ISSUED BY
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Private Bag X447
Pretoria
0001 South Africa
PLEASE NOTE: This document is intended as an information source and cannot
take the place of legal advice in a specific situation governed by legislation.
The document is not a guideline document, but serves as a reference and supportive
text. This document will not take the place of official guidelines and regulations
published by DEAT.
ENQUIRIES AND COMMENTS
All enquiries and comments should be addressed to:
The Director: Environmental Impact Management
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Private Bag X447
Pretoria
0001 South Africa
REFERENCING
When referencing this document, it should be cited as follows:
DEAT (2002) Screening, Information Series 1, Department of Environmental Affairs
and Tourism (DEAT), Pretoria.
The scope of an environmental assessment is defined by the range of issues
and alternatives it considers, and the approach towards the assessment that
will follow it (DEA, 1992b, p. 5). Scoping is a critical stage in the integrated
environmental management (IEM) procedure, since it is an important tool for
involving the public in the environmental assessment process, and for structuring
assessment studies. IEM is an approach that integrates environmental considerations
into all stages of the planning and development process.
Through scoping, the priorities of the environmental assessment are set. As
an open and iterative process, it may continue throughout planning and assessment,
depending on whether or not additional issues or alternatives are introduced
or eliminated because of new information.
The terms of reference for the assessment phase will be based on issues and
concerns raised during scoping; when issues are inadequately identified, the
assessment will be of poor quality. A consequence would be further delays in
decision-making while further environmental information is gathered and assessed.
On the other hand, if insignificant issues are not excluded from the assessment
process during scoping, a great deal of unnecessary work and wasted resources
can be expended.
Internationally there are slight variations from country to country in the
approach to scoping. Typically, the procedural aspects of scoping are determined
by the legal, policy and administrative requirements and guidelines within
a particular jurisdiction.
All who have a stake in a proposed activity are provided with the opportunity
to contribute to the scoping process. When effectively done, it will involve
the relevant authority, the proponent, other authorities, and interested and
affected parties in discussions about the proposed activity and the issues
it raises. The process for the identification of project alternatives must
be documented, as well as the criteria used to evaluate these alternatives.
Such criteria would include social, economic and ecological/biophysical issues.
Scoping is typically divided into three phases:
Planning the scoping procedure.
A process of stakeholder engagement to identify the key issues.
Reporting on the terms of reference for the next phase of the assessment.
Though scoping is described as a discrete step in the environmental assessment
procedure, in practice the process of identifying the significant issues usually
continues throughout the assessment process, as well as decision-making, detailed
design, implementation and monitoring. In controversial cases which involve
a wide diversity of stakeholders and perspectives, skilful and effective scoping
increases the probability that the environmental assessment will satisfy all
stakeholders, with agreement on rationale and criteria for distinguishing potentially
significant issues from others.
This document is one of a series of overview information reports on the concepts
of, and approaches to, integrated environmental management (IEM). IEM is a
key instrument of South Africa's National Environmental Management Act (NEMA).
South Africa's NEMA promotes the integrated environmental management of activities
that may have a significant effect (positive and negative) on the environment.
IEM provides the overarching framework for the integration of environmental
assessment and management principles into environmental decision-making. It
includes the use of several environmental assessment and management tools that
are appropriate for the various levels of decision-making.
The aim of this document series is to provide general information on techniques,
tools and processes for environmental assessment and management. The material
in this document draws upon experience and knowledge from South African practitioners
and authorities, and published literature on international best practice. This
document is aimed at a broad readership, which includes government authorities
(who are responsible for reviewing and commenting on environmental reports
and interacting in environmental processes), environmental professionals (who
undertake or are involved in environmental assessments as part of their professional
practice), academics (who are interested and active in the environmental assessment
field from a research, teaching and training perspective), non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) and interested persons. It is hoped that this document
will also be of interest to practitioners, government authorities and academics
from around the world.
This document has been designed for use in South Africa and it cannot reflect
all the specific requirements, practices and procedures of environmental assessment
in other countries.
