Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment

EIA defined

Essentially, environmental impact assessment (EIA) is an environmental decision

support tool, which provides information on the likely impacts of development
projects to those who take the decision as to whether the project should be
authorised. The purpose of an EIA is to determine the potential environmental,
social, and health effects of a proposed development, so that those who take the
decisions in developing the project and in authorising the project are informed
about the likely consequences of their decisions before they take those decisions
and are thereby more accountable. It is intended to facilitate informed and
transparent decision-making while seeking to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential
adverse impacts through the consideration of alternative options, sites or
processes.

EIA forms part of the spectrum of environmental assessment (EA) processes.

Whilst EIA relates to specific projects, EA is a generic term, which also
incorporates strategic environmental assessment (SEA) of policies, plans, and
programmes, and other forms of assessment. The distinction between these
processes is highlighted in the definitions provided below.

Definitions

There are a number of definitions of environmental assessment, EIA and SEA.

Just a sample is given here.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a systematic and integrative

process for considering possible impacts prior to a decision being taken on
whether or not a proposal should be given approval to proceed (Wood 2003)

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a process of prior examination

and appraisal of policies, plans, and programmes and other higher level or pre-
project initiatives (Sadler 1996)

1
It is important to note that the terms defined above have differing interpretations
and meanings in different countries, and that EIA and EA are often used
interchangeably.

The objective of EIA is not to force decision-makers to adopt the least

environmentally damaging alternative, but rather to make explicit the
environmental impact of the development, so that the environment is taken into
account in decision-making. EIA has been regarded as both a science and an art,
reflecting the technical aspects, such as impact identification and prediction, as
well as the evaluation, management, and presentation of information.

Background and history of EIA

Many of the more advanced planning systems around the world have considered
the issue of a development's impacts upon the environment in one form or
another. For instance, in 1947 in the United Kingdom (UK), the first Town and
Country Planning Act enabled the local planning authority to take environmental
factors into consideration in sanctioning development proposals. However, no
formal mechanism was enacted to provide for this and the manner in which this
was done was left open to the authorities.

In the United States of America (USA), as early as 1872, national parks were
established to preserve wildernesses and natural ecosystems. Increasingly, too,
the possible adverse effects of water resource and highway development were
realised and steps were taken to investigate their importance during the planning
stages of such proposals.

During the 1960s, the public increasingly became concerned that environmental
quality could not be adequately maintained by market-orientated industries or
single-issue regulating agencies who dealt with only one aspect of the
environment. Although regulations exist to examine specific aspects of
development, such as pollution control legislation, some mechanism was required

2
to ensure that all major development proposals were subjected to an examination
of their environmental consequences.

Traditionally, economic evaluation techniques have been employed to assess the

costs and benefits associated with a specific development project or proposal.
However, such techniques have rarely been able to consider environmental
impacts effectively. A 'price tag' is difficult to place on, for instance, long-term
environmental degradation. Over-reliance upon the outcome of what may be
flawed calculations means that economic techniques can become the decision-
maker, rather than an aid to decision-making. The need for a more flexible, non-
monetary means of representing environmental gains and losses was identified,
and in the USA in the late 1960s this led to the first introduction of Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA).

1.4 EIA theory and decision-making

In recent years there has been a greater interest in developing the theory
underpinning EIA, which began as a very practical tool to aid decision-making.
Since its origins in the 1960s EIA has had to adapt to different contexts, most
notably the concept of sustainable development which came to prominence after
EIA had already started being used. Today, we tend to see EIA as one of the suite
of tools that help support more sustainable decision-making, but there is a wide
range of views as to how effective it can be from a theoretical point of view.

Broadly speaking EIA arose out of the natural science disciplines, particularly in
the ecology field. Early writers referred to the need to 'design with nature' and EIA
was seen as a way in which development projects could be developed with the
aim of designing out as far as possible the worst effects on the environment. And
EIA was very much seen as a way of elevating the environment in decision-
making which had traditionally been dominated by economic considerations.

