Environmental impact assessment and
strategic environmental assessment
research in the UK
Hayes, SJ
http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S1464333215500167
Title Environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment
research in the UK
Authors Hayes, SJ
Publication title Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management
Publisher World Scientific Publishing Co
Type Article
USIR URL This version is available at: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/50503/
Published Date 2015
USIR is a digital collection of the research output of the University of Salford. Where copyright
permits, full text material held in the repository is made freely available online and can be read,
downloaded and copied for non-commercial private study or research purposes. Please check the
manuscript for any further copyright restrictions.
For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please
contact the Repository Team at: library-research@salford.ac.uk.
Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management
Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment Research
in the UK
--Manuscript Draft--
Manuscript Number: JEAPM-D-15-00010R1
Full Title: Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment Research
in the UK
Article Type: Research Paper
Keywords: Environmental Impact Assessment; Strategic Environmental Assessment;
Sustainability Assessment; Sustainability Appraisal
Corresponding Author: Samuel Hayes, PhD
UNITED KINGDOM
Corresponding Author Secondary
Information:
Corresponding Author's Institution:
Corresponding Author's Secondary
Institution:
First Author: Thomas B Fischer, PhD
First Author Secondary Information:
Order of Authors: Thomas B Fischer, PhD
Urmila Jha-Thakur, PhD
Samuel Hayes, PhD
Order of Authors Secondary Information:
Abstract: In this paper we briefly review the state of academic research in the UK in the field of
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment
(SEA). Through consideration of the number of articles related to EIA and SEA
published in academic journals and the contribution of post-graduate students' (PhD
and master level) dissertation theses we aim to understand where activity has occurred
in the field over recent decades. Simple literature and database searches reveal that
the UK is an active environment for researchers and students in the field with
numerous universities engaged in research and teaching (although not always both
activities). However, we have also collected evidence to suggest that research funding
is lacking and that there is variation over time in the number and scale of research
projects being funded in the UK.
Response to Reviewers: We are grateful for the reviewer comments and have revised the manuscript
accordingly. Primarily adding suitable references to provide examples and evidence for
the points made.
Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment Research in the UK
Abstract
In this paper we briefly review the state of academic research in the UK in the field of Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). Through consideration of
the number of articles related to EIA and SEA published in academic journals and the contribution of
post-graduate students’ (PhD and master level) dissertation theses we aim to understand where
activity has occurred in the field over recent decades. Simple literature and database searches reveal
that the UK is an active environment for researchers and students in the field with numerous
universities engaged in research and teaching (although not always both activities). However, we
have also collected evidence to suggest that research funding is lacking and that there is variation
over time in the number and scale of research projects being funded in the UK.
Introduction
In the UK, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA,
including Sustainability Appraisal – SA) are slowly developing into an ‘Environmental Assessment’
(EA) profession/discipline. This is driven in part by the EIA/SEA ‘industry’ (i.e. consultancies
conducting assessments and preparing documentation) and the Institute of Environmental
Management and Assessment (IEMA) which in 2014 had about 15,000 members and which is
actively engaged in the process of drawing up professional standards, including the voluntary
accreditation scheme ‘EIA quality mark’ (Fischer and Fothergill, 2015) and certified training.
Furthermore, there is an active, albeit small, associated research community based in several
universities (which in the UK are quasi-privatised) and some private consultancies. With regards to
research, since the 1980s, there have been various EIA/SEA projects, also including PhD
dissertations. There are many associated taught degree programmes at the post-graduate level.
These are mostly connected with subjects of wider environmental management and are offered in
about 52 UK higher education institutions (Jha-Thakur et al, 2013).
Whilst there is therefore a reasonably sized academic body teaching on the topic, there are few
researchers that have made EIA/SEA their main area of research interest, despite the numerous
associated doctoral research projects in many universities (see below). Most of the research active
scholars (judging from research funding and outputs) are currently based in four institutions, the
University of East Anglia, Oxford Brookes University, Imperial College London and the University of
Liverpool. Other universities with at least some related research activity include Strathclyde,
Dundee, Newcastle and Manchester. These institutions usually do not have more than one to two or
Manuscript
Click here to download Manuscript: Environmental Assessment Research in the UK-3.docx
a maximum of three permanent academic members of staff plus temporary research staff. However,
looking at the situation in other countries (e.g. the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden and Germany)
these numbers appear to be normal, rather than exceptional, for EIA/SEA research.
