environmental impact assessment (eia): a critical … · 2010-02-08 · destruction is to use...

CHAPTER 8

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT(EIA):A CRITICAL PLANNING ApPROACH

Too often in the past ad hoc development plans have IlIken place which have beendestnu:tive to the environment, and have thereby endangered the very basis on which

continuity and suslllinabiUty of development depend. (Tolba et al., 1987)

EIA - AN URGENT NEED

It is essential that decision makers in all

sectors and agencies take advantage of anyavailable means to anticipate and mitigate orprevent the negative conseq~ences of devel-opment activities and policies. EnvironmentalImpact Assessment (EIA) can be a vitalplanning approach. Properly carried out, anEIAcan minimize environmental degradationby identifying problems before they occurand by indicating the strategies required toprotect people and the natural environmentfrom undue harm. Dr. Mostafa Tolba, Execu-tive Director of the United Nations Environ-

ment Program (UNEP)in Nairobi, expressesthe immediate need to include EIA in all

decisions affecting the environment:

purely practical viewpoint and for theirown self-interest, developing countriescannot afford to make mistakes with

the long-term sustainability of theirdevelopment plans. One way to ensurethat development takes place withoutdestruction is to use environmental

impact assessment (EIA)of developmentplans. If such assessments are carriedout in the planning stage, when thetotality of development plans are beingconsidered, damage can be kept to aminimum. Thus, it is essential that

developing countries should undertakeenvironmental impact assessment atplanning stages, and ensure that theresults are incorporated firmly into theplanning process (Tolba et al., 1987).

There is no alternative but to pursueeconomic and social development indeveloping countries of the world,wherein more than two-thirds of man-

kind live, in order to meet basic humanneeds and to secure better prospects fortheir citizens. While development isessential to improve the quality of life,it is equally essential to ensure thatdevelopment takes place on asustainable basis. Too often in the pastad hoc development plans have takenplace which have been destructive tothe environment, and have therebyendangered the very basis on whichcontinuity and sustainability of devel-opment depend. Accordingly, from a

EIA is not a panacea; it has both its sup-porters and critics. "Advocates argue thatnumerous past instances of environmentaldegradation demand a systematic, compre-hensive evaluation of such factors in projectplanning, while opponents often assert thatthe need for such precautions is outweighedby increased costs and delays. Even so, it isgenerally accepted that some form of suchassessment should be applied, particularly inmajor projects, and numerous developingcountries have now found the procedures tobe an effective tool in environment and

resource management" (Kibria, 1985, p. iii).As nations throughout the world begin to

149

THE CHALLENGE OF SUSTAINABILITY

appreciate and confront the stresses beingimposed on their people and natural ecosys-tems due to unchecked

development, EIA isbecoming more of a fac-tor in the decision-mak-

ing process. Nationalimplementation of EIA isgrowing slowly but stead-ily; 97 percent of indus-trialized countries nowconsider EIA to be a

necessary element intheir planning and deci-sion-making processes. As of 1982, 54 per-cent of developing countries employed EIAlegislation, and 77 percent of the developingworld had some form ofEIA in place (Sammy,1982). The practice will continue to becomemore routine as donor agencies increasinglystipulate that funding will not be providedunless the proponent first completes an EIAof the proposed development project.

ment, in part by helping to ensure thatnatural resources are not wasted or used

irrationally. In the con-text of project planning,EIA can alleviate local

concerns, as well as pro-vide the proponent withinformation that will sig-nificantly reduce futureproject costs or interrup-tions. In broader applica-tions, such as policyevaluation at the

regional or nationallevel, EIAcan serve as a vital component ofinstitutional and national sustainable devel-

opment strategies. In some circumstances,assessments can also encompass the .evalu-ation of project or policy impacts on health,cultural property, and tribal peoples, includ-ing project-related resettlement. Environ-mental assessments can also be carried out at

the sectoral level, for example, to investigatethe possible impacts of major changes insectoral policies or of sector-wide investmentprograms (Wallis, 1989).

A properly done EIA is an integrativeplanning approach, which joins the govern-ment, proponent, and public in a decision-making and information-sharing process thatsatisfies the respective concerns of all partiesinvolved in the project. Some of the funda-mental objectives of EIAare to:

Environmental Impact Assessment: Amethodofanalysisthat attemptsto predictthe likely repercussions of a proposeddevelopment on the social and physicalenvironmentof the surroundingarea and(if negative impacts are predicted) topropose alternative methods of carryingout the project that mighthelp to preventor mitigatethe negativeimpacts.

WHATCAN AN EIAPROVIDE?

