K.

Fedra 2000
1
Environmental
Impact Assessment

a spatial DSS application
K.Fedra 2000
2
Environmental Impact Assessment
the history
its philosophy
the legislation
the procedure
case examples
K.Fedra 2000
3
Environmental Impact Assessment
is intended as an instrument of
preventive environmental
management. It provides a
framework and an information
basis for decision making on
activities affecting the
environment.
K.Fedra 2000
4
Environmental Impact Assessment
as a procedure, it provides a
prototypical example of a
practical application of
geomatics in a well defined
regulatory framework.
K.Fedra 2000
5
Environmental Impact Assessment
the history
its philosophy
the legislation
the procedure
case examples
K.Fedra 2000
6
Environmental Impact Assessment
was first introduced in the
USA within the framework of
the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) in 1969,
which became law on
January 1, 1971.

K.Fedra 2000
7
Environmental Impact Assessment
Belgium 1985
Denmark 1989
Germany 1990
France 1976
Greece 1990
Ireland 1990
Italy 1988
Luxemb. --
Netherlands 1986
Portugal 1990
Spain 1986
UK 1990
European implementation: 1985
K.Fedra 2000
8
Environmental Impact Assessment
European implementation:
Council of the European Communities,
Directive of 27 June 1985 on the
Assessment of the Effects of Certain
Public and Private Projects on the
Environment (85/337/EEC),
Official Journal of the European
Communities, No. L 175/40.
K.Fedra 2000
9
Environmental Impact Assessment
the history
its philosophy
the legislation
the procedure
case examples
K.Fedra 2000
10
Environmental Impact Assessment
The philosophy:
impact assessment is designed as a
preventive measure.
It should give environmental
considerations equal weight with
technical and economic aspects.
K.Fedra 2000
11
Environmental Impact Assessment
The philosophy:
environmental considerations should
be introduced early on in the
planning processes.
Broad and public participation should
ensure wide acceptance of projects
implemented.
K.Fedra 2000
12
Environmental Impact Assessment
the history
its philosophy
the legislation
the procedure
case examples
K.Fedra 2000
13
NEPA (USA, 1971)
National Environmental Policy Act
Key Provisions:
Established environmental quality
as a leading national priority by
stating a national policy for the
environment;
K.Fedra 2000
14
NEPA (USA, 1971)
Made environmental protection
part of the mandate of all federal
agencies, establishing procedures
for the incorporation of
environmental concerns into
agency decision making.
K.Fedra 2000
15
NEPA (USA, 1971)
In particular, it requires federal
agencies to prepare an
environmental impact statement
for major actions or projects that
can affect the environment;
K.Fedra 2000
16
NEPA (USA, 1971)
Established a Council on
Environmental Quality in the
Executive Office of the President
to oversee and coordinate all
federal environmental effort.
K.Fedra 2000
17
NEPA (USA, 1971)
impact statements must contain:
A description of the proposed action,
its purpose, and a description of the
environment affected
The relationship to land use plans,
policies, and controls for the affected
areas;
K.Fedra 2000
18
NEPA (USA, 1971)
The probable environmental impacts,
positive and negative, direct and
indirect, and possible international
implications;
A discussion of alternatives;
The probable negative impacts that
cannot be avoided or mitigated;
K.Fedra 2000
19
NEPA (USA, 1971)
The relationship between local and
short-term use and long-term
considerations;
An irreversible commitments of
resources;
A description of federal actions to
mitigate and offset adverse effects and
Comments from reviewers.
K.Fedra 2000
20
EIA (85/337/EEC)
applies to the assessment of the
environmental effects of those public
and private projects which are likely to
have significant effects on the
environment.
K.Fedra 2000
21
EIA (85/337/EEC)
Project means:
the execution of construction works or
of other installations or schemes
other interventions in the natural
surroundings and landscape including
those involving the extraction of
minerals.
K.Fedra 2000
22
EIA (85/337/EEC)
Development consent means:
the decision of the competent
authorities which entitles the developer
to proceed with the project.
K.Fedra 2000
23
EIA (85/337/EEC)
.. have significant effects on the
environment by virtue inter alia,
of their:
nature, size, location.
K.Fedra 2000
24
EIA (85/337/EEC)
direct and indirect effects of a project
on the following factors:
human beings, fauna and flora
soil, water, air, climate and the landscape
the inter-action between the factors
mentioned in the first and second indents
material assets and the cultural heritage.
K.Fedra 2000
25
EIA (85/337/EEC)
information to be provided by the developer
a description of the project: site, design, size
a description of the measures to avoid, reduce,
and if possible remedy significant adverse effects
data required to identify and assess the main
effects on the environment
a non-technical summary of this information.
K.Fedra 2000
26
EIA (85/337/EEC)
Mandatory assessment:
crude-oil refineries (excluding lubricants),
gasification and liquefaction of coal or bituminous
shale (> 500 tons per day)
thermal power stations and combustion
installations (> 300 MW) and nuclear power
stations (except research reactors < 1kW)
K.Fedra 2000
27
EIA (85/337/EEC)
Mandatory assessment:
permanent storage and final disposal of
radioactive waste
cast iron and steel works
extraction, processing and transformation of
asbestos (various size limits)
integrated chemical installations
K.Fedra 2000
28
EIA (85/337/EEC)
Mandatory assessment:
construction of motorways, express roads and
lines for long-distance railway traffic, airports with
basic runways > 2100 m.
trading ports and inland waterways which permit
vessels > 1,350 tons.
waste disposal (incineration, chemical treatment
or land fill) of toxic and dangerous wastes.
K.Fedra 2000
29
EIA (85/337/EEC)
Optional
agriculture
extractive industry
energy industry
processing of metals
manufacture of
glass
chemical industry

