Delivering on EIA's promises post-consent
For EIA to be of value it must influence decision-making and lead to improved outcomes for the environment, community and developer alike. In many cases EIA influences the design of development proposals to avoid, or at least reduce, negative effects on the environment. However, some impacts cannot be ‘designed out’ and dedicated additional action is needed, in either the construction or operation phase, to either prevent environmental harm or generate improvement.
Action to reduce harm is known as mitigation and often becomes mandatory as part of the conditions attached to a consent. However, if mitigation is not clearly identifiable within the text of the Environmental Statement or it fails to meet standard requirements related to the wording of conditions then it may not be picked up and carried forward. Even where mitigation is conditioned it may not be delivered or prove to be ineffective at reducing the negative environmental effect. In order to confirm that mitigation is both delivered and effective there can be a need to undertake monitoring during implementation.
Further to this, both the project’s detailed design and the developers understanding of the development site continue to evolve post-consent. As a result mitigation proposed in the EIA process may no longer be deliverable or appropriate. Consequently, simply conditioning environmental mitigation measures may not be sufficient to effectively manage a major development’s environmental effects, with a clear need to hand over environmental knowledge and responsibilities from those leading the EIA to the principal contractor and the environmental clerk of works.
Adam Boyden, of Nicholas Pearson Associates, and a second presenter, TBC, will explore the above issues in the June EIA Quality Mark webinar, including discussing the proposed changes to the EIA Directive that could lead to the mandatory monitoring of significant negative effects.
Launch of Principles of Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment in the UK
This webinar launched the first edition of ‘Principles for Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment’, prepared jointly by IEMA, CIfA and IHBC.
This webinar was aimed at helping professionals (re)define principles and develop a framework for assessment, especially for those wanting a holistic approach to impact assessment in line with international standards.
Scotland’s EIA Conference 2021 closed the unique online event with the opportunity to refresh knowledge of key EIA case law and understand different professional perspectives on what this may mean for practice.
This third session of the online Scotland’s EIA Conference programme turned its attention to the rapid progress being made in the expanded use of digital approaches to improve the effectiveness and outcomes of the EIA process.
Scotland’s EIA Conference is a partnership event designed and coordinated between: Fothergill Training & Consulting, the Scottish Government, HES, NatureScot and SEPA with the aim of furthering the enhance of EIA practice across Scotland. This opening session of the conference focused on opportunities to advance EIA practice.
The second day of online delivery of Scotland’s EIA Conference saw three experienced presenters discuss their views on EIA’s progress in different aspects of climate change and nature enhancement goals.
This Impact Assessment Network webinar, on the interaction of Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) heard from practitioners from both specialisms on the differences and similarities between these impact assessment regimes and how greater coordination can be achieved with case studies.
