Environmental Impact Assessment

1/19/2018 Environmental impact assessment - Wikipedia
Environmental impact assessment

Environmental assessment (EA) is the assessment of the environmental consequences (positive and negative) of a
plan, policy, program, or actual projects prior to the decision to move forward with the proposed action. In this context,
the term "environmental impact assessment" (EIA) is usually used when applied to actual projects by individuals or
companies and the term "strategic environmental assessment" (SEA) applies to policies, plans and programmes most
often proposed by organs of state.[1] Environmental assessments may be governed by rules of administrative procedure
regarding public participation and documentation of decision making, and may be subject to judicial review.
The purpose of the assessment is to ensure that decision makers consider the environmental impacts when deciding
whether or not to proceed with a project. The International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) defines an
environmental impact assessment as "the process of identifying, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the biophysical,
social, and other relevant effects of development proposals prior to major decisions being taken and commitments
made".[2] EIAs are unique in that they do not require adherence to a predetermined environmental outcome, but rather
they require decision makers to account for environmental values in their decisions and to justify those decisions in light
of detailed environmental studies and public comments on the potential environmental impacts.[3]
Contents
History of EIA
Methods
Follow-up
Around the world
Australia
Canada
China
Egypt
EU
Hong Kong
Iraq
India
Korea, South
Malaysia
Nepal
New Zealand
Russian Federation
Sri Lanka
Ukraine
United States
Transboundary application
Criticism
See also
References
Sources
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_assessment#Methods 1/20
Notes
Further reading
External links
History of EIA
Environmental impact assessments commenced in the 1960s, as part of increasing environmental awareness.[notes 1] EIAs
involved a technical evaluation intended to contribute to more objective decision making. In the United States,
environmental impact assessments obtained formal status in 1969, with enactment of the National Environmental Policy
Act. EIAs have been used increasingly around the world. The number of "Environmental Assessments" filed every year
"has vastly overtaken the number of more rigorous Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)."[4] An Environmental
Assessment is a "mini-EIS designed to provide sufficient information to allow the agency to decide whether the
preparation of a full-blown Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is necessary."[5][6] EIA is an activity that is done to find
out the impact that would be done before development will occur.
Methods
General and industry specific assessment methods are available including:
Industrial products - Product environmental life cycle analysis (LCA) is used for identifying and measuring the impact
of industrial products on the environment. These EIAs consider activities related to extraction of raw materials,
ancillary materials, equipment; production, use, disposal and ancillary equipment.[7]
Genetically modified plants - Specific methods available to perform EIAs of genetically modified organisms include
GMP-RAM and INOVA.[8]
Fuzzy logic - EIA methods need measurement data to estimate values of impact indicators. However, many of the
environment impacts cannot be quantified, e.g. landscape quality, lifestyle quality and social acceptance. Instead
information from similar EIAs, expert judgment and community sentiment are employed. Approximate reasoning
methods known as fuzzy logic can be used.[9] A fuzzy arithmetic approach has also been proposed [10] and
implemented using a software tool (TDEIA).[11]
Follow-up
At the end of the project, an audit evaluates the accuracy of the EIA by comparing actual to predicted impacts. The
objective is to make future EIAs more valid and effective. Two primary considerations are:
Scientific - to examine the accuracy of predictions and explain errors

Management - to assess the success of mitigation in reducing impacts
Audits can be performed either as a rigorous assessment of the null hypothesis or with a simpler approach comparing
what actually occurred against the predictions in the EIA document.[12]
After an EIA, the precautionary and polluter pays principles may be applied to decide whether to reject, modify or require
strict liability or insurance coverage to a project, based on predicted harms.
The Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol is a sector specific method for checking the quality of Environmental
and Social assessments and management plans.
Around the world
Australia
The history of EIA in Australia could be linked to the enactment of the U.S. National Environment Policy Act (NEPA) in
1970, which made the preparation of environmental impact statements a requirement. In Australia, one might say that the
EIA procedures were introduced at a State Level prior to that of the Commonwealth (Federal), with a majority of the states
having divergent views to the Commonwealth. One of the pioneering states was New South Wales, whose State Pollution
Control Commission issued EIA guidelines in 1974. At a Commonwealth (Federal) level, this was followed by passing of
the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act in 1974. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC) superseded the Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974 and is the current
central piece for EIA in Australia on a Commonwealth (Federal) level. An important point to note is that this
Commonwealth Act does not affect the validity of the States and Territories environmental and development assessments
and approvals; rather the EPBC runs as a parallel to the State/Territory Systems.[13] Overlap between federal and state
requirements is addressed via bilateral agreements or one off accreditation of state processes, as provided for in the EPBC
Act.
The Commonwealth Level

The EPBC Act provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna,
ecological communities and heritage places-defined in the EPBC Act as matters of ‘national environmental significance’.
Following are the nine matters of ‘national environmental significance’ to which the EPBC ACT applies:[14]
World Heritage sites

National Heritage places
RAMSAR wetlands of international significance
Listed threatened species and ecological communities
Migratory species protected under international agreements
The Commonwealth marine environment
Nuclear actions (including uranium mining)
National Heritage
Water resources, in relation with coal seam gas development and large coal mining development.
In addition to this, the EPBC Act aims at providing a streamlined national assessment and approval process for activities.
These activities could be by the Commonwealth, or its agents, anywhere in the world or activities on Commonwealth land;
and activities that are listed as having a ‘significant impact’ on matters of ‘national environment significance'.[14]
The EPBC Act comes into play when a person (a ‘proponent') wants an action (often called a ‘proposal’ or ‘project’)
assessed for environmental impacts under the EPBC Act, he or she must refer the project to the Department of
Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (Australia). This ‘referral’ is then released to the public, as well as relevant
state, territory and Commonwealth ministers, for comment on whether the project is likely to have a significant impact on
matters of national environmental significance.[14] The Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts assess
the process and makes recommendation to the minister or the delegate for the feasibility. The final discretion on the
decision remains of the minister, which is not solely based on matters of ‘national environmental significance’ but also the
consideration of social and economic impact of the project.[14]
The Australian Government environment minister cannot intervene in a proposal if it has no significant impact on one of
the eight matters of ‘national environmental significance’ despite the fact that there may be other undesirable
environmental impacts.[14] This is primarily due to the division of powers between the States and the Federal government
and due to which the Australian Government environment minister cannot overturn a state decision.
There are strict civil and criminal penalties for the breach of EPBC Act. Depending on the kind of breach, civil penalty
(maximum) may go up to $550,000 for an individual and $5.5 million for a body corporate, or for criminal penalty
(maximum) of seven years imprisonment and/or penalty of $46,200.[14]
The State and Territory Level
Australian Capital Territory (ACT)

EIA provisions within Ministerial Authorities in the ACT are found in the Chapters 7 and 8 of the Planning and
Development Act 2007 (ACT). EIA in ACT was previously administered with the help of Part 4 of the Land (Planning and
Environment) Act 1991 (Land Act) and Territory Plan (plan for land-use).[13] Note that some EIA may occur in the ACT on
Commonwealth land under the EPBC Act (Cth). Further provisions of the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and
Land Management) Act 1988 (Cth) may also be applicable particularly to national land and "designated areas".
New South Wales (NSW)

