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

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 90-98

  Weston, Joe ^a  

^a OXFORD BROOKES UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Development control; Environmental impact assessment; Planning; Screening

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL; DEVELOPMENT PROJECT; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; LOCAL PLANNING; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK;

ENGLAND; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 79957874144     PISSN: 14615517     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/146155111X12913679730593     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Allmendinger, P 2002. Planning Theory. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
2. Bartlett, R and A Kurian 1999. The theory of environmental assessment: implicit models in policy making. Policy and Politics, 27(4), 415-433.
3. Beanlands, G E and Duinker, N 1984. An ecological framework for environmental impact assessment. Journal of Environmental Management, 18, 267-277.
4. Beattie, R B 1995. Everything you already know about EIA (but don't often admit). Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 15(2), 109-114.
5. Bell S and D McGillivray 2006. Environmental Law, 6th edition. London: Blackstone Press.
6. Booth P 2009. Managing land-use change. Land Use Policy, 26S, S154-S159.
7. Cashmore, M 2004. The role of science in environmental impact assessment: process and procedure versus purpose in the development of theory. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, 403-426.
8. Cashmore, M, R Gwilliam, R Morgan, D Cob and A Bond 2004. The interminable issue of effectiveness: substantive purpose, outcomes and research challenges in the advancement of environmental impact assessment theory. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22(4), 295-310.
9. Catt v Brighton and Hove City Council and Brighton and Hove Albion FC [2007] EWCA Civ 298.
10. CeC 1997. Council Directive 85/337/EEC (as Amended By Directive 97/11/EC) on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the Environment. Brussels: CeC.
11. CeC 2003. Report from The Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Application and Effectiveness of the EIA Directive (Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directive 97/11/EC): How Successful Are The Member States in Implementing the EIA Directive. Brussels: CeC.
12. CeC 2008. Directive 85/337/EEC on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the Environment (EIA Directive): Interpretation of definitions of certain project categories of Annex I and II of the EIA Directive. Brussels: CeC.
13. Christensen, P 2006. Danish experiences on EIA of livestock projects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 26, 468-480.
14. DEFRA v Alford [2005] Env. L.R 960.
15. Department for Communities and Local Government 2006. Draft Revised Circular on EIA. London: DCLG.
16. Department of the Environment 1995. Circular 11/95: Use of Conditions in Planning Permission. London: DOE.
17. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions 1999. Circular 2/99 The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations. London: DETR.
18. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions 2000. Environmental Assessment: A Guide to the Procedures. London: DETR.
19. Fainstein, S S 2000. New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review, 35, 451-478.
20. Fernback and Others v Harrow LBC [TLR 15/5/2001].
21. Fortlage, C A 1990. Environmental Assessment: A Practical Guide. London: Gower-Technical.
22. Friedmann, J 1998. Planning theory revisited. European Planning Studies, 6(3), 245-253.
23. Gangolells M, M Casals, S Gassó, N Forcada, X Roca and A Fuertes 2011. Assessing concerns of interested parties when predicting the significance of environmental impacts related to the construction process of residential buildings. Building and Environment, 46, 1023-1037.
24. Gillespie v First Secretary of State and Bellway Urban Renewal [TLR 7/4/2003].
25. Glenn, H P 2000. Legal Traditions of the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Goodman and another v Lewisham London Borough Council [TLR 21/2/03].
27. Holder, J 2004. Environmental Assessment: The Regulations of Decision-Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Jiricka A and P Pröbstl 2009. One common way - The strategic and methodological influence on environmental planning across Europe. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29, 379-389.
29. Lambert, A and C Wood 1990. Environmental assessment implementation: spirit or letter? Town Planning Review, 61, 247-261.
30. Lawrence, D 2007. Impact significance determination - Back to basics. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27, 755-769
31. Pinho, P, S McCallum and S Santos Cruz 2010. A critical appraisal of EIA screening practice in EU member states. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 28(2), 91-107.
32. Pische, F and M Cashmore 2006. Decision-oriented environmental assessment: An empirical study of its theory and methods. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 26, 643-662.
33. R v Cornwall County Council, ex parte Hardy [2001] Env. L.R. 473.
34. R (on the application of Goodman) v Lewisham LBC [2003] EWCA Civ 140.
35. R (on application of Lebus) v South Cambridgeshire District Council [2002] EWHC 2009 Admin
36. R (Mortell) v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council [2007] EWHC 1526
37. Sheate, W 1996. Environmental Impact Assessment: Law and Policy, Making an Impact II. London: Cameron May.
38. Slapper, G and D Kelly 2004. The English Legal System. London: Cavendish Publishing Ltd.
39. Stoeglehner, G, A L Brown and L Kornov 2009. SEA and planning: 'ownership' of strategic environmental assessment by the planners is the key to its effectiveness. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27(2), 111-120.
40. Weston, J 1997. Introduction: EIA in the UK. In Planning and EIA in Practice, ed. J Weston. Longmans: London.
41. Weston, J 2000. EIA decision-making theory and screening and scoping in UK practice. Journal of Planning and Environmental Management, 43(2), 185-204.
42. Weston, J 2002. From Poole to Fulham: A changing culture in UK EIA decision-making? Journal of Planning and Environmental Management, 45(3), 425-443.
43. Weston, J 2003. Is there a future for EIA? Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 21(4), 278-280.
44. Weston, J 2004. EIA screening for changes and extensions to existing projects: applying an EU perspective. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 6(2), 1-12.
45. Weston, J 2006. Common sense in environmental impact assessment - it cannot be avoided. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 24(1), 12-13.
46. Weston, J 2007. Implementing international conservation agreements: the case of the Wadden Sea. European Planning Studies, 15(1), 133-152.
47. Weston, J 2010. EIA theories - all Chinese whispers and no critical theory. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 12(4), 1-18.
48. Wilkins, H 2003. The need for subjectivity in EIA: discourse as a tool for sustainable development. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 23, 401-414.
49. Wood, G 2007. Thresholds and criteria for evaluating and communicating impact significance in Environmental Statements: 'See no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil'? Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28, 22-38.
50. Wood, G and J Becker 2005. Discretionary judgement in local planning authority decision-making: screening development proposals for environmental impact assessment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 48(3), 349-371.