000. Planning theories and environmental
In Improving impact assessment, S.L. Hart et al. impact assessment. Environmental Impact
(eds). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Assessment Review 20, 607–25.
30 P R I N C I P L E S A N D P R O C E D U R E S
References
ADB (NGO Forum on ADB) 2006. The Advocacy Guide to ADB EIA
Requirement, Philippines. Available at:
www.forum-adb.org/BACKUP/pdf/guidebooks/
EIA%20Guidebook.pdf.
Lindhjem, H., Hu, T., Ma, Z., Skjelvik, J.M., Song, G.,
Vennemo, H., Wu, J. and Zhang, S. 2007. Environmental
economic impact assessment in China: problems and
prospects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 27 (1),
1–25.