Assessing the mood for EIA directive reform

9th March 2011


Related Topics

Related tags

  • EU



Implementation of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) Directive (85/337/EEC) across the EU has not been at all straightforward.

The European Commission has repeatedly brought proceedings against member states in order to ensure proper transposition of the Directive into national laws and proper implementation of its requirements.

Also, interpretation of the Directive has proved contentious. Typical problems in transposition have been inadequate screening procedures for Annex II projects, failure to cover all project categories, and poor public participation processes.

While it is likely that problems will continue, there are some hopeful signs that national governments have now, at least in most respects, implemented the EIA Directive as required. It is also fairly clear that the Directive is itself having a positive effect on environmental law across the EU.

A 2009 report by the commission on the application and effectiveness of the Directive found that:

“The objectives of the EIA Directive have generally been achieved. The principles of environmental assessment have been integrated into the national EIA systems.

"All member states have established comprehensive regulatory frameworks and implemented the EIA in a manner which is largely in line with the Directive’s requirements; in many cases, member states have built on the minimum requirements of the Directive and have gone beyond them.

"As a result, environmental considerations are taken into account in the decision making process, which has become more transparent.”

The case for change

Despite its positive findings, the 2009 report notes a number of continuing concerns with the Directive.

Of particular interest is that member states are still repeatedly exceeding the limits of their discretion when establishing EIA thresholds.

The commission suggests a simplification of the Annex III criteria and the creation of pan-European thresholds to limit future deficiencies.

There are still cases where cumulative impacts are not adequately taken into account.

In terms of the direct and indirect costs of the EIA regime, a report submitted to the commission in February 2008 highlighted a number of areas of potential concern.

These include delays resulting from a lack of timetables for stages of EIA; project size thresholds being set too low by national authorities leading to unnecessary EIAs; and authorities lacking the necessary skills and resources, leading to delays in the process.

Also, over-implementation of the Directive, or “gold-plating”, was seen as fairly common in many member states.

Quality control of EIAs is another potential problem. As the obligations in the Directive are essentially procedural, they can be satisfied by environmental documentation of widely differing quality.

To ensure environmental information is of a uniform and high quality the commission has put a number of potential solutions forward.

These include the accreditation of consultants undertaking EIA; the use of independent external review; and mandatory scoping.

Variations in the approach to whether alternatives must be considered are also viewed with unease by the commission, as are problems arising from “transboundary” EIA procedures.

The general lack of consideration of climate-change impacts in EIA is also highlighted as an issue that needs to be tackled.

The next step

It appears that momentum is developing for a general review of the Directive. In June 2010, the commission launched a public consultation covering a broad range of issues.

The Committee of the Regions, the EU body that seeks to involve regional and local authorities in the European decision-making process, issued an Opinion in April 2010 calling for a number of changes, including more formal links between the EIA Directive and the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), and a better methodology to determine climate-change impacts.

And, in November, the commission and the then Belgian presidency of the EU held a joint conference to discuss the EIA Directive’s future with member states (the papers and outcomes from the conference, including commissioner Janez Potonik’s address can be found here).

Expect further developments in 2011.


Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.

Transform articles

New guidance maps out journey to digital environmental assessment

IEMA’s Impact Assessment Network is delighted to have published A Roadmap to Digital Environmental Assessment.

2nd April 2024

Read more

Lisa Pool on how IEMA is shaping a sustainable future with impact assessment

27th November 2023

Read more

IEMA responded in September to the UK government’s consultation on the details of the operational reforms it is looking to make to the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) consenting process as put forward in the NSIP reform action plan (February 2023).

24th November 2023

Read more

Members of IEMA’s Impact Assessment Network Steering Group have published the 17th edition of the Impact Assessment Outlook Journal, which provides a series of thought pieces on the policy and practice of habitats regulations assessment (HRA).

26th September 2023

Read more

In July, we published the long-awaited update and replacement of one of IEMA’s first published impact assessment guidance documents from 1993, Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic.

1st August 2023

Read more

Are we losing sight of its intended purpose and what does the future hold for EIA? Jo Beech, Tiziana Bartolini and Jessamy Funnell report.

15th June 2023

Read more

Luke Barrows and Alfie Byron-Grange look at the barriers to adoption of digital environmental impacts assessments

1st June 2023

Read more

Susan Evans and Helen North consider how Environmental Statements can be more accessible and understandable

1st June 2023

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close