This series of documents is not meant to encompass every possible concept,
consideration, issue or process in the range of environmental assessment and
management tools. Proper use of this series of documents is as a generic reference,
with the understanding that it will be revised and supplemented by detailed
guideline documents.
This document has been prepared by the CSIR. The production of this document
would not have been possible without the valuable comments from the various
authorities and practitioners who freely gave of their time to share their
experiences.
The opinions expressed and conclusions drawn are those of the author and are
not necessarily the official view of the Department of Environmental Affairs
and Tourism. Any misrepresentation of views or errors of fact are solely those
of the author.
All sources used have been acknowledged by means of complete references.
Principal Author: Henri Fortuin
Project Managers: Mark Gordon (DEAT) and Nigel Rossouw
(CSIR)
Editorial Review: DEAT: Wynand Fourie, Johan Benade and
Danie Smit CSIR: Patrick Morant and Michelle Audouin
Peer Review: Sue Brownlie (De Villiers Brownlie and Associates)
The history of mandatory environmental assessments starts in the United States
of America, where the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) ensured
that decisions on major federal activities could only be taken with foreknowledge
of their likely environmental consequences (Wathern, 1988, p. 5). NEPA was
created to "help public officials make decisions that are based on an understanding
of environmental consequences, and take actions that protect, restore and enhance
the environment" (Council on Environmental Quality, 1978). Examples of federal
actions include decisions to enact legislation, the implementing of policies
and plans, and initiation of development projects. The procedure employed to
assess the environmental implications of such actions is the environmental
impact assessment (EIA). Industrialized countries that have led the way in
the implementation of EIA procedures include Canada, Australia, The Netherlands
and Japan, who adopted legislation in 1973, 1974, 1981 and 1984 respectively.
Directive 85/337EEC was adopted by the European Community in 1985 to make environmental
assessments mandatory for certain categories of projects, and was amended in
1997 (Directive 97/11/EC). Not only have many other countries now instituted
procedures for EIA, but it (environmental assessment) has also been incorporated
into the operational requirements of bilateral and multilateral agencies such
as the World Bank (1999), the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) countries (1996), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (1995)
and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (1996).
Environmental impact assessment has been researched and discussed in South
Africa since the 1970s. It is a major part of the integrated environmental
management (IEM) procedure, an approach that integrates environmental considerations
into all stages of the planning and development process and requires post-impact
monitoring and management (Sowman, et al, 1995, p. 51). Six guideline documents
on the IEM procedure were published in 1992 by the Department of Environment
Affairs (DEA, 1992a), and a more recent discussion document on the subject
was released in 1998 by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
(DEAT, 1998).
According to DEA (1992b, p. 20), "scoping may well be considered the critical
stage in the IEM procedure. The success of a proposal will be largely determined
by the adequacy of the scoping exercise." Such adequacy is best measured against
important principles for good environmental assessment practice, described
by UNEP (1988) as follows:
Focus on the main issues.
Involve the appropriate persons and groups.
Link information to decisions about the project.
Present clear options for the mitigation of impacts and for sound environmental
management.
Provide information in a form useful to the decision-makers.
The first contact between proponents of an activity, government agencies
and interested and affected parties (I and APs), typically occurs during scoping.
It is important that those involved in it should:
H ave sufficient information about the project and its affected area, so
that they can identify possible alternatives and potential effects on the
environment.
Understand relevant legislation and its implications for the project and
any environmental investigations that are undertaken.
Understand the decision-making process, so that they can ensure that significant
issues will be considered by the decision-maker.
This document has been written for a wide audience to serve as an initial
reference text on the scoping phase of the environmental assessment process.
It includes a definition of scoping and an overview of its purpose and various
methods available. The aim is not to provide detailed guidelines on how to
implement scoping. Instead, introductory information on the scoping process
is provided for government authorities, environmental practitioners, advocacy
groups, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), industry, project proponents,
academics, students and other I and APs.
The scope of an environmental assessment is defined by the range of issues
and alternatives to be considered, and the approach towards the assessment
that will follow (DEA, 1992b, p. 5). In some countries, screening and scoping
are merged; though the techniques and procedures for both are markedly similar,
the information gathered during screening will often provide the basis for
scoping.
