Understanding EIA
Environment Impact Assessment or EIA can be defined as the study to predict the
effect of a proposed activity/project on the environment. A decision making tool, EIA
compares various alternatives for a project and seeks to identify the one which
represents the best combination of economic and environmental costs and benefits.
1. What is EIA?
Environment Impact Assessment or EIA can be defined as the study to predict the
effect of a proposed activity/project on the environment. A decision making tool, EIA
compares various alternatives for a project and seeks to identify the one which
represents the best combination of economic and environmental costs and benefits.
EIA systematically examines both beneficial and adverse consequences of the project
and ensures that these effects are taken into account during project design. It helps to
identify possible environmental effects of the proposed project, proposes measures to
mitigate adverse effects and predicts whether there will be significant adverse
environmental effects, even after the mitigation is implemented. By considering the
environmental effects of the project and their mitigation early in the project planning
cycle, environmental assessment has many benefits, such as protection of
environment, optimum utilisation of resources and saving of time and cost of the
project. Properly conducted EIA also lessens conflicts by promoting community
participation, informing decision makers, and helping lay the base for
environmentally sound projects. Benefits of integrating EIA have been observed in
all stages of a project, from exploration and planning, through construction,
operations, decommissioning, and beyond site closure.
2. Evolution of EIA
EIA is one of the successful policy innovations of the 20th Century for environmental
conservation. Thirty-seven years ago, there was no EIA but today, it is a formal
process in many countries and is currently practiced in more than 100 countries. EIA
as a mandatory regulatory procedure originated in the early 1970s, with the
implementation of the National Environment Policy Act (NEPA) 1969 in the US. A
large part of the initial development took place in a few high-income countries, like
Canada, Australia, and New Zealand (1973-74). However, there were some
developing countries as well, which introduced EIA relatively early - Columbia
(1974), Philippines (1978).
The EIA process really took off after the mid-1980s. In 1989, the World Bank
adopted EIA for major development projects, in which a borrower country had to
undertake an EIA under the Bank's supervision (see table 1: Evaluation and history of
EIA).
Table 1: Evolution and history of EIA
Development of EIA
Pre-1970 Project review based on the technical/engineering and
economic analysis.
Limited consideration given to environmental
consequences.
Early/mid – 1970s EIA introduced by NEPA in 1970 in US.
Basic principle: Guidelines, procedures including public
participation requirement instituted.
Standard methodologies for impact analysis developed (e.g.
matrix, checklist and network).
Canada, Australia and New Zealand became the first
countries to follow NEPA in 1973-1974. Unlike Australia,
which legislated EIA, Canada and New Zealand established
administrative procedures.
Major public inquires help shape the process's development.
Late 1970 and early More formalised guidance.
1980s
Other industrial and developing countries introduced formal
EIA requirements (France, 1976; Philippines, 1977), began
to use the process informally or experimentally (
Netherlands, 1978) or adopted elements, such as impact
statements or reports, as part of development applications
for planning permission (German states [lander], Ireland).
Use of EA by developing countries (Brazil, Philippines,
China, Indonesia)
Strategic Environment Assessment[1] (SEA), risk analysis
included in EA processes[2].
Greater emphasis on ecological modelling, prediction and
evaluation methods.
Provision for public involvement.
Coordination of EA with land use planning processes.
Mid 1980s to end of In Europe, EC Directive on EIA establishes basic principle
decade and procedural requirements for all member states.
Increasing efforts to address cumulative effects.
World Bank and other leading international aid agencies
establish EA requirements.
Spread of EIA process in Asia.
1990s Requirement to consider trans-boundary effects under
Espoo convention.
Increased use of GIS and other information technologies.
Sustainability principal and global issues receive increased
attention.
India also adopted the EIA formally. Formulation of EA
legislation by many developing countries. Rapid growth in
EA training.
Source: International Study of the Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment,
final report, Environmental assessment in a changing world, Prepared by Barry
Sadler, June 1996.
[1]Definition of SEA: Policy tool to assess the environmental consequences of
development policies, plans and programmes
[2]Definition of risk assessment: An instrument for estimating the probability of
harm occurring from the presence of dangerous conditions or materials at a project
site. Risk represents the likelihood and significance of a potential hazard being
realized
3. History of EIA in India
The Indian experience with Environmental Impact Assessment began over 20 years
back. It started in 1976-77 when the Planning Commission asked the Department of
Science and Technology to examine the river-valley projects from an environmental
angle. This was subsequently extended to cover those projects, which required the
approval of the Public Investment Board. Till 1994, environmental clearance from
the Central Government was an administrative decision and lacked legislative
support.
On 27 January 1994, the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MEF),
Government of India, under the Environmental (Protection) Act 1986, promulgated
an EIA notification making Environmental Clearance (EC) mandatory for expansion
or modernisation of any activity or for setting up new projects listed in Schedule 1 of
the notification. Since then there have been 12 amendments made in the EIA
notification of 1994.
The MoEF recently notified new EIA legislation in September 2006. The
notification makes it mandatory for various projects such as mining, thermal power
plants, river valley, infrastructure (road, highway, ports, harbours and airports) and
industries including very small electroplating or foundry units to get environment
clearance. However, unlike the EIA Notification of 1994, the new legislation has put
the onus of clearing projects on the state government depending on the size/capacity
of the project.
Certain activities permissible under the Coastal Regulation Zone Act, 1991 also
require similar clearance. Additionally, donor agencies operating in India like the
World Bank and the ADB have a different set of requirements for giving
environmental clearance to projects that are funded by them.
4. The EIA process
The stages of an EIA process will depend upon the requirements of the country or
donor. However, most EIA processes have a common structure and the application of
the main stages is a basic standard of good practice.
The environment impact assessment consists of eight steps with each step equally
important in determining the overall performance of the project. Typically, the EIA
process begins with screening to ensure time and resources are directed at the
proposals that matter environmentally and ends with some form of follow up on the
implementation of the decisions and actions taken as a result of an EIA report. The
eight steps of the EIA process are presented in brief below:
Screening: First stage of EIA, which determines whether the proposed project,
requires an EIA and if it does, then the level of assessment required.
Scoping: This stage identifies the key issues and impacts that should be further
investigated. This stage also defines the boundary and time limit of the study.
Impact analysis: This stage of EIA identifies and predicts the likely
environmental and social impact of the proposed project and evaluates the
significance.
Mitigation: This step in EIA recommends the actions to reduce and avoid the
potential adverse environmental consequences of development activities.
Reporting: This stage presents the result of EIA in a form of a report to the
decision-making body and other interested parties.
Review of EIA: It examines the adequacy and effectiveness of the EIA report
and provides the information necessary for decision-making.
Decision-making: It decides whether the project is rejected, approved or needs
further change.
Post monitoring: This stage comes into play once the project is
commissioned. It checks to ensure that the impacts of the project do not exceed
the legal standards and implementation of the mitigation measures are in the
manner as described in the EIA report.
The overview of the EIA process is represented in figure 1.
Figure 1: Generalised process flow sheet of the EIA
process
Source: The manual in perspective, EIA Training Resource Manual, United Nations
Environment Programme, 2002
5. Forms of impact assessment
There are various forms of impact assessment such as Health Impact Assessment
(HIA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) that are used to assess the health and
social consequences of development so that they are taken into consideration along
with the environmental assessment. One of the forms of impact assessment is
strategic environment assessment, which is briefly discussed below:
i. Strategic environment assessment
Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) refers to systematic analysis of the
environmental effects of development policies, plans, programmes and other
proposed strategic actions. This process extends the aims and principles of EIA
upstream in the decision-making process, beyond the project level and when major
alternatives are still open. SEA represents a proactive approach to integrating
environmental considerations into the higher levels of decision-making.
Despite its wide use and acceptance, EIA has certain shortcomings as a tool for
minimising environmental effects of development proposals. It takes place relatively
late at the downstream end of the decision making process, after major alternatives
and directions have been chosen (see table 3: Difference in EIA and SEA).
Table 3: Difference in EIA and SEA
Environment impact assessment Strategic environment assessment
§ Takes place at end of decision- § Takes place at earlier stages of decision
making cycle making cycle
§ Reactive approach to development § Pro-active approach to development
proposal proposals
§ Identifies specific impacts on the § Also identifies environmental
environment implications, issues of sustainable
development
§ Considers limited number of
feasible alternatives § Considers broad range of potential
alternatives
§ Limited review of cumulative
effects § Early warning of cumulative effects
§ Emphasis on mitigating and § Emphasis on meeting environmental
minimizing impacts objectives, maintaining natural systems
§ Narrow perspective, high level of § Broad perspective, lower level of detail
detail to provide a vision and overall
framework
§ Well-defined process, clear
beginning and end § Multi-stage process, overlapping
components, policy level is continuing,
§ Focuses on standard agenda,
iterative
treats symptoms of environmental
deterioration § Focuses on sustainability agenda, gets at
sources of environmental deterioration
Source: EIA Training Resource Manual, 2nd edition, 2002, United Nations
Development Programme
SEA had limited development and implementation till 1990. However, after 1990, a
number of countries in developed economies adopted SEA. Some countries such as
Canada and Denmark have made provision for SEA of policy, plans and programmes
separately from EIA legislation and procedure. Other countries such as Czech
Republic, Slovakia, etc have introduced SEA requirements through reforms in EIA
legislation and in case of United Kingdom through environmental appraisal. While in
New Zealand and Australia, it is a part of resource management or biodiversity
conservation regimes. The adoption of SEA is likely to grow significantly in the
coming years especially with directives by European Union and Protocol to the
UNECE Convention on Transboundary EIA by signatory countries (with a
provisional date of May 2003 for completion).