food industry
textile, leather,
wood and paper
rubber industry
infrastructure
projects
others
K.Fedra 2000
30
EIA (85/337/EEC)
infrastructure projects:
industrial estate development projects
urban development projects
ski lifts and cable cars
construction of roads, harbors, and airfields
canalisation, flood relief works
dams and other water storage
tramways, railways, underground
oil and gas pipelines . etc.
K.Fedra 2000
31
Information requirements (85/337/EEC)
Description of the project:
physical characteristics, land-use
requirements during construction and
operation
production processes, materials used
estimate of expected residues and
emissions (water, air, soil pollution, noise,
vibrations, light, heat, radiation, etc.)
K.Fedra 2000
32
Information requirements (85/337/EEC)
Alternatives:
outline of the main alternatives
main reasons for choice, including
environmental effects
K.Fedra 2000
33
Information requirements (85/337/EEC)
Impacts on:
population, fauna, flora, soils, water, air,
climatic factors, material assets incl.
architectural and archeological heritage,
landscape
interrelationship between these factors
K.Fedra 2000
34
Information requirements (85/337/EEC)
Likely significant effects from:
existence of the project
use of natural resources
emission of pollutants, creation of
nuisances, elimination of waste
and the description of the methods
used to assess the effects.
K.Fedra 2000
35
Information requirements (85/337/EEC)
Description of measures:
to prevent, reduce, and where
possible to offset any significant
adverse effects on the
environment.
K.Fedra 2000
36
Information requirements (85/337/EEC)
Summary:
a non-technical summary of the
information provided
K.Fedra 2000
37
Information requirements (85/337/EEC)
Difficulties:
an indication of the difficulties
(technical deficiencies or lack of
know-how) encountered by the
developer in compiling the required
information.
K.Fedra 2000
38
Environmental Impact Assessment
the history
its philosophy
the legislation
the procedure
case examples
K.Fedra 2000
39
Environmental Impact Assessment
procedure:
deciding whether an EIA is required (Screening)
determining the scope of EIA (Scoping)
preparing of the impact statement (EIS)
consultations, public participation
evaluating EIA results and consultations
reaching a decision
monitoring impacts after project implementation
K.Fedra 2000
40
Environmental Impact Assessment
procedural steps:
description of the project
description of the environment
identification of environmental impacts
evaluation of environmental impacts
management and control of impacts
presentation of the study
public participation
judgment by authorities
K.Fedra 2000
41
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase I: description of the project
Objective: identification and characterisation
of the proposed project
Sources: developer, planners, technicians
Software: GIS, DBMS, spreadsheet,
graphics, statistics
K.Fedra 2000
42
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase I: description of the project
Input: project phases, processes,
products and materials, risks
Output: site (alternatives), emissions,
resource consumption, scheduling,
technical solutions, relation to plans
Problems: uncertainties, technical limitations
K.Fedra 2000
43
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 2: description of the environment
Objective: identification and characterisation
of the affected environment
Sources: government, public, specialists
Software: GIS, DBMS, spreadsheet,
graphics, statistics
K.Fedra 2000
44
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 2: description of the environment
Input: local/regional environments, human
concerns, standards, background
pollution levels
Output: current state, sensitive elements
Problems: data and resource limitations
K.Fedra 2000
45
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 3: identification of effects
Objective: identification of likely interactions
between project and environment
Sources: specialists, stake holders
Software: expert systems, conceptual and
qualitative models
K.Fedra 2000
46
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 3: identification of effects
Input: phases 1 and 2, checklists,
cross-impact analysis
Output: list of potentially important effects
Problems: criteria, qualitative judgement,
completeness of coverage
K.Fedra 2000
47
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 4: evaluation of effects
Objective: estimate magnitudes and
characteristics of impacts
Sources: specialists, stake holders
Software: GIS, expert systems,
environmental simulation models

