Preparing NEPA Environmental Assessments

Eccleston, Charles H.; Doub, J. Peyton

doi:10.1201/b12042

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 2 is designed to require agencies of the federal government to undertake environmental planning—to “look before it leaps” and consider agency decision-making impacts on the human environment 3 (Eccleston and Doub, 2012: 3). NEPA’s procedural requirements apply when a federal agency is involved in an action, such as providing permits or funding to a project (Council on Environmental Quality, 2007).…”

Section: Eiasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Federal agencies conducting environmental impact analyses are also influenced by other concerns and policy considerations in the decision-making process including “social, economic, technical or national security interests” (Council on Environmental Quality, 2007: 5). Courts have commonly maintained that NEPA is a procedural law; if the proposing agency complies with other environmental laws and conducts a systematic, impartial, and scientifically justifiable analysis, the courts will generally uphold an agency’s final decision (Eccleston and Doub, 2012). NEPA requires agencies to conduct an “early and open process” 5 in which the NEPA process needs to be integrated into other early planning and authorization procedures (Eccleston and Doub, 2012: 32).…”

Section: Eiasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Courts have commonly maintained that NEPA is a procedural law; if the proposing agency complies with other environmental laws and conducts a systematic, impartial, and scientifically justifiable analysis, the courts will generally uphold an agency’s final decision (Eccleston and Doub, 2012). NEPA requires agencies to conduct an “early and open process” 5 in which the NEPA process needs to be integrated into other early planning and authorization procedures (Eccleston and Doub, 2012: 32). It is intended both to ensure that agencies use NEPA as a tool to consider environmental impacts in planning and decision-making, as well as to avoid delays and potential conflicts later in the process (40 CFR 1501.2, 2021).…”

Section: Eiasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is intended both to ensure that agencies use NEPA as a tool to consider environmental impacts in planning and decision-making, as well as to avoid delays and potential conflicts later in the process (40 CFR 1501.2, 2021). Under NEPA agencies are required to inform and make concerted efforts to involve the public in preparing and executing their NEPA implementation procedures through hearings, public meetings, and publicly available documents (Eccleston and Doub, 2012). However, public participation in the assessment process is not a “vote” and agencies are not required to base their final decision on public opinion (Council on Environmental Quality, 2007: 7).…”

Section: Eiasmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Controlling the narrative: Critiquing the geopolitical narratives of US environmental impact assessments and exclusion of Indigenous communities

Grote

2022

Environment and Planning F

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental policy, while often well-intentioned, can fall short when environmental issues intersect with Indigenous community concerns. The intention of the United States National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is for federal agencies to consider the adverse environmental impacts prior to action. While NEPA has resulted in some agencies making more environmentally conscious decisions, agency self-interest is sometimes prioritized over socio-ecological well-being. Rather than using environmental impact assessments (EIAs) for their potential to inform just and sustainable environmental decisions, in practice federal, state, and private agencies have the power as assessment document authors to create geopolitical narratives. These narratives can be utilized to legitimize the outcomes that best serve their interests rather than the well-being of the surrounding physical and social environment. This article further explores the details of these narratives through two case studies in which Indigenous communities argued that the EIA documents did not adequately consider their worldviews or holistic adverse impacts. Through the utilization of a case study structure, a qualitative content analysis of EIA documents, and an environmental geopolitics framework informed by Indigenous scholarship, this article illustrates how the EIA process, in its current form, allows for agencies to justify or obscure geopolitically motivated actions, often at the expense of Indigenous communities. This work aims to critically enrich EIA scholarship by exploring the phenomenon of inadequate consideration of Indigenous worldviews through an Indigenous environmental geopolitics framework, building on conceptual understandings of the shortcomings of the EIA process and encouraging changes that make strides toward more equitable environmental assessment practice.

show abstract

Section: Eiasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Eiasmentioning

confidence: 99%