The need for EIA theory-building

Lawrence, David P.

doi:10.1016/s0195-9255(97)00030-9

Cited by 85 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bartlett and Kurian (1999) responded to the lack of theoretical development for EIA by introducing some possible models for how EIA can have an effect: as well as the information processing model they identify the symbolic politics model; the political economy model; the organizational politics model; the pluralist politics model; and the institutionalist model. These models are by no means fully accepted, however, and tend to oversimplify, reflecting the lack of theoretical maturity associated with research in this field (Lawrence, 1997). Nevertheless, they provide a useful framing for discussions of effectiveness and what it means, and this will be explored in relation to the models of Bartlett and Kurian (1999) in the following section.…”

Section: Theoretical Groundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The inclusion of a category on pluralism recognises that views differ on how impact assessment does and should work to promote change. The derivation of such a framework for evaluation acknowledges the underdevelopment of theory in relation to impact assessment (Lawrence, 1997), and attempts to accommodate elements from different theoretical framings based on an assumption that they each offer some insight and validity (as the discussion above has demonstrated), without fully explaining what impact assessment is achieving. Such a framework is unlikely to be the last word on evaluating effectiveness, although it moves the debate on by acknowledging that evaluation of what is achieved will always be based on what the observer wants impact assessment to achieve -and different observers are likely to have different views on this.…”

Section: Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda

Pope

Bond

Morrison‐Saunders

et al. 2013

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

215

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact assessment has been in place for over 40 years and is now practised in some form in all but two of the world's nations. In this paper we reflect on the state of the art of impact assessment theory and practice, focusing on six well-established forms: EIA, SEA, policy assessment, SIA, HIA and sustainability assessment. We note that although the fundamentals of impact assessment have their roots in the US National Environmental Policy Act 1969 (NEPA) each branch of the field is distinct in also drawing on other theoretical and conceptual bases that in turn shape the prevailing discourse in each case, generating increasing degrees of specialisation within each sub-field. Against this backdrop, we consider the strengths and weaknesses of collective impact assessment practice, concluding that although there are substantial strengths, the plethora of specialist branches is generating a somewhat confusing picture and lack of clarity regarding how the pieces of the impact assessment jigsaw puzzle fit together. We use this 2 review to suggest an overarching research agenda that will enable impact assessment to evolve in line with changing expectations for what it should deliver.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Groundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda

Pope

Bond

Morrison‐Saunders

et al. 2013

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

215

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…better information leads to better decisions based on 'normal science' whereby uncertainty is not present) was not questioned. More recently, however, there has been significant debate about the appropriate theoretical basis for IA, particularly in the light of uncertainty and different values of stakeholders (see, for example, Lawrence, 1997;Wallington et al, 2007;Weston, 2010;Pope et al, 2013). The argument is therefore that rational decision-making is neither typical of proposals subject to IA, nor appropriate (Kørnøv and Thissen, 2000).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Managing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment by embedding evolutionary resilience, participatory modelling and adaptive management

Bond

Morrison‐Saunders

Gunn

et al. 2015

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of continuing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment (IA) prediction, the case is made that existing IA processes are based on false 'normal' assumptions that science can solve problems and transfer knowledge into policy. Instead, a 'post-normal science' approach is needed that acknowledges the limits of current levels of scientific understanding. We argue that this can be achieved through embedding evolutionary resilience into IA; using participatory workshops; and emphasizing adaptive management. The goal is an IA process capable of informing policy choices in the face of uncertain influences acting on socio-ecological systems. We propose a specific set of process steps to operationalise this post-normal science approach which draws on work undertaken by the Resilience Alliance. This process differs significantly from current models of IA, as it has a far greater focus on avoidance of, or adaptation to (through incorporating adaptive management subsequent to decisions), unwanted future scenarios rather than a focus on the identification of the implications of a single preferred vision. Implementing such a process * corresponding author 2 would represent a culture change in IA practice as a lack of knowledge is assumed and explicit, and forms the basis of future planning activity, rather than being ignored.

show abstract

“…This theory testing using case data represents an important step in developing an applied epistemology. Theory-case study relationships have a cyclical, evolving, dialogue contributing to dialectical reasoning that identifies and resolves contradictions between ideas and reality (Lawrence, 1997;Taylor, 1980). Thus, case studies provide data that are inconsistent with, or consistent with, theoretical expectations.…”

Section: The Pattern Matching Approach -The Specific Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The pattern-matching approach and its application in tourism development

Andriotis¹,

Vaughan²

2009

Current Issues in Tourism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Copyright and moral rights to this thesis/research project are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, research or study without prior permission and without charge. Any use of the thesis/research project for private study or research must be properly acknowledged with reference to the work's full bibliographic details.This thesis/research project may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from it, or its content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s).If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address:eprints@mdx.ac.ukThe item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated. ABSTRACTTourism development cannot be fully understood and validated from a positivist perspective without the testing of theory against empirical evidence. Thus the pattern-matching approach studies phenomena on the basis of facts and observations relevant to the testing of theories and models. This paper compares two selected tourism development theories, diffusion and dependency, against empirical evidence from Crete. In doing this it has three main objectives: to set out the nature of the pattern matching approach; to illustrate the application of the pattern matching approach, in an exploratory way; and to evaluate the approach based on the evidence of the exploratory application.

show abstract

The need for EIA theory-building

Cited by 85 publications

References 60 publications

Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda

Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda

Managing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment by embedding evolutionary resilience, participatory modelling and adaptive management

The pattern-matching approach and its application in tourism development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About