Berna Grist

The Political Economy of Legislative Change: Neoliberalising Planning Legislation

The ideas associated with neoliberalism have become deeply entrenched within state institutions in a large part of the world, and these ideas have a specific political economy. Accompanying them is the notion that the market should discipline the political system (Sager, 2011) and therefore the general population, if we accept the mainstream assumption that the political system is a representation of the will of the people. The recent explosion of literature on neoliberalism (see Peck, 2010) has demonstrated that the concept is a powerful lens through which to examine regulatory and institutional transformation at a range of spatial scales and different socio-political contexts. Of particular import here is the work which emphasises that neoliberalism is not a static concept but a dynamic process. Here, neoliberalism can be seen as a form of regulatory reorganisation to impose, extend and consolidate marketised commodified forms of social life (Brenner et al., 2010). It is, as Peck (2010, p. 9) notes, about the capture and reuse of the state in the interests of shaping a ‘pro-corporate, free-trading “market order” ‘. However, the process by which this happens (neoliberalisation) is rarely identical from one place to the next, at different scales, or indeed, across different socio-political contexts. In other words, processes of neoliberalisation are dynamic, slippery and highly adaptable, and this is precisely what contributes to the persistence of neoliberal ideas.

Evaluating Ireland's IBIA as an approach to improving the quality and effectiveness of biodiversity impact assessment

The assessment of potential impacts of plans, programmes and projects on biodiversity is required under various legislative remits (including the European Unions Habitats, Strategic Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact Assessment Directives). The objective of such assessments is to ensure that potential negative impacts on both protected nature conservation sites and species and wider biodiversity are efficiently identified in a timely manner, quantified and subsequently avoided or mitigated, while enhancing positive effects. The procedural requirements of these legal obligations vary and, as a result, differing methodological steps, data gathering and analysis methods, and impact assessment techniques are commonly applied under each individual process, often leading to uncoordinated assessment efforts and results (in terms, for example, of scope, scale and assessment detail). In order to address these issues and improve current practice, an Integrated Biodiversity Impact Assessment (IBIA) methodology has been developed in Ireland with the overall aim of providing a holistic and systematic approach to biodiversity impact assessment. The IBIA framework seeks to ensure that relevant procedures are effectively integrated, time and resource efficiencies are optimised, and unnecessary duplication avoided. Particular emphasis is given to compliance with legal requirements, integration and communication of scientific knowledge, spatial assessment and biodiversity data considerations, and integration of biodiversity aspects with a variety of other concerns during the plan-making process. This paper presents the IBIA methodology and critically examines current key issues in biodiversity impact assessment that can be potentially addressed through IBIA, as well as remaining challenges. In addition, and in order to support the examination of the anticipated benefits of using this new methodological framework (such as biodiversity-inclusive planning through improved communication and coordinated assessment), two contrasting case studies are used, one pre-dating the development of IBIA and a second where elements of IBIA have been implemented.