In New South Wales, the Environment Planning Assessment Act 1979 (EPA) establishes three pathways for EIA. The first
is under Part 5.1 of the EPAA, which provides for EIA of 'State Significant Infrastructure' projects. (From June 2011, this
Part replaced Part 3A, which previously covered EIA of major projects). The second is under Part 4 of the Act dealing with
development control. If a project does not require approval under Part 3A or Part 4 it is then potentially captured by the
third pathway, Part 5 dealing with environment impact assessment.[13]
Northern Territory (NT)

The EIA process in Northern Territory is chiefly administered under the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA).[15]
Although EAA is the primary tool for EIA in Northern Territory, there are further provisions for proposals in the Inquiries
Act 1985 (NT).[13]
Queensland (QLD)
There are four main EIA processes in Queensland.[16] Firstly, under the Integrated Planning Act 1997 (IPA) for
development projects other than mining. Secondly, under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act) for some
mining and petroleum activities. Thirdly, under the State Development and Public Works Organization Act 1971 (State
Development Act) for ‘significant projects’. Finally, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth)
for ‘controlled actions’.[16]
South Australia (SA)
The local governing tool for EIA in South Australia is the Development Act 1993. There are three levels of assessment
possible under the Act in the form of an environment impact statement (EIS), a public environmental report (PER) or a
Development Report (DR).[13]
Tasmania (TAS)
In Tasmania, an integrated system of legislation is used to govern development and approval process, this system is a
mixture of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 (EMPCA), Land Use Planning and Approvals
Act 1993 (LUPAA), State Policies and Projects Act 1993 (SPPA), and Resource Management and Planning Appeals
Tribunal Act 1993.[13]
Victoria (VIC)
The EIA process in Victoria is intertwined with the Environment Effects Act 1978 and the Ministerial Guidelines for
Assessment of Environmental Effects (made under the s. 10 of the EE Act).[17]
Western Australia (WA)

The Environmental Protection Act 1986 (Part 4) provides the legislative framework for the EIA process in Western
Australia.[18] The EPA Act oversees the planning and development proposals and assesses their likely impacts on the
environment.
Canada
In Friends of the Oldman River Society v. Canada (Minister of Transportation),(SCC 1992) La Forest J of the Supreme
Court of Canada described environmental impact assessment in terms of the proper scope of federal jurisdiction with
respect to environments matters,
"Environmental impact assessment is, in its simplest form, a planning tool that is now generally regarded as
an integral component of sound decision-making."[19]
Supreme Court Justice La Forest cited (Cotton, Emond & 1981 245), "The basic concepts behind environmental
assessment are simply stated: (1) early identification and evaluation of all potential environmental consequences of a
proposed undertaking; (2) decision making that both guarantees the adequacy of this process and reconciles, to the
greatest extent possible, the proponent’s development desires with environmental protection and preservation."[20]
La Forest referred to (Jeffrey 1989, 1.2,1.4) and (Emond 1978, p. 5) who described "...environmental assessments as a
planning tool with both an information-gathering and a decision-making component" that provide "...an objective basis
for granting or denying approval for a proposed development."[21][22]
Justice La Forest addressed his concerns about the implications of Bill C-45 regarding public navigation rights on lakes
and rivers that would contradict previous cases.(La Forest, 1973 & 178-80)[23]
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012 (CEAA 2012)[24] "and its regulations establish the legislative basis for
the federal practice of environmental assessment in most regions of Canada."[25][26][27] CEAA 2012 came into force July 6,
2012 and replaces the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (1995). EA is defined as a planning tool to
identify, understand, assess and mitigate, where possible, the environmental effects of a project.
"The purposes of this Act are:

(a) to protect the components of the environment that are within the legislative authority of Parliament
from significant adverse environmental effects caused by a designated project; (b) to ensure that
designated projects that require the exercise of a power or performance of a duty or function by a
federal authority under any Act of Parliament other than this Act to be carried out, are considered in a
careful and precautionary manner to avoid significant adverse environmental effects; (c) to promote
cooperation and coordinated action between federal and provincial governments with respect to
environmental assessments; (d) to promote communication and cooperation with aboriginal peoples
with respect to environmental assessments; (e) to ensure that opportunities are provided for
meaningful public participation during an environmental assessment; (f) to ensure that an
environmental assessment is completed in a timely manner; (g) to ensure that projects, as defined in
section 66, that are to be carried out on federal lands, or those that are outside Canada and that are to
be carried out or financially supported by a federal authority, are considered in a careful and
precautionary manner to avoid significant adverse environmental effects; (h) to encourage federal
authorities to take actions that promote sustainable development in order to achieve or maintain a
healthy environment and a healthy economy; and
(i) to encourage the study of the cumulative effects of physical activities in a region and the
consideration of those study results in environmental assessments."[28]
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act
Opposition
Environmental Lawyer Dianne Saxe argued that the CEAA 2012 "allows the federal government to create mandatory
timelines for assessments of even the largest and most important projects, regardless of public opposition." (Saxe 2012)[29]
On 3 August 2012 the Canadian Environmental

