Hid - C HAPTER-2
Hid - C HAPTER-2
Hid - C HAPTER-2
C HAPTER-II
predicted impacts to allow a focus on key adverse impacts. . Mitigation involves the
introduction of measures to avoid, reduce, remedy or compensate for any significant
adverse impacts.
. Public consultation and participation aims to assure the quality, comprehensiveness and
effectiveness of the EIA, as well as to ensure that the public's views are adequately
taken into consideration in the decision-making process.
. EIS presentation is a vital step in the process. If done badly, much good work in the EIA
may be negated.
. Review involves a systematic appraisal of the quality of the EIS, as a contribution to the
decision-making process.
. Decision-making on the project involves a consideration by the relevant authority of the
EIS (including consultation responses) together with other material considerations.
. Post-decision monitoring involves the recording of outcomes associated with
development impacts, after a decision to proceed. It can contribute to effective project
management.
. Auditing follows from monitoring. It can involve comparing actual outcomes with
predicted outcomes, and can be used to assess the quality of predictions and the
effectiveness of mitigation. It provides a vital step in the EIA learning process.
2.1 EIA-team
The final structure of the team will vary depending on the project. Specialists may also
be required for fieldwork, laboratory testing, library research, data processing, surveys
and modeling. The team leader will require significant management skill to co-ordinate
the work of a team with diverse skills and knowledge.
There will be a large number of people involved in EIA apart from the full-time team
members. These people will be based in a wide range of organizations, such as the
project proposing and authorizing bodies, regulatory authorities and various interest
groups. Such personnel would be located in various agencies and also in the private
sector; a considerable number will need specific EIA training. It is essential that the EIA
team and the team carrying out the feasibility study work together and not in isolation
from each other. This often provides the only opportunity for design changes to be
made and mitigation measures to be incorporated in the project design.
The EIA process makes sure that environmental issues are raised when a project or plan
is first discussed and that all concerns are addressed as a project gains momentum
through to implementation. Recommendations made by the EIA may necessitate the
redesign of some project components, require further studies, and suggest changes
which alter the economic viability of the project or cause a delay in project
implementation. To be of most benefit it is essential that an environmental assessment is
carried out to determine significant impacts early in the project cycle so that
recommendations can be built into the design and cost-benefit analysis without causing
major delays or increased design costs. To be effective once implementation has
commenced, the EIA should lead to a mechanism whereby adequate monitoring is
undertaken to realize environmental management. An important output from the EIA
process should be the delineation of enabling mechanisms for such effective
management.
The number of projects that could be subject to EIA is potentially very large. Yet many
projects have no substantial or significant environmental impact. A screening
mechanism seeks to focus on those projects with potentially significant adverse
environmental impacts or where the impacts are not fully known. Those with little or
no impacts are screened out and are allowed to proceed to the normal planning
permission / administrative processes without any additional assessment and without
additional loss of time and expense.
Some EIA procedures include an initial outline EIA study to check on likely
environmental impacts and on their significance. Under the California Environmental
Quality Act a "negative declaration" can be produced by the project proponent, thereby
claiming that the project has minimal significant effects and does not require a full EIA.
The declaration must be substantiated by an initial study, which is usually a simple
checklist against which environmental impacts must be ticked as "yes", "maybe" or "no".
If the responses are primarily "no", and most of the "yes" and "maybe" responses can be
mitigated, then the project may be screened out from a full EIA.
The output from the screening process is often a document called an Initial
Environmental Examination or Evaluation (IEE). The main conclusion will be a
classification of the project according to its likely environmental sensitivity. This will
determine whether an EIA is needed and if so to what detail.
informal communication links need to be established with teams carrying out feasibility
studies so that their work can take proposals into account. Similarly, feasibility studies
may indicate that some options are technically or economically unacceptable and thus
environmental prediction work for these options will not be required.
By the time prediction and mitigation are undertaken, the project preparation will be
advanced and a decision will most likely have been made to proceed with the project.
Considerable expenditure may have already been made and budgets allocated for the
implementation of the project. Major changes could be disruptive to project processing
and only accepted if prediction shows that impacts will be considerably worse than
originally identified at the scoping stage. For example, an acceptable measure might be
to alter the mode of operation of a reservoir to protect downstream fisheries, but a
measure proposing an alternative to dam construction could be highly contentious at
this stage. To avoid conflict it is important that the EIA process commences early in the
project cycle.