Screening is a process to determine whether a proposed activity requires an
environmental assessment, as well as the type and level of assessment required.
Through scoping priorities are set, efficiency is improved and focus for advice
to decision-makers is provided by limiting the environmental assessment procedure
to significant issues and reasonable alternatives, i.e. focusing on a manageable
number of questions. As an open and iterative process, scoping may continue
throughout planning and assessment, depending on whether or not additional
issues or alternatives are introduced or eliminated because of new information
(DEA, 1992b, p. 20).
1 Basic elements of scoping
The characteristics of a scoping exercise are as follows:
It is an open process that involves the authorities, proponent and stakeholders.
Feasible alternatives are identified and selected for further assessment.
Important characteristics of the affected environment are identified.
Significant issues to be examined in the assessment procedure are identified.
It provides the basis for determining terms of reference for the assessment
procedure.
Key factors to be considered when identifying significant issues include:
The nature of the proposed activity and the receiving environment.
The legal, policy and planning context for the proposed activity.
The environmental priorities of the affected population.
2 Distinction between scoping, stakeholder engagement and social impact
assessment
There is potential for confusion regarding the differences between scoping,
stakeholder engagement and social impact assessment (SIA).
Scoping is carried out at the commencement of the environmental assessment
process, where it attempts to focus the assessment on a manageable number of
important questions. Stakeholder engagement is a process of interacting with
stakeholders, so that a range of views and concerns can be expressed to inform
decision-making and help build consensus on the assessment process to be followed.
However, an important tool for scoping, it also continues through other stages
of the assessment. A suite of tools to engage the publ ic would include:
Focus group meetings with representatives of key stakeholders.
Workshops and seminars.
Interdisciplinary team meetings.
Public meetings.
Participatory rural appraisals.
Public response to written documents and/or other media coverage, e.g.
TV and radio.
In contrast to scoping, which focuses on a broad range of issues, SIA is more
focused. It is a process of assessing the likely social consequences of policy,
plan or project actions, and provides an integrated, participatory framework
in which the relevant social information that has been gathered can be prioritized,
gathered, analyzed and utilized (Burdge and Vanclay, 1995). Stakeholder engagement
and scoping can also be used to focus SIAs. In South Africa SIAs are commonly
commissioned as a response to social concerns raised during scoping, and are
seldom used as an assessment tool separately from EIAs or SEAs.
3 Issues-focused scoping
When the scope is determined solely by a team of specialists, the resulting
content of the assessment report could tend to match the capabilities of the
team rather than the converse, which is that the team should match the requirements
of the assessment (Weaver, et al, 1998). Skilful use of the scoping phase of
environment assessment is thus critical in cases involving a wide diversity
of stakeholders and perspectives.
Both prior to, and at the outset of the scoping process stakeholders will
have a strong interest in whether the issues they raise will be rejected, accommodated
or validated by the process. The issues-focused approach to scoping takes care
of such concerns when there is effective participation. This approach is implicit
in the procedure described in the regulations for EIA in South Africa, issued
in 1997 in terms of sections 21, 22 and 26 of the Environment Conservation
Act 73 of 1989 (Weaver, et al, 1999). These regulations emphasize the need
for wide I and AP consultation and review. With this approach, significant
issues identified by I and APs in the scoping phase become the focus of environmental
assessment, and it is therefore critically important that the views and perspectives
of all I and APs are adequately represented in the process.
The desired outcomes of scoping are as follows (Weaver, et al, 1999):
Stakeholders have been effectively identified and incorporated into the
scoping process.
Alternatives for achieving the objectives of the proposed activity have
been given due consideration.
Closure has been reached on the significant issues to be addressed.
The roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders in the process
have been clarified.
All participants have agreed on the process to be followed.
Teams have been appointed to execute the work required, and provided with
adequate terms of reference that are acceptable to all participants.
