OBJECTIVE & Benefits of Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Definition, Process and Importance

Read this article to learn about Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA):- 1. Definitions of EIA
2. Objective of EIA 3. Methodology 4. Process 5. Importance.

Definitions of EIA:
Environmental Impact Assessment is defined as an activity
designed to identify the impact on the biogeophysical environment,
on man and well-being of legislative proposals, projects, policies,
operational procedures and to interpret and communicate
information.

EIA is a systematic process of identifying future consequences of a

current or proposed action.

Objective of EIA:
The objective of EIA is (i) to identify, predict and evaluate the
economic, environmental and social impact of development
activities (ii) to provide information on the environmental
consequences for decision making and (iii) to promote
environmentally sound and sustainable development through the
identification of appropriate alternatives and mitigation measures.

EIA is widely accepted as a tool to ensure sustained development

with minimum environmental degradation.

First Environmental Legislation:

The first comprehensive environmental legislation (Section 102) in
United States came into force on 1st January 1970 in the form of
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In India, the Central
Ministry of Environment and Forests issued a Notification on 27th
January, 1994 making EIA statutory for 29 specified activities
falling under sectors such as industries, mining, irrigation, power
and transport etc.

This Notification was amended on 4th May, 1994 and the amended
version includes a self-explanatory note detailing the procedure for
obtaining environmental clearance, technical information,
documents required to be submitted for getting environmental
clearance from the Ministry of Environment and Forests.

EIS Contents:
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should contain the
following information’s/data:
1. Description of proposed action (construction, operation and shut
down phase) and selection of alternatives to the proposed action.

2. Nature and magnitude of the likely environmental effects.

3. Possibility of earthquakes and cyclones.

4. Possible effects on surface and ground water quality, soil and air
quality.

5. Effects on vegetation, wild life and endangered species.

6. Economic and demographic factors.

7. Identification of relevant human concerns.

8. Noise pollution. Efficient use of inputs.

9. Recycling and reduction of waste.

10. Risk analysis and disaster management.

EIA Methodology:
Whenever a new development project is planned which is likely to
affect environmental quality, it is necessary to carry out EIA.

1. The first step in EIA method is to determine whether the project

under consideration follows the jurisdiction of the relevant acts and
regulations and if so, whether it is likely to create a significant
environmental disruption.

2. If so, an EIA is undertaken and the environmental impact

statement (EIS) is prepared.
3. In many countries, EIS is open to public scrutiny and is reviewed
at public hearings.

4. Finally, a political decision is taken. The development project

may be (i) accepted or (ii) accepted with amendments or (iii) an
alternative proposal is accepted or (iv) rejected.

Environment Impact Assessment Process:

In EIA system, there are sequence of activities implemented in a
project in logical manner termed as EIA process.

Guiding Principles:
The entire process of EIA is governed by eight guiding
principles.
1. Participation:
An appropriate and timely access to the process for all interested
parties.

2. Transparency:
All assessment decisions and their basis should be open and
accessible.

3. Certainty:
The process and timing of the assessment should be agreed by all
participants in advance.

4. Accountability:
The decision makers of all parties are responsible for their action
and decisions under the assessment process.

5. Credibility:
Assessment is undertaken with professionalism and objectivity.

6. Cost effectiveness:
The assessment process and its outcomes will ensure environmental
protection at the least cost to the society.

7. Flexibility:
The assessment process should be able to deal efficiently with any
proposal and decision making situation.
8. Practicality:
The information and outputs provided by the assessment process
are readily usable in decision making and planning.

Participants in EIA Process:

1. Proponent:
Government or Private Agency which initiates the project.

2. Decision maker:
Designated individual or group.

3. Assessor:
Agency responsible for the preparation of EIS.

4. Reviewer:
Individual/Agency/Board.

5. Expert advisers, Media and Public, Environmental organisations

etc.
EIA Process in Sequence of Application:
1. Stakeholder’s Involvement:
Stakeholders’ involvement occurs in various stages of EIA to ensure
quality, efficiency and effectiveness.

2. Project Screening and Scoping:

(i) Determine necessity for EIA requirement.

(ii) Describe various screening criteria.

(iii) Scoping determines coverage or scope of EIA.

3. Project Design and Construction:

(i) Type of project under consideration.

(ii) Physical dimensions of the area being considered.

(iii) Whether the resources will be used optically?

(iv) Whether there is an irretrievable commitment of land?

(v) Whether the project is a critical phase of a larger development?

(vi) Whether there will be serious environmental disruptions during
construction?

(vii) What are the long-term plans of the proponent?

4. Project Operation:
(i) What provisions have been made to check the safety equipment
regularly?

(ii) How will the hazardous waste products be handled?