6. Comparative review of EIA procedures and practices
Developed countries EIA in developing EIA in India
countries
Well-framed EIA legislation Lack of formal EIA Formal legislation for
in place. For instance, in legislation in many EIA. It has been enacted
Canada, Canadian developing countries. For by making an
Environmental Assessment instance, EIA is not amendment in the
Act regulates EIA while EU mandatory in many Environment Protection
countries are guided by African countries Act 1986.
Directive on EIA (1985).
In developed countries, Limited involvement of Limited involvement of
active involvement of all public and government public and government
participants including agencies in the initial agencies in the initial
competent authority, phases. This often results phases.
government agencies and in poor representation of
affected people at early the issues and impacts in
stages of the EIA. This the report, adversely
makes the process more affecting the quality of
robust and gives a fair idea the report.
of issues, which need to be
addressed in the initial
phase of EIA.
Integrated approach to EIA Mainly environmental No provision in place to
followed. All aspects aspects considered. Poor cover landscape and
including social and health on social or health visual impacts in the
taken into account. aspects. Indian EIA regulations
Proper consideration of The consideration of Same as developing
alternatives in EIA alternatives in developing countries
countries is more or less
absent.
The process of screening is In developing countries, Screening done on the
well defined. For instance, screening practice in EIA basis of a defined list.
in EU countries competent is weak. In most cases, Threshold values on the
authorities decide whether there is a list of activities size of the project has
EIA is required after that require EIA but been used to decide
seeking advice from without any threshold whether the project will
developer, NGO and values. be cleared by the state
statutory consultees. In government or the
Japan, screening decision is central government.
made by the authorizing
agency with respect to
certain criteria. In Canada,
federal authority determines
whether an environmental
assessment is required or
not.
Scoping process is Scoping process in most Earlier scoping was
comprehensive and involves developing countries is done by consultant or
consultation with all the very poorly defined. In proponent with an
stakeholders. In many many countries including inclination towards
countries like US, China, Pakistan, etc. there meeting pollution
Netherlands, Canada and is no provision for control requirements,
Europe, the involvement of scoping. In some rather than addressing
the public and their concern countries like in Nigeria the full range of
are addressed in the scoping and Indonesia, a term of potential environmental
exercise. Besides this, reference is followed for impacts from a
funding organisations such scoping while in some proposed development.
as World Bank, ADB and countries like Ghana, However, the new
ERDB have provision for Taiwan and Chile, a notification has put the
consultation with the general checklist is onus of scoping on the
affected people and NGOs followed. In countries expert committee based
during identification of where it is undertaken, on the information
issues in scoping exercise. there is no public provided by the
consultation during proponent. Consultation
scoping. Moreover, in with public is optional
most developing and depends on the
countries, scoping is discretion of the expert
often directed towards committee.
meeting pollution control
requirements, rather than
addressing the full range
of potential
environmental impacts
from a proposed
development.
Most reports in local Most reports in English Most reports in English
language and not in the local and not in the local
language. language. In some case,
executive summary is
translated into local
language.
A multi-disciplinary Lack of trained EIA Same in India.
approach. Involvement of professionals often leads Preparation of EIA is
expert with expertise in to the preparation of done by consultants.
different areas. inadequate and irrelevant Therefore, the selection
EIA reports in developing criterion for the
countries organisation is fees/cost
rather than the expertise
of EIA team.
Two tier of EIA review, Poor review or In India too, EIA review
One conducted after the monitoring. is not upto the marks.
completion of EIA to check The review agency
the adequacy and called Impact
effectiveness of EIA and the Assessment Agency
second done before (IAA) lacks inter-
decision-making. disciplinary capacity.
No representation of
NGO in IAA, which is a
violation of the EIA
notification.
Expertise in EIA: The The expertise in EIA is Expertise in this area is
International Association for slowly developing. In developing.
Impact Assessment (AIA) most cases, students from
and other organisations the developing countries
demonstrate that there are a go to the developed
large number of individuals countries to gain
with the capability to knowledge of the subject.
design, conduct, review and
evaluate EIAs from
countries of the North. The
major portion of teaching
about environmental
assessment also takes place
in industrial countries.
