An Evaluation of the Quality of Environmental Impact Statements in Thessaloniki, Greece

Abstract

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) legislation was first adopted in Greece in 1979. In the intervening 23 years, competent authorities, practitioners, and developers have gained considerable experience in the practice of EIA. A previous research study conducted for the European Commission indicated, on the basis of the quality of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) produced, that overall the nation's EIA system was performing satisfactorily. This research builds on the previous study by examining a considerably larger sample (72) of EISs produced for a diverse range of project types. Only 40% of EISs sampled were found to be of a satisfactory quality (compared to 75% in the previous study). An assessment of the performance of different elements of the EIA process indicates that descriptive tasks are, on average, performed better than scientific tasks. Consultation with stakeholder groups and their participation appears to be particularly problematic. Variables that influence the quality of EISs are identified and a number of broad recommendations are made for improving the effectiveness of the EIA system in the short and long term.

Fifteen Years of Environmental Impact Assessment System in Bangladesh: Current Practice, Challenges and Future Directions

“…These findings are similar to previous evaluations of EIA systems (for example, Badr et al, 2011;Barker and Wood, 1999;Cashmore et al, 2002;Glasson et al, 1997;Sandham and Pretorius, 2008). With regards to key shortcomings, for some EISs, baseline data collected appear to be inadequate and inconsistent.…”

Sectorial variation in the quality of environmental impact statements and factors influencing the quality

“…This indicates that the overall quality of EISs in Bangaldesh is generally 'satisfactory' despite the fact that a significant percentage (35%) of EISs are found to be poor. These findings correspond broadly to the findings of other similar studies (for example, Barker and Wood 1999;Cashmore, Christophilopoulos, and Cobb 2002;Glasson et al 1997;Sandham and Pretorius 2008;Badr, Zahran, and Cashmore 2011). While the overall quality of EISs of four major sectors in Bangladesh is deemed to be satisfactory irrespective of the four major sectors, the actual quality of EISs significantly varies across the four major sectors, as analysed in the next section.…”

“…This approach has been widely used by researchers elsewhere (e.g. Hughes and Wood 1996;Glasson et al 1997;Barker and Wood 1999;Cashmore, Christophilopoulos, and Cobb 2002;Gray and Edward-Jones 2003;Badr, Cashmore, and Cobb 2004;Pinho, Rodrigo, and Monterrosso 2007;Sandham and Pretorius 2008;Badr, Zahran, and Cashmore 2011) in the last two decades. This approach, along with good practice criteria, has been adapted and applied to Bangladesh for the purpose of this study.…”

Impact mitigation in environmental impact assessment: paper promises or the basis of consent conditions?

“…For example, studies have suggested a general improvement in the quality of ESs Cashmore et al, 2002), plus there is, despite the problems discussed earlier, increasing availability of guidance for good practice preparation of ESs (Tromans and Fuller, 2003). In addition, EIA legislation in England changed in 1999, during the second time period (see Table 5), and a contingency table examining the use of mitigation measures before and after the legislation was introduced indicated that the two time periods (before and after new legislation was adopted in 1999) and the use of mitigation measures are not independent variables either.…”