The terms of reference for the assessment phase are based on the issues raised
during scoping. When significant issues are not identified and addressed, it
will result in an inadequate assessment of poor quality (Wood, 2000). Delays
in decision-making may thus also be experienced while further environmental
information is gathered and assessed. On the other hand, if insignificant issues
are not excluded from the assessment process at an early stage, a great deal
of unnecessary work and wasted resources will be expended.
1 Terms of reference
Scoping is typically considered complete when a document, which sets the terms
of reference for the subsequent assessment phase and the process to be followed,
is produced and reviewed. This document should not be rigid; it should be flexible
enough either to increase or decrease the scope of investigations as new issues
emerge or others are reduced in importance. It should also clearly identify
the work to be undertaken. An example of content for a scoping report is provided
by UNEP (2002).
Weaver, et al. (1999) stress that why an answer to a particular question
is needed is just as important as what the question is. The concerns
underlying questions raised usually provide important pointers for specifying
the depth and extent of the investigations that are required to adequately
respond to the question itself. Proper terms of reference will ensure that
the results of the environmental assessment will, indeed, provide the answers
to concerns raised by stakeholders, thus closing the loop between their concerns
and the findings of the assessment.
The value of scoping should not be underestimated, whether undertaken as part
of a legal process or as good practice. Its benefits are as follows (adapted
from EC, 2001):
Scoping ensures that issues of particular concern to I and APs are included
in the information base for decisionmaking by authorities.
It helps to focus the environmental assessment on issues which are important
for decision-making, and thus reduces any delays in decision-making due to
requests for further environmental information.
Engagement on the proposed activity and its environmental effects between
the proponent and stakeholders occurs very early in the project cycle.
Feasible alternatives to the proposed activity are identified, as well
as preliminary mitigation measures that must be considered by the proponent.
All legal, policy and planning measures relevant to the proposal are identified,
so that duplication of effort and costs due to compliance with the various
measures may be avoided.
Scoping is useful for finalizing the choice of who the members of the
assessment team should be.
Internationally, procedural aspects of scoping are shaped by whatever legal,
policy and administrative requirements and guidelines are in place.
1 Roles and responsibilities for scoping
Scoping involves all who have a stake in a proposed activity. Effectively
done, scoping will involve the lead authority and the proponent in a dialogue
about the project and the issues arising from it. This is supplemented by consultations
with relevant statutory and non-statutory organizations, and I and APs (EC,
2001).
1.1 The proponent
The proponent should provide a clearly stated proposal based on existing information,
as well as succinct statements of the purpose and need for the proposed activity,
and information that will help determine the appropriate level of environmental
assessment. Scoping will help the proponent to recognize the perspective of
others, consider alternatives and issues of concern raised by the authorities
and I and APs, and to make changes to the proposal that will not only address
concerns raised, but also improve it.
1.2 The lead authority
The lead authority may issue directions on the scope of the environmental
assessment, or may review and approve the scope proposed by the proponent.
These directions may include the issues to be addressed, other authorities
and I and APs to be consulted, and the form of consultation to be employed.
1.3 Other authorities
Other authorities contribute detailed knowledge about specific issues within
their jurisdiction, e.g., water supply and controls on health and safety. This
knowledge may include specific legislation, policy frameworks, standards, local
knowledge and experience. Because they often provide licences, permits, approvals
or leases, knowledge of their requirements is essential.
1.4 Interested and affected parties (I and APs)
Interested parties include those indirectly affected by a proposed activity,
such as local, national and sometimes international NGOs, individuals and interest
groups. They reflect a range of values that should be included in the scoping
process and they can provide useful information to improve the effectiveness
of this process .
Those affected by the proposal have a major role in identifying issues and
ensuring that local knowledge and values are understood. Their views should
be taken into account when choosing between alternatives, in deciding on the
importance of issues, and in framing mitigating measures, compensation provisions
and management plans. Some affected communities might, in order to articulate
their concerns and play a meaningful role in the assessment process, need help
and support for them to understand the proposed activity, its alternatives,
and likely effects.
2 Generic procedure for scoping
Though scoping is described as a discrete step in the environmental assessment
procedure, in practice the process of identifying significant issues usually
continues throughout the assessment process, decision-making, detailed design,
implementation and monitoring.
When scoping commences, the proponent should provide a documented account
of how proposal alternatives were identified, as well as the social, economic
and ecological/biophysical criteria used to evaluate such alternatives.
The phases of scoping are typically divided into the following:
Planning the scoping procedure.
A process of stakeholder engagement to identify the key issues.
Reporting on terms of reference for the next phase of the assessment.
2.1 Planning the scoping procedure
When planning the scoping procedure, the objectives include the following:
Identification of the authorities and I & APs who should be involved in
the process.
Definition of the roles and responsibilities of the various authorities
and I and APs.
Agreement by all stakeholders on the process to be undertaken for the
assessment.
Compilation of background information to enable effective involvement
by authorities and I and APs.
Identification of the most effective strategies for communicating with
all I and APs.
The outline of the scope is developed through assembling available information,
identifying information gaps and through discussions between the proponent,
the lead authority, and other authorities and key I and APs. The process to
be undertaken should be agreed upon with relevant authorities and key I and
APs. Legislative requirements, including permitting requirements, should be
clarified, key decision points should be identified and the type of information
required from each stakeholder for the scoping process should be clarified.
A background information document (BID) should be produced, which will enable
I and APs to understand the nature of the proposed activity and identify key
issues. This BID should include an outline for scoping, with headings such
as the following:
Objectives and description of the proposed activity.
The legal, policy and planning context and setting of the proposed activity.
Environmental opportunities and constraints, including the characteristics
and importance of an area.
Feasible alternatives.
Predicted impacts on the environment.
Public involvement - how I and APs can participate.
A timetable of the process to be followed.
2.2 Stakeholder engagement to identify the key issues
The objectives for the process of engagement with stakeholders include:
Agreement on the scoping process to be followed.
Making information on the scoping process, and other supporting information,
available to those whose views are to be obtained.
Ensuring that I and APs understand what is being proposed, and why.
Identification of the key issues to be addressed in the assessment.
Prioritizing the issues by evaluating the potential significance of concerns
raised from both a technical and a subjective perspective, taking into account
the needs, values and importance of the affected environment to stakeholders.
Development of a strategy for addressing and resolving each key issue.
This will include why and what information is required, and the terms of
reference for specialist studies.
A range of techniques can be used to facilitate participation. These include
workshops, focus group meetings with specific stakeholders, media releases,
telephone/e-mail/fax hotlines and meetings with key individuals. The European
Commission (2001) has developed a comprehensive checklist for scoping consultation.
It is important that the stakeholder engagement process creates opportunities
for participation by all, so that no I and APs are excluded from the process.
2.3 Reporting on the terms of reference for the next phase of the
assessment
The objectives for reporting on the terms of reference for the next phase
of the assessment include:
Closure on the issues to be addressed in the environmental assessment and
in any specialist studies to be undertaken.
Provision of feedback on the way concerns raised has been incorporated
into the environmental assessment process.
A draft scoping report should be compiled, which includes an issues trail
and the draft terms of reference for specialist studies. The issues trail is
a list of the issues identified by stakeholders, together with the project
team's response to each concern.
Significant issues are identified for inclusion in the environmental assessment
and prioritized in order to focus the assessment studies on the most important
concerns. However, since environmental assessment deals with the effects of
human activities, assigning significance or importance to these effects would
therefore include a value judgment (UNEP, 2002) with criteria that reflect
political reality.
Kennedy (1988) characterized environmental impact assessment (EIA) as a science
and an art, because it attempts to bridge the gap between a scientific approach
to assessment and the political nature of decision-making. The effect of this
is that natural scientists involved in environmental assessment are often required
to extend their interpretation of significance beyond the scientific criteria
of their academic discipline to issues such as quality of life, health and
safety, and assurances about the future supply of food, materials, clean water
and air.
Great care must be taken to ensure that the output of scoping and the subsequent
structure of the environmental assessment reflect issues related to the proposed
activity, and not only to the competence area of the specialists. When the
concerns of poor people are not adequately considered, it often happens that
the emphasis of the environmental assessment can shift to
“green” issues.
