Environmental Assessment Techniques - Report Example

Question After decades of assessing human impact on the environment, the potential impacts of climate change and recent natural disasters have prompted consideration of assessment of environmental impacts on humans. Critically assess whether, and how established EIS / SEA techniques might be applied in the latter context. Background The environmental assessments techniques are used in many countries to access the impact of development projects to the natural environment. Such techniques include Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). EIA began in USA in 1969. In 1986, World Bank adopted EIA in its planning and decision making process in project assessment, before being adopted by other multilateral and bilateral organizations (Hanna, 2005). The use of EIA has spread around the globe and techniques ahs been adopted and developed for different reasons related to decision making plans, projects and programs. EIA supports mainstreaming of environmental plans in the development activities. Nevertheless, for the implementation of EIA and SEA processes to be implemented effectively, appropriate arrangement have to be instigated so as to minimize the challenges that exist, which include inadequate definition of SEA and EIA guidelines and procedures, and public awareness (Abaza et al., 2004). EIA is a process of identifying and evaluating the potential impact of the project development or activity on the environment, considering the human health, cultural impacts and socio-economic impacts for adverse and beneficial impacts (Donnelly, 1998). SEA is similar to EIA; accept that SEA is usually applied to plans, policies projects and programs, to ensure that they are fully addressed or included at an early phase of decision making. Both processes assist the public, developers and decision makers in the evaluation and identification of alternative projects and minimize potential opportunities for preparing and implementing inappropriate projects, plans and programs. However, SEA covers various activities or area, usually over an extended time period compared to EIA (Kleinschmidt, 1998). Principles of EIA EIA process involves various steps, whose contents depend on nature and purpose of the study. Scholars have emphasized the significance of early stages of EIA in project development (Anahva et al., 1994; Great Britain., & Wales. 2000; Abaza et al., 2004). Rootman, (2000) pointed out that beginning EIS process when designing a technical project has economic advantages. The first step consist of screening to decide whether EIA may be necessary, scoping to identify issues and impacts to the project, including description of the environment and listing out the main impacts. This is followed by prediction of the impact, then evaluation and reviewing. During the process there should be proper communication among the stockholders and public participation (Rootman, 2000). Screening EIA process begins with screening; to find out if EIA is required and to determine the detail level. Guidelines for performing EIA are based on varied reasons, subjected to the aim-legal requirements verses project development or policy. The legislations normally stipulate the standards for performing screening process or for the whole EIA process. Some countries provide a list of projects which require EIA. The aim of screening is to make sure that EIA will have impact on the environment. Thus the decisions made at an early EIA stage are very important to the process (Kleinschmidt, 1998). Screening is essential in situations where there are no legislations. Donor organizations may perform their own screening process to prevent project development with adverse impact on the environment. Large industrial organizations have established processes to trigger EIA as part of design and planning process (Lawrence, & Lawrence, 2013). Screening at an early stage can be used to identify possible locations that may result in the change of design so as to develop environment performance, as well as provide an opportunity to involve the local communities. It can be based on initial study or policy decisions. Initial study is aimed at identifying possible impact of the developed project on the environment. Matrices or checklist are tools which can be used or initial environmental evaluation. Screening which is based on policy decisions uses specific criteria (Donnelly, 1998). Scoping The objective of EIA process is to identify main issues with environmental changes that may affect the individuals, communities and public at an early stage of planning (Lawrence, 2003). Scooping is describes the process for determining what can be included in EIA, which occlude the depth, term and the scope which would be addressed by environmental statement. It can be understood to be a method used to identify the major public concerns on the proposed project and for planning the scientific assessment (Kleinschmidt, 1998). Scoping can be divided into social scooping which deals with public concerns, including interested parties and the government seeking feedback on issues which may concern different parties in the process, and ecological scooping which is concern with the development of scientific study to study the extent and nature of the possible impact of the project. The scoping process involves identification of the impact and public involvement, and should be an ongoing process throughout the life of the project (Abaza et al., 2004). Impact identification This involves the process for identifying the potential impact found through screening and scooping. This includes identification of direct and indirect impacts and the possible causes. The aim is not to create conclusive statements on magnitude, significance and magnitude of the possible effects of the activity on the environment. The evaluators should not try to make conclusive statements during the scoping but should use it to plan the major investigations to produce information about the concerns (Sadler, 1996; Kleinschmidt, 1998). A number of techniques and methods have been proposed for impact identification, which has often been confused with complete EIA. As many people believe that EIA is a technical work whose objectives are satisfied using more mechanical techniques (Basu, 2006). However, the technique has significant aids in impacts identification in a systematic manner. The burden of deciding on the likely impacts and their significance lies with the evaluator (Abaza et al., 2004). Method development began in Canada and USA in 1970´s (Basu, 2006). Various tools which include matrices, overlays, networks and checklists, were develop to accomplish tasks in EIA. However, the disadvantage of using these techniques is that EIA may become static and aspects which may not be these tools may not be considered. The tools are used to identify the impacts; the impact prediction, discussion and evaluation on reducing the impact are not considered (Abbasi & Arya, 2004). Decision making The process of making decision takes place throughout EIA, from screening, scooping, data collection and analysis stages to prediction of impacts, choosing among alternatives and mitigations actions and final decision for acceptance or refusal of the proposal. Usually, environmental impact statement (EIS) is produced by the decision makers (Abaza et al., 2004). The decisions taken at various stages are independent, but biodiversity is the major issue. The final decision is usually political on whether to continue with the project depending on specific conditions. The rejected proposal may be redesigned and resubmitted. The precaution should be taken in making decisions based on scientific uncertainty about project which has significant impact on the biodiversity. But as the scientific knowledge increase the decision makers can make their modifications accordingly (Basu, 2006). Mitigation measures Mitigation measures are identified after evaluating the impacts, and environmental management plan is drawn. The aim of migration in EIA is to identify the best alternative for implementing a project such that adverse effects of the project are reduced or avoided to minimum levels and thus enhance the environmental benefits, and make sure that the individuals of the public do not carry costs instead of the benefits that come from the project (Donnelly, 1998). Thus, the