EIAprovides, for proponents and regulators aswell as for intervenors, the .opportunity toidentify, mitigate, or enhance the potentialenvironmental, health, and social conse-quences of a proposed development activity.It can also generate alternative or additionaloptions to that activity. Furthermore, "it canpresent information in a form that permitslogical and rational decisions to be made,and provides the platform for the sustainableuse of resources" Oohnstone, 1986). In otherwords, EIAis specifically designed to providedecision-making information about a pro-posed development project or program. Italso has the extremely important capabilityof providing information that can assist indefining the social and ecological limits toeconomic growth. This means that EIA caneliminate or reduce damage to the environ-

150

. document existing (baseline) environ-mental conditions;

. identify adverse environmental effectsthat may result from the project;

. identify and incorporate appropriatemitigation measures into the project;

. identify positive project benefits as wellas its economic, social, and environ-

mental acceptability to the community;

~ identify critical environmental issuesthat require further studies, monitoring,or management;

~ identify and analyze alternative projectoptions, including alternative invest-ments, sites, and designs;

~ involve the public and the affected com-munity(s) in the decision-makingprocessrelated to the environment; and

~ assistall parties involved in developmentto understand their roles,responsibilities,and overall relationships with oneanother (after Biswasand Geping, 1987;Wallis, 1989).

PRINCIPLESAND APPLICATIONS

Historically, EIAhas been used primarily forlarge infrastructure projects such as dams,highways, and energy projects, but it also hasimportant applications in the assessment ofsmaller community-based projects. Generallya screening process is applied to determinewhether or not a full EIA is necessary andappropriate for a particular project. If it isdetermined that an EIA is indeed required,the assessment is normally carried out priorto project implementation (e.g., at the feasi-bility stage). However, it is also possible touse EIA techniques to evaluate existing pro-jects, with the aim of identifying and rectify-ing any environmental problems that werenot previously anticipated. Many financialinstitutions are now requiring that an EIAbedone prior to property sales or the release offunds for a particular project. Although theremay be legal or quasi-legal requirements todo an EIA,this is not a guarantee that the EIAwill be done correctly or applied within arational decision-making framework. It is

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

therefore necessary to ensure that the insti-tutional mechanisms for EIAare well estab-lished, so that the process will have anenduring and credible foundation.

Traditionally,decisionmakershavebeenaccustomed to analyzingprojects on the basisof benefit/cost projections. However, envi-ronmental losses and gains are not alwayseasilymeasurable in economic terms. An EIAapproach can help characterize and quantifythe economic and social value of the envi-ronment and its resources and functions.The goal is to enhance the decision-makingcapabilities of managers and planners bypresenting information in an accessible,problem-specificmanner.

Planning and Participation

Integrating EIA into the planning processrequires a commitment on the part of admin-istrators and policy makers (Pierce, 1990).The EIAis typically prepared and financed bythe proponent, often a private-sector inter-est. It will be up to the government (theregulator) to review the EIAfor accuracy andto make the decision to proceed with theproject, cancel it, or modify it so that nega-tive environmental consequences are mini-mized. Both proponent and regulator will beinvolved in the implementation of the assess-ment, with respect to altering project plansand installing monitoring programs. In somecases, a government body will be the propon-ent of a project and should therefore do theEIA.Where a governmental body is proposingnew policies or programs, the governmentshould ensure that an EIA is carried out on

the policy to minimize negative environ-mental effects stemming from any resultingprojects. This will be most apparent for anypolicies involving natural resources, energy,or inftastructure.

Public participation in the EIAprocess iscritical. Participatory processes are funda-

151

THE CHALLENGE OF SUSTAINABILln'

mental to sustainable development, and theEIAprocess functions well within this frame-work. The public must be part of the EIAprocess if there is a risk that the projectcould affect other interests. If the public ismarginalized from the outset of the project,and problems later occur, the proponent andthe regulator will have a difficult time inregaining the support and confidence of thepublic. Environmental issues involving publicconcern can lead to unplanned, costly, andlengthy delays in completing the project.Even where the public is not part of theactual EIA team, an integrated program ofconsultations, reviews, and information ac-cessibility can ensure public participation inthe process. Should a dispute between thepublic and the proponent occur, the regula-tor can call upon the services of a trainedintervenor to assist in conflict resolution.

Time and Money

Sufficient financial resources are required todo an EIAproperly. The cost should be fac-tored into the feasibility study, and it mayaccount for 0.1 to 0.5 percent of total pro-ject cost (FEARO,1989), or 5 to 10 percent ofthe cost of project preparation (Wallis,1989). At the high cost end, under strictenvironmental regulations and opposition,the costs of preparing an EIAmay run evenhigher, up to 3 percent of the total projectcost (Milton, 1993).

It will also take time to do an EIA.For a

small community development project, suchas an irrigation or water supply project, theEIA may take several days to complete. Alarge industrial project, like a dam or ahighway, may take many months or evenyears. Table 8.1 summarizes some representa-tive costs (in $U.S.) and time periodsinvolved in preparing an Initial Environ-mental Examination (lEE) for a range ofprojects in Thailand (Bisset, 1980). Time

152

(and therefore costs) will also increase toallow public hearings; full public participa-tion, a necessary aspect of the EIA process,can double the time and costs involved.