K.Fedra 2000
48
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 4: evaluation of effects
Input: phases 1,2 and 3, scientific
literature, expert knowledge,
analysis tools
Output: description and classification or
ranking of impacts
Problems: criteria, model and data uncertainty
subjective judgement
K.Fedra 2000
49
Environmental Impact Assessment
subjective judgement:

the Delphi method
K.Fedra 2000
50
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 5: Management and control
of the environmental effects
Objective: mitigation, compensation, and
monitoring measures
Sources: specialist, developer, government
Software: GIS, DBMS, visualisation


K.Fedra 2000
51
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 5: management and control
of the environmental effects
Input: phases 1,2 and 4, standards,
methods and technologies
Output: procedures, measures (monitoring
plan, mitigation measures)
Problems: criteria, resources, judgement
K.Fedra 2000
52
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 6: presentation of the study
Objective: report preparation
Sources: specialist (risk communication)
developer, government
Software: visualisation, GIS, DBMS,
text processing, multi-media


K.Fedra 2000
53
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 6: presentation of the study
Input: phases 1,2,3,4,5, formal regulatory
requirements
Output: report (consensus)
Problems: communication, vested interests
K.Fedra 2000
54
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 7: public participation (hearings)
Objective: negotiation with public, interest
groups, stake holders (actors)
Sources: all actors involved, media
Software: visualisation, GIS, DBMS,
text processing, multi-media


K.Fedra 2000
55
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 7: public participation
Input: phases 1,2,3,4,5,6
Output: opinions, comments, position
statements
Problems: communication, conflicting
objectives, plural rationalities,
subjectivity, hidden agenda
K.Fedra 2000
56
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 8: formal decision making
Objective: decision making, communication,
implementation
Sources: government regulations,
specialists
Software: DSS, KBS


K.Fedra 2000
57
Environmental Impact Assessment
Phase 8: formal decision making
Input: phase 6,7
Output: formal decisions, commitments
Problems: communication, political trade-offs,
legal challenges

