Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
common key activities involved in the preparation
of EIAs, along with the techniques used in the
presentation of the assessment (see Table 17.1).
However, the determination in 1985 of the
European Commission (EC), that EIAs should
become the practice in all member countries, led,
in the preamble to Directive 85/337, to it both
accepting and embellishing the 1980 definition. It
did so by affirming that the EIA process involves a
systematic approach that embraces both a
structured methodology and a formal set of
procedures, adding that the investigation that
constitutes the EIA implies the preparation of a
report—an environmental impact statement (EIS)
—which in itself 'provides the basis for
consultation, participation and decision making'
(Wood et al . 1991). The systemic nature of the EIA
process, wherever it is applied, ideally involves
both the developer and the relevant planning
authority in an iterative process where it is the
feedback loops that will help to minimise impacts,
improve attempts to mitigate environmental
damage and assist in general project design (Figure
17.1). Ultimately, such an approach must also affect
the quality of decision making that follows a full
consideration of the EIS, a document for which
the developer bears the full responsibility.
EIA—PROBLEMS OF APPLICATION
AND INTERPRETATION
Subverting the EIA process
Having stressed the procedural strength of EIA in
the provision of a clear-cut method of evaluation,
the initial acceptance of the need for EIA, as well
as its eventual application, can have political
dimensions, sometimes amounting to the
subversion of its intent. When the suggestion was
made that the EU should embrace EIAs, some
member states did not view the prospect with
much enthusiasm. France, particularly, feared both
national and transnational problems if EIAs were
applied to the large number of nuclear power
plants it was planning to build, many of which
Table 17.1 Environmental Impact assessment.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search