Progressing quality control in environmental impact assessment beyond legislative compliance: An evaluation of the IEMA EIA Quality Mark certification scheme

Abstract

The effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) systems is contingent on a number of control mechanisms: procedural; judicial; evaluative; public and government agency; professional; and development aid agency. If we assume that procedural and judicial controls are guaranteed in developed EIA systems, then progressing effectiveness towards an acceptable level depends on improving the performance of other control mechanisms over time. These other control mechanisms are either absent, or are typically centrally controlled, requiring public finances; this we argue is an unpopular model in times of greater Government austerity. Here we evaluate a marketbased mechanism for improving the performance of evaluative and professional control mechanisms, the UK Institute of Environmental Management and Assessments' EIA Quality Mark. We do this by defining dimensions of effectiveness for the purposes of our evaluation, and by identifying international examples of the approaches taken to delivering the other control measures to validate the approach taken in the EIA Quality Mark. We then evaluate the EIA Quality Mark, when used in combination with legal procedures and an active judiciary, against the effectiveness dimensions and use time-series analysis of registrant data to examine its ability to progress practice. We conclude that the EIA Quality Mark has merit as a model for a market-based mechanism, and may prove a more financially palatable approach for delivering effective EIA in mature systems in countries that lack centralised agency oversight. It may, therefore, be of particular interest to some Member States of the European Union for ensuring forthcoming certification requirements stemming from recent amendments to the EIA Directive.

On legitimacy in impact assessment: An epistemologically-based conceptualisation

“…We argue in this paper that the advent of 'fake news' and the 'filter bubble' illustrate new ways in which the knowledge possessed by IA stakeholders can be subverted, actively or passively, and which presents a real threat to the legitimacy of tools like IA which inform political decision-making. Epistemologically positioning IA as essential to understanding knowledge legitimacy alongside organisational legitimacy ties in with an understanding that there is a strong relationship between epistemology and legitimacy (Mizrachi, 2002), and this may help to explain why knowledge is clearly regarded as being an important component of an effective IA system (Bond et al, 2017).…”

METODOLOGIA PARA AVALIAÇÃO DE SUSTENTABILIDADE HIDROAMBIENTAL PARA PROJETOS DE INTERVENÇÕES EM RIOS PERENES (MASRios): CONCEITO E ESTRUTURAÇÃO DO INSTRUMENTO

“…Desse modo, a AIA deve contar com ferramentas metodológicas para elaboração e embasamento de seus estudos ambientais a fi m de oferecer fundamentação na identifi cação, na análise e na avaliação dos impactos ambientais decorrentes das intervenções antrópicas planejadas e aplicadas. Contudo, como cita Bond et al (2016), a efi cácia da AIA depende de vários mecanismos de controle: processuais, judiciais, avaliativos, órgãos públicos e governamentais, profi ssionais, e de políticas de públicas.…”

“…Nesta perspectiva, entende-se que a Avaliação de Sustentabilidade (AS) enquanto uma metodologia de avaliação, pode ser um importante instrumento de gestão ambiental para embasamento da análise do conjunto de dados e informações contidas nestes estudos ambientais. Lee (2006), Bond et al (2011) e Bond et al (2012) citam que este tipo de metodologia assegura mais atenção direta, efetiva e efi ciente à interação dos fatores sociais, econômicos e ambientais envolvidos no processo de avaliação de uma determinada intervenção antrópica no meio ambiente. (2018), a AS é considerada como a geração seguinte da avaliação de impacto ambiental e da avaliação ambiental estratégica, uma vez que, abordam principalmente os impactos associados através de indicadores, comunicando informações essenciais à tomada de decisão por parte dos usuários e dos formuladores de políticas.…”

Enhancing EIA systems in developing countries: A focus on capacity development in the case of Iran

“…Public participation has two primary benefits, first, it helps in introducing procedural democracy (Aschemann 2007; Panigrahi and Amirapu 2012) and secondly, it can serve as a mechanism for quality control within EIA (Bond et al 2017). However, public participation cannot effectively work without embedding a culture of public participation into society (Purnama 2003;Marara et al 2011).…”