Starting up; early stages - Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment - page 98

discussion of alternatives ensures that the developer has considered both other
approaches to the project and the means of preventing environmental damage. It
encourages analysts to focus on the differences between real choices. It can allow people
who were not directly involved in the decision-making process to evaluate various
aspects of a proposed project and how decisions were arrived at. It also provides a
framework for the competent authority's decision, rather than merely a justification for a
particular action. Finally, if unforeseen difficulties arise during the construction or
operation of a project, a re-examination of these alternatives may help to provide rapid
and cost-effective solutions.
The original EC Directive 85/337 stated that alternative proposals should be
considered in an EIA, subject to the requirements of Article 5 (if the information is
relevant and if the developer may reasonably be required to compile this information).
Annex III required “where appropriate, an outline of the main alternatives studied by the
developer and an indication of the main reasons for this choice, taking into account the
environmental effects”. In the UK, this requirement was interpreted as being
discretionary. This led to the consideration of alternatives being one of the weakest
aspects of EIS quality (Barker & Wood 1999, Eastman 1997, Jones et al. 1991).
One of the main changes in the amendments of EC Directive 97/11 (CEC 1997) was to
strengthen the requirements on alternatives: EISs are now required to include “an outline
of the main alternatives studied by the developer and an indication of the main reasons
for the developer's choice, taking into account the environmental effects”. Current UK
guidance (ODPM 2003a) is that:
It is widely regarded as good practice to consider alternatives, as it results
in a more robust application for planning permission. Also, the nature of
certain developments and their location may make the consideration of
alternatives a material consideration. Where alternatives are considered,
the main ones must be outlined in the environmental statement.
The Department for Transport's Transport Analysis Guidance (DfT 2003) also
encourages the consideration of alternatives.
4.5.2 Types of alternative
During the course of project planning, many decisions are made concerning the type and
scale of the project proposed, its location and the processes involved. Most of the
possible alternatives that arise will be rejected by the developer on economic, technical or
regulatory grounds. The role of EIA is to ensure that environmental criteria are also
considered at these early stages. A thorough consideration of alternatives would begin
early in the planning process, before the type and scale of development and its location
have been agreed on. A number of broad types of alternative can be considered: the “no
action” option, alternative locations, alternative scales of the project, alternative
processes or equipment, alternative site layouts, alternative operating conditions and
alternative ways of dealing with environmental impacts. We shall discuss the last of these
in Section 5.4.