Transparency in environment impact assessment decision-making: recent developments in Western Australia

Environmental Management

Bailey

2003

Self Cite

/ A large body of literature addresses the role of science in environmental impact assessment (EIA) but less attention has been given to the views of practitioners themselves. In this research a survey of 31 EIA practitioners in Western Australia was undertaken to determine their perceptions of the quality and importance of science in EIA.The survey results are compared with previous theoretical, empirical and survey studies of the role of science in EIA. Interview questions addressed the role of science in impact prediction, monitoring activities, mitigation and management, and EIA decision-making. It was clear from the interviews that many practitioners are satisfied with the quality of science currently used in EIA, but do not believe that it is given sufficient importance in the process. The quality and importance of science in the pre-decisions stages of EIA was rated higher than in the post-decision stages. While science was perceived to provide the basis for baseline data collection, impact prediction and mitigation design, it was seen to be less important during decision-making and ongoing project management. Science was seen to be just one input to decision-makers along with other factors such as socio-political and economic considerations.While time and budget constraints were seen to limit the scientific integrity of EIA activities, pressure from the public and regulatory authorities increased it. Improving the scientific component of EIA will require consideration of all these factors, not just the technical issues.KEY WORDS: science, environmental impact assessment, professional practice, monitoring, impact prediction, mitigation, decision-making Science and Environmental Assessment 3A considerable amount of interest and attention has been focussed on the role of science in environmental impact assessment (EIA) and a substantial body of literature has addressed this topic. This paper reviews this literature briefly before presenting the results of a survey of 31 EIA practitioners in Western Australia. The principal aim of the survey was to determine what practitioners perceived that the role of science in EIA should be and to compare this with the positions established in the literature. The results of a survey of EIA practitioners in Western Australia are presented and compared with previous theoretical, empirical and survey studies of the role of science in EIA. The study provides valuable insights concerning the practice of EIA and what can be expected of the process. As the hypotheses underlying the study were derived from the literature on the role of science in EIA, it is useful to start with an overview of this body of work.Much of the literature can be classified into two main types:• studies of the theory and practice of EIA with respect to the role that science can or should play (eg. Beanlands and Duinker 1984, Shrader-Frechette 1985, Lemons 1994 A generic approach to EIA has been described by Sadler (1996, p18) which can be applied to any proposal put forward by a proponent. It...

Section: Decision-makingsupporting

confidence: 59%

Section: Factors Determining the Level Of Science In Eiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Factors Determining the Level Of Science In Eiamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Practitioner Perspectives on the Role of Science in Environmental Impact Assessment

Environmental Management

Bailey

2003

Self Cite

“…In Western Australia, the assessment report prepared by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) is a public document and subject to third party appeals (Morrison-Saunders and Bailey 2000). During the appeals process, the Appeals Convenor consults with appellants during the consideration of the appeal.…”

Section: Secretary Of State For the Environment And Another 2000 [3 Wmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is Necessary to Ensure Natural Justice for Community Participants in Sustainability Decision-Making?: Natural Justice in Sustainability Decision-Making

The International Journal of Environmental, Cultural, Economic,

2007

Self Cite

International practices for environmental and sustainability decision-making with respect to expectations to uphold natural justice or procedural fairness through full engagement of public stakeholders concerning all information used to guide decisions are reviewed. Best practice principles that emerge from a literature review and survey of international practitioners from the impact assessment field are evaluated. The concept of natural justice relates to a duty to involve those affected by new development proposals to be involved in approval decision-making through meaningful consultation and participation. This includes fully explaining the reasons for a decision that has been made and reasonable provisions for appealing against decisions taken. Typically, natural justice is not something that is prescribed in law but emerges from practice and customs. The more advanced systems of impact assessment generally provide for a high level of transparency, accountability and public participation in decision-making. In systems where the advice to the decision-maker is available for public comment, there is a greater expectation for full disclosure of information relevant to decision-making. The nature of the legal direction provided for the basis of decision-making has direct bearing on the level of public involvement in decision-making. Decision-making by elected ministers is generally less transparent than that at the level of government agencies, and expectations of practitioners concerning natural justice varies accordingly. Balance has to be struck between efficiency of process and provision of endless opportunity for public participation in decision-making -provision of appeal rights along with full disclosure of the reasons behind a decision are important here. Ultimately some judgement is required by decision-makers to decide when and how much information should be disclosed to stakeholders on a case by case basis, realising however, that a fair process is ultimately likely to lead to the most sustainable outcome and in the most efficient way.

“…Ensure that the term significance is specified and applied consistently (Ehrlich and Ross 2015;Ross et al 2006); and 4. Uphold transparency in decision-making so that significance determinations are clear to all EIA stakeholders (Gibson et al 2005;Morrison-Saunders and Bailey 2000;IAIA & IEA 1999).…”

Section: Essential Components Of Significance Determinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making sense of significance in environmental impact assessment

Jones

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

2016

Self Cite

Impact significance determination lies at the heart of environmental impact assessment (EIA) but conflict and misunderstanding around the concept is common. This paper attempts to make sense of impact significance in EIA based on four essential components of significance synthesised from the literature to ensure that: (1) a clear operational framework for significance determination applies throughout EIA, (2) attention focuses only on significant issues, (3) the term significance is specified and applied consistently, and (4) significance determinations are transparent to all EIA stakeholders. To provide a practical perspective, the extent to which EIA institutional provisions in Western Australia uphold these significance determination components is reviewed. Overall the Western Australian approach generally meets all four components, but areas for improvement include: better guidance encouraging proponents to adopt a more consultative approach to determining relevant environmental factors and objectives to better focus EIA, and distinguishing between terms used for significance within EIA documentation. A new significance framework approach in Western Australia represents a clear attempt to uplift practice, but opportunity exists to improve the way impact significance determinations are presented to stakeholders. EIA practitioners may benefit from mapping and making sense of impact significance in their own jurisdiction using the four components presented.