Environmental Impact Assessment in Australia - Term Paper Example

Introduction Not until would the next of the Environment Report be released to the public. Over the last five to ten years, however, Australia’s environmental status has made significant progress. This is largely due to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), a collaborative approach that seeks to “afford greater consideration to nature and the environment” (Elliott and Thomas 2009, 5). The EIA’s fundamental role is to ensure ecological sustainable development, which can only be done with the cooperation of key sectors, such as the government, environmental professionals, civil society, the community, and special interest groups. All these sectors play a huge role in the implementation, monitoring and maintenance of complicated EIA processes as they help to integrate environmental management through planning for development proposals, then forge agreements to reach project approval before projects can be put into operation (Nevill 2000, 1). Role of Government in EIA The government’s foremost role in the EIA is to zoom in on “improving the coverage and effectiveness of the EIA process” and other relevant decision making processes (Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 1992). In their quest for continuing improvement, the government hopes to further its EIA roles through coordinated efforts and through using quality and existing knowledge base in “assessing the acceptability of environmental impacts” in reference to cultural, social and community values and services and potential economic gains (DEWHA, 1992). The government can enhance EIA processes by ensuring that, whenever possible and appropriate, they include certain environmental, cultural, economic, health and social factors in their assessment. Secondly, they should be able to review the role of EIA within the general permissions and decision making processes by working within each area of responsibility. Finally, the government is also responsible for working “towards further developing a comprehensive data base” to advance the standard and accessibility of standard information and knowledge in the EIA process (DEWHA, 1992). Consequently, this may lead to the improvement of methods and tools used by officers in the economic and social analysis of environmental impact. In addition to the abovementioned roles and responsibilities, the government has greatly contributed to EIA’s growth through the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). Created under the Environmental Protection Act of 1986, a legislation mandating its establishment, the EPA is the leading state agency on the “consultation and negotiation of any bilateral agreements with the Commonwealth Government,” especially concerning EIA (Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2003). Its major roles include “the prevention, control and abatement of pollution and environmental harm,” for the express purpose of conserving, preserving, protecting, enhancing and managing the environment and other such environmental concerns. Specifically, part of EPA’s EIA commitment under the Nature Conservation Act 1992 and Marine Parks Act 1982 is to impose an environmental impact statement (EIS) for events and activities held or organized in protected areas (i.e. bird sanctuaries or endangered habitats). The institution also plays an important role in conducting mining industry EIA corollary to the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Environmental Protection Authority, n.d.). Furthermore, as part of its assessment responsibilities under the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 and the Integrated Planning Act 1997, EPA provides advice on environmental-friendly methods of constructing infrastructure, and on assessment management, “or referral agency role (concurrence or advisory) in prescribed circumstances, for assessable development” (DERM, 2003). As a whole, decision makers in the government, particularly the final decision-maker, the Ministry for the environment, “need to be able to provide clear and detailed reasons” for the decisions they undertake to all stakeholders, especially the public, who are most affected by them (Nevill 2000, 1). Role of Environmental Professionals Most environmental professionals play the role of assessors, who screen the accuracy and validity of environmental impact statements. However, these assessors come from the government and are “not always skilled” in specific subject areas. This arrangement undermines the knowledge and skills of independent ecologists from the academe or from the Ecological Society of Australia (ESA) (Warnken and Buckley 1998, 1-8). Benkendorff (n.d.) argues that for EIA assessment to also speed up, independent ecologists with competent skills in necessary subject areas should be tapped as assessors and commissioned to make peer reviews. In such a way, ecological studies conducted during EIA will be adequate and conclusions drawn will be accurrate (4). The ESA, she says, is willing to support the “formation of professional consulting associations that enable the accreditation of ecologists” who will be designated as EIA assessors (Bernkendorff n.d., 6). These ecologists must comply with the following environmental ethics: “honest interpretation of available data, recognition of any inadequacies in the data base, understanding of the uncertainties that may be part of any analysis or assessment, and unbiased statement of findings” (The National Committee on Environmental Engineering, 1992). The quality of these environmental professionals is very important as this also reflects the quality and accuracy of EIA processes. As suppliers of valid and specialized ecological information, environmental professionals should be armed with competent tools and methods to assess the impact of projects or programs on the environment (United Nations University, 2006). Role of Civil Society, Community and Special Public Interest Groups EIA, according to Mandy Elliott and Ian Thomas (2009), is just a formality, but in truth, it is just another impact assessment which “can be done by anyone, at anytime for any scale of project” and “anyone should be able to take and apply the ideas” behind it (7). The authors argue that public participation is one of EIA’s defining characteristics. In fact, the