choice between alternatives is central to EIA process. The choice may include the means of policy implementation, design and locations alternatives. The counteractive actions can be prevention, mitigation which includes rehabilitation and restoration of sites, and finally compensation. Compensation will depend on the residual effects after mitigation and prevention (Morgan, 2001; Momtaz, 2013). Evaluation and monitoring EIA foresee the environmental changes which may result from the project implementation, taking into account the impact of the changes. Auditing and monitoring are used to find out what has occurred after starting project implementation. Predicted effects on the biodiversity are monitored, to make sure that the proposed mitigation actions in environmental impact assessment are successful. Good environmental management maintain the predicted impacts within the anticipated levels, unpredicted impact are prevented before becoming a problem, and positive development are achieved as the project develops (Morgan, 2001; Donnelly, 1998). The outcomes of monitoring are information which can be used in periodic alteration and review of management plans on the environment, and for enhancing environment protection through proper action in all the stages of project development. The biodiversity information produced through EIA should be useable and accessible to the public, and should be related to biodiversity assessment according to the biological diversity convention. The periodic predict must be central to the process, and thus if the prediction are good enough, the decision makers make more informed decision (Donnelly, 1998). Public participation The extents to which the public participate in EIA differ from one country to another, depending on the legal requirements. In some countries public participation is supposed to have larger influence, while in other countries they have low influence. However, public participation has often been treated as a technical work which requires procedure instead of being a daily practice. The reality is that the public usually comes late in the process (Momtaz, 2013). It is important to ensure public participation at an early stage of the process for the success of EIA development and better project outcome. The public can provide the required information in EIA process, concerning the identification of important values to be considered. The public also has a role of scrutinizing the implementation process, therefore enabling batter quality assessment (Schmidt et al., 2005). Strategic Environmental Assessment SEA has developed at a slow pace compared to EIA and is only now beginning to form round a consolidated and constant manner (Lee et al., 1998). The public should be involve throughout the SEA process, and is put into law in some countries. SEA is therefore a process for reviewing environmental objectives and effects of the development activities and to make sure that there compatibility with other initiated plans and policies. The decision makers include government organizations and other authorities, or other agencies responsible planning and making policies. IN various countries, SEA is a major tool for promoting sustainable project development. It influence the implementation of environmental conservation as well as the management of integrated wetland and water resources (Lee, 1998; Fischer and Miller2006) Benefits of Doing an EIA There are various benefits of SEA and EIA include: Provide sustainable solutions by producing environmental conditions information of an area. Such information can use by project planners to produce a better design which is adapted to the project and ensure that the people are not put at risk through negative environmental degradation (James, 1994). Mitigate the adverse effect: a disaster can have a long lasting negative impact on air, water, land or other natural resources. Lack of response will result in negative impact on the community livelihoods and health such as loss of land, water contamination and human conflict. Early assessment will ensure proper mitigation actions and chances are identified and applied (Petts, 2009; United Nations., 2009). Reduction in long term cost: EIA process is a long term process which reduces the likelihood of long negative impact and the overall costs of the disaster, since the humanitarian assistance is associated with development process (United Nations., 2009). Conclusion EIA process plays important role in dealing with environmental issues related to the development of the proposed project. The most important achievement involving development is the integration of environment in the development plan. Thus, economic development plans must be integrated with environmental protection strategies. EIA is important in providing preventive action for environmental protection and management in any project development. Various countries are still at an early stage of the implementation of EIA processes. There is a need for capacity building in these countries. In spite of all this impediments, EIA has become an integral part of project development plan, which is being improved with time. References Abbasi, S. A., & Arya, D. S. (2004). Environmental impact assessment: Available techniques, emerging trends. New Delhi: Discovery. Abaza, H., Bisset, R., Sadler, B., & United Nations. (2004). Environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment: Towards an integrated approach. New York: United Nations. Basu, R. C. (2006). Environmental awareness and wildlife conservation. Kolkata: Zoological Survey of India. Donnelly, A., Dalal-Clayton, D. B., Hughes, R., International Institute for Environment and Development., World Resources Institute., & International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. (1998). A Directory of impact assessment guidelines. London: International Institute for Environment and Development. European Workshop on Environmental Impact Assessment, Kleinschmidt, V., & Wagner, D. (1998). Strategic environmental assessment in Europe: 4th European Workshop on Environmental Impact Assessment. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Fischer F. Miller G. J., (2006). Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods, CRC Press, 2006 Great Britain., & Wales. (2000). Environmental impact assessment: A guide to procedures. London: Great Britain, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. Hanna, K. S. (2005). Environmental impact assessment: Practice and participation. Don Mills, Ont: Oxford University Press. James, D. (1994). The application of economic techniques in environmental impact assessment. Dordrecht [u.a.: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Lawrence, D. P. (2003). Environmental impact assessment: Practical solutions to recurrent problems. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley-Interscience. Lawrence, D. P., & Lawrence, D. P. (2013). Impact assessment: Practical solutions to recurrent problems and contemporary challenges. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Lee, N., Hughes, J., & Europa-Kommissionen. (1998). Strategic environmental assessment legislation and procedures in the Community: Final report. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Community. Morgan, R. K. (1998). Environmental impact assessment: A methodological perspective. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Momtaz, S., & Kabir, S. M. Z. (2013). Evaluating environmental and social impact assessment in developing countries. Waltham, Mass: Elsevier. Morgan, R. K. (2001). Environmental impact assessment: A methodological perspective. Dordrecht [u.a.: Kluwer Acad. Publ. Petts, J. (2009). Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment, 2: Impact and Limitations. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Rootman, I. (2000). Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and perspectives. WHO Regional Publications. Sadler, B. (1996). Environmental assessment in a changing world: Evaluating practice to improve performance ; final report. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada. Schmidt, M., João, E. M., & Albrecht, E. (2005). Implementing strategic environmental assessment. Berlin: Springer. United Nations., & Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes. (2009). Guidance on water and adaptation to climate change. New York: United Nations. Read More

