An overview of UK practice to date - Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment - page 243

In the UK there is an important decision-making stage linked most normally to a
planning approval process by the competent authority, and involving the consideration of
the EIS and associated information. The EIS may have an impact on a planning officer's
report, on a planning committee's decision and on modifications and conditions to the
project before and after submission. But the impact of EIA on decisionmaking may be
much wider than this, influencing, for example, the alternatives under consideration,
project design and redesign, and the range of mitigation measures and monitoring
procedures (Glasson 1999). Indeed, the very presence of an effective EIA system may
lead to the withdrawal of unsound projects and the deterrence of the initiation of
environmentally damaging projects.
In Chapter 3 the various participants in the EIA process were identified. These
participants will have varying perspectives on EIA in decision-making. A local planning
officer may be concerned with the centrality of EIA in decision-making (does it make a
difference?), central government might be concerned about consistency in application to
development proposals across the country; pressure groups may also be concerned with
these criteria, but also with fairness (in providing opportunities for participation) and
integration in the project cycle and approval process (to what extent is EIA easily
bypassed?). A number of studies have attempted to determine whether EIA and
associated consultations have influenced decisions about whether and how to authorize a
project.

Table 8.10 Judging environmental acceptability—
trade-offs

Non-negotiable impacts Negotiable impacts*

Ecological (physical and
biological systems components)

Degrades essential life support
systems

No degradation beyond carrying
capacity

Degrades conservation estate No degradation of productive

systems

Adversely affects ecological
integrity

Wise use of natural resources

Loss of biodiversity

Social (humans as individuals
or in social groupings)

Loss of human life Community benefits and costs

and where they are borne

Reduces public health and
safety unacceptably

Reasonable apportionment of
costs and benefits

Unreasonably degrades quality
of life where people live

Reasonable apportionment of
inter-generational equity

Compatibility with defined
environmental policy goals

* In terms of net environmental benefits.
( Source: Sippe 1994.)