Assessment Agency nine "designated projects" with "Now that federal environmental assessments are gone,
the federal government will only assess very large, very
their timelines: Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline important projects. But it’s going to do them in a hurry."
Joint Review Panel (JRP) 18 months; Marathon Dianne Saxe[29]
Platinum Group Metals and Copper Mine Project
(JRP):[30] 13 months; Site C Clean Energy Project
(JRP) 8.5 months; Deep Geologic Repository Project (JRP) 17 months; Enbridge Northern Gateway Project (JRP) 18
months; Jackpine Mine Expansion Project (JRP) 11.5 months; Pierre River Mine Project:[31] 8 months; New Prosperity
Gold-Copper Mine Project (JRP) 7.5 months; Frontier Oil Sands Mine Project (JRP)[32][33] 8.5 months; EnCana/Cenovus
Shallow Gas Infill Project (JRP) 5 months.[34]
Saxe compares these timelines with environmental assessments for the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline. Thomas R. Berger,
Royal Commissioner of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry (9 May 1977), worked extremely hard to ensure that
industrial development on Aboriginal people's land resulted in benefits to those indigenous people.[35]
On 22 April 2013, Official Opposition Environment critic Megan Leslie issued a statement claiming that the federal
government's recent changes to "fish habitat protection, the Navigable Waters Protection Act and the Canadian
Environmental Assessment Act", along with gutting existing laws and making cuts to science and research, "will be
disastrous, not only for the environment, but also for Canadians’ health and economic prosperity."[36] On 26 September
2012, Leslie argued that with the changes to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act that came into effect 6 July
2012, "seismic testing, dams, wind farms and power plants" no longer required any federal environmental assessment. She
also claimed that because the CEAA 2012—which she claimed was rushed through Parliament—dismantled the CEAA
1995, the Oshawa ethanol plant project would no longer have a full federal environmental assessment.[37] Mr. Peter Kent
(Minister of the Environment) explained that the CEAA 2012 "provides for the Government of Canada and the
Environmental Assessment Agency to focus on the large and most significant projects that are being proposed across the
country." The 2,000 to 3,000-plus smaller screenings that were in effect under CEAA 1995 became the "responsibility of
lower levels of government but are still subject to the same strict federal environmental laws."[37] Anne Minh-Thu Quach,
MP for Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC, argued that the mammoth budget bill dismantled 50 years of environmental
protection without consulting Canadians about the "colossal changes they are making to environmental assessments." She
claimed that the federal government is entering into "limited consultations, by invitation only, months after the damage
was done."[37]
China
The Environmental Impact Assessment Law (EIA Law) requires that an environmental impact assessment be completed
prior to project construction. However, if a developer completely ignores this requirement and builds a project without
submitting an environmental impact statement, the only penalty is that the environmental protection bureau (EPB) may
require the developer to do a make-up environmental assessment. If the developer does not complete this make-up
assessment within the designated time, only then is the EPB authorized to fine the developer. Even so, the possible fine is
capped at a maximum of about US$25,000, a fraction of the overall cost of most major projects. The lack of more
stringent enforcement mechanisms has resulted in a significant percentage of projects not completing legally required
environmental impact assessments prior to construction.[38]
China's State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) used the legislation to halt 30 projects in 2004, including
three hydro-power plants under the Three Gorges Project Company. Although one month later (Note as a point of
reference, that the typical EIA for a major project in the USA takes one to two years.), most of the 30 halted projects
resumed their construction, reportedly having passed the environmental assessment, the fact that these key projects'
construction was ever suspended was notable.
A joint investigation by SEPA and the Ministry of Land and Resources in 2004 showed that 30-40% of the mining
construction projects went through the procedure of environment impact assessment as required, while in some areas
only 6-7% did so. This partly explains why China has witnessed so many mining accidents in recent years.
SEPA alone cannot guarantee the full enforcement of environmental laws and regulations, observed Professor Wang
Canfa, director of the centre to help environmental victims at China University of Political Science and Law. In fact,
according to Wang, the rate of China's environmental laws and regulations that are actually enforced is estimated at barely
10%.[39]
Egypt
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) EIA is implemented in Egypt under the umbrella of the Ministry of state for
environmental affairs. The Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency (EEAA) is responsible for the EIA services.
In June 1997, the responsibility of Egypt's first full-time Minister of State for Environmental Affairs was assigned as stated
in the Presidential Decree no.275/1997. From thereon, the new ministry has focused, in close collaboration with the
national and international development partners, on defining environmental policies, setting priorities and implementing
initiatives within a context of sustainable development.
According to the Law 4/1994 for the Protection of the Environment, the Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency (EEAA)
was restructured with the new mandate to substitute the institution initially established in 1982. At the central level, EEAA
represents the executive arm of the Ministry.
The purpose of EIA is to ensure the protection and conservation of the environment and natural resources including
human health aspects against uncontrolled development. The long-term objective is to ensure a sustainable economic
development that meets present needs without compromising future generations ability to meet their own needs. EIA is
an important tool in the integrated environmental management approach.
EIA must be performed for new establishments or projects and for expansions or renovations of existing establishments
according to the Law for the Environment. [40]
EU
A wide range of instruments exist in the Environmental policy of the European Union. Among them the European Union
has established a mix of mandatory and discretionary procedures to assess environmental impacts.[41] European Union
Directive (85/337/EEC) on Environmental Impact Assessments (known as the EIA Directive) [42] was first introduced in
1985 and was amended in 1997. The directive was amended again in 2003, following EU signature of the 1998 Aarhus
Convention, and once more in 2009. The initial Directive of 1985 and its three amendments have been codified in
Directive 2011/92/EU of 13 December 2011.[43] In 2001, the issue was enlarged to the assessment of plans and
programmes by the so-called Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive (2001/42/EC), which is now in
force.[41] Under the EU directive, an EIA must provide certain information to comply.[44] There are seven key areas that
are required:
1. Description of the project
Description of actual project and site description

Break the project down into its key components, i.e. construction, operations, decommissioning
For each component list all of the sources of environmental disturbance
For each component all the inputs and outputs must be listed, e.g., air pollution, noise, hydrology
2. Alternatives that have been considered
Examine alternatives that have been considered

Example: in a biomass power station, will the fuel be sourced locally or nationally?
3. Description of the environment
List of all aspects of the environment that may be affected by the development
Example: populations, fauna, flora, air, soil, water, humans, landscape, cultural heritage
This section is best carried out with the help of local experts, e.g. the RSPB in the UK
4. Description of the significant effects on the environment
The word significant is crucial here as the definition can vary

'Significant' must be defined
The most frequent method used here is use of the Leopold matrix
The matrix is a tool used in the systematic examination of potential interactions
Example: in a windfarm development a significant impact may be collisions with birds
5. Mitigation
This is where EIA is most useful

Once section 4 is complete, it is obvious where impacts are greatest
Using this information ways to avoid negative impacts should be developed
Best working with the developer with this section as they know the project best
Using the windfarm example again, construction could be out of bird nesting seasons. Or removal of hardstanding
on a potentially contaminated land site, out of the rainy season.
6. Non-technical summary (EIS)
The EIA is in the public domain and be used in the decision making process
It is important that the information is available to the public
This section is a summary that does not include jargon or complicated diagrams
It should be understood by the informed lay-person
7. Lack of know-how/technical difficulties
This section is to advise any areas of weakness in knowledge