It is important that an institutionalframework exist to support implementationof the EIA.Without an adequate institutionalinfrastructure, the EIAprocess will lack con-sistency of application, credibility, and -most importantly - the mechanisms toensure that effective regulation and miti-gation techniques are applied to the project.To provide sufficient institutional supportand enhance interagency co-ordination andcommunications, it may be necessary toestablish an executive or autonomous

planning and statutory body, such as anEnvironmental Review Council. Examples ofsuch councils can be found in Thailand'sNational Environmental Board and India's

Department of the Environment. The objec-tives of such a council are often to:

. co-ordinate the activities of the con-

cerned line agencies related to the envi-ronment:

. provide specific guidelines with respectto the subjects to be covered in the EIA:

. monitor, assess, and evaluate proposed,ongoing, or finished projects:

. review those development projects thatare related to the use of naturalresources; and

. formulate recommendations to author-

izing agencies concerning developmentactivities (Biswas and Geping, 1987).

EIAis a multidisciplinary activity. In mostcases, no one individual has the expertiseneeded to complete an EIA alone. An EIA


Source: R. Bisset, "Methods for Environmental Impact Analysis,' in Journal of Environmental Management,1980, Vol II: 27-43. Reprinted by permission of Academic Press limited, U.K.

153

Table 8.1 - Time Period Required to Prepare Iff in Thailand

lEEproject assessment EIAcost timemethodologiesapplied (human required

months) (months)

1. smallscaleirrigation itembyitem, mattix 2 2

2. pulpmail itemby item 10 2

3. industtial projects, item by item, 21 3Eastern seaboard mattix, network

4. iron and steel item by item, mattix 12 4

5. soda ash item by item, mattix 21 3

6. industtial estate Samut item by item 30 3Sakom

7. integrated rural item by item 2 2

development

B. sericulture item by item, mattix 1 1

9. highland agriculture item by item, mattix 2 2development

10. rainfed agriculture item by item, mattix - 2

11. fish propogation item by item, mattix - 1

12. village fish pond item by item, mattix - 2

13. offshore mioning item by item, mattix 16 4

14. land settlements item by item, mattix - 2

15. rural road item by item, - 4fillin the blank

16. resorthotel itembyitem, - 1/ill in the blank

17. eastern seabord regional item by item, mattix 3 3

development plan

lB. Asia regional remote item by item 3 2sensing training

THE CHALLENGE OF SUSTAINABILllY'

team typically requires a variety of technical,economic, biological, and orher types ofskills. A large projecr with far-reachingeffecrs, like a hydroelectric dam, mighrrequire rhe inpurs of five to seven specialisrsor more, whereas a smaller enterprise mightrequire only one or rwo. There should alsobe someone wirhin the decision-makinginstitution who is familiar with the EIApro-cess. It is the responsibility of the decisionmaker to adequately scope the issues thatneed attention and then locate the expertiseto provide the needed information.

Environmental information for EIAis a

resource that has to be used wisely. The lackof accessible environmental data presented inproblem- and solution-oriented formats is aworldwide problem. Unfortunately, manygovernments and institutions also suffer froma lack of dynamic interdepartmental co-ordination in obtaining and sharing therequired information. As a result, peoplemay not be aware of data availability, whichsometimes results in needless spending toacquire the data.

Involving local expertise and knowledgein an EIAcan help the necessary informationflow and exchange, in addition tostrengthening the technical capabilities oflocal and regional public- and private-sectorinsritutions. As well, the conclusions of theEIAwill be more relevant to local needs and

culture. The use of imported experts in anEIA is acceptable when specific technicalinformation is required, but it is no substirutefor capable local experts who are in rouchwith cultural sensitivities and information

sources. Another exrremely important sourceof information and expertise for the EIAprocess can be found in ttaditional orindigenous knowledge concerning the envi-ronment and resource management. Incombining EIA techniques with this uniquebody of Traditional Ecological Knowledge(TEK),decision makers can acquire informa-

154

tion about the environment that will providedelicate insight into the possible human andenvironmental effects of a project.

Policy and Program Assessment. Thepolicies and programs of different levels ofgovernment can have significant environ-mental effects - some intended, others theby-products of their implementation. InCanada, subsidy programs designed to pro-mote farm welfare inadvertently paid farmersto plough unstable slopes and to fillwetlands. European Economic Commission(EEC)studies have shown significant negativeeffects on habitat management from foodsubsidies and infrastructural policy in somenations (Bowers and Cheshire, 1983). ACanadian inventory showed in the late 1980sthat over 1,000 government policies andprograms had discernable impact on how theenvironment was managed - yet most man-agers of these programs were unaware oftheir impacts (Bond et al., 1986).

Because of the far-reaching environ-mental effects of policies and programs, newinitiatives are underway to develop themeans to anticipate and manage for theimpacts of government programs. This isproving difficult because of the paucity ofstudies that clearly document the cause-and-effect relationship berween programs andpolicies and particular environmental effects.

Policy and program impact assessment isevolving in the following ways:

~ systematic review of project-level effectsunder specific programs;

~ expert panels to provide advice on thepossible or probable impacts of new pol-icies and programs on key environ-mental issues;

~ reviewof impacts of existing policies andprograms through one or more of:

~ program-by-program analysis (rop-down),

~ regionalanalysisbased on problems(bottom-up), and

~ integrated analysisfocused on specificenvironmental issues (problem-oriented); and

~ iterative review of effects of ongoingprograms aimed at redirection, mitiga-tion, or redesign during operation.