Stakeholder engagement is thus critically important as a process for integrating
diverse knowledge, expressed in various ways. This requires that stakeholder
engagement practitioners take the time to become familiar with diverse stakeholders
and their modes of expression to help them understand technical aspects under
discussion and to ensure that any of their concerns that underlie issues can
be uncovered (Weaver, et al, 1999).
2 Timing and duration of scoping
In EIAs, rigorous scoping typically comprises 30% of the time, effort and
cost (Weaver, et al, 1998). A good scoping exercise reduces the amount of work
required for the latter parts of the environmental assessment.
While scoping is a distinct and early part of the environmental assessment
process, review of the scope is a continuous activity that proceeds throughout
the detailed assessment, decision-making, detailed design, and implementation
and monitoring. Unforeseen issues may arise in any of these phases, requiring
further consideration. For example, within a particular issue (e.g. indigenous
flora or air pollution), the work undertaken for the assessment may uncover
new aspects for consideration by the study team and stakeholders.
3 Some constraints to scoping
Based on observations of EIAs done in South Africa, the following constraints
and weaknesses in scoping should be noted (Weaver, et al, 1998):
Too many meetings lead to scoping fatigue, and I and APs lose interest
in further participation.
Some I and APs can decide not to participate in the environmental assessment,
then later cause delays in implementation if a decision which favours the
proposed activity is made.
The process is open to manipulation by individuals or groups who follow
their own agenda if there is an ineffective and inequitable distribution
of information and/or resources within the process.
Communication or language problems can marginalize or alienate important
I and APs.
Raising expectations unnecessarily, e.g. an emphasis on job creation benefits,
can blur the focus of the stakeholder engagement process.
Inadequate consideration of the wider planning context can lead to it
not being addressed in the terms of reference for the assessment.
4 Some suggestions for an effective scoping process
To add value to the scoping exercise, the following is suggested:
Maintain an effective paper trail of all correspondence (e.g. faxes, e-mails,
advertisements and minutes). When posting information, check that it has
been received and ensure that all deliveries have been signed for.
Include issues if there is uncertainty about their significance.
Avoid focusing on insignificant impacts.
8. Conclusions
Scoping is a critical stage in the IEM procedure, in which the following are
identified:
The approach to the environmental assessment.
The key issues to be addressed.
Feasible alternatives to the proposed activity.
Preliminary mitigation measures that can be considered by the proponent.
The terms of reference for the assessment phase are based on the issues raised
during scoping. Inadequate scoping will therefore result in an inadequate assessment
of poor quality. Delays in decision-making may thus be experienced as further
environmental information is gathered and assessed. As scoping deals with interpretations
of significance, which are mostly value-based, stakeholder engagement is of
critical importance.
Through scoping, the identification of significant issues allows priorities
to be set, which provide a focus for decision-making. This improves the efficiency
of the environmental assessment. During scoping, legislative or regulatory
measures relevant to the proposed activity are identified, and early consultation
is initiated between the proponent, the lead authority, other authorities,
and interested and affected parties.
Burdge, RJ and Vanclay, F. (1995) Social Impact Assessment, in Environmental
and Social Impact Assessment, In: Vanclay F. and Bronstein DA (eds.),
West Sussex. Wiley, 31-65.
DEA (1992a) Integrated Environmental Management Guideline Series,
Volumes 1-6, Department of Environment Affairs,
DEA (1992b) Guidelines for Scoping, Department of Environment Affairs,
Pretoria.
DEAT (1998) A National Strategy for Integrated Environmental Management
in South Africa, Discussion Document, Department of Environmental Affairs
and Tourism, Pretoria.
DWAF (2001) Generic Public Participation Guidelines, Department of
Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa.
European Commission (2001) Guidance on EIA Scoping, Office for Official
Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
Food and Agriculture Organization (1995) Environmental impact assessment
of irrigation and drainage projects, 53 FAO Irrigation and Drainage
Paper. Director, Publications Division, Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.
