IEMA responds to Government’s environmental outcomes consultation

IEMA is pleased to publish its response to the Government’s consultation on their new proposals to introduce Environmental Outcome Reports (EOR) as part of the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill (LURB). Here, Rufus Howard, IEMA’s policy and engagement lead for impact assessment, discusses the key aspects of the Institute’s response.

The Government is currently seeking views on its proposals to introduce changes to the existing environmental assessment regime through the introduction of EOR to replace the current environmental assessment processes of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

From consulting our members, we developed two key tests; 1). Do the proposals seize the opportunity to improve environmental assessment? and 2). Will the proposals introduce new weaknesses within environmental assessment and so lessen environmental protection?

Examining the consultation against these two tests identified a wide range of concerns and perceived weaknesses in the proposals. Our conclusion was that it would be far better to modify and improve the existing regime of EIA and SEA than to start again with a new regime.

Our concerns are listed in more detail in the consultation response, but by way of highlights, the key concerns are that the proposals:

• Do not address the lack of skills, capacity and resources in Local Authorities, Regulators and Statutory Consultees.
• Do not address the lack of official guidance, research and central coordination of environmental data and assessment knowledge.
• Do not address deficiencies in access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters.
• Do not strengthen the requirement for decision-makers to enforce or act on the findings of EOR.

• Are regressive in the reduction of the scope of assessment on social impacts and impacts on people and communities (including population health) which will reduce protection.
• Are regressive in the reduction in scope of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) (inc. adaptation and resilience).
• Introduce increased risks of delays and greater costs due to uncertainty concerning legal issues, untried new procedures, loss of coherence and lack of continuity.

Taking all of the concerns together, the overall message is clear from our members and discussions with other key stakeholders. Carried out properly, based on evidence review, research and engagement with expert professionals, there is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to improve the environmental assessment regime to increase environmental protection and outcomes for people and nature. However, the current proposals lack evidence-based research.

On this basis, IEMA has called on the Government to consider the following recommendations:

• Invest in training, skills and capacity to ensure sufficient numbers of competent experts are present within Local Authorities, Regulators and Statutory Consultees engaged with the environmental assessment regime.
• Invest in knowledge management to develop and publish evidence-based research, policy and guidance on good practice in environmental assessment.
• Invest in better long-term and coordinated project and plan level monitoring to develop evidence on the effectiveness of assessment predictions, mitigation efficiency and environmental outcomes. Ensure that these lessons are then disseminated and acted upon by feeding back into screening and scoping decisions, to continually improve assessment techniques.
• Maintain the continued use of competent experts to carry out environmental assessment, as required by the existing EIA regulations.

• Expand and improve provisions that provide access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters.
• Adequately fund and increase the use of planning conditions, compliance monitoring, enforcement and remedy of non-compliance.
• Increase and make clear the requirement for decision makers to justify why projects and plans should be approved where the environmental assessment has identified negative outcomes for the environment and affected communities.
• Set up and adequately resource a National Environmental Assessment Unit to coordinate and assist the delivery of the above.

Further detailed research and engagement is required by the Government to develop proposals that retain the best aspects of the existing legislative framework and practice, as well as introduce changes to improve these instruments to secure better outcomes for the environment and society.

IEMA is committed to aiding policymakers in developing evidence-based policy using sound science and professional experience from competent experts. IEMA continues to advocate for advances in the field of impact assessment to support the objective of living within environmental limits and supporting a transition to a sustainable economy.

IEMA would like to thank all of the leading impact assessment practitioners and stakeholders from our network of over 20,000 members that have participated and provided feedback to help develop the Institute’s consultation response.

In particular, the consultation response drafting has been led by our Impact Assessment Steering Group, which is comprised of 15 leading experts in impact assessment from across a range of public, private and NGO organisations. A special thanks to our Chair, Juliette Callaghan, and the team at Trium who have helped coordinate the response drafting.

In addition, our response was greatly strengthened by a series of workshops with leading practitioners from our EIA Quality Mark Scheme, a voluntary scheme that 60 organisations have signed up to, committing to best practice in the application of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). A big thanks to all the quality mark leads who participated in our engagement workshops and submitted written contributions. Our review of the EOR consultation also benefited and built upon our previous and ongoing engagement with the planning reforms that have been ongoing since 2020.

To read the IEMA consultation response in full click here.

To learn more about the IEMA EIA Quality Mark click here.