Is environmental impact assessment regulation a ‘burden’ to private firms?

Annandale, David; Taplin, Ross

doi:10.1016/s0195-9255(03)00002-7

Cited by 28 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Boyd et al, 1993;Starbuck and Mezias, 1996). The impact assessment studies of Macintosh (2010) and Annandale and Taplin (2003) were founded on surveys or interviews with proponents. In subsequent work, firstly Annandale et al (2004) used the perceptions of managers of companies as a basis for determining the performance outcomes of voluntary environmental protection instruments (specifically corporate environmental reporting and environmental management systems), and secondly Annandale et al (2007) performed a follow-up analysis of the same companies using printed documents and other archival material.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further we have articulated the nature of impact assessment benefits, and their relative tangibility in a simple framework. We now call upon impact assessment researchers and practitioners alike to pursue investigations from practice that will build an empirical database on the small body of existing foundational work, especially that of Annandale and Taplin (2003), for demonstrating the benefits of impact assessment to proponents.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example Annandale and Taplin (2003) reported that the majority of senior mining company executives from Australia and Canada in their study saw impact assessment as a "catalyst for integrating environmental design into the early planning of a project, thereby alleviating the need to spend money on overcoming environmental problems once a poorly designed project has been commissioned" (p383). Similarly a survey of proponents reported both direct and indirect effects of the federal environmental impact assessment regime in Australia to be an important driver of environmental benefits realised through the process (Macintosh, 2010).…”

Section: Demonstrating the Benefits Of Impact Assessment -An Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It also aligns with an identified benefit of impact assessment associated with the "legitimation of sound projects" (Ortolano and Shepherd, 1995, p9). The strongest advocacy we are aware of for the business benefits of impact assessment comes from Annandale and Taplin (2003) who reported that representatives from a significant majority of proponent companies in their survey: "indicated that the environmental approvals process should be considered to be an important determinant of investment strategy" (p392).…”

Section: Demonstrating the Benefits Of Impact Assessment -An Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Demonstrating the benefits of impact assessment for proponents

Morrison‐Saunders

Bond

Pope

et al. 2015

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is a call for more studies that explicitly demonstrate the benefits of impact assessment to proponents. While the community of impact assessment practitioners generally believe that impact assessment is beneficial (to all stakeholders), empirical demonstration of this, particularly to project proponents, is warranted, and especially in financial terms. While many impact assessment benefits are intangible in nature, learning from the business and management literature shows how such benefits can usefully be measured based upon perceptions of managers within proponent agencies in tandem with archival material. A framework of the nature of impact assessment benefits for proponents, and their relative tangibility is presented along with a five step methodology for determining benefits. We now call upon impact assessment researchers and practitioners alike to use this framework and methodology to structure investigations from practice that will contribute to an empirical database for demonstrating the benefits of impact assessment to proponents.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Demonstrating the Benefits Of Impact Assessment -An Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Demonstrating the Benefits Of Impact Assessment -An Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Demonstrating the benefits of impact assessment for proponents

Morrison‐Saunders

Bond

Pope

et al. 2015

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…EIAs have historically been seen as a constraint to development, but this view is gradually disappearing (11). Initially, developers ignored the ecosystem while preparing for an EIA because resilience in a natural system would take care of perturbation in early stages of the developmental process (12,13).…”

Section: Genomics Tools In Environmentalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Reviewed: Genomics Tools in Environmental Impact Assessment

Purohit¹,

Raje²,

Kapley³

et al. 2003

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The perils of ranking mining countries and regions: a critical look at the annual survey of the Fraser Institute

Söderholm,

Ericsson,

Hellman

2023

Miner Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The attractiveness of mineral investments across countries and regions worldwide can be judged through various measures, each with its strengths and weaknesses. The purpose of this paper is to scrutinize the Fraser Institute’s ranking of mining jurisdictions, which builds on eliciting the perceptions of industry representatives around the world through an annual survey. The analysis takes stock in the growing scholarship on country performance indicators and concludes that due to the low response rate and the lack of clear definitions of some of the underlying concepts (e.g., political stability), there are reasons to question both the reliability and the validity of this survey. There could also exist incentives among exploration companies to “game” the rankings. For these reasons, the ranking outcomes do not constitute a meaningful scorecard that countries can employ to improve their mining-related policies. However, despite these deficiencies, the Fraser Institute’s survey often enjoys relatively uncritical media attention. It even sets in motion a political “rankings game” in which the mining companies, governments, and other organized groups choose to participate. There is an urgent need for a more reliable and unbiased survey approach, including the consideration of alternative—complementing—measures for assessing investment attractiveness in the mining industry.

show abstract

Is environmental impact assessment regulation a ‘burden’ to private firms?

Cited by 28 publications

References 12 publications

Demonstrating the benefits of impact assessment for proponents

Demonstrating the benefits of impact assessment for proponents

Peer Reviewed: Genomics Tools in Environmental Impact Assessment

The perils of ranking mining countries and regions: a critical look at the annual survey of the Fraser Institute

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About