Policy and program assessment is a signifi-cant challenge both to the research com-munity and to current institutions. Fullintegration into the policy process will comewith some difficulty,as many decisionmakersare reluctant to cede any form of second-guessing of their policy making to any exter-nal or internal review procedure. Never-theless, impetus is growing internationally toinstitute routine policy- and program-levelreview. Ideally, this form of review processwill identify new and promising means tointegrate environmental and economic objec-tives at the policy and program level.

Cumulative EffectsAssessment. The assess-ment of cumulative effects is of growingconcern to those who must evaluate projectsand their impacts at a regional, national, orinternational scale.Cumulative effectsassess-ment is important where:

~ the impacts of a single project are insig-nificant (e.g., establishment of one padi,or filling of one small wetland), buttogether many such projects constitutea significant change; or

~ the changes are cumulative and reinforc-ing (e.g., urbanization of agriculturalland, biomagnification of toxies in thefood chain); or


~ the changes are synergistic (e.g., wasteput into a watercourse from one factoryis not damaging, but when combinedwith waste from another it becomes atoxic substance).

Cumulative effects assessment is a new field.It has developed in response to therealization that many of the most significantimpacts occur in small increments, whichmay escape standard approaches to environ-mental, social, or project impact assessment.Climate change, desertification, loss of wild-life habitat, and pollution of watercourses,for example, all occur primarily because ofmany small actions added together. Promis-ing approaches to cumulative effects assess-ment include the following.

~ Adding a broader level review process:This requires rime and broad baselinedata.

~ Establishing regional or national standardsor limits for key qualitative or quantitativeattributes of the environment: Thisrequires a regulatory process and themeans to address equity concerns.

~ Integratingassessment into the planningprocess:This treats cumulative effects atthe scale of the entire region orplanning unit; individual projects mustthen complywith established plan goals.

The application of EIA has usually beenproject-specific or site-specific. It will there-fore be very difficult, on a project basis. toaddress the assessment of cumulative effects.Instead, it appears that a separate process,tied to the overall national planning process,will be the best solution. Such an approachwill require greater integration of environ-mental variables and objectives into theeconomic or land planning process than is

155

THE CHALLENGE OF SUSTAINABIUTY

currently being done. The assessment ofcumulative effects will also require institu-tions to be charged with analysis at appro-priate scales,within an ecosystemframework.Further, the management and regulation ofcumulative effects may require an institu-tional shift awayfrom reactive, project-levelreview and management, and tOwardsantici-patory, system-based approaches.

METHODS AND APPROACHES

No one method of EIAis completely suitableto every project or application. Even a par-ticular assessment will probably require twoor more different approaches to record,present, and analyze the environmentalinformation.

If one looks at the application ofmethods for assessments of impacts andplanning for development, one is awarethat methodology is not applied at anyone phase or at anyone time in theprocess. It is in fact applied at a varietyof phases over a spectrum of time. Andwe see, for example, that /Tom thepoint one is asked to look at and studythe problem to the point the decision ismade, down the spectrum to the pointwhere one monitors the impact of thedecision, one has to apply a variety ofapproaches in order to assess the qual-ity of impact and the quality of devel-opment one is inheriting It is theobject of such methods and proceduresthat they [be] simple to apply, simpleto explain to outsiders, that they [be]acceptable legally, that they [be] fairlyaccurate in displaying the distributionof effects across societies, that theyincorporate the notion of risks anduncertainty, and that they incorporatetime dimension effects and spatialdimension effects and that they utilizeboth intangible and non-monetaty cri-

156

teria What is critical to understand is

that our approach to using these tech-niques and procedures has shifted /Tomone of being sectoral or limited inscope to one of being holistic (Furtado,1990).

No matter what the size of the project or theapproach taken, an EIAwill present a core ofinformation that should be consistentlypresent from one project to another. Thefollowing list describes some of the questionsthat have to be addressed by the EIA team.

. Who is the project initiator (propon-ent)? Who will pay for the assessment?Who will conduct the assessment? Whowill review the report, and who will usethe assessment?

. What is the existing environment at theproject site? Does an adequate environ-mental inventory exist?

. What is the nature of the project?

. Why is the project necessary? What aresome of the benefits expected to accruefrom the implementation of the project?

. Are thereoptions?

oralternativesproject

. What are the significant environmentaleffects?Will there be cumulative effects?

. Can the environmental effects be miti-

gated or avoided?

. Is there significant public concern?Would a public review be helpful?

. What are the recommended monitoringrequirements and follow-up actions?

Figure 8.1 - Initial Assessment


Initial """"",,,I ccn>lUutes al/ thesaeening and any su"'equen' environmentalin""rigatlons needed '0 teach one of ,heinUial a"""ment decisions

Sc_lng is a component of inUiala"."men' pha.. which places a propa;alinto one of ,he 8 saeening deei"on rout"

Initial Envi_taI Ewluatlon is thedocumented ""ult Ot in""rigation needed '0add"" unknowns idenrified at the "'teening>lage which a" impeding an inital"""ment decision

FtOm: Duffy, P.). (ed.), Initial A"e"ment Guide: Fedetal EnvitOnmental Mse"ment Review PtOce". (Ottawa, Canada: Fede...1EnvitOnmenlal Asse"men! Review Office, April. 1986). Reproduced by permission of FEARO

. What are the conclusions to be drawnfrom the EIA?