However, as time has gone on and environmental assessment has broadened its
application around the world, and its influence has stretched into the more

3
strategic arena of plans and policies (through SEA), so social scientists have taken
an interest in it, often highly critical of the scientific, 'rationalist' model out of
which EIA has evolved rationalist in the sense that - so the argument goes - if you
provide better and more information to the decision-maker then they will make a
more rational decision because they will be better informed. But we all know that,
in reality, decisions about development are not made solely - or in some cases
even at all - on a rational basis. Decisions are based on many considerations, and
are often highly political. However, that argument can sometimes overlook the
wider value of the process of EIA; EIA is not just about its immediate outcome
(whether it influences the decision to give consent or not) or the environmental
impact statement (EIS) that is produced, but the process of engaging with
stakeholders that EIA engenders and the potential for dialogue created may have
greater value

Why might theory be important? Well, theoretical models and understanding help
in refining and developing practice - there should be an ongoing iteration between
theories and practice so that theory is developed from, and tested with,
observation, and practice is informed by maturing theoretical ideas. For example,
how best to engage local communities in decision-making can be informed by
understanding different theories of communication and power relations between
stakeholders. No one theory will hold the answers (they are theoretical after all),
but the discussion among the theorists can help to identify issues that should be
taken into account when designing good public engagement practices as part of
EIA, and issues that can be tested in practice.

Key issues in EIA

In order to identify the likely consequences of development, a series of steps must

be undertaken to ensure that issues are approached in a systematic and rational
way. These stages form what is known as the EIA process. The process
is iterative, which means that it is not linear, but stages in the process
recur and feed back into the process and the design of the project as new

4
information is gathered. There are a number of key issues which run through
EIA in all countries and which are essential components of the process, and which
are highlighted below.

When is EIA required?

EIA is required for all projects that have been identified as likely to have a
significant effect upon the environment. As you can probably imagine, defining
what is 'significant' is not a simple task.

When does EIA start?

To be effective, EIA should start early in the planning of a project in order

materially to influence the design and location. There are a number of advantages
and disadvantages of undertaking EIA at an early stage. Advantages include
fewer costs associated with rethinking a project, or delays resulting from
an attempt to mitigate impacts late in the design process. The project is
more likely to be accepted if it has dealt with the concerns of the local people at
an early stage; EIA can be seen as aiding good environmental public relations.
Cost-effective design, taking the environment into account, often means that the
overall project development costs are reduced

Disadvantages of undertaking EIA early in the development process include the

difficulty of assessing the impacts of a project which is not fully designed. It may
be difficult to predict the costs of EIA, and indeed the project, when the final
outcome is unknown as a result of not knowing what effects the consideration of
the environment may have on the project.

What should be covered in an EIA?

It is important that the number of impacts considered in an EIA is reduced to a

manageable number of key issues at an early stage. This helps to direct resources
towards addressing important issues, which are of concern to involved parties and
the wider public. Examples of the types of issues, which may be included, are

5
pollution of watercourses, visual intrusion in a sensitive landscape, or the
destruction of a habitat or area important for its cultural heritage.

Who carries out EIAs?

This varies in different counties. Frequently, it is the developer or environmental

consultants acting on behalf of the developer who carry out EIAs. However, in
other cases, the EIA can be commissioned by the decision-making authority or
undertaken by an independent body.

What about the public?

Consultation and participation have formed an integral part of the EIA process
since its inception and most EIA systems make some provision for the
involvement of the public. The public have a democratic right to be informed
about projects that will affect the environment in which they live and to voice their
concerns. There is growing acceptance that increased consultation and
participation can produce significant benefits for both the project proponent and
those affected.

How are the results of the EIA presented?

The environmental impact statement (EIS) is the document that is presented

to the decision-making body, alongside the application for development consent.
It contains the environmental information and conclusions of the assessment and
should be presented in a clear, unbiased manner, enabling non-specialists to
determine what issues are at stake. A non-technical summary is often
produced for wider distribution. Public meetings, exhibitions, and displays also
provide a means of disseminating information to the public.

Overview of the stages of the EIA process

This section very briefly presents an overview of the stages of EIA to help place
them in the context of the whole process. More detail about each stage is
provided later.

