Impact significance determination-Pushing the boundaries

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Volumn 27, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 770-788

  Lawrence, David P ^a  

^a PO Station A   (Canada)

Author keywords

Cumulative effects; Good practices; Impact significance determination; Positive impacts; Precautionary Principle; Socio economic effects; Sustainability

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

BIO-PHYSICAL IMPACTS; CUMULATIVE EFFECTS; IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE DETERMINATION; NEGATIVE IMPACTS; PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

BIOPHYSICS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE; SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT; STAKEHOLDER; SUSTAINABILITY;

EID: 35148900173     PISSN: 01959255     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2007.02.010     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Appell D. The uncertainty principle (2001), Scientific American January
2. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC). A national approach to environmental impact assessment in Australia, ANZECC secretariat, Canberra, Australia (1991)
3. Australian Government. EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1 Significance Impact Guidelines: matters of National Environmental Significance (2006), Department of the Environment and Heritage, Commonwealth of Australia
4. Barrow C.J. Environmental and social impact assessment - an introduction (1997), Arnold, London
5. Barrow C.J. Social impact assessment - an introduction (2000), Oxford University Press Inc., New York
6. Bronfman L.M. Setting the social impact agenda: an organizational perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 11 (1991) 69-79
7. Burdge R.J. Why is social impact assessment the orphan of the assessment process?. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 20 (2002) 3-9
8. Burdge R.J., and Robertson R.A. Social impact assessment and the public involvement process. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 10 (1990) 81-90
9. Burdge R.J., and Vanclay F. Social impact assessment: a contribution to the state of the art series. Impact Assessment 14 (1996) 59-86
10. Deakin M., Curwell S., and Lombari P. Sustainable urban development: the framework and directory of assessment methods. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 11 (2002) 171-197
11. Denq F., and Altenhofel J. Social impact assessments conducted by Federal agencies: an evaluation. Impact Assessment 15 (1997) 209-231
12. Erickson P.A. A practical guide to environmental impact assessment (1994), Academic Press, San Diego, California
13. Finsterbusch K. In praise of SIA - a personal review of the field of social impact assessment: feasibility, justification, history, methods, issues. Impact Assessment 13 (1995) 229-252
14. Finsterbusch K., and Freudenburg W.R. Social impact assessment and technology assessment. In: Riley R.A., and Michelson W. (Eds). Handbook of environmental sociology (2002), Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut 407-447
15. Gagnon C. Social impact assessment in Québec: issues and perspectives for sustainable community development. Impact Assessment 13 (1995) 273-288
16. Gibson R.B. Sustainability assessment - criteria and processes (2005.), Earthscan, London, U.K.
17. Glasson J. Socio-economic impacts 1: overview and economic impacts. In: Morris P., and Thérivel R. (Eds). Methods of environmental impact assessment (1995), UBC Press, Vancouver 9-28
18. Goodland R. The concept of environmental sustainability. In: Porter A.L., and Fittipaldi J.J. (Eds). Environmental methods review: retooling impact assessment for the new century. Army Environmental Policy Institute and International Association for Impact Assessment, Fargo, North Dakota (1998) 69-76
19. Government of Canada. A Canadian perspective on the precautionary approach/principle. Discussion paper (2001), Government of Canada, Ottawa, Canada September
20. Gullett W. Environmental protection and the 'Precautionary Principle': a response to scientific uncertainty in environmental management. Environmental and Planning Law Journal 14 (1997) 52-69
21. Harrop D.O., and Nixon J.A. Environmental assessment in practice (1999), Routledge, London
22. Hegmann G.H., and Yarranton G.A. Cumulative effects and the energy resources conservation board's review process. Working paper vol. 1 (1995), Macleod Institute for Environmental Analysis, Calgary, Alberta July
23. Hildén M. Evaluation of the significance of environmental impacts. Canadian environmental assessment agency and international association for impact assessment, report of the EIA process strengthening workshop, Canberra 4-7 April 1995 (1997), CEAA, Hull, Quebec 49-60 January
24. Holm S., and Harris J. The Precautionary Principle stifles discovery. Nature (1999) 400
25. Howitt R. SIA, sustainability, and developmentalist narratives of resource regions. Impact Assessment 13 (1995) 387-402
26. International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA). Social impact assessment international principles. Special publication series vol. 2 (2003), IAIA, Fargo, ND May
27. Interorganizational Committee on Principles and Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment. Principles and guidelines for social impact assessment in the USA. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 21 (2003) 231-250