(iii) What are the contingency plans developed to cope up with the
possible accidents?

(iv) What provisions have been made for training the employees for
environmental protection?

(v) What plans have been made for environmental monitoring?

5. Site Characteristics:
(i) Whether the site is susceptible to floods, earth quakes and other
natural disasters?

(ii) Whether the terrain is creating problems in predicting ground

water characteristics and air pollution etc.?

(iii) Whether the local environment is conductive for the success of

the project?

(iv) How many people are likely to be displaced because of the

project?

(v) What are the main attributes (e.g., protein content, calorie
content, weed or pest status, carnivorousness, rarity of species, etc.)
of the local fauna and flora?

(vi) Whether the project will interfere with the movements of fish
population and important migratory animals?

(vii) Whether historic sites are likely to be endangered because of

the project?
6. Possible Environmental Impacts:
(i) What are the possible short-term and long-term environmental
impacts from the projects during construction and after
construction?

(ii) Who would be effected because of these impacts?

7. Mitigation Measures:
(i) Design system to avoid, reduce and minimize adverse impacts.

(ii) Enhance beneficial outcomes.

8. Monitoring and auditing measures:

(i) Identify impacts that require monitoring and auditing.

9. Socio-Economic Factors:
(i) Who are the expected gainers and losers by the projects?

(ii) Where are the expected trade-offs?

(iii) Will the project interfere (blend, increase or reduce) with the
existing inequalities between occupational, ethnic and age groups?

(iv) Will it effect the patterns of local/regional/national culture?

10. Availability of Information and Resources:

(i) Whether local and outside experts are available to consult
specific impacts of the project?

(ii) Whether the relevant guidelines, technical information and

other publications are available to identify the possible impacts of
similar projects?

(iii) Whether relevant environmental standards, by-laws etc. are

considered?

(iv) Whether the sources of relevant environmental data are

identified and whether they are accessible?

(v) Whether the views of the specialist groups and general public
regarding the project have been considered?
(vi) Whether the competent technical manpower is available to
handle the project?

11. EIA Report and Review:

Complete information in report including non-technical summary,
methodologies used, results, interpretation and conclusions. Review
assesses adequacy of issues and facilitate decision making process.

12. Decision Making:
The project may be accepted, accepted with alterations or rejected.

Importance of EIA:
1. EIA is potentially a useful component of good environmental
management.

2. It is the Government policy that any industrial project has to

obtain EIA clearance from the Ministry of Environment before
approval by the planning commission.

Benefits of Environmental Impact Assessment

Although there are costs associated with undertaking EIA, experience has shown that the potential
savings over the life of a project can repay the investment many times over. The savings can be
economic (e.g. identification of least cost alternative) as well as environmental (e.g. impact reduction,
maintaining other resource use opportunities). Generally the earlier EIA process is introduced in the
project cycle, the greater the potential returns. When EIA is integrated into the project preparation
phase, environmental design considerations can be introduced in the first place rather than the
proposal having to be modified later.

Benefits

The benefits of EIA can be direct, such as the improved design or location of a project, or indirect,
such as better quality EIA work or raised environmental awareness of the personnel involved in the
project. In these cases, there will be with flow-on effects in their future work. As mentioned above,
these potential gains from EIA increase the earlier the process is applied in the design process.

In general the benefits of EIA include:

 Better environmental planning and design of a proposal. Carrying out an EIA entails an
analysis of alternatives in the design and location of projects. This can result in the selection
of an improved technology, which lowers waste outputs or an environmentally optimum
location for a project. A well-designed project can minimise risks and impacts on the
environment and people, and thereby avoid associated costs of remedial treatment or
compensation for damage.
 Ensuring compliance with environmental standards. Compliance with environmental
standards reduces damage to the environment and disruption to communities. It also avoids
the likelihood of penalties, fines and loss of trust and credibility.
  Savings in capital and operating costs. EIA can avoid the undue costs of unanticipated
impacts. These can escalate if environmental problems have not been considered from the
start of proposal design and require rectification later. An ‘anticipate and avoid’ approach is
much cheaper than ‘react and cure’. Generally, changes which must be made late in the
project cycle are the most expensive.
 Reduced time and costs of approvals of development applications. If all environmental
concerns have been taken into account properly before submission for project approval, then
it is unlikely that delays will occur as a result of decision-makers asking for additional
information or alterations to mitigation measures. Increased project acceptance by the public.

This is achieved by an open and transparent EIA process, with provision of opportunities for public
involvement of people who are most directly affected by and interested in the proposal, in an
appropriate way that suits their needs.

