1.0.2
The Changing Context
As with other decision-making tools, EIA must also adjust itself with any
change in the basic premise. In the last thirty-one years of its existence
there have been significant developments both in technique and methodologies
of EIA. However, much remains to be done in integrating EIA into project planning
cycle, particularly against the environmental sustainability perspectives
of Developing Nations. Over the last two decades particularly after the publication
of the final report of the World Commission on Environment and Development
(WCED 1987), - Our Common Future, there have been perceptible shifts in the
paradigms of human prosperity from economic growth to sustainable development.
EIA methodologies require to get adjusted against these changes. EIA methodologies
are essentially tools for identification, prediction and summarisation of
impacts. EIA methodologies are also very useful for comparing and evaluating
alternatives (Canter 1996).
Early EIA literatures were dominated by methodological issues. However most
of the methodologies developed were effective only for achieving sector-specific
environmental management goals of the developed nations. Moreover, there still
exists some methodological vacuum. This is more so because most of the EIA
methodologies need to address the needs of later developments in the EIA process,
viz., Screening and Scoping. To be applicable in developing nations most EIA
methodologies will require to be adjusted against ground realities. It can
be conclusively stated that natural and man-modified resources exhibit more
extensive interdependence in developing countries than in the countries of
the developed world (Pearce and Turner 1990). While in the developed countries
the interdependence is somewhat reduced by the role played by technology and
economic capital, in the technology starved developing countries a more immediate
dependence on renewable resources is exhibited. Pearce and Turner (1990) observed
that in many developing countries the rate of renewable resource consumption
is in excess of the regenerative capacity of those resources. The situation
is comparable to exploitation of exhaustible resources. In case of depleting
mineral resources the situation is more conspicuous. The fundamental rationale
for environmental management in developing countries is therefore provided
by the following three features (Repetto 1986, Pearce and Turner 1990):-
* Directness of impact.
* Resource interconnections.
* Damage to regenerative capacity.
These marked deviations in the objectives of environmental management in developing
countries call for development of appropriate strategies suited to these objectives.
It is therefore important that EIA methodologies be evaluated against these
features before being applied to developing countries. EIAs should be able
to identify sustainable development indicators such as maximum sustainable
yields (supportive capacity), local assimilative capacities, project EIA studies
should be so oriented that the outputs can be utilised in the promotion of
sustainable development objectives.
Under the changed paradigm of human development the purposes of environmental
impact assessment may therefore be enumerated as below (Glasson et al. 1994):
-
1. An instrument for sustainable development
2. An aid to formulation of development actions.
3. An aid to decision making..
However, all these three purposes show considerable variation in intent depending
on the geographical setting, economic puissance, and socio-political set up
of the country or region where the human activity is to be undertaken. The
nature of developmental activity under scrutiny will also change the decision
making process or for that matter the very premise of sustainability.
For example neo-Malthhusian economists often advocate maintenance of inter-generational
equity to be a sine-qua-non for sustainable development. Sustainable development,
although is largely a macro-economic problem can only be promoted through
micro-economic activities such as pollution abatement, restoring depleted
soil and forests, and conserving mineral resources (Mikesell 1994). Solow
(1993) advocated that the present generation bequeaths to future generations
a natural resource base with a capital value at least equal to that which
it inherited. However mineral resources being essentially non-renewable in
nature environmentalists often argue in favour of limiting their uses to ensure
maintenance of reasonable capital stock for the foreseeable future. On the
other hand, question remains whether extraction of mineral represents a loss
of capital value under all circumstances.
All these seemingly add to the already existing chaotic and confusing situations
regarding goals of and expectations from EIA studies. As has been clarified
above, perspectives on human development have been changing continually over
temporal and spatial scale. Over the last two decades EIA has moved from a
defensive tool to a potentially exciting environmental and social development
technique (O'Riordan 1990).
The above paragraphs amply demonstrate that in order to develop an appropriate
EIA methodology for developing countries, the absolute minimum steps to be
followed include, inter-alia;-
1. An unambiguous definition of sustainable development and a well defined
pathway for developing countries to achieve the goals of sustainable development.
2. A study of the importance of the sector under consideration for the economic
development of the developing country in which the project is to come up.
3. A study of various activities to be undertaken during various phases of
the project, i.e., A 'cradle to grave' definition of project activities.
4. A study to define the bio-physical environment likely to be impacted by
the project.
5. A study of various EIA methodologies in respect of adequacy of purposes
served, resource, skill and time requirement, etc.