Extent of EIA/SEA research outputs – a scopus review
In order to say anything meaningful regarding research outputs, it is important to clarify first what
we mean by EIA/SEA as terminology is used differently in different disciplines. Apart from the ex-
ante, procedural and participatory environmental management policy, plan, programme and project
decision support tool we are writing about here, the term EIA is also used by environmental
scientists and engineers in a different way. A scopus database (the biggest academic research output
on-line database) search, using ‘strategic environmental assessment’ and ‘environmental impact
assessment’ as search terms for the period 1994 until today, for example, in mid January 2015
resulted in over 21,000 hits. Journals with the largest number of publications (together making up
about 11% of all outputs) include ‘Science of the Total Environment’, ‘Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment’ and ‘Environmental Science and Technology’. However, most of the associated
publications do not deal with the decision support instrument EIA, but rather focus on
environmental science and related auditing (Reflected in the titles of papers, such as ‘Comparison of
produced water toxicity to arctic and temperate species’; Camus et al, 2015) and engineering (e.g.
‘Environmental impact assessment of hydrometallurgical processes for metal recovery from WEEE
residues using a portable prototype plant’; Rocchetti et al, 2013). Whilst these publications may
include information which could potentially feed into a specific EIA or SEA process, we do not see
them as being integral parts of the emerging EA discipline we are focusing on here
1
.
We estimate that about 19,000 scopus hits fall within environmental science and engineering,
leaving only 2,000 (or about 10%) being from the EIA/SEA ex-ante environmental management
decision support instrument community. This is supported when limiting the search to the three
main journals of that community, namely Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Impact
Assessment and Project Appraisal and the Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and
Management (which, according to Fischer and Onyango, 2012, publish about 50% of all related
papers), which results in 1,056 hits. Around 20 other journals occasionally publish papers on the
subject (including e.g. ‘Journal of Environmental Management’, ‘Environmental Management’,
‘Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning’ and others). Of those 1,056 publications, over 21%
1
Not being clear about what is focused on in a database search can result in gross misrepresentations,as
recently happened in e.g. Li and Zhao (2015) who claimed to have identified over 100,000 key EIA and SEA
publications, but which for the most part were actually papers from environmental science, technology and
engineering.
are from UK based authors, followed by Canadian (12%), US (10%), Australian (10%), Dutch (6%) and
South African (4%) authors
2
. This means about one fifth of all associated papers in the international
English language literature are from UK authors, i.e. UK research in the area is very visible
internationally.
Of UK authors’ papers, 40% were specifically dealing with EIA, 28% with SEA and about 10% with SA.
About another 10% of the papers were dealing with impact assessment in general and then there
were more papers looking at EIA/SEA through the lense of social impact assessment, health impact
assessment, biodiversity impact assessment and others. There was a change of focus over time with
EIA featuring more extensively over the first decade (i.e. from 1995 to 2004) and SEA more
extensively over the second (2005 to 2014) decade. Nearly 20% of the papers were more conceptual
or theory based (e.g. Chanchitpricha and Bond, 2013; Fischer, 2003; Weston, 2011) and about 10%
were explicitly dealing with aspects of effectiveness (e.g. Arts et al, 2012; Eales and Sheate, 2011).
Although few of those were looking at effectiveness based on empirical research findings. Nearly
half of the papers included some systematic practice reviews, e.g. reporting on the quality of
environmental statements (making up 10% of the entire set of publications) or the quality of
assessment procedures (e.g. Fischer, 2010; Bonde and Cherp, 2000). In this context, spatial/land use
(e.g. Therivel, 2013), infrastructure (transport related; e.g. Fischer, 2006; 2005) and energy (e.g.
Phylip-Jones and Fischer, 2013; Marshall and Fischer, 2006) were the most widely covered areas.
Other areas covered included planning in developing countries (e.g. Nadeem and Fischer, 2009),
waste management (e.g. Fischer et al, 2011), mining (e.g. Jha-Thakur et al, 2009), tourism (Lemos et
al, 2012), events (Pereira et al, 2014) and resource management (Jackson and Dixon, 2006). The
latter three were only explicitly addressed in one dedicated paper for each. The SEA Directive was
the main focus in about 5% of all papers. Publications reflect an international outlook, with 33
countries being covered in them next to the UK. Public participation was the main focus in 8% of all
papers (e.g. Bond et al, 2004). Other themes covered in over 2% of the publications (equivalent to at
least 5 papers) included GIS/scale and data issues (e.g. Riddlesden et al, 2012), health (e.g. Fischer et
al, 2010), cumulative effects (e.g. Bragagnolo et al, 2012), legal aspects (e.g. Therivel, 2013),
methods overviews (e.g. Perdicoulis and Glasson, 2012), climate change (e.g. Wende et al, 2012),
flooding (e.g. Hayes et al, 2014), disaster management (e.g. Tajima et al, 2014), policy (e.g. Axelsson
et al, 2012), and follow-up/monitoring (e.g. Hanusch and Glasson, 2009; Gachechiladze-Bozhesku
and Fischer, 2012).
2
Looking at all 21,354 scopus hits, this is distinctly different, with US authors leading the list (22%), followed by
UK (11%), Chinese (7%), Canadian (6%) and German (6%) authors.