What is Impact Assessment?

Impact assessments are carried out to assess the consequences of individual projects -- Environmental
Impact Assessment -- or of policies and programs -- Strategic Environmental Assessment.

Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process of evaluating the likely environmental impacts of a
proposed project or development, taking into account inter-related socio-economic, cultural and
human-health impacts, both beneficial and adverse.

UNEP defines Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as a tool used to identify the environmental,
social and economic impacts of a project prior to decision-making. It aims to predict environmental
impacts at an early stage in project planning and design, find ways and means to reduce adverse
impacts, shape projects to suit the local environment and present the predictions and options to
decision-makers. By using EIA both environmental and economic benefits can be achieved, such as
reduced cost and time of project implementation and design, avoided treatment/clean-up costs and
impacts of laws and regulations.

Although legislation and practice vary around the world, the fundamental components of an EIA would
necessarily involve the following stages:

- Screening to determine which projects or developments require a full or partial impact

assessment study;
- Scoping to identify which potential impacts are relevant to assess (based on legislative
requirements, international conventions, expert knowledge and public involvement), to
identify alternative solutions that avoid, mitigate or compensate adverse impacts on
biodiversity (including the option of not proceeding with the development, finding
alternative designs or sites which avoid the impacts, incorporating safeguards in the design
of the project, or providing compensation for adverse impacts), and finally to derive terms
of reference for the impact assessment;
- Assessment and evaluation of impacts and development of alternatives, to predict and
identify the likely environmental impacts of a proposed project or development, including
the detailed elaboration of alternatives;
- Reporting the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or EIA report, including an
environmental management plan (EMP), and a non-technical summary for the general
audience.
- Review of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), based on the terms of reference
(scoping) and public (including authority) participation.
- Decision-making on whether to approve the project or not, and under what conditions; and
- Monitoring, compliance, enforcement and environmental auditing. Monitor whether the
predicted impacts and proposed mitigation measures occur as defined in the EMP. Verify
the compliance of proponent with the EMP, to ensure that unpredicted impacts or failed
mitigation measures are identified and addressed in a timely fashion.
Strategic Environmental Assessment

Sadler and Verheem (1996) define Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as the formalized,
systematic and comprehensive process of identifying and evaluating the environmental consequences of
proposed policies, plans or programs to ensure that they are fully included and appropriately addressed
at the earliest possible stage of decision-making on a par with economic and social considerations.

Since this early definition the field of SEA has rapidly developed and expanded, and the number of
definitions of SEA has multiplied accordingly. SEA, by its nature, covers a wider range of activities or a
wider area and often over a longer time span than the environmental impact assessment of projects.

SEA might be applied to an entire sector (such as a national policy on energy for example) or to a
geographical area (for example, in the context of a regional development scheme). SEA does not replace
or reduce the need for project-level EIA (although in some cases it can), but it can help to streamline and
focus the incorporation of environmental concerns (including biodiversity) into the decision-making
process, often making project-level EIA a more effective process.

SEA is commonly described as being proactive and ‘sustainability driven’, whilst EIA is often described as
being largely reactive.

Why is it Important?

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Ramsar Convention and the Convention on the
Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) recognize impact assessment as an important
tool for helping ensure that development is planned and implemented with biodiversity in mind. The
CBD requests Parties to apply impact assessment to projects, programs, plans and policies with a
potential negative impact on biodiversity.

Biodiversity is relevant to all types of impact assessment and should be addressed at all levels, from
environmental impact assessment carried out for individual projects (EIA) to the strategic environmental
assessment of policies, plans and programs (SEA). Its values should be addressed in social impact
assessment; health impact assessment may need to consider the role of biodiversity in disease
transmission or biological control. Finally, biodiversity provides commodities for international trade that
may be the subject of study in trade impact assessment (sometimes referred to as sustainability impact
assessment).

EIA procedures should refer to other relevant national, regional and international legislation,
regulations, guidelines and other policy documents such as the national biodiversity strategy and action
plan (NBSAP) documents, the CBD and biodiversity-related conventions and agreements, including, in
particular, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES);
the CMS and related agreements; the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971); the Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context; the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea; the European Union directives on environmental impact assessment; and the Protocol
for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea against Pollution from Land-based Sources.
Consideration should be given to improving integration of NBSAPs and national development strategies
using SEA as a tool for such integration to promote the establishment of clear conservation targets
through the NBSAP process. These targets should then be used for the screening and scoping of targets
of EIA and for developing mitigation measures.

What's the Problem?

Impact assessment processes are in place and applied in many countries, yet biodiversity is often
inadequately addressed. There is a growing recognition of the need to better reflect biodiversity
considerations in environmental impact assessments and in strategic environmental assessments.
Important barriers to the incorporation of biodiversity in impact assessment include low priority for
biodiversity and limitations in one or more of the following areas: capacity to carry out the assessments;
awareness of biodiversity values; adequate data; and post-project monitoring. Strategic environmental
assessments have high potential for addressing biodiversity in planning and decision-making, but there
are challenges to their application.

The following paragraphs summarize information on the implementation of the Convention's provisions
on impact assessment.