Costs

It can be difficult to determine the exact costs of an EIA because major projects typically require a
large number of investigations and reports, often for closely related purposes (e.g. engineering
feasibility studies of hydrology and surface materials). The World Bank notes that the cost of
preparing an EIA rarely exceeds one per cent of the project costs and this percentage can be reduced
further if local personnel are used to do most of the work. For Bank projects, the relative cost of an
EIA typically ranges from only 0.06 per cent to 0.10 per cent of total project costs. The total cost of an
EIA might range from a few thousand dollars for a very small project, to over a million dollars for a
large and complex project, which has a significant environmental impact and requires extensive data
collection and analysis.

Although many proponents complain that EIA causes excessive delays in projects, many of these are
caused by poor administration of the process rather than by the process itself. These occur when:

 the EIA is commenced too late in the project cycle;

 the terms of reference are poorly drafted;.
 the EIA is not managed to a schedule;
 the technical and consultative components of EIA are inadequate; and
 the EIA report is incomplete or deficient as a basis for decision making.

Similar considerations apply to the timeframe for the EIA process. Most projects merely require
screening and might take only an hour or two of work. Where further EIA work is necessary, the time
taken can range from a few days or weeks, for a small irrigation or a minor infrastructure project, to
two years or more for a large dam or a major infrastructure project. Generally speaking, the costs and
time involved in EIA should decrease as experience is gained with the process and there is a better
understanding of the impacts associated with different types of projects and the use of appropriate
methods. Over a longer timeframe, the availability of baseline data should also increase.

All participants in the EIA process are ‘stakeholders’, who pursue particular interests and hold
different views and preferences. Full public involvement, open to all affected and interested parties,
provides the best means of ensuring the EIA process is fair and credible. It allows decision-makers
and participants themselves to gain an understanding of the diversity and balance of opinion on the
issues at stake. The final decision can then be made in a fully informed and transparent manner,
having regard to all the facts and the views by stakeholders and the public at large Section 3 – Public
involvement).

In addition, there are a number of specific measures that can help to make the EIA process
transparent, accessible and accountable to the public. Examples of measures that reinforce the
fairness of the process include:

 requiring the proponent to register all consultants, their expertise and responsibilities with
the administering agency;
 publishing these details in the terms of reference and the EIA report;
 making all EIA documents and reports available to the public; and
 publishing reasons for decisions – screening and final approvals – together with requirements
and terms and conditions for mitigation and environmental management plans.

Capacity building is the long-term, voluntary process of increasing the ability of a country to identify
and solve its own problems and risks, and to maximise its opportunities.

In this context, countries should firstly aim to carry out their own EIAs of proposals. Second, they
should aim to use local experts as much as possible when undertaking EIAs of proposals financed by
the World Bank and other multilateral lending agencies. Where this is not possible without
compromising the quality of EIAs and outside experts must be engaged, every opportunity should be
taken to transfer their expertise to local personnel. This strategy will make the implementation of EIA
recommendations more effective and strengthen the basis of EIA expertise locally.

Capacity building can be carried out in a number of ways, including institutional strengthening,
technical assistance and advice, and EIA training programmes. A systematic, long-term commitment
will be necessary to overcome limited capacity of many developing countries to undertake EIA. In
addition, this process should be backed by activities to strengthen education and research institutions.
EIA-specific training can be done at many different levels and over different periods to meet a variety
of needs.

A systematic EIA capacity building programme will need to provide a range of different activities.
These could include advice on drafting or strengthening EIA legislation and procedures, improving
their application to relevant sectors, such as energy and mining, and strengthening particular aspects
of practice, such as public involvement. Pilot projects involving local experts in actual EIAs of
proposals can be used to transfer ‘hands on’ knowledge and skills. Supporting activities include
developing resource materials and establishing a network of practitioners with experience in EIA or
technical analysis.

Environmental Impact Assessment in India

Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment:
The environmental impact assessment in India was started in 1976-
77, when the planning commission asked the Department of Science
and Technology to examine the river valley projects from
environmental angel. This was subsequently extended to cover
those projects, which required approval of the Public Investment
Board.

Then the Govt. of India enacted the Environment (Protection) Act

on 23rd May 1986 to achieve the objective the decision that were
taken is to make environmental impact assessment statutory. After
following the legal procedure, a notification was issued on 27th Jan
94. 10th April, 1997 and 27th Jan 2000. making environmental
impact assessment statutory for 30 development projects (Schedule
I), the mandatory EIA clearance procedure started.
The EIA Cycle and Procedures:
The EIA process in India is made up of the following
phases:
 1. Screening

2. Scoping and consideration of alternatives

3. Baseline data collection

4. Impact prediction

5. Assessment of alternatives, delineation of mitigation measures

and environmental impact statement

6. Public hearing

7. Environment Management Plan

8. Decision making

9. Monitoring the clearance conditions

Screening:
Screening is done to see whether a project requires environmental
clearance as per the statutory notifications.