It can be used to focus areas of future research
Some developers see the EIA as a starting block for poor environmental management
Annexed projects
All projects are either classified as Annex 1 or Annex 2 projects. Those lying in Annex 1 are large scale developments such
as motorways, chemical works, bridges, powerstations etc. These always require an EIA under the Environmental Impact
Assessment Directive (85,337,EEC as amended). Annex 2 projects are smaller in scale than those referred to in Annex 1.
Member States must determine whether these project shall be made subject to an assessment subject to a set of criteria set
out in Annex 3 of codified Directive 2011/92/EU.
The Netherlands
EIA was implemented in Dutch legislation on September 1, 1987. The categories of projects that require an EIA are
summarised in Dutch legislation, the Wet milieubeheer. The use of thresholds for activities makes sure that EIA is
obligatory for those activities that may have considerable impacts on the environment.
For projects and plans that fit these criteria, an EIA report is required. The EIA report defines a.o. the proposed initiative,
it makes clear the impact of that initiative on the environment and compares this with the impact of possible alternatives
with less a negative impact.[45]
Hong Kong
EIA in Hong Kong, since 1998, is regulated by the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance 1997.
The original proposal to construct the Lok Ma Chau Spur Line overground across the Long Valley failed to get through
EIA, and the Kowloon–Canton Railway Corporation had to change its plan and build the railway underground. In April
2011, the EIA of the Hong Kong section of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge was found to have breached the
ordinance, and was declared unlawful. The appeal by the government was allowed in September 2011. However, it was
estimated that this EIA court case had increased the construction cost of the Hong Kong section of the bridge by HK$6.5
billion in money-of-the-day prices.[46]
Iraq
Ministry of Environment of the federal government of Iraq is in charge of issuing Environmental compliance certificate
based on an EIA report prepared by professional consultant and thoroughly reviewed by MOE. Any project or activity
prior to its establishment or even already existing project has to be approved and obtain such certificate from the MOE.
Projects are classified into 3 categories; “A”, “B” and “C”. EIA report is usually obligatory for those projects and activities
falling under categories “A” (large-scale) and “B” (small-scale) that may have considerable impacts on environment[47]. An
example of “A” category activities such as: dams and reservoirs, forestry production projects, industrial plants, irrigation,
drainage and flood control, land clearance and leveling, port and harbor development, river basin development, thermal
power and hydro-power development, manufacture, transportation and use of pesticides or other hazardous materials,
hazardous waste management and disposal….etc. An example of “B” category activities such as: agro-industries, electrical
transmission, renewable energy, rural electrification, tourism, rehabilitation or maintenance of highway or rural roads,
rehabilitation or modification of existing industrial facilities…etc. preparation of EIA report is usually exempt for projects
falling under category “C” that may have low to no impact on environment, and example of “C” category activities: small
fish breeding pond, institutional development, most human resources projects…etc.
The main environmental legislations in Iraq are: Law No.64 for cities and land use (1965), Law No.21 for noise prevention
(1966), Law No.25 for system of rivers and other water resources protection (1967), Law No.99 for ionized radiation
(1980), Law No.89 for public health (drinking water provision, sanitation and environmental monitoring (1981), Law
No.79 for protection and improvement of environment (1986), Environmental criteria for agricultural, industrial and
public service projects (1990), Law No.3 for protection and improvement of environment (1997), Law No.2 for water
systems protection (2001), Law No.44 for creation of Ministry of Environment instead of the council of protection and
improvement of environment (2003), Law No.27 for environmental protection and improvement (2009)[48] , Law No.4 for
protection of ambient air system (2012).
Meanwhile, Environmental Protection and Improvement Board in the regional government of Kurdistan in the northern
Iraq (Erbil, Duhok, Sulaimany and Garmyan) is responsible of issuing Environmental compliance certificate, the board
was established according to law No.3 Environmental protection and improvement board in Iraqi Kurdistan Region
(2010)[49]. The board is responsible of issuing such certificate for all projects and activities except of petroleum operation
which EIA process is organized and implemented by the Ministry of Natural Resources of Kurdistan Regional
government[50]. The same Environmental Legislations mentioned are adopted but the procedure of EIA in Iraqi-Kurdistan
region government may differ from the one in the Federal government of Iraq.
India
The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) of India has been in a great effort in Environmental
Impact Assessment in India. The main laws in action are the Water Act(1974), the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act (1972),
the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act (1981) and the Environment (Protection) Act (1986),Biological Diversity
Act(2002).[51] The responsible body for this is the Central Pollution Control Board. Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) studies need a significant amount of primary and secondary environmental data. Primary data are those collected in
the field to define the status of the environment (like air quality data, water quality data etc.). Secondary data are those
collected over the years that can be used to understand the existing environmental scenario of the study area. The
environmental impact assessment (EIA) studies are conducted over a short period of time and therefore the
understanding of the environmental trends, based on a few months of primary data, has limitations. Ideally, the primary
data must be considered along with the secondary data for complete understanding of the existing environmental status of
the area. In many EIA studies, the secondary data needs could be as high as 80% of the total data requirement. EIC is the
repository of one stop secondary data source for environmental impact assessment in India.
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) experience in India indicates that the lack of timely availability of reliable
and authentic environmental data has been a major bottle neck in achieving the full benefits of EIA. The environment
being a multi-disciplinary subject, a multitude of agencies are involved in collection of environmental data. However, no
single organization in India tracks available data from these agencies and makes it available in one place in a form
required by environmental impact assessment practitioners. Further, environmental data is not available in enhanced
forms that improve the quality of the EIA. This makes it harder and more time-consuming to generate environmental
impact assessments and receive timely environmental clearances from regulators. With this background, the
Environmental Information Centre (EIC) has been set up to serve as a professionally managed clearing house of
environmental information that can be used by MoEF, project proponents, consultants, NGOs and other stakeholders
involved in the process of environmental impact assessment in India. EIC caters to the need of creating and disseminating
of organized environmental data for various developmental initiatives all over the country.
EIC stores data in GIS format and makes it available to all environmental impact assessment studies and to EIA
stakeholders in a cost effective and timely manner. So that we can manage that in different proportions such as remedy
measures etc.,
Korea, South
Recycling culture and policy Ministry of Environment
Malaysia
In Malaysia, Section 34A, Environmental Quality Act, 1974[52] requires developments that have significant impact to the
environment are required to conduct the Environmental impact assessment.
Nepal
In Nepal, EIA has been integrated in major development projects since the early 1980s. In the planning history of Nepal,
the sixth plan (1980–85), for the first time, recognized the need for EIA with the establishment of Environmental Impact
Study Project (EISP) under the Department of Soil Conservation in 1982 to develop necessary instruments for integration
of EIA in infrastructure development projects. However, the government of Nepal enunciated environment conservation
related policies in the seventh plan (NPC, 1985–1990). To enforce this policy and make necessary arrangements, a series
of guidelines were developed, thereby incorporating the elements of environmental factors right from the project
formulation stage of the development plans and projects and to avoid or minimize adverse effects on the ecological
system. In addition, it has also emphasized that EIAs of industry, tourism, water resources, transportation, urbanization,
agriculture, forest and other developmental projects be conducted.
In Nepal, the government’s Environmental Impact Assessment Guideline of 1993 inspired the enactment of the
Environment Protection Act (EPA) of 1997 and the Environment Protection Rules (EPR) of 1997 (EPA and EPR have been
enforced since 24 and 26 June 1997 respectively in Nepal) to internalizing the environmental assessment system. The
process institutionalized the EIA process in development proposals and enactment, which makes the integration of IEE
and EIA legally binding to the prescribed projects. The projects, requiring EIA or IEE, are included in Schedules 1 and 2 of
the EPR, 1997 (GoN/MoLJPA 1997).
New Zealand
In New Zealand, EIA is usually referred to as Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE). The first use of EIA's dates
back to a Cabinet minute passed in 1974 called Environmental Protection and Enhancement Procedures. This had no legal
force and only related to the activities of government departments. When the Resource Management Act was passed in
1991, an EIA was required as part of a resource consent application. Section 88 of the Act specifies that the AEE must
include "such detail as corresponds with the scale and significance of the effects that the activity may have on the
environment". While there is no duty to consult any person when making a resource consent application (Sections 36A
and Schedule 4), proof of consultation is almost certain required by local councils when they decide whether or not to
publicly notify the consent application under Section 93.
Russian Federation
As of 2004, the state authority responsible for conducting the State EIA in Russia has been split between two Federal
bodies: 1) Federal service for monitoring the use of natural resources – a part of the Russian Ministry for Natural
Resources and Environment and 2) Federal Service for Ecological, Technological and Nuclear Control. The two main
pieces of environmental legislation in Russia are: The Federal Law ‘On Ecological Expertise, 1995 and the ‘Regulations on
Assessment of Impact from Intended Business and Other Activity on Environment in the Russian Federation, 2000.[53]
Federal Service for monitoring the use of natural resources