6
Screening

The EIA process begins from the very start of a project. Once a developer has
identified a need and assessed all the possible alternatives of project design and
sites to select a preferred alternative, two important questions must be asked:
'What will be the effects of this development on the environment? Are those
effects significant?' If the answer to the second question is 'yes', an EIA may be
required. Answering this question is a process known as screening and can be an
essential first step into a formal EIA.

The EIA process is, it must be stressed, iterative. This is demonstrated at this
early stage of screening where the requirement for a formal EIA and its associated
cost implications can lead the developer to reassess the project design with a view
to reducing the significant impacts to a level where an EIA is not legally required

EIA should be applied to those projects likely to have significant effects on the
environment. Frequently, however, little or no guidance is given on the
interpretation of the term 'significant'. Those responsible for screening are thus
often left to make a choice, based on their own interpretation of the likely effects
of a project, and the probable implications for the local community.

The consequences of the screening decision may be far-reaching and therefore a

correct decision on the significance of a development's effects is important.

The screening decision is very important to the developer. If an EIA is required,

the developer will have to pay for the work and will also have to wait until it is
completed before the application for planning permission itself will be considered.
Because of this, an indication from the appropriate authority that an EIA would be
required can frequently lead to design changes at an early stage in order to
reduce the impacts to a level where a formal EIA is no longer required. The
screening decision will often rest with the same body that will decide whether
permission should be granted for the particular development. This body will
require basic details about the project: the sort of processes that will be involved,

7
the land use requirements, the infrastructure requirements, raw materials needed
and so on. This is all necessary to allow a consideration of the likely significance of
the development's impact on the environment.

The methods adopted for screening vary between countries. Some rely on the
expertise of the decision-makers, whilst others have adopted specific methods to
aid the decision.

Examples of criteria used in screening

Screening Criteria

The size or scale of the impact. For example, if the

feeding grounds of a population of rare birds are to be
Magnitude
affected, the proportion of the area affected must be
defined.

Is it a one-off impact? Even if it is of low magnitude, a

large number of similar developments could lead to a
Potential for severe cumulative impact. Typical examples here
cumulative include housing developments where the same housing
impacts estate tends to be extended again and again, thus
creating a large urban area from an accumulation of
small housing projects.

Taking duration first, it is important to establish whether

an impact will be short or long term. For example, a
one-off delivery may cause inconvenience, but it may
not be a major problem. However, if deliveries occur
Duration and every day for a year or longer, the inconvenience may
frequency no longer be tolerable. The frequency of an impact is
also important, especially in relation to natural systems.
For example, a pollution episode into a river occurring
once a week may be of little consequence if the river
then has time to recover between each episode. If, on

8
 the other hand, the pollution frequency is daily, the river
may be badly affected.

What is the probability of a serious event occurring and

the likelihood of exposure to the event? This should be
Risks
looked at in terms of the risk to human beings and the
effects on environmental systems.

Note that these two terms can be used synonymously.

This can be a very emotive criterion as it asks what sort
of signficance we attach to the issue under discussion.
Views on this can vary enormously: but significance is a
function of the sensitivity and geographical distribution
(among other things) of the receptor - whether that be
Importance/ people, wildlife or aspects of the environment. Impacts
significance on rare things will be more significant than on common
things, for example. Even a small magnitude impact
may be significant if the receptor is very rare or
sensitive. Conversely, a large magnitude impact may
not be very significant if the receptor is common and
widely distributed.

If the potential problems can be easily resolved, eg if

temporary or reversible, there may not be significant
Mitigation
difficulties with the development. This will be discussed
in more detail later in this unit.

Scoping

Where it is decided that a formal EIA is required, the next stage is to define the
issues that need to be addressed, that is, those impacts that have a significant
effect on the environment. This is known as scoping and is essential for focusing
the available resources on the relevant issues.

9
In the early days following the introduction of EIA to the USA, voluminous EISs
were produced which were designed more with a view to avoiding legal challenge
than meeting the objectives of NEPA (Wood 2003). As a result, a formal scoping
process was introduced in 1978 and now is widely recognised as an important
stage in EIA, even if not formally required by some legal regimes.