. What are the sources of informationused for the EIA?

Figure 8.1 provides a sample overview of theenvironmental decision-making process withrespect to a project-level EIA. The figureillustrates the process for doing an EIAaccording to the Canadian EnvironmentalAssessment Review Guidelines Order (Supplyand Services Canada, 1987). An expandedreference list of questions related to the

various aspects of the EIAprocess is providedin Appendix 4, and a sample outline of anenvironmental assessment report is given inAppendix 5.

EIA does not have to be elaborate in

design or implementation, but it should befounded in the cultural, technological, andfinancial characteristics and capabilities ofthe country, as well as being tailored to therequirements of a particular project. Thereare a number of EIAmethods available that

have been developed over the years. Some ofthe methods that are most commonly usedinclude the following.

157

PROPOSALSTO BE

SCREENED

. -AutomaticInsirificantAdverse Abilityto Effects Significant SignificantExclusion A erse Effects Mitigate Adverse Public Automatic

Effects Mitigable UnknownUnknown Effects ConCl!t'n

Referral

I .Investigation to POTENTIAL

Address Unknowns SIGNIFICANT Referral to'

NO SIGNIFICANTEFFECTS resulting in Initial EFFECTS Minister of theEnvironmental Environment for

Evaluation Public Review

UNACCEPTABLEEFFECTS ,

Project Proceeds'Project'with any Necessary Modify'

Mitigationand Abandonedor and

Follow-up Postponed Rescreen


Figure 8.2 - Ad Hoc TechniqueApplied to a Hypothetical Hydroelectric Dam

Items

C

Number of reservoirs on river system

Combined surface area (ha)

Total reservoir shoreline (km)

New irrigation areas (ha)

Reduced open space because of project andassociated population increase (ha)

lnundated archaeological sites

Reduced soil erosion (relative magnitude)

Enhanced fisheries (relative magnitude)

Provision of flood control measures

New potential malarial areas(relative magnitude)

Additional employment potential(number of persons)

°

NilNil

Nil

Nil

From: B.N. Lohan; and N. HaHm, "Recommended Methodolog;es for Rap;d Env;ronmental Impact Assessment ;n Develop;ngCountries: Experiences Derived from Case Studies ;n Thailand: ;n Biswas, K., and Q. Geping (eds.), Environmental Impact Assess-

ment for Developing Countries, Natural Resources and the Environmental Se,;es, vol. 19. Copyright @ 1987 by the United NationsUnive"ity. All rights reserved.

Ad hoc. This method provides broad, quali-tative information. Conclusions are stated in

simple terms. No attempt is made to outlinethe actual impacts on specific parametersthat will be affected. An example of the adhoc technique applied to a hypotheticalhydroelectric dam project is given in Figure8.2 above.

Checklists. This is one of the most basic

methods for an EIA.Checklists identitY envi-ronmental characteristics that would be

affected by a project activity. Different typesof checklists include: simple checklists, whichprovide a list of parameters, with no

158

guidelines on how the parameters are to beinterpreted; descriPtive checklists, which pro-vide identification of environmental parame-ters and guidelines on how data on theparameters are to be measured; and scaling-weighting checklists, which also provide infor-mation on the subjective scaling and evalu-ation of each parameter with respect to allother parameters (ESCAP, 1985). Figure 8.3illustrates the use of the checklist approachfor the Huasai-Thale Noi Road Project,Thailand.

Overlays. This method uses a series of trans-parent maps of the project area to identitY,

Alternatives

A B

4 1

8,500 1,300

190 65

40,000 12,000

10,000 2,000

11 3

4X IX

4X IX

Yes Yes

4X IX

1,000 200

from: B.N. lohani and N. Halim, ibid. Copyright @ 1987 by the United Nations University. All rights reselVed.

project, illustrate, and evaluate the relation-ship of project activities to the environ-mental and geographical paramerers of theproject area. Maps showing different environ-

mental factors are superimposed, and thencombined to form a composite land use map,through which areas of compatibility andconflict with the particular project can be

159

ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTASSESSMENT

F;gure 8.3 - Checkl;st for the Huasa;-Thale No; Road Project, Thailand

Nature of likelyimpacts

Items Adverse Beneficial

51 L1 R IR LW I ST

L1 51 N

Aquatic ecosystems x X' x

Fisheries x x x

Forests x x x

Terrestrial wildlife x x x

Rare and endangered species x x X

Surfacewaterhydrology x x x

Surface water quality X X X

Ground water * * * * * * * * * *Soils

Air quality x x

Navigation x x

Land transport X x

Agriculture x x

Socio-economic x x

Aesthetic x x

Legend: 51 = Short L1 = Long term R = Reversible

IR = Irreversible L = Local W = Wide

51 = Significant N = Normal* = Negligible

THE CHALLENGE OF SUSTAINABILll1'

identified. Geographic Infonnation Systems(GIS) essentially represent a computerizedapplication of this approach, in whichregional data banks can be accessed to com-plement the infonnation represented in themap overlays and to assist in the preparationand graphical representation of the overlays.