Screening is essential in situations where there are no legislations. Donor organizations may perform their own screening process to prevent project development with adverse impact on the environment. Large industrial organizations have established processes to trigger EIA as part of design and planning process (Lawrence, & Lawrence, 2013). Screening at an early stage can be used to identify possible locations that may result in the change of design so as to develop environment performance, as well as provide an opportunity to involve the local communities.

It can be based on initial study or policy decisions. Initial study is aimed at identifying possible impact of the developed project on the environment. Matrices or checklist are tools which can be used or initial environmental evaluation. Screening which is based on policy decisions uses specific criteria (Donnelly, 1998). Scoping The objective of EIA process is to identify main issues with environmental changes that may affect the individuals, communities and public at an early stage of planning (Lawrence, 2003).

Scooping is describes the process for determining what can be included in EIA, which occlude the depth, term and the scope which would be addressed by environmental statement. It can be understood to be a method used to identify the major public concerns on the proposed project and for planning the scientific assessment (Kleinschmidt, 1998). Scoping can be divided into social scooping which deals with public concerns, including interested parties and the government seeking feedback on issues which may concern different parties in the process, and ecological scooping which is concern with the development of scientific study to study the extent and nature of the possible impact of the project.

The scoping process involves identification of the impact and public involvement, and should be an ongoing process throughout the life of the project (Abaza et al., 2004). Impact identification This involves the process for identifying the potential impact found through screening and scooping. This includes identification of direct and indirect impacts and the possible causes. The aim is not to create conclusive statements on magnitude, significance and magnitude of the possible effects of the activity on the environment.

The evaluators should not try to make conclusive statements during the scoping but should use it to plan the major investigations to produce information about the concerns (Sadler, 1996; Kleinschmidt, 1998). A number of techniques and methods have been proposed for impact identification, which has often been confused with complete EIA. As many people believe that EIA is a technical work whose objectives are satisfied using more mechanical techniques (Basu, 2006). However, the technique has significant aids in impacts identification in a systematic manner.

The burden of deciding on the likely impacts and their significance lies with the evaluator (Abaza et al., 2004). Method development began in Canada and USA in 1970´s (Basu, 2006). Various tools which include matrices, overlays, networks and checklists, were develop to accomplish tasks in EIA. However, the disadvantage of using these techniques is that EIA may become static and aspects which may not be these tools may not be considered. The tools are used to identify the impacts; the impact prediction, discussion and evaluation on reducing the impact are not considered (Abbasi & Arya, 2004).

Decision making The process of making decision takes place throughout EIA, from screening, scooping, data collection and analysis stages to prediction of impacts, choosing among alternatives and mitigations actions and final decision for acceptance or refusal of the proposal. Usually, environmental impact statement (EIS) is produced by the decision makers (Abaza et al., 2004). The decisions taken at various stages are independent, but biodiversity is the major issue. The final decision is usually political on whether to continue with the project depending on specific conditions.

Read More