The purpose of scoping is to focus the environmental impact issues to ensure that
useful and relevant results will be obtained and to determine the parameters and
boundaries of the assessment. The geographical area to be covered by the EIA
may need to be much greater than just the local area in which the project is to be
located. Ideally, a scoping exercise should involve public
participation or consultation to make sure that those issues that are important
to the public are addressed and considered at an early stage. This can allow for
project design changes to accommodate them. It will be seen in the discussion of
procedures that public consultation and participation frequently occur too late, if
at all, with subsequent adverse effects for the environment, or for the project
itself. Scoping can be considered as having three main components focusing on
technical, political, and social aspects.

Technical aspects: involves identifying issues that, in the perception of technical

experts, are important. For example, when considering a nuclear plant, the
disposal of radioactive water may be identified as an issue, and may be something
that a non-technical person would not think of.

Political aspects: concerns the perceptions of the decision-makers who will have
their own set of priorities, which are often political in derivation.

Social aspects: are the most difficult to deal with as this requires assessing the
views of the public to establish their concerns about a development. The table
below shows how such concerns might be categorised.

Examples of social concerns considered in scoping

10
Social
Explanation
concerns

Public concern about health may increase for any

one particular hazard as a longer period of time is
considered, and decreases as wider areas are
considered. For example, consider air pollution
from traffic: people living near to a major road
Health and
may be more concerned about the risk to health
safety
from air pollutants (asthma, respiratory diseases
etc) than the general population of the country in
which it is situated, and concern about traffic and
air pollution may be greater where exposure is
likely over many years than over just one year.

This is concerned with the exploitation of natural

resources. Effects can be both direct and indirect.
For example, if fish stocks dwindle as a result of a
Threats to
proposal, this is a direct impact; however, there
livelihood
are also indirect impacts on the fishermen, and
further down the supply chain to dealers and
sellers.

The social make-up of a community may be

based on a strong sense of cultural traditions and
Lifestyle
relationships. An influx of people into an area
modifications
with different social values can erode these
cultural traditions.

EIAs in developed countries will often emphasise

recreational, aesthetic, educational, and scientific
Loss of
issues to a greater extent than those in
leisure
developing countries. They are often associated
activities
with special interest groups who lobby to get the
issues considered.

11
 This tends to be resource-orientated, for
Land-use
example, using flat land for housing instead of
conflict
other potential uses such as airfields.

Supply and demand varies, as demand grows at a

Imbalances rate which threatens supply, concern is expressed
in resources about the degradation of non-renewable
resources.

Baseline study

Following on from scoping, it is essential to collect all relevant information on the

current status of the environment. This study is referred to as a baseline
study as it provides a baseline against which change due to a development can
be measured.

A baseline study is essential in order to be able to determine the level of impact

expected and to enable the monitoring of impacts after the development has
occurred. In some cases, baseline information will need to be gathered in the
field, and in others it will already be available and need only be collated. Where a
project has a number of alternative sites, each of the sites should undergo a
baseline study so that the relative severity of the impacts for each alternative can
be assessed.

It is essential that the baseline information which is collected represents both the
temporal and spatial trends of the parameters in question. For example, a
particular habitat may be shrinking in size by 10% per year from the western
margin. Without this trend having been established, the effect of a development
in the future would be hard to assess and it would be difficult to determine
whether any further loss of habitat was natural or due to the development.

12
Understanding how the baseline environment may change in the absence of the
proposed project is therefore important in order to understand what difference the
project will make. This obviously becomes more difficult the longer the timescale
over which you are considering impacts, as issues like climate change may
become important in altering the baseline state of the environment.

Impact prediction

Once the baseline study information is available, the important task of impact
prediction can begin. Impact prediction involves forecasting the likely changes in
the environment that will occur as a result of the development.

Impact prediction can be carried out by a variety of means. For example, models,
quantitative measurements or professional judgment based on experience and
research can be used. Frequently, the impact predictions may reveal that the
environmental effects are not as great as imagined and may not be significant,
hence the process can loop back to the scoping phase to amend the EIA
accordingly.

