Joe Weston

EIA in a risk society

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was developed and introduced in the 1960s during a time that was dominated by three key societal influences. These were the growth of modern environmental concern, the drive for more rational, scientific and objective environmental decision making and a desire for more public involvement in environmental decision making. The legitimacy of EIA, as a tool to aid decision making, lies in its ability to meet the requirements of all three demands, the chief among these being its ability to be a systematic scientific and rational approach to decision making. Yet today we live in a society that no longer accepts the rationalist model as either possible or desirable. The deference to ‘the expert’ and our trust in science and technology has steadily declined during the period of EIAs development and widespread use. Today, EIA still depends for its legitimacy on its claim to provide a systematic and scientific approach to assessments, while society has moved on. This paper examines this growing divergence and argues that it is time for a major re‐evaluation of the role of EIA in environmental decision making.

EIA THEORIES — ALL CHINESE WHISPERS AND NO CRITICAL THEORY

There have been a large number of attempts to develop a theory or theories of Environmental Impact Assessment in order to justify its use in environmental decision-making. A review of academic articles demonstrates that these theories are largely drawn from planning theories. Planning theories are themselves a development of sociological theories of decision-making and from one particular strand of sociological theory. In this review of the theories of EIA it is argued that an understanding of wider sociological theory is necessary to fully understand both planning and EIA.

From Poole to Fulham: A Changing Culture in UK Environmental Impact Assessment Decision Making?

This paper examines the role of environmental impact assessment (EIA) in project authorization decision making and the way in which the courts have interpreted its role. The purpose of the paper is to establish whether or not that role has changed over the period between the introduction of EIA in 1988 and 2001. From the evidence reported here, it is argued that while the procedural stages of EIA have been very much strengthened over that period, the importance of EIA as a tool to aid planning authorization decision making remains largely peripheral.

Screening for environmental impact assessment projects in England: what screening?

Previous survey research into screening for environmental impact assessment (EIA) in England has found that few local authorities have very much experience of dealing with EIA projects. This research examined actual case files of projects that fall within the ambit of the UKs EIA Regulations and found an explanation for this lack of experience. In the majority of the cases examined they were not even screened to see if an EIA was required. This suggests that there is widespread misunderstanding of the EIA regulatory requirements by English local planning authorities. It is also suggested that there may be a culture of resistance to EIA among planners and that this can undermine both EIA effectiveness and the theories used to justify its use.

Implementing International Environmental Agreements: The Case of the Wadden Sea

Abstract It has been a feature of the past 30 years or so that individual sovereign states have been increasingly willing to partially set aside their own interests in favour of international treaties on pollution control and wildlife protection. It is the political will of the government signatories to such agreements that is the key to successful implementation as that political will provides the legitimate enforceable authority that is necessary to ensure compliance. This paper examines a trilateral agreement made by the Governments of Denmark, Germany and Holland for the protection and management of the Wadden Sea—one of Europes most important wildlife sites. The examination of that agreement explores the key mechanisms used for its implementation and, in the case of the Wadden Sea, those mechanisms include the operation of key European Union environmental Directives. The paper finds major differences in approach and application of the Birds, Habitats and Environmental Impact Assessment Directives across the Wadden Sea region and argues that these differences undermine the trilateral agreements made by the three governments.

Environmental statements, environmental information, environmental assessment and the UK planning process

Since 1988 and the introduction into UK planning of the requirement for formal environmental impact assessment (EIA) of major projects, there has been much research on the quality of the environmental statements (ESs) submitted with planning applications. Yet the ES is only one part of the total environmental information (EI); its quality does not necessarily reflect the overall quality of the EIA process or of the decisions which flow from it. Ten case studies demonstrate this point, the complex process of gathering environmental information, and its relationship to the ES and decisionmaking. While the ES remains a key feature of EIA, it is often far less significant than the mass of other information assessed by local planning authorities in making decisions on major projects.

Implementing new EU environmental law: the short life of the UK Site Waste Management Plan Regulations

Using an analytical framework based on current implementation theory, this research examines the transposition of the EU Waste Framework Directive into UK law and local government development control procedures. The study which forms the basis of this paper was commissioned by the UK Government to evaluate the effectiveness of the construction Waste Management Plans introduced as a legal requirement in 2008. It was found that its implementation had largely failed and that these new laws had been ineffective. Subsequently, in March 2012 the UK Government announced its intention to withdraw these Regulations. In the context of current deregulatory pressures, but with the continuing need to minimise construction waste, this research concludes that more attention should be paid by central government to their current ‘top-down’ implementation procedures in order to better roll-out new environmental legislation in the future.

Inclusion and Transparency in Planning Decision-Making: Planning Officer Reports to the Planning Committee

Abstract Language is central to effective communication and communication is the foundation of the current orthodoxy in planning theory. For communication to be effective in fostering the greater public engagement in planning demanded by communicative and collaborative planning theorists it must be inclusive and transparent. This article examines the language used in the reports produced by planning officers in UK development control decision-making. These reports to planning committees are the only documents available to the public that communicate the local planning authoritys assessment of a planning application before a decision is made. They are, therefore, a crucial communication tool in planning and yet are rarely the subject of research. The results of the content analysis of these reports suggests that far from being in the mould of communicative and collaborative planning theory they remain exclusive and shrouded in the language of the rational professional expert.

Reflections on 10 Years of Councillor Training

The decisions of planning committees in local government directly affect the lives of individuals as well as the local and wider economy and environment. For outsiders it must be somewhat of a shock to learn that, after 50 years of a comprehensive, legalistic, quasijudicial land-use planning system in the UK, the people charged with making planning decisions have not always been trained for that role. The publication of the third Nolan report in 1997 (on Local Government) partially addressed this anomaly. Its recommendations for councillor training and greater probity in decision making in town planning created a new impetus for culture change. The Nolan Committee stated categorically that ‘‘members of planning committees should be trained in planning procedures and planning law’’ (Committee on Standards in Public life, 1997, p. 6). The UK Government endorsed this position as part of its modernisation programme after 1997, and even produced an on-line leaflet setting out a model syllabus of the topics that councillor training in planning should cover. However, the government fell short of making councillor training in planning a legal or compulsory requirement. Member training for conducting the town planning function remains largely a patchy business, dependent on the enthusiasm of senior planning officers and pro-active planning committee chairs. It adds another responsibility to the busy schedules of senior staff and depends on the willingness of councillors to spend even more time on council premises attending seminars and workshops. Indeed, a recent report highlighted the indifference many local authorities still have towards councillor training (Morris, 2004a). The norm appears to be a cursory run-through of established procedures (particularly in development control) by council staff. We will argue that this is a valuable first step in councillor training for the planning function, but not always enough. These reflections are by two town planners who have been running training sessions for practitioners and local councillors for many years. One is an experienced councillor who has chaired local planning committees and taken an executive role on a large urban unitary council, as well being involved in frontline work in a smaller urban district council. The other author was a development control manager in local government before joining academia.

More Than Local Impacts: Aggregate Quarrying In The National Parks Of England And Wales

Aggregate quarrying plays an important role in the local economy of the UKs national parks, providing local jobs and expenditure on local services. There are also adverse local impacts from traffic, dust, noise and blasting. However, it is the status of the parks as crucial features of the nations landscape capital that increases the significance of localised landscape impacts to a level which outweighs any benefits that quarrying provides. This article is based upon commissioned research into the impact of quarrying on the national parks and assesses those impacts against the functions of the parks as nationally important designated landscapes.