2. EIA processes/stages

Question 1

typical stages

Answer 1

1. Planning (need, problem)
2. Screening (EA required?)
3. Scoping (what EA will adress?)
4. Assessment (baseline, prediciton, impacts)
5. Review/recommendations
6. Decision
7. Follow-up/monitoring/compliance

Question 2

For every project?

Answer 2

NO, depends size, location, some sectors might excluded (separate acts). EIA processes change with governments + evolve with society

Question 3

all projects will require,

Answer 3

some sort of government approvals

Question 4

Stage 1: need/problem

Answer 4

clarifying details at this stage = efficient

what info needed, why?
how consult?
what needed for approval?
alternatives (to project or ways of doing it-priject design) should be considered, how?

Question 5

Stage 2: screening

Answer 5

what need to do EIA, level of complexity?
EIA required-regulations, sufficient public concern?

Question 6

Stage 3: scoping

Answer 6

regulatory requirement?
people’s concerns?
VECS
spatial + temporal boundaries of project

Question 7

We need … for screening and assessment

Answer 7

project description

location
purpose
alternatives to, means
major project components
activities for each component
activity most likely cause impacts

Question 8

stage 4: assessment

Answer 8

understand affected environment (baseline conditions)

possible effects on the environment, how project will change it?

how mitigate adverse effects + evaluate significance of residual effects?

=report can be used in decision-making

Question 9

Stage 5: reviewing EA

Answer 9

by agency, provides info to

a) proponent: plan, comply rules, law, regulations

b)agency/public/decision-makers: completeness, accuracy, effects, mitigation, necessity. helps inform if proposal should approved, what conditions?

Question 10

Stage 6: decision

Answer 10

EIA process provide recommendation or makes decision?

Criteria + limitations on decision-makers?

Question 11

Stage 7: follow-up/monitoring/compliance

Answer 11

verify accuracy of EA, effectiveness/implementation mitigation measures, compliance with EIA approval conditions + other regulatory requirements

independent auditing, monitoring

Question 12

Recommendation vs decision

Answer 12

Recommendation:
what we know, what we think about EIA and proposal, what should do/can do/might do

Decision:
here is it

Question 13

Why rejection happens?

Answer 13

project conepts (location, design, idea)

not compatible with public policy objectives

strategic problems (poor understanding approval/review process/assessment requirements, poor consultation/communication/consensus with INDG, little public acceptance)

RARE

Question 14

Baseline conditions

Answer 14

data/info already existing
what need collect?
consult experts/communities
major enviro. components (+ ones subject to changes)
VECs
timeframe for baseline?

Question 15

Project effects

Answer 15

link project activities to environmental characteristics

identify project-environment interactions/linkages (qualitative + quantitative)

determine effects of alternatives

effects as changes in enviro. (+/-, direct/indirect, cumulative/additive/synergistic), risks, scenarios, effects enviro. on project

Question 16

Assessing effects

Answer 16

determine adverse enviro. effects (which one significant, which one needing mitigation)

magnitude, frequency, duration, risks

regulatory?

public concerns?

Question 17

how determine significance?

Answer 17

significance = jusgement based on an understanding of ecological dynamics and social definitions of significance (socially-constructed, subjective)

evaluation criteria: ecological/geographic/magnitude/frequency/duration/reversibility/public perception/importance to people context

significant?
adverse effects likely?
residual effects adverse?

Question 18

Not insignificant vs significant?

Answer 18

Not insignificant:
less direct way of stating importance (understatement)

suggest ucertainties, implies subtle or unexpected impacts possibility

still suggest importance

might be used to downplay initial perception of something while still acknowledging its relevance (being cautious in stating just how impactful)

Significant:
directly states impact is considerable, undeniable, directly communicates effect is notable/meaningful/substantial

Question 19

Mitigation hierarchy

Answer 19

1. Avoid
2. Minimize
   3, Restor/rehabilitate
3. Compensate (least desirable)

consider effectiveness of measures (likely/probable), feasibility, costs

how can completely avoid impacts?
how can eliminate risk?

Question 20

Calculating equivalency

Answer 20

1. Quantify losses (relative to baseline conditions or reference state)
2. Quantify anticipated gains from the offsets
3. Scale the offset so the total increase in services from it = service losses from the impact
   (want to achieve no net loss of productivity)

–> consider time (time lag before offset is where it needs to be)

Question 21

Who gets the EIA?

Answer 21

public registry (provides info for participation, agency reviews)

used by agencies/proponents to
-make decision
-set approval conditions
-licenses/permit processes
-planning (construction, operations, closure)
-follow-up

Question 22

Bias challenge

Answer 22

Assessor should document the methods, results, conclusions, rationale, reproducibility, standardization

Question 23

EAs format

Answer 23

a) predetermined: assessor completing table/format to ensure adheres to legislation. Content standardized, but still tailored to project/industry/context/location

b) open: prepare report suing experience, professional judgement, flexible, but adheres to information/content requirements

Question 24

Mitigation hierarchy examples

Answer 24

Avoid: timing, location of temporary activities modified
(construction not when migration)

Minimize: period, intensity, scale of impacts (ecological corridors)

Restore: project site rehabilitated/protected/restored so no net loss or net gain in enviro. quality (plant trees)

Compensate: biophysical enhanecements at another location, replacement infrastructure, financial compensation (may be not acceptable-habitat)-based

Question 25

Equivalency

Answer 25

impacts compared to benefits of offsetting activity

comparison of losses from the impacts to expected gains from the offset

ecological (resource-to-resource, service-to-service), economic (values-to-value, value-to-cost)

balance losses/gains with an impact + resulting offsetting

can include methods to deal with uncertainty + time lags

uncertainty should be acknowledged, assessed, managed

–> concept = integral part of mitigation hierarchy if no net loss of service is policy goal

Question 26

offset policies may require that offsets be larger than … to account for uncertainty and time delays

Answer 26

anticipated impacts

Question 27

Uncertainty in equivalency analyses

Answer 27

inherent in impact predictions

time delays associated with offset methods

measurement uncertainty related to metric chosen (should chose appropraite ones, multiple ones)

uncertainty in efficacy of offset

enviro. natural variability

Question 28

Time lag

Answer 28

often required for the offset to be fully functional. NOT good to compensate an immediate loss by hypothetical equivalent gains only realized in the future

Question 29

Climate change + invasive species can lead to unexpected offsetting outcomes

Answer 29

any mgmt action = unexpected and undesired consequences, which no equivalency calculation can take into account

–> need for robust monitoring programs with ability to allow for adaptation of offsetting program

Question 30

Best practice

Answer 30

deal with uncertainties and risks individually with a wide variety of mgmt options

Question 31

Equivalency +/-

Answer 31

+
allows for differing offsetting options to be explored utilizing resource-based metric

greater flexibility in offsetting

provides costing info, informs monitoring requirements

-
requires detailed knwoledge/data of resource being managed (need experts, local data..)