The Scottish Government

Listen

Environ UK Limited
ISBN 0 7559 6146 3

This document is also available in pdf format (120k)

This summary sets out the main findings of research into the use of Environmental Impact Assessment ( EIA) in development consent applications made under Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999 and the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 2000. Specifically, the research sought to assess whether EIA practice is in compliance with the Regulations, and to establish if evidence existed that EIA contributes to the protection of Scotland's environment.

The research was commissioned by the Scottish Executive Development Department, Planning Division, and Department of Enterprise, Transport and Life Long Learning, Energy and Telecommunications Division. It was undertaken by ENVIRON UK Limited, in collaboration with the University of Manchester EIA Centre and Bond Pearce Solicitors.

Main Findings

The main findings of the research project are summarised below.

• The number of applications subject to EIA has increased significantly since the introduction of the 1999 and 2000 regulations, from an average of 33 per year prior to 1999, to an average of 59 per year, since 1999.
• The type of projects most commonly subject to EIA now is similar to that before 1999, with extractive projects, energy, infrastructure, tourism and waste management being the most common.
• There has been a 6 fold increase in wind farm applications since 1999, and a 4 fold increase in urban development applications over the same period.
• The spread of EIA applications across the range of project types has narrowed since 1999.
• Whilst it is difficult to attribute the increase in EIA applications solely to the new regulations, anecdotal information suggests the introduction of thresholds and criteria to schedule 2 has been a contributory factor, with many authorities and applicants using these as default triggers for EIA.
• Compliance with the regulations is generally satisfactory. Occasional instances of non-compliant practice were noted, including; a failure to consult all consultation bodies during scoping; failure to give reasons when screening applications in to EIA, and; in some cases where the authority is also the applicant, a failure to seek input from consultation bodies where proposals are screened out of EIA. Additionally, some authorities are unaware that information relating to screening and scoping has to be placed on the Public Register, alongside the Environmental Statement.
• Screening is generally implemented satisfactorily, although there is some confusion over the thresholds and the indicative criteria set out in the regulations and the Circular. Not all authorities clearly state the reasons when screening applications into EIA. Screening decisions often take longer than the 3 weeks specified by the regulations, although there is no evidence of applicants seeking screening directions from Scottish Ministers.
• Some authorities are unaware that screening decisions can be changed if the circumstances of a project change; this is particularly important in cases which have been screened out and where modifications to the project might mean that it should subsequently be screened in.
• There is a general trend towards wider stakeholder consultation in the scoping process, leading to more comprehensive baseline information and a clearer identification of significant issues, although uncertainty and variations in practice arise regarding the level of project and environmental information required at this stage.
• The "quality" of scoping opinions provided by authorities is mixed. Some authorities do not appear to consult all consultation bodies. A high proportion of opinions are issued beyond the 5 week timeframe required by the regulations, but there is no evidence of applicants seeking a Scoping Direction from Ministers.
• Environmental Statements ( ESs) are generally compliant and provide sufficient information. The main weaknesses are the patchy consideration of alternatives; the occasional omission of key issues; assessments that lack rigour; lack of detailed mitigation; and poor consideration of cumulative effects. Some Non-Technical Summaries were considered too promotional and insufficiently objective.
• A strong feature of EIA practice in Scotland is the relative good quality of Electricity Act project ESs, particularly those for wind farms.
• Some authorities are unsure of requirements concerning the publication of further information, although in general, this is more a lack of awareness of existing guidance.
• Consultation bodies play a key role in EIA, informing scoping, scrutinising ESs, and contributing to planning conditions and controls.
• Public consultation often goes well beyond the strict requirements of the Regulations, and includes public exhibitions and workshops, although practice varies.
• There remains uncertainty over the application of EIA to outline planning applications, although authorities were more content that EIA was appropriate in the case of property development applications where a masterplan is provided as part of the application.
• EIA has increased the profile of development impacts and formalised the assessment of environmental effects. Scoping leads to a better understanding of potential effects at the earliest stage with the result that "better" development proposals evolve.
• From the limited evidence available, due to the timing of the study, EIA improves project design by identifying potential effects early on so they can be avoided or at least limited, or controlled. It helps to identify and frame planning conditions and agreements with positive results for development quality and environmental protection.
• Resource constraints limit the extent to which authorities can confirm that planning conditions are implemented correctly. Some authorities have overcome the problem by making it a condition that evidence of implementation is demonstrated, for example, though periodic monitoring reports.
• A specific finding relating to applications under the 2000 Regulations is that whilst Ministers can consider amendments to consents granted, planning authorities cannot make such amendments. The result is that amendments must be considered as fresh applications.
• In general, the level of awareness and understanding in EIA is high; difficulties are limited to specific aspects of compliance and practice and not to EIA as a whole. Quality has improved, specifically in scoping and impact assessment.
• The level of involvement among consultation bodies has increased also, as has the level of public consultation. The degree to which project design has improved to take greater account of environmental effects has increased, as has environmental input into planning conditions and agreements.
• Experience and practice varies enormously however. There is a trend too towards larger, more complex and lengthier EIAs, with implications for resources and costs.
• Expertise and experience of those involved in the process are key. Experience across the country is still patchy, and there is an appetite for further guidance and training.

Research Method

The aim of the research was to assess compliance and practice in EIA. Whilst ESs provide information about a project and its environmental effects, rarely do they set out how a project has evolved and what EIA process was adopted. The ES can be reviewed to assess the extent to which it is "compliant" but provides only a limited window on the process as a whole. The research was designed to capture a broad base of experience on the one hand and detailed process information on the other.

A three stage process was adopted. The first involved a structured review, undertaken by the EIA Centre, of a large (38) sample of ESs drawn from a broad range of project types, geographies and situations, using a variation of the Lee and Colley ¹ review method developed for reviewing ES quality, to assess the performance of the ESs against some 55 different criteria, and specifically to assess whether the ESs met the minimum requirements set out in the Regulations.

¹ Lee, Colley, Bond and Simpson. 1999. Reviewing the Quality of ESs and Environmental Appraisals. Occasional Paper No 55. Planning and Landscape, School of Environment and Development, University of Manchester.

The second stage, conducted by ENVIRON, looked in greater detail at a smaller number (19) of cases, drawn from Stage 1. It involved a detailed examination of public and file information to assess how the application was screened, scoped and how the ES informed the eventual decision, supplemented with information obtained from structured interviews with representatives from the applicant, his advisors, the consultation bodies and competent authority, for each case. The resulting factual information and opinion provided a substantial information base from which to assess how effectively EIA was practiced in these cases, as an indicator of experience in general.

The final stage was undertaken by Bond Pearce and took the detailed findings from Stage 2, and interpreted them against the specific requirements of the 1999 and 2000 regulations to assess the extent to which practice appears to be in legal compliance.

The research was steered by a Steering Group drawn from the two commissioning Departments. In addition, an Advisory Group was assembled from a range of stakeholders, including industry groups, consultation bodies and non-statutory bodies, to provide feedback on the research at key stages. Two Advisory Group meetings were held in the course of the research, the first at the end of Stage 1, and the second at the end of Stage 3, at which the findings of the research were presented. The final report reflects the comments and feedback obtained.

About this Study

The research project has generated an extensive data base of ES and EIA process information, which is contained in a series of appendices to the main report available online via the Scottish Executive web pages. Whilst all the information presented has been derived from actual cases, case references have not been included and none of the findings is attributed to an individual case or source.

Acknowlegement

The authors wish to express their gratitude to representatives of the client body for their assistance in the course of the research and to those attending the Advisory Group sessions for the valuable contribution to the project.

If you wish further copies of this Research Findings or have any enquiries about social research, please contact us at:

Scottish Executive Social Research
1-F (Dockside)
Victoria Quay
EDINBURGH
EH6 6QQ
Tel: 0131 244-0874
Fax: 0131 244-7573
Email: socialresearch@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Website: www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch

If you wish a copy of "The Use of Environmental Impact Assessment in the Planning System and Electricity Act Applications" the research report which is summarised in this research findings, please send a cheque for £5 made payable to:

Blackwell's Bookshop
53 South Bridge
Edinburgh
EH1 1YS
Tel: 0131 622 8283 / 0131 622 8258
Fax: 0131 622 8258
Email: business.edinburgh@blackwell.co.uk

This document (and other Research Findings and Reports) and information about social research in the Scottish Executive may be viewed on the Internet at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch

The site carries up-to-date information about social and policy research commissioned and published on behalf of the Scottish Executive. Subjects covered include transport, housing, social inclusion, rural affairs, children and young people, education, social work, community care, local government, civil justice, crime and criminal justice, regeneration, planning and womens issues. The site also allows access to information about the Scottish Household Survey.