The Effectiveness of Eia as an Instrument for Environmental Governance: Reflecting on 25 Years of Eia Practice in the Netherlands and the Uk

Abstract

The European Union (EU) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive which was introduced some 25 years ago has had a major impact on decision-making practices in EU member states. In the professional literature, this impact has mostly been discussed under the heading of "effectiveness", with an emphasis being given in particular to procedural elements. The extent to which EIA has contributed to objectives, such as raising environmental awareness and leading to an incorporation of environmental values in decision-making has only been rarely investigated. This paper reflects on these latter two aspects of EIA effectiveness in two EU member states; the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Empirical evidence was compiled mainly on the basis of a comprehensive literature review and online surveys with EIA professionals in both countries. Our results indicate that overall the instrument is about equally effective in both countries with regards to the incorporation of environmental concerns in decision-making. As both countries have different governance mechanisms, further research is needed on why perceived effectiveness does not differ more. § Corresponding author.

Theorising EIA effectiveness: A contribution based on the Danish system

“…Cashmore et al, 2004;Sadler, 1996;Zobaidul Kabir and Momtaz, 2013). The 'substantive' effectiveness of EIA -the extent to which EIA practises achieve the substantive objectives of this policy tool -has received much less attention (Arts et al, 2012;Cashmore et al, 2004).…”

“…The first is the measurement of the effectiveness of EIA practises through an assessment of its outcomes. The second involves developing knowledge on the causal mechanisms through which these effects occur and the mediation of its effects by contextual variables (Runhaar and Driessen, 2007;Arts et al, 2012). For instance, EIA legislation, in part, is believed to steer decision-making through the provision of 'rational' information, although the effectiveness of this causal mechanism has been extensively critiqued (Kørnøv and Thissen, 2000).…”

“…For instance, EIA legislation, in part, is believed to steer decision-making through the provision of 'rational' information, although the effectiveness of this causal mechanism has been extensively critiqued (Kørnøv and Thissen, 2000). Other governance mechanisms in EIA operate more subtly, such as its effects on public awareness and on promoting learning (Arts et al, 2012).…”

“…In this paper we contribute to theory-development on the substantive effectiveness of EIA based upon a point of departure in a model developed by Arts et al (2012). We apply this model to the Danish EIA system, 1 which has some interesting features from a governance perspective.…”

System-Based Assessments—Improving the Confidence in the EIA Process

“…Currently, the significance of an impact is based on the "best professional judgement" of the EIA team: a process that relies on individual expertise and is applicable only in the context of particular projects, even if other approaches exist [6][7][8]. Because of this commonly admitted practice, quantitative measures of impact rarely support an EIA, and very few impact analyses rely on an ecosystem-based assessment [8][9][10][11][12]. The notion of "significant impact" has relied mainly on qualitative impact methodologies that were proposed as a stop-gap measure in the early 1970s, such as Leopold's methods [13], when US regulators were overwhelmed with EIA reports [14].…”