Kennedy, W.V. (1988) Environmental Impact Assessment in North America, Western
Europe: what has worked where, how and why? International Environmental
Reporter, 11(4), 257-262.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (1996) Coherence
in Environmental Assessment: Practical Guidance on Development Co-operation
Projects, Development Assistance Committee, OECD. Paris. 106pp.
Sowman, M, Fuggle, R and Preston, G. (1995) A review of the evolution of environmental
evaluation procedures in South Environmental Impact Assessment Review,
15, 45-47.
United Nations Environment Programme (1988) Environmental Impact Assessment:
Basic Procedures for Developing Countries, Regional Office for Asia
and the Pacific, UNEP. Bangkok.
United Nations Environment Programme (1996) Environmental Impact Assessment
Training Resource Manual. Environment and Economic Unit, UNEP, Nairobi.
Wathern, P. (1988) An introductory guide to EIA, In: Walthern, P. (ed.), Environmental
Impact Assessment. Theory and London and New York. Routledge. p 5.
Weaver, A, Morant, P, Ashton, P and Kruger, F. (1998) Strengthening the effectiveness
of EIA in South Africa, Paper presented at the annual conference of IAIA-SA.
Cathedral Peak, KwaZulu-Natal.
Weaver A, Rossouw N and Grobler D. (1999) Scoping and “Issues-focused”
Environmental Impact Assessment in South Africa, African Journal of Environmental
Assessment and Management, 1, 1-11.
World Bank (1999) Good practices: environmental assessment, Operational
Manual, GP 4.01, Environment Department, World Bank. Washington, DC.
Wood, C. (2000) Screening and Scoping, In: Lee, N. and George, C. (eds.), Environmental
Assessment in Developing and Transitional Countries, John Wiley and
Sons, Ltd.
Those parts of the socio-economic and biophysical environment impacted on
by the development.
Affected public
Groups, organizations, and/or individuals who believe that an action might
affect them.
Alternative proposal
A possible course of action, in place of another, that would meet the same
purpose and need. Alternative proposals can refer to any of the following,
but are not necessarily limited to these:
Alternative sites for development.
Alternative projects for a particular site.
Alternative site layouts.
Alternative designs.
Alternative processes.
Alternative materials.
In IEM, the so-called "no-go" alternative also requires investigation.
Authorities
The national, provincial or local authorities that have a decision-making
role or interest in the proposal or activity. The term includes the lead authority
and other authorities.
Baseline
Conditions that currently exist. Also called "existing conditions".
Baseline information
Information derived from data that:
Records the existing elements and trends in the environment.
Records the characteristics of a given project proposal.
Decision-maker
The person(s) entrusted with the responsibility for allocating resources or
granting approval to a proposal.
Decision-making
The sequence of steps, actions or procedures that result in decisions, at
any stage of a proposal.
Environment
The surroundings within which humans exist and that are made up of:
The land, water and atmosphere of the earth.
Micro-organisms, plant and animal life.
Any part or combination of (i) and (ii) and the interrelationships
among and between them.
The physical, chemical, aesthetic and cultural properties and
conditions of the foregoing that influence human health and well-being. This
includes the economic, cultural, historical, and political circumstances,
conditions and objects that affect the existence and development of an individual,
organism or group.
Environmental Assessment (EA)
The generic term for all forms of environmental assessment for projects, plans,
programmes or policies. This includes methods/tools such as EIA, strategic
environmental assessment, sustainability assessment and risk assessment.
Environmental consultant
Individuals or firms that act in an independent and unbiased manner to provide
information for decision-making.
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
A public process that is used to identify, predict and assess the potential
environmental impact of a proposed project page 11 on the environment. The
EIA is used to inform decision-making.
Fatal flaw
Any problem, issue or conflict (real or perceived) that could result in proposals
being rejected or modified.
Impact
The positive or negative effects on human well-being and/or on the environment.
