Integrating EIA with EMS for Proposed Projects

Graduation Project by Alpay BEYLA 010050448

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Ilhan TALINLI

Contents

Part 1. Introduction Part 2. Environmental Impact Assessment Part 3. Environmental Management

Systems Part 4. Integrating EIA with EMS Part 5. Results and Discussions

PART 1. Introduction

Introduction

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is one of the major tools relied upon by governments and societies worldwide to achieve environmental management.

It is primarily used to assist them in the identification, prediction and mitigation of the environmental impacts of their activities.

Introduction

The aim of environmental impact assessment (EIA) is to ensure effective environmental management outcomes for development projects.

Some argue that it has failed to achieve this, because environmental management activities are not properly planned in the EIA process.

A representation of a project's interaction with itsenvironment.

Part 2. Environmental Impact Assessment

Development of EIA

Pre-1970 Project review based on the technical/engineering and economic analysis. Limited consideration given to environmental consequences.

Early/Mid-1970s

EIA introduced by NEPA in 1970 in US. Basic principle: Guidelines, procedures including public participation requirement instituted. Standard methodologies for impact analysis developed (e.g. matrix, checklist and network). Canada, Australia and New Zealand became first countries to follow NEPA in 1973-1974. Unlike Australia, which legislated EIA, Canada and New Zealand established administrative procedures. Major public inquires help to shape the process development.

Late 1970 and Early 1980s

More formalized guidance. Other industrial and developing countries introduced formal EIA requirements (France, 1976; Philippines, 1977) began to use the process informally or experimentally ( Netherlands, 1978) or adopted elements, such as impact statements or reports, as part of development applications for planning permission (German states, Ireland). Use of EA by developing countries (Brazil, Philippines, China, Indonesia). Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA), risk analysis included in EA processes. Greater emphasis on ecological modeling, prediction and evaluation methods. Provision for public involvement. Coordination of EA with land use planning processes.

Mid 1980s to end of decade

In Europe, EC Directive on EIA establishes basic principle and procedural requirements for all member states. Increasing efforts to address cumulative effects. World Bank and other leading international aid agencies establish EA requirements. Spread of EIA process in Asia.

1990s

Requirement to consider trans-boundary effects under Espoo convention. Increase use of GIS and other information technologies. Sustainability principal and global issues receive increased attention. India also adopted the EIA formally. Formulation of EA legislation by many developing countries. Rapid growth in EA training.

Structure of the EIA Document

Descriptive information: For instance, descriptions of the site and its locality, the proposal, scoping and public consultation, the-non technical summary

Analytical information: The approach to, and results of, studies, significance, conclusions and so on

Commitments or recommendations: For instance, mitigation and enhancement, and environmental management plans

The Necessity of the EIA Methods

The EIA practitioner is faced with a huge quantity of raw and usually unorganized information that must be collected and analyzed in preparation of an EIA report. The best methods are able to:

organize a large mass of heterogeneous data; allow summarization of data; aggregate the data into smaller sets with least loss of

information; and display the raw data and the derived information in a

direct and relevant fashion.

Summary of EIA Methods and Study Activities

The EIA Process

Gathering environmental information Describing a development or other project Predicting and describing the environmental effects of the project Defining ways of avoiding, reducing or compensating for the

adverse effects Publicising the project and the Environmental StatementEnvironmental Statement including

a clear, non-technical prediction of the likely effects, so that the public can play an effective part in the decision making process

Consulting specific bodies with responsibilities for the environment Taking all of this information into account before deciding whether

to allow the project to proceed Ensuring that the measures prescribed to avoid, reduce or

compensate for environmental effects are implemented

The Environmental Statement

The ‘Environmental Statement (ES)’ is the report normally produced by, or on behalf of, and at the expense of, the developer or project promoter which must be submitted with the application for whatever form of consent or other authorisation is required.

Key Stages and Steps in the EIA Process

(David Tyldesley, 2005)

Four priorities for better EIA practice

Aims and Objectives of EIA

Project development: The use of EIA in project development may be regarded as a way of avoiding environmental impacts by using EIA at as early stage as possible in the development. This is also a way of avoiding costs due to these impacts.

Development control: (licenses, permits etc). Here the EIA is a tool for authorities to prevent adverse environmental impact from the proposed projects

Plan development: This EIA is a tool for authorities in planning of resource. This EIA often is called Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA).

Policy development: Another use of SEA is in policy development were the consequences of a policy can be evaluated by a government.