Screening Criteria are based upon:

(i) Scales of investment;

(ii) Type of development; and,

(iii) Location of development.

A Project requires statutory environmental clearance only if the

provisions of EIA notification and/or one or more statutory
notification is mentioned.

Scoping:
Scoping is a process of detailing the terms of reference of EIA. It has
to be done by the consultant in consultation with the project
proponent and guidance, if need be, from Impact Assessment
Agency. The Ministry of Environment and Forests has published
guidelines for different sectors, which outline the significant issues
to be addressed in the EIA studies Quantifiable impacts are to be
assessed on the basis of magnitude, prevalence, frequency and
duration and non-quantifiable impacts (such as aesthetic or recre-
ational value), significance is commonly determined through the
socio-economic criteria.

After the areas, where the project could have significant impact, are
identified, the baseline status of these should be monitored and
then the likely changes in these on account of the construction and
operation of the proposed project should be predicted. Recent years,
scoping was determined by “Term of reference” clearance by MOEF.

Baseline Data:
Baseline data describes the existing environmental status of the
identified study area. The site-specific primary data should be
monitored for the identified parameters and supplemented by sec-
ondary data if available.

Impact Prediction:
Impact prediction is a way of ‘mapping’ the environmental
consequences of the significant aspects of the project and its
alternatives. Environmental impact can never be predicted with
absolute certainty and this is all the more reason to consider all
possible factors and take all possible precautions for reducing the
degree of uncertainty.

The Following Impacts of the Project should be Assessed:

Air:
Changes in ambient levels and ground level concentrations due to
total emissions from point, line and area sources effects on soils,
materials, vegetation, and human health.

Noise:
Changes in ambient levels due to noise generated from equipment
and movement of vehicles effect fauna and human health.

Water:
(i) Availability to competing users

(ii) Changes in quality

(iii) Sediment transport

(iv) Ingress of saline water

Land:
(i) Changes in land use and drainage pattern

(ii) Changes in land quality including

(iii) Effects of waste disposal

(iv) Changes in shoreline/river-bank and their stability-

Biological:
(i) Deforestation/tree-cutting and shrinkage of animal habitat

(ii) Impact on fauna and flora (including aquatic species if any) due
to contaminants/pollutants

(iii) Impact on rare and endangered species, endemic species, and

migratory path/route of animals

(iv) Impact on breeding and nesting grounds

Socio-Economic:
(i) Impact on the local community including demographic changes
(ii) Impact on economic status

(iii) Impact on human health

(iv) Impact of increased traffic

Assessment of Alternatives, Delineation of Mitigation

Measure and Environmental Impact Assessment Report:
For every project, possible alternatives should be identified and
environmental attributes compared. Alternatives should cover both
project location and process technologies. Alternatives mould
considers ‘no project’ option also. Alternatives should then be
ranked for selection of the best environmental option for optimum
economic benefits to the community at large.

Once alternatives have been reviewed, a mitigation plan should be

drawn up for the selected option and is supplemented with an
Environmental Management Plan (EMP) to guide the proponent
towards environmental improvements. The EMP is a crucial input
to monitoring the clearance conditions and therefore details of
monitoring should be included in the EMP.

An EIA report should provide clear information to the decision-

maker on the different environmental scenarios without the project,
with the project and with project alternatives. Uncertainties should
be clearly reflected in the EIA report.

Public Hearing:
Law requires that the public must be informed and consulted on a
proposed development after the completion of EIA report. Any one
likely to be affected by the proposed project is entitled to have
assess to the Executive Summary of the EIA.

The affected persons may include:

(i) Bonafide local residents

(ii) Local associations,

(iii) Environmental groups: active in the area

(iv) Any other person located at the project site/ sites of
displacement

They are to be given an opportunity to make oral/written

suggestions to the State Pollution Control Board as per Schedule IV
of Annex I.

Decision Making:
Decision making process involve consultation between the project
proponent (assisted by a consultant) and the impact assessment
authority (assisted by an expert group if necessary). The decision on
environmental clearance is arrived at through a number of steps
including evaluation of EIA and EMP.

Monitoring the Clearance Conditions:

Monitoring should be done during both construction and operation
phases of a project. This is not only to ensure that the commitments
made are compiled with but also to observe where the predictions
made in the EIA reports were correct or not.

Where the impacts exceed the predicted levels, corrective action

should be taken. Monitoring will enable the regulatory agency to
review the validity of predictions and the conditions of imple-
mentation of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP).