Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
M 166
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a tool used to identify the environmental, social and
economic impacts of a project prior to decision-making. It aims to predict environmental impacts at an early
stage in project planning and design, find ways and means to reduce adverse impacts, shape projects to suit
the local environment and present the predictions and options to decision-makers. By using EIA both
environmental and economic benefits can be achieved, such as reduced cost and time of project
implementation and design, avoided treatment/clean-up costs and impacts of laws and regulations.
The key elements of an EIA are (a) Scoping: identify key issues and concerns of interested parties; (b)
Screening: decide whether an EIA is required based on information collected; (c) Identifying and evaluating
alternatives: list alternative sites and techniques and the impacts of each; (d) Mitigating measures dealing
with uncertainty: review proposed action to prevent or minimise the potential adverse effects of the project;
and (e) Issuing environmental statements: report the findings of the EIA.
Aspects of EIA
There are three major aspects of EIA as follows, a) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), b) Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS), and c) Environmental Inventory (EI).
An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is an activity designed to identify and predict the impact on the
biogeographical environment and on human health of legislative proposals, policies, programmes, projects and
operational procedures and to interpret and communicate information about the impacts.
-2-
An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is a public document written in a format specified by
authorized national, state and/or local agencies.
An Environmental Inventory (EI) is a description of the environment, as it exists in an area where a
particular proposed action is being considered.
Historical Perspectives of EIA
EIA of major developments were undertaken as a early as 1950's particularly in North America, Europe and
Japan. The main objective was to ensure that public safety and health were adequately protected. Separate
documents were submitted to each of the regulatory agencies involved (e.g. water authority, air pollution control
branch etc.) and no attempt was made to prepare a comprehensive overview. In the case of an EIA for a dam
calculations were undertaken to ensure that the structure could withstand major floods, based on return periods of
precipitation and runoff extremes. Similarly chimneys were designed on the basis of atmospheric diffusion models
to ensure that ground level concentrations of the pollutants would not exceed air quality standards. The appropriate
regulatory bodies reviewed these analyses. In the case of the nuclear energy industry, detailed field investigations
were also required before an operating permit would be authorized.
The environmental movements of the 1960s, pioneered by the people like Rachel Carson, Barbara Ward and
Barry Commoner, resulted in environmental groups becoming politically active in many countries. As a partial
response to these pressure groups governments accepted the principle that citizens' organizations should have an
opportunity of participate in the decision-making process of those major developments, which could have
significant environmental impacts.
The comprehensive environmental legislation in U. S. A. the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
came into force in January 1970. In Canada the government established an Environmental Assessment and
Review Process in 1973. The need of carrying out an environmental impact assessment has been accepted in
many other jurisdictions including most of the provinces in U.S.A., Canada, Japan, Australia and several
European countries.
From 1970s the emphasis of EIA was on measurable physical factors, particularly those for which
there were standards and codes, e.g., air quality, water quality, solid waste disposal etc. After a few years
EIAs began to include biological and ecological factors. More recently, EIAs were broadened even further
to include socio-economic factors (employment opportunities, cultural impacts, recreational impacts etc.).
The EIA system has been welcomed in principle by may scientists, engineers, citizen's groups and
others.
The role of EIA in society
The role of EIA in society may be assessed as follows:
1) It provides a procedure for the full consideration of the possible adverse environmental impacts of
policies, programmes, activities and projects before any decision to proceed; it precludes 'behind
close doors' decision making in the public and private sectors;
2) There is opportunity to present recommendations to the decision-maker of the suitability of the
policy, programme (groups of projects, either sequential or concurrent) activity or project, to
proceed or not, on environmental grounds;
3) For proposals which proceed, there is the opportunity to present the incorporation of conditions of
consent that should mitigate some of the adverse environmental effects;
4) It is an avenue for the public to contribute to the decision making process, through written and
oral contribution to the decision makers appearance at public enquiries and hearing and possible
participation in mediation processes;
-3-
5) The whole process of development is open to scrutiny for the benefit of all the key players
proponent - government and public, resulting in better projects more carefully thought out;
6) Basically unsatisfactory projects (including otherwise satisfactory projects on the wrong sites)
tend to weed themselves out before advancing far into the EIA process and certainly before
reaching a public inquiry stage;
7) Condition of approval may ensure monitoring, annual reporting by the proponent, post-project
analysis (PPA) and independent auditing;
8) Alternative approaches, mixes of technology, and sites can be thoroughly examined;
9) EIA is seen, however, as t he servant of development: promoting better developments, at best, but
basically supporting economic growth,
10) The process endorses waste discharges, the emission of greenhouse gases in many, cases a
profligate use, mining, extraction and processing of natural resources;
11) The whole process as a creature of government is subject to political pressures: key players within
government have no security of employment whatever;
12) Officers of integrity have little chance when confronted by a combination of hostile interests at a
political level;
13) On the other hand, a vigilant public, skilled objectors and organizations with a range of legal
rights to object, access to the courts, and a supportive media with some political sympathy, can
exercise countervailing power and influence.