Matrix. A matrix is a type of checklist, inwhich possible project activities are repre-sented along one axis of the matrix andpotential environmental effectson the other.Using this approach, cause-and-effect rela-tionships between project activities andenvironmental impacts can be identified, andtheir importance or magnitude can be esti-mated. An example of a matrix is given inFigure 8.4. It is even possible to expand thematrix approach into a three-dimensionalmodel, as shown in Figure 8.5.

Networks. Networks are an extension of

matrixes, incorporating the long-tenn (sec-ondary, tertiary, and higher-order) effects ofproject activities. The network approach canbe used to identifY pathways for both directand indirect environmental effects.

Other emerging approaches to EIAinvolve the use of specific environmentalimpact indexes; the incorporation of tradi-tional cost-benefit analysis directly into theimpact assessment; and the use of simulationmodeling workshops to identifY possibleconflicts and to detennine subsequentactions (ESCAP,1985).

IS EIA EFFECTIVEAND OF VALUE?

An understanding of the environment can bemeasured by our ability to predict what theenvironmental effects will be as a result of aproject's activities. The challenge of the EIAis to identifYwhat elements of the environ-ment will be significantly and/or negativelyaltered. As well, the assessment must deter-

160

mine the significance of the cumulativeeffects of many small disturbances within theenvironment. This task is not easy, becausethe environment is not static. Unplanned orunexpected variations in climate, animalmigration, harvest sequence, or any of a widerange of human and environmental factorscan affect the accuracy of the EIA. It hasbeen calculated that the average accuracy ofquantified, critical, testable predictions in EIAfor Australia is only 44 percent (Buckley,1991), which seems unfortunately low. Com-plete accuracy in the prediction of effects isprobably desirable, but an unlikely and per-haps inappropriate goal considering thedynamic nature of ecosystems and human-ecosystem interactions and our evolvingknowledge of how ecosystems function. Howcan the efficacy and value of EIA as aplanning approach for sustainable develop-ment be enhanced? Despite growing recog-nition of the benefits of EIA, there remain anumber of common constraints that restrict

its successful application, particularly indeveloping countries. These include:

. lack of financial resources;

. insufficient political awareness;

. insufficient public participation;

. inadequate legislative framework;

. poor institutional base;

. insufficient skilled manpower;

. poor scientific databases and infonna-tion; and

. lack of review, monitoring, and enforce-ment capabilities (OECD, 1986).

Figure 8.4 - Exampleof an Impact Assessment Matrix

~"".- c:-.-"'-.- '"...-GI" c:ti "'.210"-1010- ::I

"'_.'!::UO<l>

]

~a ~

~ ! I !~ ~ :ti~iJ~~~~J

i 1 ialit~] I J ~ i

..,.

~ Ii,~ G .~ ~ j

z .<a . ~oJ! .~ g~ ~..E ;;-

jiiil~t2 :I: :I: Jj 8 u

From: Clark, B.D., et aI., A Manual for the Assessment of Major Development Proposals (london, U.K.: Her Majesty's Stationary Office,1981). Reprinted by permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationary Office.

161

- -.-..-.....---Hazard x x

Solid waste disposal x x XAqueousdischarges x x xDustand particulatesOdours xGaseous emissions x x xVibration X

Noise X X

Transport of products X

Transport of employees x

Transport of raw materials X

Employment X X

Local expenditure X

Water X

Severance X

Structures X

Immigration X X X X X X X X

Construction PI1aseHazard X

Solid waste disposal X

Aqueous discharges X X

Odours

Gaseous emissions

Noise X X

Vibration X

Water demand X

Local expenditure X

Employment X X

Dust and particulates X

Site preparation X X

Transport of employees X

Transport of raw materials X

Severance X

Immigration X X X X X X X


Figure 8.5 - Three-Oimensionallmpact Matrix

From: Welch, HW., and G.D. lewis, "Assessing Environmental Impacts of Multiple Use land Management,"journal of EnvironmentalManagement, 4: pp. 197-209. Reprinted by permission of Springer-Vedag New York Publishers.

162

/ Educational ///////TTT77///.,<f'"/ Recreational /3/ / / / / /3/3/7777 / /v

...",<><>'/Residential / / / / / / / / / / 77777 /Vit"'o$'/ Secondhome '/2/ / / /1/ /2./0/2/ / / 777f/ /v

<0'1'"/ U,banexpansion/ / / / /1/ / / / / / / /77 /f/ /0$'/ Newtowns / / / / / / / / / ///777f/ /f/

.) T,ansport / / / / / / / / / / /7777/f/// Resomreexploitation / / / / / / / / /3/ / /777f//f/

/ Industrialization/ / / / / / / / / / / / /77/f// of>"<>

Legal 2 1 1 1 1/ /f/ ',$'<tPolitical 4 1 1 ? 1/ / s.o /

C 1/ .f> /1/.S! Social !$' 'Ii. Commemal 5 ??? #'" //f/. Tourism <' / f/ /f/:!! Labom / /f//

Public 5 ? 1 /1/ /f/Private 1 /r/I/ /

. Government 3 1? / /1/1/Pa,ks 1 1? /1/ /1/

8 Testfaelities /1/ /...Indian ?? /1/Boro.. /

/

./ / / / / / / / //.