Integrated Environmental Management (IEM)
A philosophy that prescribes a code of practice for ensuring that environmental
considerations are fully integrated into all stages of the development and
decision-making process. The IEM philosophy (and principles) is interpreted
as applying to the planning, assessment, implementation and management of any
proposal (project, plan, programme or policy) or activity - at the local, national
and international level - that has a potentially significant effect on the
environment. Implementation of this philosophy relies on the selection and
application of appropriate tools to a particular proposal or activity. These
may include environmental assessment tools (such as strategic environmental
assessment and risk assessment), environmental management tools (such as monitoring,
auditing and reporting) and decision-making tools (such as multi-criteria decision
support systems or advisory councils).
Interested and Affected Parties (I and APs)
Individuals, communities or groups, other than the proponent or the authorities,
whose interests may be positively or negatively affected by a proposal or activity
and/or who are concerned with a proposal or activity and its consequences.
These may include local communities, investors, business associations, trade
unions, customers, consumers and environmental interest groups. The principle
that environmental consultants and stakeholder engagement practitioners should
be independent and unbiased excludes these groups from being considered I and
APs. Lead authority The environmental authority at the national, provincial
or local level entrusted, in terms of legislation, with the responsibility
for granting approval to a proposal or allocating resources and for directing
or coordinating the assessment of a proposal that affects a number of authorities.
Mitigate
The implementation of practical measures to reduce adverse impacts or enhance
beneficial impacts of an action.
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
Voluntary environmental, social, labour or community organizations, charities
or pressure groups.
Proponent
Any individual, government department, authority, industry or association
proposing an activity (e.g. project, programme or policy).
Proposal
The development of a project, plan, programme or policy. Proposals can refer
to new initiatives or extensions of, and revisions to existing ones.
Public
Ordinary citizens who have diverse cultural, educational, political and socio-economic
characteristics. The public is not a homogeneous and unified group of people
with a set of agreed common interests and aims. There is no single public.
There are a number of publics, some of whom may emerge at any time during the
process, depending on their particular concerns and the issues involved.
Roleplayers
The stakeholders who play a role in the environmental decision-making process.
This role is determined by the level of engagement and the objectives set at
the outset of the process.
Scoping
The process of determining the spatial and temporal boundaries (i.e. extent)
and key issues to be addressed in an environmental assessment. The main purpose
of scoping is to focus the environmental assessment on a manageable number
of important questions. Scoping should also ensure that only significant issues
and reasonable alternatives are examined.
Screening
A decision-making process to determine whether or not a development proposal
requires environmental assessment, and if so, what level of assessment is appropriate.
Screening is initiated during the early stages of the development of a proposal.
Significant/significance
Significance can be differentiated into impact magnitude and impact significance.
Impact magnitude is the measurable change (i.e. intensity, duration and likelihood).
Impact significance is the value placed on the change by different affected
parties (i.e. level of significance and acceptability). It is an anthropocentric
concept, which makes use of value judgements and science-based criteria (i.e.
biophysical, social and economic). Such judgement reflects the political reality
of impact assessment in which significance is translated into the public acceptability
of impacts.
Stakeholders
A subgroup of the public whose interests may be positively or negatively affected
by a proposal or activity and/or who are concerned with a proposal or activity
and its consequences. The term therefore includes the proponent, authorities
(both the lead authority and other authorities) and all interested and affected
parties (I and APs). The principle that environmental consultants and stakeholder
engagement practitioners should be independent and unbiased excludes these
groups from being considered stakeholders.
Stakeholder engagement
The process of engagement between stakeholders (the proponent, authorities
and I and APs) during the planning, assessment, implementation and/or management
of proposals or activities. The level of stakeholder engagement varies, depending
on the nature of the proposal or activity and the level of commitment by stakeholders
to the process.Stakeholder engagement can therefore be described by a spectrum
or continuum of increasing levels of engagement in the decisionmaking process.
The term is considered more appropriate than the term "public participation".
Stakeholder engagement practitioner Individuals or firms whose role it is to
act as independent, objective facilitators, mediators, conciliators or arbitrators
in the stakeholder engagement process. The principle of independence and objectivity
excludes stakeholder engagement practitioners from being considered stakeholders.