In 2006, the parliament committee on ecology in conjunction with the Ministry for Natural Resources and Environment,
created a working group to prepare a number of amendments to existing legislation to cover such topics as stringent
project documentation for building of potentially environmentally damaging objects as well as building of projects on the
territory of protected areas. There has been some success in this area, as evidenced from abandonment of plans to
construct a gas pipe-line through the only remaining habitat of the critically endangered Amur leopard in the Russian Far
East.
Federal Service for Ecological, Technological and Nuclear Control

The government’s decision to hand over control over several important procedures, including state EIA in the field of all
types of energy projects, to the Federal Service for Ecological, Technological and Nuclear Control had caused a major
controversy and criticism from environmental groups that blamed the government for giving nuclear power industry
control over the state EIA.
Not surprisingly the main problem concerning State EIA in Russia is the clear differentiation of jurisdiction between the
two above-mentioned Federal bodies.
Sri Lanka
The National Environmental Act, 1998 requires environmental impact assessment for large scale projects in sensitive
areas. It is enforced by the Central Environmental Authority.[54]
Ukraine
The new law of Ukraine on evaluation of impact on surroundings prescribes the requirements of environmental safety,
rational use of national resources, minimizing of harmful impact on surroundings in the process of making managerial
decisions about planned activity. The designing of the conclusion of evaluation of impact is a result of its conducting. The
key moment of the law on evaluation of impact on surroundings is a substitution of conclusion of state environmental
experise on the conclusion of evaluation of impact on surroundings. Business entity is forbidden to conduct or to start its
planned activity without the conclusion of impact on surroundings. [55]
United States
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), enacted in 1970, established a policy of environmental impact
assessment for federal agency actions, federally funded activities or federally permitted/licensed activities that in the U. S.
is termed "environmental review" or simply "the NEPA process."[56] The law also created the Council on Environmental
Quality, which promulgated regulations to codify the law's requirements.[57] Under United States environmental law an
Environmental Assessment (EA) is compiled to determine the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
Federal or federalized actions expected to subject or be subject to significant environmental impacts will publish a Notice
of Intent to Prepare an EIS as soon as significance is known. Certain actions of federal agencies must be preceded by the
NEPA process. Contrary to a widespread misconception, NEPA does not prohibit the federal government or its
licensees/permittees from harming the environment, nor does it specify any penalty if an environmental impact
assessment turns out to be inaccurate, intentionally or otherwise. NEPA requires that plausible statements as to the
prospective impacts be disclosed in advance. The purpose of NEPA process is to ensure that the decision maker is fully
informed of the environmental aspects and consequences prior to making the final decision.
Environmental assessment
An environmental assessment (EA) is an environmental analysis prepared pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act to determine whether a federal action would significantly affect the environment and thus require a more
detailed Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The certified release of an Environmental Assessment results in either a
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or an EIS.[58]
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), which oversees the administration of NEPA, issued regulations for
implementing the NEPA in 1979. Eccleston reports that the NEPA regulations barely mention preparation of EAs. This is
because the EA was originally intended to be a simple document used in relatively rare instances where an agency was not
sure if the potential significance of an action would be sufficient to trigger preparation of an EIS. But today, because EISs
are so much longer and complicated to prepare, federal agencies are going to great effort to avoid preparing EISs by using
EAs, even in cases where the use of EAs may be inappropriate. The ratio of EAs that are being issued compared to EISs is
about 100 to 1.[59]
Likewise, even the preparation of an accurate EA is viewed today as an onerous burden by many entities responsible for
the environmental review of a proposal. Federal agencies have responded by streamlining their regulations that
implement NEPA environmental review, by defining categories of projects that by their well understood nature may be
safely excluded from review under NEPA, and by drawing up lists of project types that have negligible material impact
upon the environment and can thus be exempted.
Content
The Environmental Assessment is a concise public document prepared by the federal action agency that serves to:
1. briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an EIS or a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI)
2. Demonstrate compliance with the act when no EIS is required
3. facilitate the preparation of an EIS when a FONSI cannot be demonstrated
The Environmental Assessment includes a brief discussion of the purpose and need of the proposal and of its alternatives
as required by NEPA 102(2)(E), and of the human environmental impacts resulting from and occurring to the proposed
actions and alternatives considered practicable, plus a listing of studies conducted and agencies and stakeholders
consulted to reach these conclusions. The action agency must approve an EA before it is made available to the public. The
EA is made public through notices of availability by local, state, or regional clearing houses, often triggered by the
purchase of a public notice advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation in the proposed activity area.
Structure
The structure of a generic Environmental Assessment is as follows:
1. Summary
2. Introduction
Background
Purpose and Need for Action
Proposed Action
Decision Framework
Public Involvement
Issues
3. Alternatives, including the Proposed Action
Alternatives
Mitigation Common to All Alternatives
Comparison of Alternatives
4. Environmental Consequences
5. Consultation and Coordination
Procedure
The EA becomes a draft public document when notice of it is published, usually in a newspaper of general circulation in
the area affected by the proposal. There is a 15-day review period required for an Environmental Assessment (30 days if
exceptional circumstances) while the document is made available for public commentary, and a similar time for any
objection to improper process. Commenting on the Draft EA is typically done in writing or email, submitted to the lead
action agency as published in the notice of availability. An EA does not require a public hearing for verbal comments.
Following the mandated public comment period, the lead action agency responds to any comments, and certifies either a
FONSI or a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS in its public environmental review record. The preparation of an EIS
then generates a similar but more lengthy, involved and expensive process.
Environmental impact statement