K.Fedra 2000
58
Environmental Impact Assessment
Tools and Methods
Example application:
the Mekong water
resources development
system MEXSES
K.Fedra 2000
59
Environmental Impact Assessment
Tools and Methods
Graphic overlay methods (McHarg,
1968; Dooley and Newkirk, 1976)
USGS Matrix (Leopold, Clarke,
Hanshaw et al., 1971)
Network Analysis (Sorensen, 1971;
Sorensen, 1972)
Cross-impact Simulation (Kane, 1972)
EES: Environmental Evaluation System
(Dee et al., 1973)
K.Fedra 2000
60
Environmental Impact Assessment
HEP: Habitat Evaluation Procedures (US
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1976)
Decision Analysis (Keeney and Raiffa,
1976)
WRAM: Water Resources Assessment
(Solomon, Colbert, Hansen et al., 1977;
Richardson, Hansen, Solomon et al., 1977
EQA: Environmental Quality Assessment
(Duke et al., 1977)
K.Fedra 2000
61
Environmental Impact Assessment
METLUND Landscape Planning Model
(Fabos et al., 1978)
Goals Achievement Matrix (Hill, 1968)
WES: Wetland Evaluation System
(Galloway, 1978)
AEAM: Adaptive Environmental
Assessment (Holling, 1978)
K.Fedra 2000
62
Environmental Impact Assessment
EQEP: Environmental Quality
Evaluation Procedure (Duke, 1979)
CBA: Cost--Benefit Analysis and related
methods: numerous authors
Interactive Systems Analysis and
Decision Support (Fedra, Li, Wang et
al., 1987; Fedra, Karhu, Rys et al.,
1987; Fedra, 1988; Fedra, 1991).
Expert Systems (Fedra et al., 1991;
Hushon (1992).
K.Fedra 2000
63
Environmental Impact Assessment
Classification of methods:
Ad hoc
Checklists
Matrices
Networks
Overlays (GIS)
Cost/benefit analysis
Modeling (AEAM)
K.Fedra 2000
64
Environmental Impact Assessment
Requirements:
systematic, comprehensive, flexible
organize large amounts of
heterogeneous data
quantitative, accurate, objective
participatory, easy to communicate
fast, easy, and cheap
K.Fedra 2000
65
Environmental Impact Assessment
Impact measurement:
Comprehensive but specific
(isolate project effects)
Explicit, quantitative, commensurate
Objective, reproducible
Easy to aggregate
Incorporate risk and uncertainty
K.Fedra 2000
66
Environmental Impact Assessment
Checklists consist of a list of
environmental parameters to be
investigated for potential impacts.
They therefore ensure complete
coverage of environmental aspects to
be investigated.

K.Fedra 2000
67
Environmental Impact Assessment
Earth: mineral resources; construction material;
soils; land form; force fields and background
radiation; unique physical features;
Water: surface (rivers, lakes and reservoirs,
estuaries); coastal seas and ocean,
underground; quality; temperature; recharge;
snow, ice, and permafrost;
Atmosphere: quality (gases, particles); climate
(micro, macro); temperature;

K.Fedra 2000
68
Environmental Impact Assessment
Flora: trees; shrubs; grass; crops;
microflora; aquatic plants; endangered
species; barriers; corridors;
Fauna: birds; land animals including
reptiles; fish and shellfish; benthic
organisms; insects; microfauna;
endangered species; barriers; corridors;

K.Fedra 2000
69
Environmental Impact Assessment
Land use: wilderness and open
space; wetlands; forestry; grazing;
agriculture; residential; commercial;
industrial; mining and quarrying;
Recreation: hunting; fishing; boating;
swimming; camping and hiking;
picnicking; resorts.

K.Fedra 2000
70
Environmental Impact Assessment
Checklists
do carry a geographical, as well as
cultural, bias ;
maybe only project type specific;
or, if universal, carry a large number
of mutually exclusive categories.
K.Fedra 2000
71
Environmental Impact Assessment
Impact matrices combine a checklist of
environmental conditions likely to be
affected with a list of project
activities, the two lists arranged in the
form of a matrix. The possible cause-
-effect relationships between
activities and environmental features
are then identified and evaluated cell
by cell.
K.Fedra 2000
72
Environmental Impact Assessment
Matrices can be very detailed and
large, the classical Leopold matrix
contains 100 by 88 cells, and is thus
somewhat cumbersome to handle.
Numerous extensions and
modifications have been proposed.

K.Fedra 2000
73
Environmental Impact Assessment
Networks are designed to explicitly
consider higher order, i.e., secondary
and even tertiary consequences in
addition to the primary cause--effect
relations addressed by matrices.
They consist of linked impacts
including chained multiple effects and
feedbacks.
K.Fedra 2000
74
Environmental Impact Assessment
Cost--benefit analysis (CBA) is an
attempt to monetize all effects for
direct comparison in monetary terms:
provides a clear answer and basis for
the comparison of alternatives;
but the monetization of many
environmental problems is
sometimes extremely difficult.