public has since been able to have ready access to information and services related to EIA procedures. Transparent EIA decision making processes with regard to environmental consequences always encourage the public to air their comments and opinions. Such public sentiments could be helpful in arriving at better assessment decisions. “Official” public participation occurs in the middle of EIA processes. There are also public participation programs instituted to ensure civil society’s direct participation in EIA processes. All individuals interested in the proposal and with the opportunity to participate are “expected to be involved in the program” (Eliott and Thomas 2009, 85). The significance of public participation in EIA processes is its capacity to economize and reduce subsequent costs (i.e. creating an impact statement). Public objections in particular can limit the costs and time-consuming delays of impact statement processes because they can lead to the qualitative and quantitative enhancement of data accessible and “available to planners, and head-off the investigation of unacceptable [and environmentally questionable] alternatives” (Clark 1981, 310). Whenever public objections tend to inspire more research, the earlier such public involvement is, the sooner planners can make possible “go or no-go” decisions, rather than possible weakening the intensity of postponement (Clark 1981, 310). This means that public sentiments can set forth the agenda of planning officers and can provide for both quality and speed in decision making. The EIA is indeed a good catalyst for public and grassroots mobilization (International Association for Impact Assessment, 2008). Even remote communities can play a significant role in the successful implementation of EIA processes by providing “information and views that are relevant to scoping” (United Nations University, 2006). They may or may not be directly affected by the proposal, but the community is still a major stakeholder in EIA as their inputs could serve as a cornerstone for making decisions. They are just as important as local, national and, occasionally, international non-government organizations (NGOs) and public interest groups that are also mobilized to take part in EIA processes. Groups like the Australian Conservation and Wilderness Society have special motives in participating--either to promote local issues or promote their group’s cause--even if they are not directly affected by any particular development program. These public interest groups take up the cudgels of ordinary citizens, who have no confidence to voice out their protests against unacceptable proposals (Elliott and Thomas 2009, 85). Their involvement, in addition to other individuals in the community, is so rooted in Western Australia that they even make appeals on EIA processes and effectively provide a mechanism for check and balance, reducing political interference in EIA (Middle 2008, 1-3). Conclusion and Insights The government, environmental professionals both in the public and private sectors, the public, the community and special interest groups all has a stake in EIA processes. These stakeholders make or break the quality, speed and accuracy of EIA data and decision making. First, the government, besides being the final decision maker and the main implementer of impact assessments, has the corresponding duties to tap, and not just consult, professionals from the private or non-profit sectors to aid them during assessment. They should also be accountable to the public by giving them access to information and opportunities to participate and express their concerns. On one hand, professionals are responsible for the promulgation of valid ecological information both for the sake of quality and for inducing public awareness. Lastly, the public, along with the community, NGOs and other special interest groups, have the duty to affect EIA decision makings by lobbying and appealing for unacceptable alternatives. They should coalesce arm in arm to effectively check and balance the actions of government, to uplift the standard, speed and validity of environmental impact assessments, and to ensure that the next state of the environment (2011 SoE) would epitomize ecologically sustainable development. Bibliography Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. “Ecologically Sustainable Development.” Accessed September 6, 2010. http://www.environment.gov.au/about/esd/index.html Berkendorff, Kirsten. “Position Statement by the Ecological Society of Australia: Ecological Factors in Environmental Impact Assessment.” Position Paper, University of Wollongong, n.d. Clark, Brain D. The Aims and Objectives of Environmental Impact Assessment: Proceeding of the NATO advanced study Institute on Environmental Impact Assessment, Toulouse, France. The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1981. Elliott, Mandy, and Ian Thomas. Environmental Impact Assessment in Australia: Theory and Practice. New South Wales: The Federation Press, 2009. Environmental Protection Authority. “Legislation.” Accessed September 7, 2010. http://www.epa.wa.gov.au/template.asp?ID=10&area=Profile&Cat=Legislation International Association for Impact Assessment. “Mobilization of the Public for Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment.” Accessed September 8, 2010. http://www.iaia.org/iaia08perth/cs/session.aspx?id=CS1.5&ts=7 Middle, Garry. “The Environmental Appeal Process in Western Australia: A Check and Balance on EIA.” IAIA 08 Paper, Office of the Appeals Convenor, 2008. Nevill, Jon. “Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment.” The Tasmanian University Union, May 2000. http://www.tucs.org.au/~cnevill/eia_principles.pdf Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management. “A Guide to Environmental Impact Assessment.” Accessed September 7, 2010. http:// www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p00703aa.pdf National Committee on Environmental Engineering. Environmental Principles for Engineers. Australia: The Institute of Engineers, 1992. United Nations University. “Environmental Impact Assessment: Course Module.” Accessed September 8, 2010. http://eia.unu.edu/course/?page_id=142 Warnken, Wiebke, and Ralf Buckley. “Scientific Quality of Tourism Environmental Impact Assessment.” Journal of Applied Ecology 35 (1998): 1-8. Read More