Exploring the EIA/Environmental Management Relationship

Morrison‐Saunders, Angus; Bailey, John

doi:10.1007/s002679900233

Cited by 41 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, in previous empirical studies in which we analysed the scientific integrity of various components of the EIA process in Western Australia (eg. Bailey and others 1992, Bailey 1997, Morrison-Saunders and Bailey 1999 we concluded that effective mitigation and environmental management could arise in the absence of rigorous science. We analysed the scientific integrity of EIA in terms of conformance with accepted scientific procedures for collecting and analysing information (eg.…”

Section: Role Of Science In Eia Overallmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Morrison-Saunders and Bailey (1999) found it useful to differentiate between pre-decision and post-decision stages of EIA. In this study, the focus was on four main tasks which are utilised at various times during EIA: monitoring, impact prediction, mitigation and decisionmaking.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It commences with screening of proposed developments to determine the need for EIA, includes preparation of environmental impact Science and Environmental Assessment 4 statements (EIS) by proponents and their review by the public, decision-making and setting of approval conditions and extends into project implementation and follow-up. Previously Morrison-Saunders and Bailey (1999) found it useful to differentiate between pre-decision and post-decision stages of EIA. In this study, the focus was on four main tasks which are utilised at various times during EIA: monitoring, impact prediction, mitigation and decisionmaking.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But even in this project, numerous problems with the integrity of monitoring were recorded for the key issue of water quality monitoring including; unsuitable spatial distribution of sampling sites, a five year period when sampling was conducted on a single annual basis only, no replication of sampling and contamination of a so-called 'control' site located in the impact zone of the outfall (Morrison-Saunders 1996). Combined with various other deficiencies of environmental monitoring programs for these six case studies, Morrison-Saunders and Bailey (1999) concluded that the monitoring programs largely failed to meet scientific expectations of the EIA process.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Practitioner Perspectives on the Role of Science in Environmental Impact Assessment

Morrison‐Saunders

Bailey

2003

Environmental Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

/ A large body of literature addresses the role of science in environmental impact assessment (EIA) but less attention has been given to the views of practitioners themselves. In this research a survey of 31 EIA practitioners in Western Australia was undertaken to determine their perceptions of the quality and importance of science in EIA.The survey results are compared with previous theoretical, empirical and survey studies of the role of science in EIA. Interview questions addressed the role of science in impact prediction, monitoring activities, mitigation and management, and EIA decision-making. It was clear from the interviews that many practitioners are satisfied with the quality of science currently used in EIA, but do not believe that it is given sufficient importance in the process. The quality and importance of science in the pre-decisions stages of EIA was rated higher than in the post-decision stages. While science was perceived to provide the basis for baseline data collection, impact prediction and mitigation design, it was seen to be less important during decision-making and ongoing project management. Science was seen to be just one input to decision-makers along with other factors such as socio-political and economic considerations.While time and budget constraints were seen to limit the scientific integrity of EIA activities, pressure from the public and regulatory authorities increased it. Improving the scientific component of EIA will require consideration of all these factors, not just the technical issues.KEY WORDS: science, environmental impact assessment, professional practice, monitoring, impact prediction, mitigation, decision-making Science and Environmental Assessment 3A considerable amount of interest and attention has been focussed on the role of science in environmental impact assessment (EIA) and a substantial body of literature has addressed this topic. This paper reviews this literature briefly before presenting the results of a survey of 31 EIA practitioners in Western Australia. The principal aim of the survey was to determine what practitioners perceived that the role of science in EIA should be and to compare this with the positions established in the literature. The results of a survey of EIA practitioners in Western Australia are presented and compared with previous theoretical, empirical and survey studies of the role of science in EIA. The study provides valuable insights concerning the practice of EIA and what can be expected of the process. As the hypotheses underlying the study were derived from the literature on the role of science in EIA, it is useful to start with an overview of this body of work.Much of the literature can be classified into two main types:• studies of the theory and practice of EIA with respect to the role that science can or should play (eg. Beanlands and Duinker 1984, Shrader-Frechette 1985, Lemons 1994 A generic approach to EIA has been described by Sadler (1996, p18) which can be applied to any proposal put forward by a proponent. It...

show abstract

Section: Role Of Science In Eia Overallmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Practitioner Perspectives on the Role of Science in Environmental Impact Assessment

Morrison‐Saunders

Bailey

2003

Environmental Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, EIA is normally not only understood as an environmental protection tool, but also as an instrument for strengthening environmental management processes (Roberts, 1995;Morrison-Saunders and Bailey, 1999;Marshall and Fischer, 2004). During the 1990s, EIA was increasingly applied within planning systems that became dominated by the sustainability agenda.…”

Section: Eia and Sea -Advocacy Instruments Or Integrative Tools?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Is Wrong With Eia and Sea Anyway? A Sceptic's Perspective on Sustainability Assessment

Morrison‐Saunders

Fischer

2006

J. Env. Assmt. Pol. Mgmt.

Self Cite

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) was initially introduced as an advocacy instrument for the biophysical environment in project decision-making. Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) evolved with a similar mission for strategic level proposals. However, recent trends towards more integration, particularly in the context of sustainability assessment (SA) mean that social and economic aspects are now frequently considered on a par with the environment in impact assessment processes. There are indications that this development will ultimately favour trade-offs towards socio-economic benefits, causing adverse environmental impacts. In this paper, we discuss problems connected with these types of integrated assessments. Based on observations of SA processes are actually environmentally unsustainable, we argue that the need for environment focussed EIA and true SEA in planning processes is now greater than ever. We suggest that until power relationships develop in a way that will allow integration in an environmentally sustainable manner, practitioners should not give up the benefits that have arisen from 35 years of EIA practice.We conclude that in our current world, there is nothing wrong with environmental advocacylet's continue to use EIA and SEA effectively to protect the environment!

show abstract

Environmental Impact Assessment

Noble

2011

Encyclopedia of Life Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a systematic process designed to identify and predict the potential impacts of human activity on the biophysical and human environment. It also functions as an environmental management tool to identify measures to avoid, mitigate or compensate for those effects. EIA is intended to be an iterative process to follow‐up to projects postimplementation to determine actual environmental outcomes, interpret and communicate information about those outcomes and investigate opportunities for improved project environmental performance. Originating from the United States’ National Environmental Policy Act of 1970, EIA is now amongst the most successful and widely practiced environmental management tools in the world. Key Concepts: EIA is an aid to decision making through which concerns about the potential environmental consequences of proposed projects are assessed before those projects become a reality. Screening in EIA ensures that assessments are done when needed and not done when not needed. Scope is essential to good EIA and the goal is to focus on a select set of environmental components that are deemed important from scientific, public or regulatory perspectives and are likely to be adversely affected by the project. The underlying intent of EIA is to allow project proponents, managers and decision makers to enhance the benefits of proposed development projects and to mitigate potentially adverse impacts to the point of acceptability. EIA must be applied early in the development planning processes if it is to be influential in project design and decision making. Information gained in EIA follow‐up studies, after the project is implemented, provides feedback to improve predictions and mitigation and management programmes, and an opportunity to learn for subsequent project proposals.

show abstract

Exploring the EIA/Environmental Management Relationship

Cited by 41 publications

References 15 publications

Practitioner Perspectives on the Role of Science in Environmental Impact Assessment

Practitioner Perspectives on the Role of Science in Environmental Impact Assessment

What Is Wrong With Eia and Sea Anyway? A Sceptic's Perspective on Sustainability Assessment

Environmental Impact Assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About