-4-
8. Waste disposal and treatment Ocean dumping, landfill, contaminants and toxic substances,
underground storage
9, Chemical treatment Insecticides, herbicides
10. Recreation Hunting areas, parks, resort development, vehicles
Project operations
How will hazardous wastes and waste products be handled ?
What provisions have been made for training employees in the environmental protection ?
How contingency plans have been developed to cope with accidents ?
What plans have been made for environmental monitoring ?
What safety equipment be checked regularly ?
Site characteristics
Is the terrain complex creating problems in predicting ground water characteristics, air pollution,
-5-
transport etc. ? a Is the site likely to be particularly susceptible to natural disasters, e.g.,floods or
earthquakes ?
Will many people be displaced by the project ?
Will historic sites or traditional thoroughfares be endangered ?
Will the project interfere with the movements of important migratory animal and fish population ? a
What are the main attributes of local flora and fauna ? a Is the local environment unsuitable for the
project to be complete success.
Possible Impacts
For this class of project what are the possible impacts on the environment ? During construction? After
construction ? Long term ? Who would be affected by these impacts ?
Socio-economic Analysis
Who will gain and who will lose by the project ?
What are the trade-off ?
Will the project reduce inequalities between inequalities between occupational, ethnic, sex and age groups?
Will it blend or enhance valuable elements and patterns in the local, national or regional culture?
Alternatives
Could the project proposal be modified to reduce the environmental impacts ?
Is an alternative possible ? i.e. the same project at a different site? A different project at the same site?)
-6-
The Silent Valley Hydro-Electric Project became the subject of much controversy in the early 1980s. The
southern state of Kerala had proposed to develop a part of the silent valley, a densely forested area to
increase electricity production in the state. This was made with great opposition from both environmentalists
and the general public. The central government intervened and the project was stopped on environmental
grounds.
Another major involvement has been the water resources development programme of the Narmada basin;
the river Narmada rises at Amarkantak in M.P. flowing 1300 km west to the Arabian Sea, its catchments
embracing three states. The water development programme plans eventually to construct 29 major (several
smaller) projects to utilized vast amount of energy for irrigation and power, as well as to deliver water for
domestic and industrial purposes. EIAs have been done over the catchments area, the dam environs,
submergence areas, and downstream river areas, the implications for resettlements and rehabilitation, and
how to achieve these. In spite of widespread agitation and protests staged by renowned environmentalists
(e.g. Medha Patekar) the project has clearance from the government and the work is now in progress.
Various recommendations have emerged about soil and moisture conservation measures, such as terracing,
check dams, and grassland improvement; conservation, improvement of existing natural forests and
plantations, and soil conservation; and the encouragement of public participation in the planning phase.
The World Bank was, for a time heavily involved in this project. In 1993 the India Govt, cancelled
the proposed World Bank loan unhappy, at least in part, with the banks, exacting environmental and
resettlement standards. The project itself, however, is still to proceed.
Conclusions
The main objective of an EIA is the reconciliation of environmental and socio-economic considerations
with respect to development. According the EIA system is a potentially useful component of good
environmental management; however, it is far from perfect. Some of the criticisms are as follows: 1) the
EIA system delays projects, 2) the preparation of EIS is costly, 3) the predictions of EIS are too uncertain,
4) the EIS is a glossy document written to impress or educate citizens, groups, 5) the EIS is prepared too
quickly and is not subject to review. In spite of all these shortcoming the EIA has been accepted mandatory
-7-