28. Joyce S.A., and MacFarlane J. Social impact assessment in the mining industry: current situation and future directions (2001), International Institute for Environment and Development, UK
29. Kauppinen T. 2002. Human impact assessment (HuIA) in Finland. STAKES - Human Impact Assessment-Seminar., STAKES National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health Helsinki.
30. Kirk D. A decision support tool to aid in evaluating significance of adverse effects on birds for environmental assessment (2000), Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Hull, Quebec
31. Larcombe P., and Winds and Voices Environmental Services Inc. Determining significance of environmental effects: an aboriginal perspective (2000), Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Hull, Quebec
32. Lawrence D. The need for EIA theory-building. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 17 (1997) 79-107
33. Lawrence D. Significance in environmental assessment (2002), Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa. http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/015/001/011/index_e.htm http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/015/001/011/index_e.htm
34. Lawrence D. The significance of social and economic impacts in environmental assessment (2004), Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa. http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/015/001/023/index_e.htm http://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/015/001/023/index_e.htm
35. Lawrence D. Significance criteria and determination in sustainability-based environmental impact assessment, Mackenzie Gas Project review panel (2005). http://ngps.nt.ca/registryDetail_e.asp%3FCategoryID%3D265 http://ngps.nt.ca/registryDetail_e.asp?CategoryID=265
36. Lockie S. SIA in review: setting the agenda for impact assessment in the 21st century. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 19 (2001) 277-287
37. Lynch-Stewart and Associates. Using ecological standards, guidelines and objectives for determining significance (2000), Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Hull, Quebec
38. Lynch-Stewart and Associates. Sharing good practice (2002), Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Hull, Quebec
39. Marusich S. The application of fuzzy logic analysis to assessing the significance of environmental impacts: case studies from Mexico and Canada (2001), Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa
40. McBride G.B., Loftis J.C., and Adkins N.C. What do significance tests really tell us about the environment?. Environmental Management 18 (1993) 317
41. Ortolano L. Environmental regulation and impact assessment (1997), Wiley, New York
42. Rickson R.E., Burdge R.J., Hundloe T., and McDonald G.T. Institutional constraints to adoption of social impact assessment as a decision-making and planning tool. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 10 (1990) 233-243
43. Rickson R.E., Western J.S., and Burdge R.J. Social impact assessment: knowledge and development. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 10 (1990) 1-10
44. Sadler B. Environmental assessment in a changing world: evaluating practice to improve performance, IAIA and Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ministry of Supply and Services, Ottawa, Canada, 1996.
45. Seebohm K. Guiding principles for the practice of social assessment in the Australian water industry. Impact Assessment 15 (1997) 233-251
46. Stamps III A.E. A paradigm for distinguishing significant from non-significant visual impacts: theory, implementation, case histories. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 17 (1997) 249-294
47. Taylor C.N., Goodrich C.G., and Bryan C.G. Social assessment. In: Porter A.L., and Fittipaldi J.J. (Eds). Environmental methods review: retooling impact assessment for the new century. Army Environmental Policy Institute and International Association for Impact Assessment, Fargo, North Dakota (1998) 210-218
48. Tickner J. A commonsense framework for operationalizing the Precautionary Principle. Paper presented at the Wingspread Conference, strategies for implementing the Precautionary Principle (1998), Racine, Wisconsin
49. Tickner J., Raffensperger C., and Myers N. The Precautionary Principle in action: a handbook (1998), Science and Environmental Health Network, Ames, Iowa
50. United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Environmental impact assessment training resource manual. second ed. (2002). http://www.unep.ch/etu/publications/EIAMan_2edition_toc.htm Australian EIA Network. URL, http://www.unep.ch/etu/publications/EIAMan_2edition_toc.htm
51. Vanclay F. Social impact assessment. In: Petts J. (Ed). Handbook of environmental impact assessment vol. 1 (1999), Blackwell Science, Oxford 301-326
52. Vanclay F. Conceptualising social impacts. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 22 (2002) 183-211
53. Walker A. Restoring flows on Australia's Snowy River: assessing the impacts on local amenity. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 21 (2003) 119-124
54. Wiener J.B., and Rogers M.D. Comparing precaution in the United States and Europe, WP 2001-02, Duke Center for Environmental Solutions (2002), Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
55. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Our common future (1987), Oxford University Press, Oxford
56. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe (WHOROE). Precautionary policies and health protection: principles and application. Report of a WHO Workshop, Rome, Italy (2001)