For each of the scoped issues, an attempt needs to be made to predict, in as

much detail as possible, the likely effects of the development for all of the
possible alternatives, both in terms of sites and development proposals. This
needs to be done in a quantified way, if possible, and should also consider the
time over which impacts are expected to develop. Therefore, for discharge of
effluent into a stream, the effect on fish life is one impact which needs to be
examined, and the impact prediction should state the percentage drop in fish life
as a result of the development, when this would happen, and likely future trends.
It is also essential to point out the uncertainty associated with this decision, for
example, 'there is a 10% chance of all fish life being eliminated'. There is often
uncertainty in making predictions and this should not be hidden.

Impact prediction is an area where there are many techniques available to help
us. Impact prediction should look not only for direct impacts, but also indirect

13
impacts and the interactions between them. This is the only way of building up a
full picture of the environmental system under study so that the effects can be
understood.

Impact assessment

The next phase involves the assessment of the identified impacts - impact
assessment. This requires interpretation of the importance or significance of
the impacts to provide a conclusion, which can ultimately be used by decision-
makers in determining the fate of the project application.

Once predictions have been made about impacts, the essential but difficult task of
assessing their importance or significance must be carried out. Significance is a
function both of the magnitude of the predicted impact but also of the sensitivity
of the receiving environment (which may also depend on the geographical scale
being considered, the frequency or duration of the impact etc).

A development that removes an entire habitat on the site for a certain species
may seem highly significant, but if the lost habitat forms a tiny fraction of the total
habitat for that species available locally, the significance of the impact is reduced.
Likewise, a small impact would be highly significant if it threatens a portion of the
last remaining habitat of a species. The overlap with screening and scoping is
apparent here, as an initial assessment of significance must already have been
made to have progressed this far. At this stage, the analyses need to be far more
detailed and precise.

It is this assessment of the impacts that provides the decision-maker with

information on the significance of environmental impacts when determining a
project application. Again it boils down to the reasoned opinions of experts in the
field who can view and interpret the available evidence. However, as for
screening, criteria can be applied to assist in the judgment.

14
The assessment will form the crucial part of an environmental impact statement
and will need to be able to stand up to the scrutiny of experts, the public,
pressure groups, and the decision-makers.

This assessment is the point at which problems of bias may occur. It is often for
the developer to organise the EIA and they can go about this task in a number of
ways; they can undertake the EIA themselves, they can employ a consultancy
firm to manage the whole assessment, or they can employ a whole series of
consultants with expertise in different fields and combine all the results for the
final EIS. Whichever of these alternatives is employed, the developer will be
paying for the work and have a vested interest in the outcome - hence the
possibility of bias. Whether it happens or not depends on the quality control
mechanisms put in place to review and scrutinise the EISs.

Mitigation

Frequently, the assessment of impacts will reveal damaging effects upon the
environment. These may be alleviated by mitigation measures. Mitigation
involves taking measures to reduce or remove identified impacts and may include
enhancements, which are changes unrelated to identified impacts but which
improve the environment in some way and it can be seen that the iterative nature
of the EIA process is well demonstrated here. For example, successful design of
mitigation measures could possibly result in the removal of all significant impacts;
hence a new screening exercise would reveal that there might have been no need
to carry out a formal EIA had the mitigation measures been included from the
start.

The inclusion of mitigation measures obviously changes the nature of the project
and its impacts. Hence, it may be that where significant impacts are removed, an
EIA is no longer required, or some issues can be scoped out of the assessment.

Impacts that still remain even after the design of mitigation measures are known
as residual impacts.

15
Producing the environmental impact statement

The outcome of an EIA is usually a formal document, known as

an environmental impact statement (EIS), which sets out factual information
relating to the development, and all the information gathered relating to
screening, scoping, baseline study, impact prediction and assessment, mitigation,
and monitoring measures. It is quite common that a requirement of an EIS is that
it also produces a non-technical summary. This is a summary of the information
contained within the EIS, presented in a concise non-technical format, for those
who do not wish to read the detailed documents. This is very important, as EISs
are public documents intended to inform the public of the nature and likely
consequences of a development in time to comment and/or participate in the final
project design.