..o.. :- >"'"'j . <f


fIA In Action:Lake Sentani Hydroelectric

Project, Indonesia

A hydroelectric project was proposed at an outlet of Lake Sentani in theextreme northeast of Indonesia. The site is surrounded by 22 small villagesthat live a traditional, fishing-based lifestyle. Several feasibility studies werefunded by development banks, but no EIAs were included in the original termsof reference. Critical to the people of the area were their concerns about theprojected lake fluctuation of 2 meters, which would have caused majorenvironmental and social problems, as food availability is directly related to thelake level. An EIA was eventually carried out, with the cooperation of theCanadian International Development Agency (CIDA).

One of the first tasks of the EIA study team was to make contact with local

people, who were instrumental in providing site-specific information. The studywas not limited to biological impacts, but also evaluated socioeconomic aspectsof the project. This highlighted the linkages between various programcomponents, allowing for the analysis of interactions among economic, social,cultural and environmental concerns.

As a result of intensive data gathering involving local people, trained

specialists and government officials, an EIA Was prepared. The assessmentshowed that there could be changes in the project's design that would mitigatethe negative environmental impacts, without jeopardizing the station's capacityfor power generation. Alternatives were considered in project design whichpredicted fishing and harvesting improvements for the local residents. Somegovernment authorities were initially hesitant about accepting the EIA.

However, attitudes changed as the EIA demonstrated that project design andoperation could be modified without affecting the cost-benefit ratio.

The Sentani project demonstrates how EIA can incorporate environmentaland social factors early in the project planning process. Because of this, keydecisions were made early to allow for project alterations in advance offinalizing the project design. As well, the EIA provided the opportunity tocreate a list of critical issues to address thus eliminating unnecessary and costlystudies. The study also benefitted from effective communications with the localpeople, who were an integral part of the "project team."

In the Lake Sentani example, consultation with local residents and early

consideration of project design alternatives proved invaluable in the successfulcompletion and application of the EIA. This experience shows that EIA can beused as a planning and decision making tool, to "anticipate and prevent"rather than "react and cure."

From: P. Paradine. "EIA at Work: A Hydroelectric Project in Indonesia," in Strengthening Environmental Cooperation withDeveloping Countries (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECDI, 1989).

163


Some of these obstacles can be addressed

through appropriate modifications and appli-cations of the EIAprocess itself. For example,public participation can be incorporated inthe EIAprocess, or environmental boards forreview, monitoring, and enforcement pur-poses can be established. Some of theobstacles are national-level concerns, such asthe need to strengthen legislative supportsand political awareness, or the lack of anappropriate institutional framework for theprocess. Other problems may be bestaddressed through regional or internationalco-operative efforts, such as the enhance-ment of technical and administrative skills,or the improvement of scientific databasesand communication of information.

A particularly important key to improv-ing the accuracy and efficacyof ElAs is themonitoring of the project once the assess-ment has been completed. Monitoring iscritical in providing a feedback link to theenvironmental management plan for theproject. Monitoring will also provide infor-mation on the accuracy of the assessment'spredictions of effects, and on the suitabilityof suggested mitigation procedures. Further-more, compliance monitoring will ensure thatthe recommended mitigation techniqueshave been applied. If monitoring is notcarried out, the complete value and effec-tiveness of the EIAwill be reduced.

With environmental concerns in manycountries becoming more serious and morewidespread in scope and influence, a "react-and-cure" approach to problem solving maybe inadequate or inappropriate.

164

I

Coupled with this, developing countriesare challenged to secure adequate financialresources, skilled practitioners, access toinformation, and the legal administrativestructures to manage the issues. The bestoption is to anticipate and prevent problemsbefore they get out of hand. A thorough EIAwill provide a wealth of information aboutthe environmental effects of a project that,in many cases, will reduce project construc-tion and operations costs. It will alsoengage the participation and knowledge oflocal residents. Skillfully applied, in a mannerthat is consistent with the available

resources, EIA is an effective planningapproach that can help avoid needless pro-ject delays and, in some cases, mitigate oreliminate the negative human and environ-mental impacts of development activities.

As our understanding of ecosystemfunctioning grows, greater emphasis is beingplaced on the long-term environmental costsof development, and on the increasedinvolvement in the decision-making processof those who may be negatively affected bya project. In the early days of EIA, the pro-cess was proponent-driven, and weighedlong-term economic benefit against short-term environmental impact. But environ-mental protection and economic develop-ment do not have to be conflicting objec-tives. As the EIA decision-making processbecomes more sensitive to the needs of the

public and the limits of ecosystems, devel-opers and governments can nurture eco-nomic and social development without dam-aging the ecological supports on which ourfuture depends.


Questions for Review

1. Whatare some of the most commonly used approaches to ELM

2. What are the main goals of ELM

3. What are some of the barriers to effective implementation ofEIA,particularly in developing countries? In what ways mightsome of these barriers be overcome?

4. What is the role of an Environmental ReviewCouncil? Underwhat circumstances might the establishment of such a boardbecome necessary or useful?

5. In what ways can EIA contribute to the decision-makingprocess? If an EIAreport is on hand, how does this enhancethe decision-making capabilities of a manager or planner?

6. Why is a strong institutional framework an important compo-nent of the EIAprocess?

7. Why is public participation an important component of the EIAprocess?

8. What are some of the specific issues that should be addressedby an ELA?

9. How do the broader-scale applications of EIA(e.g., for regionalor national policy evaluation) differ from project-level or sec-tor-specific assessments?

10. Why is cumulative effects assessment an important manage-ment concern?

11. What are some of the advantages of using local expertise incarrying out an EIA?In what ways might participation in an EIAproject serve to enhance local technical capabilities andexpertise?

165


Questions for Discussion and Research

1. What do you consider to be the most significant environ-mental effects that could result from a project? What aboutsocial effects? Economic?Political?

2. What existing mechanisms could be used to institute an EIAframework in your country, sector, or region?

3. Do you consider it important that local people becomeinvolved in the decision-making process? At what level, andto what extent?

4. Are you using a project implementation system that couldeasily incorporate an EIAprocess?

5. At what level would you implement an EIAin the decision-making process? Would it be most valuable, for example, atthe level of the field officer? Manager? Minister?

6. At what phase of the project could funds be identified for theEIAif the EIAwere to be done by the government? Would thisphase change if the proponent were to do the EIA?

7. How would you devise an EIAplan that minimized the poten-tial for proponent/public confrontation, while maximizingpublic participation?

8. Discuss the roles of proponent, regulator, and intervenor inthe EIAprocess, and the possible types of interactions betweenthem.

9. Could your current system of assessment be adapted to servethe goals of sustainable development?

10. Is it possible to keep EIAseparate from the political process?

166

------


REFERENCES

Biswas, K., and Q. Geping, eds. 1987.Environ-mental Impact Assessment for DeveloPing Countries.Natural Resources and the Environment Series.Vol. 19. London: United Nations University,Tycooly International.

Bond, W., H. Bruneau, and P. Bircham.1986.Federal Programs With the Potential to SignificantlyAffect Canada's Land Resource. Ottawa, producedfor the Interdepartmental Committee on Land bythe Lands Directoriate, Environment Canada.

Bowers,J.K., and P. Cheshire. 1983.Agriculture,the Countryside and Land Use. New York:Methuen, and Munton, R. 1987. "The conflictbetween conservation and food production inGreat Britain," in C. Cocklin, B. Smit, and T.Johnston (eds.). Demands on Rural Lands:Planningfor Resource Use. London: Westview.

Buckley, R.C. 1991. How accurate are environ-mental impact predictions?AmbiDxx (3-4): 161-162.

ESCAP. 1985. Environmental Impact Assessment:Guidelines for Planners and Decision Makers.Bangkok: United Nations Economic and SocialCommission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP).

FEARO. 1989. Initial Environmental Assessment

Procedures and Practices, Instructor's Manual.Ottawa, Canada: Environment Canada.

Furtado, J.I.R. 1987. Methods and procedures fordevelopment planning and impact assessment.Paper presented at the Workshop on ImpactAssessment for International Development inBarbados, West Indies.

Johnstone, AI. 1986. An inttoduction to envi-ronmental impact assessment. Paper presented atthe Environmental Impact Assessment Work-shop, Environmental Institute, 15-17 October atUniversity of Salford, Manchester, England.

Kibria, S.AM.S. 1985. Foreword. In Environ-mental Impact Assessment: Guidelines for Plannersand Decision Makers. Bangkok: United NationsEconomic and Social Commission for Asia and

the Pacific (ESCAP).

Milton, L. 1993. Personal Communication.

OECD. 1986. Environmental Assessment andDeveloPingAssistance.OECDMonograph No.4.

Pierce, M.A. 1990. Impact assessment for inter-national development.The Environmentalist10(3).

Sammy,G.K. 1982.Environmental impact assess-ment in developing countries. Ph.D. Thesis,University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.

Tolba, M., K. Biswas, and Q. Geping (eds.).1987. Environmental Impact Assessment for Devel-oping Countries. Natural Resources and Environ-mental Series, vol. 19. London, U.K.: UnitedNations University and Tycooly International, pp.ix-x.

Wallis, J.AN. 1984.EnvironmentalAssessmentofInvestment Projects and Programs: Scope andProcesses. Washington, D.C.: The EconomicDevelopment Institute of the World Bank. ED!Catalog No. 2601004.

167

environmental impact assessment (eia): a critical … · 2010-02-08 · destruction is to use...

Documents