Reasons of Diminished Effectiveness of EIA Failure to implement the process early in the

planning stages Inadequate consideration of environmentally

preferable alternatives Lack of meaningful public participation Failure to implement monitoring, mitigation, and

compliance measures recommended during the EIA process in required and enforceable components of the operational stages of the approved action

(Lee, 2000)

Weaknesses in EIA Processes and Practice Timing of the EIA process relative to project

planning and design The poor scientific quality of many EIA studies Allowing inadequate public involvement The absence of “follow-up” environmental The absence of “follow-up” environmental

management activitiesmanagement activities

“Follow-up” Environmental Management Activities Follow-up environmental management

activities include tasks such as mitigation, monitoring, reporting and auditing of the environmental impacts of development.

These activities, undertaken by both project proponents and government agencies, are conducted after a development proposal is approved.

Final Point for EIA

The EIA report provides an obvious foundation for developing a list of potential environmental impacts to be monitored, as well as a reference for establishing performance targets to be met within the EMS.

Part 3. Environmental Management Systems

Definition of EMS

Environmental management systems, streamline and systematize activities and services to deliver outcomes that aim to improve organizational environmental performance.

They are usually committed to voluntarily by organizations or management.

History of EMS In June 1992, the British Standards Institute published BS

7750, the first Environmental Management Systems standard. This standard set the stage for the world to take a look at their environmental practices.

In 1996, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) published standard 14001 Environmental Management Systems – Requirements with Guidance for Use.

ISO 14001 was first published in September 1996 and amended in November 2004. It was created and amended by Technical Committee ISO/TC207, Environmental Management, Subcommittee SC1 Environmental Management Systems.

BS 7750 EMAS ISO 14000

Focus AreaWhole organization, can be

applied to any sector or activity

Specified sites an/or industrial activities

Whole organization, covers all activities, products and services

Frequency of Audits Not specifiedMaximum audit frequency at 3

yearsNot specified, can be negotiated

Focus on Environmental Performance

Audit is not concerned with environmental performance

Auditing is only concerned with environmental performance

and compliance with relevant environmental legislation.

It is a process standard

Information that must be publicly available

Environmental policy programme and

management systemEnvironmental policy Environmental policy

Countries UK and few other European Union Internationally

ApplicationOpen to non-industrial

activities (i.e. transport, local government)

Non-industrial activities included on experimental basis

Applicable to non-industrial activities

Date of Acceptance of Standard

1992 1993 1996

Criticized Aspects of Standard

1. Standard can be obtained by promising to improve

2. Small companies find cost a problem

1. Auditing criteria are too vague.2. It cost too much.

3. It badly disrupts activities of organizations.

4. It may generate hostility from the public and workforce.

1. Standard does not require sufficient public disclosure of company’s

environmental impacts.2. Standard does not guarantee

environmental performance or compliance with applicable

national environmental legislation.

Structure of EMS

Plan - Establish the objectives and processes necessary to deliver results in accordance with the organizations environmental policy

Structure of EMS

Do - Implement the processes

Structure of EMS

Check - Monitor and measure processes against environmental policy, objectives, targets, legal and other requirements, and report the results

Structure of EMS

Act - Take actions to continually improve performance of the environmental management systems

Structure of EMS

Simplified Overview of a Typical EMS

Benefits of the ISO 14001 (EMS) Obtain insurance at reasonable cost Enhance image and market share Meet vendor certification criteria Ability to dispose of waste Liability limitation and risk reduction Save in consumption of energy and materials Easier site selection and permitting Technology development and transfer Improve industry-government relations Meet customer’s environmental expectations Maintain good public/community relations Satisfy investor criteria Reduce cost of waste management Lower distribution costs Provide a framework for continuous improvement of environmental

performance

Part 4. Integrating EIA with EMS

Relation Between EIA and EMS

Interaction Between EIA and EMS

Within EIA, there is also a range of factors which may influence environmental management activities. In particular, environmental management activities can be influenced by;

Design changes in the pre-decision stage of EIA Environmental management commitments within

Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) Environmental management conditions on project approval Environmental management activities implemented in the

operational development Enforcement of approval conditions by government

agencies in the operational development

The relative usefulness of well practiced EIA and EMS as tools to determine environmental outcomes for a project during the different phases of the project cycle.

(Ridgway, 2005)

Comparison Between EIA and EMS

Comparison Between EIA and EMS

Impact identification is the initial step common to both tools. However, an important difference is that in the EIS preparation potentialpotential impacts are identified, while in an EMS both actualactual and potentialpotential impacts must be considered.