The aim of the EIA process is to provide information about a proposal's likely
environmental impacts to the developer, public and decision-makers so that a better
decision may be made. As such, how the information is presented, how the various
interested parties use that information, and how the final decision incorporates the
results of the EIA and the views of the various parties, are essential components in the
EIA process.
Projects or programmes have significant impacts on the local population. Whilst the aim
is to improve the well being of the population, a lack of understanding of the people
and their society may result in development that has considerable negative
consequences. More significantly, there may be divergence between national economic
interests and those of the local population. For example, the need to increase local rice
production to satisfy increasing consumption in the urban area may differ from the
needs as perceived by the local farmers. To allow for this, public participation in the
planning process is essential. The EIA provides an ideal forum for checking that the
affected publics have been adequately consulted and their views taken into account in
project preparation.
The role of public consultation and participation in the EIA process is to assure the
quality, comprehensiveness, and effectiveness of the EIA, as well as to ensure that the
public's views are adequately taken into consideration in the decision-making process.
Public participation can be useful at most stages of the process:
often both culturally alien and unacceptable. Alternative techniques must be used.
Surveys, workshops, small group meetings and interviews with key groups and
individuals are all techniques that may be useful. Tools such as maps, models and
posters can help to illustrate points and improve communication. Where resettlement is
proposed, extensive public participation must be allowed which will, at a minimum,
involve an experienced anthropologist or sociologist who speaks the local language.
He/she can expect to spend months, rather than weeks, in the field.
EIS presentation
Although the EIA regulations specify the minimum contents required in an EIS, they do
not give any standard for the presentation of this information. EISs range from a three-
page typed and stapled EIS, to glossy brochures with computer graphics, and multi-
volume documents in purpose designed binders. This section discusses the contents,
organization, and clarity of communication and presentation of an EIS.
The part of the EIS covering monitoring and management is often referred to as the
Environmental Action Plan or Environmental Management Plan. This section not only
sets out the mitigation measures needed for environmental management, both in the
short and long term, but also the institutional requirements for implementation. The
term 'institutional' is used here in its broadest context to encompass relationships:
The above list highlights the breadth of options available for environmental
management, namely: changes in law; changes in prices; changes in governmental
institutions; and, changes in culture which may be influenced by education and
information dissemination. All the management proposals need to be clearly defined
and coated. One of the more straightforward and effective changes is to set-up a
monitoring programme with clear definition as to which agencies are responsible for
data collection, collation, interpretation and implementation of management measures.
The use of satellite imagery to monitor changes in land use and the 'health' of the land
and sea is becoming more common and can prove a cost-effective tool, particularly in
areas with poor access. Remotely sensed data have the advantage of not being
constrained by political and administrative boundaries. They can be used as one
particular overlay in a GIS. However, authorization is needed for their use, which may
be linked to national security issues, and may thus be hampered by reluctant
governments.
The Environmental Management Plan needs to not only include clear recommendations
for action and the procedures for their implementation but must also define a
programme and costs. It must be quite clear exactly how management and mitigation
methods are phased with project implementation and when costs will be incurred.
Mitigation and management measures will not be adopted unless they can be shown to
be practicable and good value for money. The plan should also stipulate that if, during
project implementation, major changes are introduced, or if the project is aborted, the
EIA procedures will be re-started to evaluate the effect of such actions.
Auditing
In order to capitalize on the experience and knowledge gained, the last stage of an EIA
is to carry out an Environmental Audit some time after completion of the project or
implementation of a programme. It will therefore usually be done by a separate team of
specialists to that working on the bulk of the EIA. The audit should include an analysis
of the technical, procedural and decision-making aspects of the EIA. Technical aspects
include: the adequacy of the baseline studies, the accuracy of predictions and the
suitability of mitigation measures. Procedural aspects include: the efficiency of the
procedure, the fairness of the public involvement measures and the degree of
coordination of roles and responsibilities. Decision-making aspects include: the utility
of the process for decision making and the implications for development, (adapted from
Sadler in Wathern, 1988). The audit will determine whether recommendations and
requirements made by the earlier EIA steps were incorporated successfully into project
implementation. Lessons learnt and formally described in an audit can greatly assist in
future EIAs and build up the expertise and efficiency of the concerned institutions.