EIA, An Instrument for IEM

Hello mates!  How is it going? I wish you all well!

In my previous postings I have presented you some of the known IEM principles. Specifically, I frequently discussed comprehensiveness, interconnective, strategic, and coordinative/interactive. However, I have not provided a specific tool in environmental management that possibly or potentially embraces all of them.

Well, let us journey into the world of environmental impact assessment (EIA) which is considered one of the most important tools developed to achieve an effective environmental management. In New Zealand, they refer to it as Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) under the RMA Act. But what exactly EIA does and how does it embody an integrated environmental management approach?

EIA: Meaning and Objectives

EIA is defined 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. There are vast and different projects that may require EIA application such as wind farm projects, shopping malls, housing etc. The definition itself is already suggesting integration, don’t you think so? It does not only take into account the adverse impacts to the environment but take into account potential social, economic and other related effects. In other words, all these aspects are integrated under the EIA. By definition, EIA may refer to as:

•         Environment – ecology, economy, society

•         Impact – change (positive or negative), effect

•         Assessment – non-deterministic

But why do we need to conduct an EIA?What does it aim for? The International Association of Impact Assessments (IAIA) provides the following objectives:

•         To ensure that environmental considerations are explicitly addressed and incorporated into the development decision making process;

•         To anticipate and avoid, minimize or offset the adverse significant biophysical, social and other relevant effects of development proposals;

•         To protect the productivity and capacity of natural systems and the ecological processes which maintain their functions; and

•         To promote development that is sustainable and optimizes resource use and management opportunities.

Hence, EIA is considered a tool designed to avoid or remedy relevant disastrous effects to environment of a proposed development projects. It enhances better decision by allowing decision-makers to foresee future impacts of a project by looking not only on its effect to the environment but also make considerations of other aspects of the triple bottom line (social and economic). Sadler (1994) provides a framework of environmental assessment in an institutional framework.

This institutional arrangement of EIA already confers the importance of an integrated approach. For instance, EIA requires the conduct of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) which is to determine the economic viability of the project. Do the benefits expected to be generated from the project will significantly offset the cost of doing it? Risk analysis is designed to undertake assessment of the receiving environment. For instance, one may look on the ecological values of the would-be project location. One may lists all valuable species of flora and fauna, landscape and cultural significance and current uses. The social impact assessment on the other hand is designed to provide potential effects to the community within the vicinity, specifically on how the project will promote social development.

The step by step process of Sadler’s EIA framework also discussed participation or involvement of various actors or stakeholders as it move to the top of the pyramid. For instance, it specifically directs one process to be conducted from the local to regional and national level. This reflects bottom-up or horizontal integration. Coordination with the proponent, decision-maker and stakeholders can also be seen from this framework.

The EIA does imply an embodiment of the principles of IEM that we have previously discussed. Well the institutional framework provided by Sandler might be good. But do this actually being done in practice or actual process of the EIA?

The EIA Process

A better way to look on matters of integration is to see how EIA is being undertaken. I personally select herewith the framework provided by Glasson et al. (2005). I find it simple and easy to interpret and yet it provides an ideal integrated approach.

Figure 2. Glasson et al. (2005) EIA framework.

This framework of Glasson et al (2005) is considered cyclical, considerable and more especially, it is interactive. It is cyclical in the sense that the process can be repeated if something may have possibly been omitted in the process. It therefore provides a room for improvement of the process as a whole and of the evaluation outcome in particular. It also takes into consideration all important potential impacts of the proposed project. It is focus and strategic in the sense that it list down all possible measures in order to mitigate, remedy or off-set the impact. Hence, this somewhat incorporates the very principle of IEM which is comprehensive and strategic. Further, this framework importantly provides for a more interactive or coordinative process by involving all key stakeholders throughout the process. Public consultation and participation is considered an effective way in identifying impacts and determining measures to avoid them. In IEM, it is important to have a good coordination and interaction with various stakeholders in order to come with better management approach to environmental issues.

EIA, thus, embody what IEM is all about. It is comprehensive enough to include the triple bottom line, strategic by identifying all possible measures to mitigate, remedy or off-set potential impacts, interconnective by setting a linkage between affected ecosystems, and interactive and coordinative by engaging key stakeholders in the process. Hence, I consider EIA process as an effective tool for IEM.

There you go mates. What do you think? I wish I made my point clear. Thank you very much!

      

References

Glasson, Therivel & Chadwick (2005). Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment. 3rd ed., The natural and built environment series, ISBN 0415338379, xix, 423

Sadler (1994) “Environmental Assessment and Development Policy Making” in Goodland & Edmondson (Eds) Environmental Assessment and Development. Washington, D.C., The World Bank.