EIS review

Once the EIS is completed it will need to be reviewed by the competent authority
or other bodies asked to comment on the EIS, and by the public. It is essential
that the statement be checked for consistency, bias, and accuracy.

The purpose of the review is to establish whether the statement provides the
necessary information to allow the decision-maker to determine the application
and, at the very least, provides the information required to be provided in the
governing EIA legislation. Some form of guidance undoubtedly helps in this
process, as it will focus the mind of the reviewer on the topics, which should be
covered by the statement, and the level of detail expected. A large part of the
review involves the investigation of the information quality; obviously a relevant
technical expert will be required to assist in the review in some cases.

Once the EIA is complete, the EIS is submitted to the competent authority. This
is the body with the authority to permit or refuse development applications. The
competent authorities are often in a position of having very little time to make a

16
decision and have a detailed and lengthy EIS to read through which may contain
errors, omissions, and developer bias. It is essential, therefore, that
they review the document. Review can take a number of forms: it may be purely
an ad hoc process whereby the document is read and commented on by decision-
makers; it can be more formalised and expert opinion is sought; or it can be
through the use of formal review methods designed specifically for the purpose.
Basically, the review process should enable the decision-maker to decide whether
the EIS is adequate (eg whether it is legally compliant), whether the information
is correct, and whether it is unbiased. If it is, they are then in a position to use the
EIS as information to be considered in determining whether the project should
receive consent. This issue of review is discussed in more detail elsewhere in this
module.

The competent authority is now in possession of the information they require

about the possible effects of the development on the environment. They will use
this information, in combination with all of the other details and representations
they have received, to help them come to a decision.

Follow up

Follow up relates to the post-approval phase of EIA and encompasses

monitoring of impacts, the continued environmental management of a project,
and impact auditing. Without any form of follow up EIA would operate as a linear
rather than an iterative process, and an important step towards achieving
environmental protection will also have been omitted.

Follow up presents an opportunity both to control environmental effects and to

learn from the process and cause-effect relationships. Ideally, data generated by
monitoring and other aspects of follow up should be compared with the original
predictions and mitigation measures in the EIS to determine

1. the accuracy of the original predictions

2. the degree of the deviation from the predictions
3. the possible reasons for any deviation

17
 4. whether mitigation measures have achieved their objective of reducing
or eliminating impacts

Information generated by this process can contribute to the improvement of

future EIA practice, for example, by enabling more accurate predictions to be
made.

Unit Summary

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is, essentially, an environmental

management tool, which provides information on the impacts of development
projects to those who take the decision as to whether the project should be
authorised. It is a predictive tool in that it aims to identify the likely effects of a
development action on the environment. It is not intended to stop developments,
but rather to make clear to society the consequences of development decisions.
The first EIA legislation was enacted in the USA through the National
Environmental Policy Act (1969). Since then, EIA has become a legal requirement
in many industrialised and developing countries for developments with a
significant effect upon the environment. EIA is an evolutionary, rather than a
revolutionary, concept. Prior to EIA legislation, most advanced planning systems
contained provisions for environmental protection, but they failed to evaluate the
'total' impact of a development upon the environment in a systematic way.

The EIA process is iterative, that is, the outcome of each stage is fed back into the
system. There are a number of key issues which run through EIA in all countries
and which are essential components of the process. These include the importance
of: initiating EIA early in a project; what should be covered; and involving the
public throughout the EIA process.

There are several key stages to the EIA process which include; screening,
scoping, baseline, impact prediction, impact assessment, mitigation, production of
the EIS, EIS review, and follow up. The iterative nature of the EIA process can be
demonstrated, for example, through the early design of mitigation measures

18
which can lead to a reassessment of the significance of the project's impacts at
the screening stage. Much of the EIA process depends on the discretion of the
decision-maker and, in many countries, the stages of the EIA process will vary
depending on legislative requirements. But there are some universal principles
that now underpin EIA around the world.

The value of EIA lies in the concentration of resources on key issues at a stage
early enough to be able to affect the design of the development.

19