Both processes require the ranking of impacts according to their relative importance, but, in EIA, ranking criteria will be submitted on public election. Although public input is also recommended in EMS, the decision whether or not to solicit and how to incorporate these views rests exclusively internally.

Comparison Between EIA and EMS

EIA derives not from any substantive prescribe to choose an environmentally beneficial alternative,

But instead from its procedural requiring decision-makers to evaluate and consider the environmental impacts of potential actions,

Decision-makers would analyze other, more traditional factors such as economic costs, design options, and construction schedules.

Differences Between the EIA and EMS

The Goal Behind Integration ofEIA with EMS Ensuring that initial adverse impacts will

be no greater than the levels set out as acceptable in the plan,

Reducing the adverse impacts by continual design improvements, process refinements, and mitigation measures.

The Goal Behind Integration ofEIA with EMS EIA seeks integration of environmental

considerations into other planning and decision-making,

While EMS seeks to integrate the monitoring, reporting, training, feedback, and self-correcting process into every aspect of the operation.

The Goal Behind Integration ofEIA with EMS EMS involves a commitment to take

essential actions to improve environmental quality.

As a result, EMS provides a mechanism for enforcing the substantive environmental mandate that many EIA procedures lack.

Benefits of Integrating EIA with EMS

The recommendations presented in EIA are generally stated in terms that are too broad and generic. In order to be implemented these recommendations need to be ‘translated’ into a set of clear procedures and/or instructions.

Converting the management measures proposed in an EIS into enforceable commitments

The effort to describe the affected environment and to identify impacts during the EIA process would not be duplicated once the organization decides to implement an EMS.

New opportunities for infusing substantive environmental goals into both government planning and business decision-making

More effective planning and improved environmental protection

Streamlining compliance and enhancing business competitiveness

Benefits of Integrating EIA with EMS

Pollution Prevention Perspective

Under an integrated strategy, EIA processes may provide a practical framework for evaluating and integrating a comprehensive pollution prevention plan,

While the EMS process provides a top-down policy for ensuring that pollution prevention measures are actually incorporated on a continuous basis during the operational phases.

Obstacles to Integration

Insufficient interaction between the EIS consultant and the proponent project team.

Incompability between the project team and operational staff can cause loss of time and money.

The EIA process is often viewed by project proponents as a bureaucratic step to obtain a government permit, rather than a useful planning process that will assist in the actual operation of the project.

Conceptual Framework for Integrating an EIA with EMS

(Ridgway, 1999)

Cause–effect relationship linking a project action to an environmental impact

(Sánchez and Hacking, 2002)

Single-sequence Idea for the EIA-EMS Integration

(Sánchez and Hacking, 2002)

Conceptual Framework for Integrating an EIA with EMS

(Charles H. Eccleston andRobert B. Smythe, 2002)

The Policy, Planning, Analysis, and Decision-makingPhase (Performed by EIA Process)

Performed by standart EMS Process

Alternating-sequence Conceptual Framework for the EIA-EMS Integration

(A. Perdicoúlis and B. Durning, 2007)

EMS-EIA-EMS(-EIA) providesa balanced division of tasks. This framework includes a series of modificationsto key documents of both processes, to render them appropriate for smoothintegration.

Achievement of the Integration of EIA with EMS will be concluded in a process that ensures adverse impacts

are anticipated and controlled (which is the objective of EIA), and

that any remaining significant impacts are reduced or eliminated through a continuous improvement cycle (which is the hallmark of an EMS).

Results and Discussions

The EIA process, which focuses on pre-approval planning and design, often lacks a legally binding obligatory to protect the environment in the operational phases of an approved action.

In contrast, the EMS process requires ongoing monitoring and meaningful actions to be taken, leading to continual environmental improvement.

Results and Discussions

But simply conducting both processes, whether simultaneously or in sequence, does not automatically achieve the benefits and goals described in the previous sections.

In reality, planners, managers and legislators must develop a detailed and carefully thought-out strategy for consciously combining the two processes in order to truly gain from the relative strengths of each system.

Results and Discussions

The initial EIA process should be designed to be compatible with the EMS planning requirements.

In this way the EIA could provide a clear starting point for the EMS.

The weaknesses of one system The weaknesses of one system tend to be offset by the strengths tend to be offset by the strengths

of the otherof the other

Thanks for your attention.