Origins and development - Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment - page 41

scheme at Loch Lomond and various motorway and trunk road proposals (Clark &
Turnbull 1984).
In 1973, the Scottish Office and DoE commissioned the University of Aberdeen's
Project Appraisal for Development Control (PADC) team to develop a systematic
procedure for planning authorities to make a balanced appraisal of the environmental,
economic and social impacts of large industrial developments. PADC produced an
interim report, The assessment of major industrial applications—a manual (Clark et al.
1976), which was issued free of charge to all LPAs in the UK and “commended by
central government for use by planning authorities, government agencies and
developers”. The PADC procedure was designed to fit into the existing planning
framework, and was used to assess a variety of (primarily private sector) projects. An
extended and updated version of the manual was issued in 1981 (Clark et al. 1981).
In 1974, the Secretaries of State for the Environment, Scotland and Wales
commissioned two consultants, J.Catlow and C.G.Thirwall, to investigate the
“desirability of introducing a system of impact analysis in Great Britain, the
circumstances in which a system should apply, the projects it should cover and the way in
which it might be incorporated into the development control system” (Catlow & Thirwall
1976). The resulting report made recommendations about who should be responsible for
preparing and paying for EIAs, what legislative changes would be needed to institute an
EIA system, and similar issues. The report concluded that about 25-50 EIAs per year
would be needed, for both public and private sector projects. EIA was given additional
support by the Dobry Report on the development control system (Dobry 1975), which
advocated that LPAs should require developers to submit impact studies for particularly
significant development proposals. The report outlined the main topics such a study
should address, and the information that should be required from developers.
Government reactions to the Dobry Report were mixed: the Royal Commission on
Environmental Pollution endorsed the report, but the Stevens Committee (1976) on
Mineral Workings recommended that a comprehensive standard form for mineral
applications should be introduced, arguing that such a form would make EIAs for mineral
workings unnecessary.
2.4.3 Department of the Environment scepticism
However, overall the DoE remained sceptical about the need, practicality and cost of
EIA. In fact, the government's approach to EIA has been described as being “from the
outset grudging and minimalist” (CPRE 1991). In response to the Catlow and Thirwall
report, the DoE stated: “Consideration of the report by local authorities should not be
allowed to delay normal planning procedures and any new procedures involving
additional calls on central or local government finance and manpower are unacceptable
during the present period of economic restraint” (DoE 1977). A year later, after much
deliberation, the DoE was slightly more positive:
We fully endorse the desirability…of ensuring careful evaluation of the
possible effects of large developments on the environment… The
approach suggested by Thirwall/Catlow is already being adopted with
many [projects]… The sensible use of this approach [should] improve the