Eskild Holm Nielsen

EIA as Regulation: Does it Work?

Since its introduction into Danish planning in 1989, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been widely discussed. At the centre of the debate the question has been whether EIA has actually offered anything new and there has been a great deal of scepticism about the efficacy of the instrument. Although, in principle EIA offers a holistic and proactive methodology, it does not seem to lead to a more holistic and proactive regulation which covers more ground than traditional planning and environmental regulation. In an evaluation of Danish experiences, this study has looked more closely at the effects of EIA. Three types of effects on projects have been examined: changes occurring prior to the formal application; changes during the EIA process; and the mitigation measures that are demanded of projects. The general conclusion is that EIA does generate a significant number of changes to projects. In approximately half of the cases studied, modifications are made prior to the formal application. During the formal EIA process, modifications were made in more than 90% of the cases. However, most of these could be considered as minor. EIA is characterized by being based upon a broad concept of the environment. It was found that a progressive narrowing of the concept of environment takes place during the course of the EIA process.

Mission impossible: does environmental impact assessment in Denmark secure a holistic approach to the environment?

This article focuses on the holistic approach to the environment within environmental impact assessment (EIA). Based on a comprehensive evaluation of the EIA regulations in Denmark, an important observation is that the environmental concept, from being broad in the initial stages, is narrowed considerably in subsequent phases of the EIA process. Although the EIA process starts out as very holistic, ultimately we find that mitigation measures and the regulatory efforts largely mirror traditional regulations, such as the law of environmental protection and other sectoral legislation. The article finally addresses some of the difficulties facing the authorities, when handling the broad concept of the environment.

BETWEEN GOVERNANCE AND GOVERNMENT: DANISH EIA IN UNCHARTED WATERS

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has now passed its first 25 years and looking back it becomes clear that it has changed its direction. In this article we will look closer at how different pressures have pushed it in the direction of decentralisation and deliberative democracy, while other forces have pushed it in the direction of more centralised, top-down government. Different developments during this period can thus be perceived as in accordance with a system of governance based upon framework legislation and characterised by flexibility, coordination and participation. Reflecting on some of the manifest developments encountered in Danish EIA legislation, this article shows that the development of governance structures is followed by developments in the direction of more government. By studying EIA screenings of livestock projects, which is the dominating Danish EIA practice, it becomes obvious that governance as well as government has changed its role often at one and the same time. Although there was scepticism about the efficacy of the EIA instrument at the beginning, this changed from the mid-1990s primarily because it was realised, that EIA screening could address the overwhelming problem of agricultural production, but also that it opened the door for more public participation and broader assessment of projects than found previously under environmental regulation. This can be interpreted as an example of a shift away from government to governance, but the story turns out to be more complex than that as the opposite trend is also encountered. In our empirical work on EIA screening in Denmark, we find that two major changes have taken place. These changes all relate to the problem of livestock production. In all cases, we find that the way EIA is used in Denmark is innovative, but also that pressure from the newly introduced Natura 2000 as well as the Water Framework Directive increases the pressure to return to more traditional top-down measures. Using these examples, this paper offers important insights into the dynamic between governance and government.

The environmental policies of firms certified according to BS 7750

By the summer of 1996, 34 Danish firms were certified according to BS 7750. In this paper we will examine how these firms have formulated their environmental policies and how many and which subjects are treated in them. Furthermore, we will look into the development since 1993, when the first firm was certified, until the present, concerning the formulation of environmental policies.