K.Fedra 2000
75
Environmental Impact Assessment
Case study:
Water resources development in the
Lower Mekong Basin.
Mekong river: 475,000 Mill.m
3
/year
China, Burma, Laos, Thailand,
Kampuchea and Viet Nam,
delta into the South China Sea
southwest of Ho Chi Minh City.
K.Fedra 2000
76
Environmental Impact Assessment
The lower Mekong basin covers an area of
611,000 km
2
(77%) of the total river basin.
It includes nearly the whole of the Lao PDR
(202,400 km
2
), the northern tip and the
northeast area of Thailand (180,240 km
2
)
nine-tenths of Kampuchea (154,000 km
2
)
and the western flank and southern tip of
Viet Nam (65,200 km
2
).

K.Fedra 2000
77
Environmental Impact Assessment
Development potential:
hydroelectric power resources of the
lower Mekong basin at 58,000 MW
installed capacity and 505,000 GWh
per year. The estimated potential for
year round irrigation with the help of
storage and flood plain reservoirs is of
the order of 6.4 million ha.
K.Fedra 2000
78
Environmental Impact Assessment
Development problems:
Watershed degradation, erosion and
sedimentation;
Acidification of soils in the delta;
Soil salinization in the Korat plateau;
Problem soils (desertification);
Inundation control effects on fisheries;
Waterborne diseases;
Rural water supply (saline and acid).
K.Fedra 2000
79
Environmental Impact Assessment
MEXSES:
Rule-based expert system with GIS
Combines project type specific
checklists, matrices, and network
analysis in an interactive system.
Individual impacts are classified as
not significant - small - moderate - major
K.Fedra 2000
80
Environmental Impact Assessment
Assessment proceeds in stages for:
site selection
project design
construction phase
operational phase
mitigation measures
cost-benefit analysis
K.Fedra 2000
81
Environmental Impact Assessment
Summary assessment in terms of:
Losses in precious natural resources;
Accelerated use of natural resources;
Hazards to ecology and endangered species
Unrealized resource utilization potential;
Undesirable land use development,
urbanization;
Increased disparity in income;
Unrealized socio-economic enhancements.

K.Fedra 2000
82
Environmental Impact Assessment
Project Types:
Multi-purpose Projects
Hydropower (with Dam/Reservoir)
Dams and Reservoirs
Irrigation Projects
Pump Irrigation Projects
Fisheries and Aquaculture
Navigation Projects
Flood Protection
Power Transmission Lines.

K.Fedra 2000
83
Environmental Impact Assessment
Checklist example: location problems
Resettlement
Watershed degradation
Encroachment upon precious ecosystems
Encroachment on historical/cultural values
Watershed erosion
Reservoir siltation
Impairment of navigation
K.Fedra 2000
84
Environmental Impact Assessment
Checklist example: location problems
Changes in groundwater hydrology,
waterlogging
Seepage and evaporation losses
Migration of valuable fish species
Inundation of mineral resources/forests
Other inundation losses and adverse effects
Earthquake hazards
Local climatic change.
K.Fedra 2000
85
Environmental Impact Assessment
Rule-based assessment:
Rules consist of two basic parts:
Premise: the list of conditions which are
to be tested (connected by AND or OR)
Conclusion: the actions to be
performed, if all conditions of the
premise have been fulfilled

K.Fedra 2000
86
Environmental Impact Assessment
Rule-based assessment:
RULE 1010101 #country dependency
IF project_country == Thailand
AND people_to_resettle >= 25,000
THEN impact = major
ENDRULE

K.Fedra 2000
87
Environmental Impact Assessment
Rule-based assessment:
RULE 1010129 # project size
IF project_area == very_large
AND [ population_density == high
OR population_density == medium ]
OR project_area INCLUDES settlement
THEN people_to_resettle = very_many

K.Fedra 2000
88
Environmental Impact Assessment
Rule-based assessment:
RULE 1010582 #USLE final round: erosion_potential
IF [ rain_factor == low
OR rain_factor == very_low ]
AND [ soil_slope_factor == high
OR soil_slope_factor == very_high ]
AND [ vegetation_factor == very_high
OR vegetation_factor == high ]
THEN erosion_potential = medium
ENDRULE