The adequacy of an environmental impact statement (EIS) can be challenged in federal court. Major proposed projects
have been blocked because of an agency's failure to prepare an acceptable EIS. One prominent example was the Westway
landfill and highway development in and along the Hudson River in New York City.[60] Another prominent case involved
the Sierra Club suing the Nevada Department of Transportation over its denial of the club's request to issue a
supplemental EIS addressing air emissions of particulate matter and hazardous air pollutants in the case of widening U.S.
Route 95 through Las Vegas.[61] The case reached the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which led to
construction on the highway being halted until the court's final decision. The case was settled prior to the court's final
decision.
Several state governments that have adopted "little NEPAs," state laws imposing EIS requirements for particular state
actions. Some of those state laws such as the California Environmental Quality Act refer to the required environmental
impact study as an environmental impact report.[62]
This variety of state requirements produces voluminous data not just upon impacts of individual projects, but also in
insufficiently researched scientific domains. For example, in a seemingly routine Environmental Impact Report for the
city of Monterey, California, information came to light that led to the official federal endangered species listing of
Hickman's potentilla, a rare coastal wildflower.[63][64][65]
Transboundary application
Environmental threats do not respect national borders. International pollution can have detrimental effects on the
atmosphere, oceans, rivers, aquifers, farmland, the weather and biodiversity. Global climate change is transnational.
Specific pollution threats include acid rain, radioactive contamination, debris in outer space, stratospheric ozone depletion
and toxic oil spills. The Chernobyl disaster, precipitated by a nuclear accident on April 26, 1986, is a stark reminder of the
devastating effects of transboundary nuclear pollution.[66]
Environmental protection is inherently a cross-border issue and has led to the creation of transnational regulation via
multilateral and bilateral treaties. The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (UNCHE or Stockholm
Conference) held in Stockholm in 1972 and the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development
(UNCED or Rio Summit, Rio Conference, or Earth Summit) held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 were key in the creation of
about 1,000 international instruments that include at least some provisions related to the environment and its
protection.[67]
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe's Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary Context was negotiated to provide an international legal framework for transboundary EIA.[68]
However, as there is no universal legislature or administration with a comprehensive mandate, most international treaties
exist parallel to one another and are further developed without the benefit of consideration being given to potential
conflicts with other agreements. There is also the issue of international enforcement.[69] This has led to duplications and
failures, in part due to an inability to enforce agreements. An example is the failure of many international fisheries
regimes to restrict harvesting practises.[70] Application shall be achieved by the willing of counties authorities. / Aphro10
Criticism
As per Jay et al., EIA is used as a decision aiding tool rather than decision making tool. There is growing dissent about
them as their influence on decisions is limited. Improved training for practitioners, guidance on best practice and
continuing research have all been proposed.[71]
EIAs have been criticized for excessively limiting their scope in space and time. No accepted procedure exists for
determining such boundaries. The boundary refers to ‘the spatial and temporal boundary of the proposal’s effects’. This
boundary is determined by the applicant and the lead assessor, but in practice, almost all EIAs address only direct and
immediate on-site effects.[72]
Development causes both direct and indirect effects. Consumption of goods and services, production, use and disposal of
building materials and machinery, additional land use for activities of manufacturing and services, mining and refining,
etc., all have environmental impacts. The indirect effects of development can be much higher than the direct effects
examined by an EIA. Proposals such as airports or shipyards cause wide-ranging national and international effects, which
should be covered in EIAs.[73]
Broadening the scope of EIA can benefit the conservation of threatened species. Instead of concentrating on the project
site, some EIAs employed a habitat-based approach that focused on much broader relationships among humans and the
environment. As a result, alternatives that reduce the negative effects to the population of whole species, rather than local
subpopulations, can be assessed.[74]
Thissen and Agusdinata [75] have argued that little attention is given to the systematic identification and assessment of
uncertainties in environmental studies which is critical in situations where uncertainty cannot be easily reduced by doing
more research. In line with this, Maier et al.[76] have concluded on the need to consider uncertainty at all stages of the
decision-making process. In such a way decisions can be made with confidence or known uncertainty. These proposals are
justified on data that shows that environmental assessments fail to predict accurately the impacts observed. Tenney et
al.[77] and Wood et al.[78] have reported evidence of the intrinsic uncertainty attached to EIAs predictions from a number
of case studies worldwide. The gathered evidence consisted of comparisons between predictions in EIAs and the impacts
measured during, or following project implementation. In explaining this trend, Tenney et al.[77] have highlighted major
causes such as project changes, modelling errors, errors in data and assumptions taken and bias introduced by people in
the projects analyzed.
See also
Economic impact analysis
Environmental good
Environmental impact design
Environmental indicator
Environmental policy of the European Union
Equator Principles
Global environmental analysis
Healthy development measurement tool
Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol

Leopold matrix
List of international environmental agreements
Natural landscape
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Social Impact Assessment
Strategic Environmental Assessment
United Nations Environment Programme
Sustainability appraisal
References
1. Eccleston, Charles H. (2011). Environmental Impact Assessment: A Guide to Best Professional Practices (https://ww
w.amazon.com/Environmental-Impact-Assessment-Professional-Practices/dp/1439828733/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=
1486945778&sr=8-2&keywords=charles+eccleston). Chapter 5. ISBN 978-1439828731
2. "Principle of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120507084339/http://w
ww.iaia.org/publicdocuments/special-publications/Principles%20of%20IA_web.pdf) (PDF). International Association
for Impact Assessment. 1999. Archived from the original (http://www.iaia.org/publicdocuments/special-publications/Pri
nciples%20of%20IA_web.pdf) (PDF) on 2012-05-07.
3. Holder, J., (2004), Environmental Assessment: The Regulation of Decision Making, Oxford University Press, New
York; For a comparative discussion of the elements of various domestic EIA systems, see Christopher Wood
Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review (2 ed, Prentice Hall, Harlow, 2002).
4. Clark & Canter 1997, p. 199.
5. Rychlak & Case 2010, p. 111-120.
6. Kershner 2011.
7. Daniel, S., Tsoulfas, G., Pappis, C., & Rachaniotis, N. (2004) Aggregating and evaluating the results of different
Environmental Impact Assessment methods Ecological indicators 4:125-138
8. Hitzschky, K., & Silviera, J. (2009) A proposed impact assessment method for genetically modified plants (As-GMP
method) Environmental Impact Assessment review 29: 348-368
9. Peche, R., & Rodriguez, E., (2009) Environmental impact Assessment procedure: A new approach based on Fuzzy
logic Environmental Impact Assessment review 29:275-283
10. Duarte O. (2000) Técnicas Difusas en la Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad de Granada
11. ARAI Research Group, Granada, Spain. "Environmental Impact Assessment at University of Granada." (http://arai.ug
r.es/eiadifusa/)
12. Wilson, L., (1998), A Practical Method for Environmental Impact Assessment Audits Environ Impact Assess Rev 18:
59-71
13. Elliott, M. & Thomas, I. (2009), "Environment Impact Assessment in Australia: Theory and Practice, 5th Edn,
Federation Press, Sydney"
14. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/), Australia: The
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, retrieved 9 September 2010
15. The Northern Territory Government, viewed 10 September 2010,
16. The Environment Defenders, viewed 10 September 2010, EDO factsheet (http://www.edo.org.au/edoqld/edoqld/factsh
eets/factsheet11%2009.07.pdf)
17. The Law Handbook, viewed 9 September 2010,
18. The Government of Western Australia, viewed 9 September 2010,
19. SCC 1992.
20. Roger, Cotton; Emond, D. Paul (1981). John Swaigen, ed. Environmental Impact Assessment. Environmental Rights
in Canada. Toronto, Ontario: Butterworths.
21. Jeffery, Michael I. (1989). Environmental Approvals in Canada. Toronto, Ontario: Butterworths.
22. Emond, D. P. (1978). Environmental Assessment Law in Canada. Toronto, Ontario: Emond‑Montgomery Ltd.
23. La Forest,, Gérard V. (1973). Water Law in Canada. Ottawa: Information Canada.
24. {{{year}}} SCC {{{num}}} (https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/{{{year}}}/{{{year}}}scc{{{num}}}/{{{year}}}scc{{{num}}}.ht
ml) (18 July 2012)
25. 2012 SCC {{{num}}} (https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2012/2012scc{{{num}}}/2012scc{{{num}}}.html)
26. {{{year}}} SCC {{{num}}} (https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/{{{year}}}/{{{year}}}scc{{{num}}}/{{{year}}}scc{{{num}}}.ht
ml)
27. CEAA (2012). "What is the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012?". Basics of Environmental Assessment.
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.
28. CEAA 2012.
29. Saxe, =Dianne (9 August 2012). "Federal environmental assessments will be rushed" (http://envirolaw.com/short-fede
ral-environmental-assessments/). Environmental Law and Litigation.
30. http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/details-eng.cfm?evaluation=54755
31. http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/050/details-eng.cfm?evaluation=59539
32. http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/details-eng.cfm?evaluation=65505
33. http://majorprojects.alberta.ca/details/Frontier-Oil-Sands-Mine
34. Saxe 2012.
35. Host:Allan McFee (9 May 1977). "The Berger Report is released" (http://archives.cbc.ca/society/native_issues/topics/
295-1552/). As It Happens. transcript (http://ms.radio-canada.ca/archives_new/2002/en/wma/berger19770509er1.wm
a). Toronto. CBC Radio. CBC Radio 1. Retrieved 9 December 2011.
36. "Statement by Official Opposition Environment critic Megan Leslie on Earth Day" (https://www.ndp.ca/news/statement
-official-opposition-environment-critic-megan-leslie-earth-day). NDP. 22 April 2013.
37. Megan Leslie ({{{year}}}). Question period
38. Wang, Alex (2007-02-05). "Environmental protection in China: the role of law" (http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/sh
ow/single/en/745-Environmental-protection-in-China-the-role-of-law).
39. Gu, Lin (2005-09-29). "China Improves Enforcement of Environmental Laws" (http://www.chinese-embassy.org.uk/en
g/zt/Features/t214565.htm). China Features.
40. "About MSEA" (http://www.eeaa.gov.eg/English/main/about.asp). EEAA. Retrieved 2013-01-03.
41. Watson, Michael (November 13–15, 2003). "Environmental Impact Assessment and European Community Law" (htt
p://www.members.tripod.com/~danubedita/library/2003watson2.htm). XIV International Conference "Danube-River of
Cooperation".
42. Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the
Environment (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31985L0337:EN:HTML) (1985-06-27)
from Eur-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)
43. DIRECTIVE 2011/92/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 13 December 2011 on the
assessment of the effects of some public and private projects on the environment (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriSer
v/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:026:0001:0021:EN:PDF) from Eur-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)
44. Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.
do?uri=CELEX:32001L0042:EN:HTML) (2001-06-27) from Eur-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)
45. List of criteria for EIA/SEA (http://docs1.eia.nl/cms/engelse_c-d-lijsten.pdf)
46. "LCQ1: Judicial review case regarding the Environmental Impact Assessment reports of the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-
Macao Bridge" (http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201110/26/P201110260238.htm). Press Releases.
www.info.gov.hk. October 26, 2011. Retrieved October 27, 2011.
47. "EIA process in Iraq" (https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/eia/documents/WG14_MOS3_nov2010/Diagram_EI
A_process_in_Iraq.pdf) (PDF).
48. "Law No.27 of 2009 for protection and improvement of environment" (http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/irq100188E.
pdf) (PDF).
49. "Environmental Legislation guides in Kurdistan Region-Iraq" (http://www.natureiraq.org/uploads/5/2/9/9/52997379/eng