Legislation and procedure on environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental
assessment (SEA)

The third national reports confirm that nearly all responding Parties have impact assessment legislation
and procedures at project level (EIA) in place. More than half of country Parties have also developed
impact assessment legislation and procedures for programs and policies (SEA), while many others are in
the process of developing SEA legislation and procedures. Only one and three Parties, respectively,
reported not having an EIA or SEA policy.

Most Parties also reported implementing bilateral, regional and/or multilateral agreements on activities
likely to significantly affect biological diversity outside their jurisdiction. Only some countries reported
having mechanisms in place to prevent or minimize danger or damage to biological diversity originating
in their territory, in the territory of other Parties, or in areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

Many respondents have established national mechanisms for emergency response to activities or events
that present a grave and imminent danger to biological diversity, and some others are in the process of
developing such mechanisms. Most countries reported that their impact assessment legislation and
procedures are designed to minimize negative impacts on biodiversity. Only some, however, reported
applying major aspects of the guidelines on biodiversity considerations in impact assessment (decisions
VI/7-A and VIII/28) while many others were applying some aspects of the guidelines. This may be
attributed to the relatively recent development of the guidelines and the periodicity of typically about a
decade between modifications of impact assessment legislation and/or procedures. Countries reported
on a variety of mechanisms in place to ensure that due consideration is given to the environmental
consequences of national programs and policies that are likely to have significant adverse impacts on
biological diversity. These include: strategic environmental assessment legislation for development
plans, policies, programs and strategies; sectoral impact studies; inter-ministerial committees; inter-
agency consultation on all major programs, policies or modifications; partnership of public sector,
universities and NGOs to address impacts of agriculture, animal husbandry and aquaculture on
biodiversity; special environmental committees; sanctions, incentives, compensation and enforcement
measures; and the development and application of best practice guidelines.

Positive outcomes of implementing Article 14.1

Countries reported on several positive outcomes of implementing Article 14.1, including:

The reinforcement of impact assessment legislation and institutional framework;

A growing number of environmentally sound projects;

Greater awareness of environmental legislation;

Greater awareness of the importance of impact assessment as tools for environmental and
biodiversity protection;

Introduction of the assessment of the environmental consequences of national policies and

programs;

Bilateral collaboration on impact assessment;

Introduction of independent impact assessment review committees;

Publication of guidance material on incorporating biodiversity issues into EIA and SEA, including
sector-related (e.g. trade; forestry) and issue-related (e.g. wetlands; migratory species; protected areas)
guidance.

Obstacles to the implementation of Article 14.1

Countries reported on a number of obstacles hampering the full application of impact assessment tools.
These include:

- Inadequate human and financial capacity;

- Lack of quality and availability of environmental data and of information necessary for fully
identifying the impacts of development activities, including limited knowledge and scientific
basis to develop biodiversity evaluation criteria, particularly with regard to genetic diversity,
and insufficient exchange of knowledge, technology and experience;
- Narrowness of project inclusion lists;
- Weak institutional structures and limited inter-sectoral coordination often coupled with a
lack of political will and leadership and a lack of transparency and accountability;
- Inadequate monitoring and enforcement of impact assessment regulations and of mitigation
measures, reported largely as a consequence of lack of institutional structures and financial
and human resources;
 - Lack of ongoing qualification and certification process for environmental service providers;
- Limited resources to review, monitor and enforce impact assessment decisions leading to
delays in decision-making and project approval;
- Lack of meaningful public and stakeholder participation in environmental planning and
management often linked to poverty, low levels of education, lack of awareness of
environmental and biodiversity issues;
- Limited commitment to biodiversity conservation, including on the part of the private
sector, and prioritization of economic objectives and needs.

What Needs to be Done?

Article 14 of the Convention on Biological Diversity addresses Impact Assessment and Minimizing
Adverse Impacts

In accordance with this Article:

1. Each Contracting Party, as far as possible and as appropriate, shall:

- Introduce appropriate procedures requiring environmental impact assessment of its proposed

projects that are likely to have significant adverse effects on biological diversity with a view to avoiding
or minimizing such effects and, where appropriate, allow for public participation in such procedures;

- Introduce appropriate arrangements to ensure that the environmental consequences of its

programs and policies that are likely to have significant adverse impacts on biological diversity are duly
taken into account;

- Promote, on the basis of reciprocity, notification, exchange of information and consultation on

activities under their jurisdiction or control which are likely to significantly affect adversely the biological
diversity of other States or areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, by encouraging the
conclusion of bilateral, regional or multilateral arrangements, as appropriate;

- In the case of imminent or grave danger or damage, originating under its jurisdiction or control,
to biological diversity within the area under jurisdiction of other States or in areas beyond the limits of
national jurisdiction, notify immediately the potentially affected States of such danger or damage, as
well as initiate action to prevent or minimize such danger or damage; and

- Promote national arrangements for emergency responses to activities or events, whether

caused naturally or otherwise, which present a grave and imminent danger to biological diversity and
encourage international cooperation to supplement such national efforts and, where appropriate and
agreed by the States or regional economic integration organizations concerned, to establish joint
contingency plans.
2. The Conference of the Parties shall examine, on the basis of studies to be carried out, the issue of
liability and redress, including restoration and compensation, for damage to biological diversity, except
where such liability is a purely internal matter.