lish.pdf) (PDF).
50. "INSTRUCTIONS (NO. 1) OF 2013 ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PETROLEUM
OPERATIONS" (http://mnr.krg.org/images/pdfs/MNR%20-%20EIA%20Instructions%20Draft%20for%20consultation%
20-%201%20December%202013.pdf) (PDF).
51. Shibani Ghosh, "Demystifying the Environmental Clearance Process in India" (http://www.nujslawreview.org/pdf/articl
es/2013_3/03shibanighosh.pdf), NUJS LAW REVIEW, January 2, 2015
52. http://www.doe.gov.my/portal/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Appendix_1.pdf
53. Department of Environmental Protection, Russia
54. Central Environmental Authority. "Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Procedure in Sri Lanka" (http://www.cea.l
k/web/index.php/en/environmental-impact-assessment-eia-procedure-in-sri-lanka). Central Environmental Authority.
Central Environmental Authority. Retrieved 1 November 2016.
55. MCL LLC. "Evaluation of impact on surroundings" (http://www.mcl.kiev.ua/en/evaluation-of-impact-on-surroundings-
2/). MCL LLC. Eric Firado. Retrieved 1 November 2017.
56. United States. National Environmental Policy Act, P.L. 91-190 (http://www.usinfo.org/enus/government/branches/nepa
eqia.htm), 83 Stat. 852 (http://legislink.org/us/stat-83-852), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/
42/4321) et seq. Approved January 1, 1970.
57. U.S. Council on Environmental Quality. "NEPA and Agency Planning." Code of Federal Regulations, 40 C.F.R. 1501
(https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/40/1501).
58. Eccleston, Charles H. and J. Peyton Doub (2010). Preparing NEPA Environmental Assessments: A User’s Guide to
Best Professional Practices (https://www.amazon.com/Preparing-NEPA-Environmental-Assessments-Professional/dp/
1439808821/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1486949351&sr=8-3&keywords=charles+eccleston). ISBN 978-1439808825.
59. Eccleston, Charles; Doub, J. Peyton (2012). Preparing NEPA Environmental Assessments: A User's Guide to Best
Professional Practices. CRC Press. ISBN 9781439808825.
60. Sierra Club v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, (http://www.elr.info/litigation/vol13/13.20326.htm) 701 F.2d
1011, 18 ERC 1748. (2d Cir., 02/25/1983)
61. Ritter, John (2003-06-03). "Lawsuit pits risks and roads" (https://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-03-06-vegas-hi
ghway-usat_x.htm). USA Today.
62. "Sive,D. & Chertok,M., "Little NEPAs" and Environmental Impact Assessment Procedures" (http://www.sprlaw.com/pd
f/spr_little_nepa_ali_aba_0605.pdf) (PDF). Retrieved 2013-01-03.
63. Rogers, Mark. Endangered Flora of California (https://books.google.com/books?id=O17xCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA106&lpg
=PA106&dq=C.M.+Hogan,+G.+Deghi,+M.+Papineau+et+al.&source=bl&ots=ZKZSMO9-Y6&sig=gezVDrq4tzoDHNmr
QfNjAXjcguw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi7-KmQsMTQAhXP0RoKHRzOBAUQ6AEIIzAB#v=onepage&q=C.M.%20
Hogan%2C%20G.%20Deghi%2C%20M.%20Papineau%20et%20al.&f=false). lulu.com. p. 106. ISBN 978-
1312862784. Retrieved November 25, 2016.
64. C.M. Hogan, G. Deghi, M. Papineau et al., Environmental Impact Report for the Pebble Beach Properties project by
Del Monte Forest, Earth Metrics Inc. Prepared for the city of Monterey and State of California Clearinghouse (1992)
65. U.S. Federal Register: August 2, 1995 (Volume 60, Number 148, Pages 39326-39337)
66. Sands, P., (1989), The Environment, Community and International Law, Harvard International Law Lournal, 393, p402
67. Weiss, E., (1999), Understanding Compliance with International Environmental Agreements: The Bakers Dozen
Myths, Univ Richmond L.R. 32, 1555
68. "Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo, 1991)" (http://www.unece.or
g/env/eia/welcome.html). Unece.org. Retrieved 2013-01-03.
69. Wolfrum, R., & Matz, N., (2003), Conflicts in International Environmental Law, Max-Planck-Institut für Ausländisches
Öffentliches Recht und Völkerrech
70. Young, O., (1999), The Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes, MIT Press
71. Jay, S.; Jones, C.; Slinn, P.; Wood, C. (2007). "Environmental Impact Assessment: Retrospect and Prospect".
Environmental Impact Assessment Review. Elsevier. 27 (4): 289–300. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2006.12.001 (https://doi.org/
10.1016%2Fj.eiar.2006.12.001).
72. Lenzen, M.; Murray, S.; Korte, B.; Dey, C. (2003). "Environmental impact assessment including indirect effects—a
case study using input-output analysis". Environmental Impact Assessment Review. Elsevier. 23 (3): 263–282.
doi:10.1016/S0195-9255(02)00104-X (https://doi.org/10.1016%2FS0195-9255%2802%2900104-X).
73. Shepherd, A.; Ortolano, L. (1996). "Strategic environmental assessment for sustainable urban development".
Environmental Impact Assessment Review. Elsevier. 16 (4-6): 321–335. doi:10.1016/S0195-9255(96)00071-6 (https://
doi.org/10.1016%2FS0195-9255%2896%2900071-6).
74. Fernandes, João P. (2000). "EIA procedure, Landscape ecology and conservation management—Evaluation of
alternatives in a highway EIA process". Environmental Impact Assessment Review. Elsevier. 20 (6): 665–680.
doi:10.1016/S0195-9255(00)00060-3 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2FS0195-9255%2800%2900060-3).
75. Thissen, WIH; Agusdinata, DB (2008). "Handling deep uncertainties in impact assessment". In proceedings of the
28th annual conference of the IAIA May 5–9, 2008, Perth, Australia. IAIA.
76. Maier, HR; Ascough, JC; Wattenbach, M; Renschler, CS; Labiosa, WB (2008). "Uncertainty in Environmental Decision
Making: Issues, Challenges and Future Directions". Publications from USDA-ARS/UNL Faculty. Paper 399. USDA-
ARS/UNL Faculty.
77. Tenney, A; Kværner, J; Gjerstad, KI (2006). "Uncertainty in environmental impact assessment predictions: the need
for better communication and more transparency". Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 24 (1): 45–56.
78. Wood, C; , Dipper, B; Jones, C (2000). "Auditing the assessments of the environmental impacts of planning projects".
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 43 (1): 23–47.
Sources
Clark, Ray; Canter, Larry, eds. (1997). Environmental Policy and NEPA: Past, Present and Future. Boca Raton,
Florida: St. Lucie Press.
Rychlak, Ronald J.; Case, David W. (2010). Environmental Law: Oceana's Legal Almanac Series. New York: Oxford
University Press. pp. 111–120.
Kershner, Jim (27 August 2011). "NEPA, the National Environmental Policy Act" (http://HistoryLink.org).
Friends of the Oldman River Society v. Canada (Minister of Transport) 1992 CanLII 110 (https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/s
cc/doc/1992/1992canlii110/1992canlii110.html), [1992] 1 SCR 3 (23 January 1992), Supreme Court of Canada
(Canada)
Notes
1. The United States Environmental Protection Agency was established on 2 December 1970, in response to elevated
concern about environmental pollution.
Further reading
Carroll, B. and Turpin T. (2009). Environmental impact assessment handbook, 2nd ed. Thomas Telford Ltd (http://ww
w.thomastelford.com/), ISBN 978-0-7277-3509-6
Fischer, T. B. (ed., 2016). Environmental Assessment. Critical Concepts of the Built Environment, Routledge, New
York. ISBN 978-1-138-77776-7
Glasson, J; Therivel, R; Chadwick A. (2005). Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment. London: Routledge
Hanna, K. (2009). Environmental Impact Assessment: Practice and Participation, 2nd ed. Oxford
Petts, J. (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment, Vols 1 & 2. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. ISBN 0-632-
04772-0
Ruddy, T. F.; Hilty, L. M. (2008). "Impact assessment and policy learning in the European Commission".
Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 28 (2–3): 90. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2007.05.001 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.
eiar.2007.05.001).
External links
European Commission - EIA website (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/home.htm)
European Commission-funded project on Impact Assessment Tools (http://www.sustainabilitya-test.net/)
Environmental Impact Assessment at the University of Sydney (http://www.isa.org.usyd.edu.au/research/eia.shtml)
International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) (http://www.iaia.org/)
Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment (http://www.eia.nl)
UNU Open Educational Resource on EIA: A Course Module, Wiki and Instructional Guide (http://eia.unu.edu)
ELM EIA Law Matrix ~ Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (https://www.elaw.org/elm)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Environmental_impact_assessment&oldid=820927335"
This page was last edited on 17 January 2018, at 12:28.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Environmental Impact Assessment - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental Impact Assessment - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental Impact Assessment - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is an environmental impact assessment?

What is an environmental impact assessment?

What are some methods used for environmental impact assessments?

What are some methods used for environmental impact assessments?

1/19/2018 Environmental impact assessment - Wikipedia

Scientific - to examine the accuracy of predictions and explain errors

Around the world

The Commonwealth Level

World Heritage sites

The State and Territory Level

Australian Capital Territory (ACT)

New South Wales (NSW)

Northern Territory (NT)

South Australia (SA)

Western Australia (WA)

"The purposes of this Act are:

On 3 August 2012 the Canadian Environmental

1. Description of the project

Description of actual project and site description

Examine alternatives that have been considered

The word significant is crucial here as the definition can vary

This is where EIA is most useful

This section is to advise any areas of weakness in knowledge

Federal Service for monitoring the use of natural resources

Federal Service for Ecological, Technological and Nuclear Control

Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or an EIS.[58]

Environmental impact statement

Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol

49. "Environmental Legislation guides in Kurdistan Region-Iraq" (http://www.natureiraq.org/uploads/5/2/9/9/52997379/eng

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Environmental_impact_assessment&oldid=820927335"

This page was last edited on 17 January 2018, at 12:28.

You might also like