A review of the quality of environmental impact assessments in the Scottish forest sector

Citation
Im. Gray et G. Edwards-jones, A review of the quality of environmental impact assessments in the Scottish forest sector, FORESTRY, 72(1), 1999, pp. 1-10
Citations number
10
Categorie Soggetti
Plant Sciences
Journal title
FORESTRY
ISSN journal
0015752X → ACNP
Volume
72
Issue
1
Year of publication
1999
Pages
1 - 10
Database
ISI
SICI code
0015-752X(1999)72:1<1:AROTQO>2.0.ZU;2-2
Abstract
The Environmental Assessment (Afforestation) Regulations 1988 became effect ive on 12 July 1988. In Scotland, between 1988 and 1996 a total of 160 appl ications for grant assistance for afforestation proposals received by the F orestry Commission have been subject to Environmental Impact Assessment (EI A). Of these, 81 had been completed by 1996 and the assessment process conc luded. In common with other EIA legislation in the UK there is no mandatory review stage in the assessment process. This paper presents a review proce dure tailored for use in the UK forest sector. Using this procedure, a 20 p er cent sample of completed Environmental Statements (ES), was reviewed, an d the results presented. In addition, statistics on the total forest sector EIA activity during the period 1988-1996 are presented, describing the num ber of assessments requested by conservancy, current status and, the reason s why the assessments were initially requested. Although there were instanc es of good practice in the assessment process, the review highlighted the o verall poor quality of EIA and ES production. The recurring elemental failu re, which subsequently led to additional difficulties, was the absence of a full scoping phase. Assessments were therefore unfocused, did not adequate ly investigate the key issues and wasted effort on irrelevancies. This in t urn led to the collection of inadequate baseline data, which later made the task of assessing the magnitude and significance of impact extremely diffi cult. The review also noted that only one Woodland Grant Scheme (WGS) appli cation was rejected following EIA, and that none of the ESs reviewed found any significant impacts. In light of the poor coverage of mitigation method s this suggests that both project screening and EIA practice require streng thening. The authors wish to thank the Forestry Authority for the assistanc e given while carrying out the background research for this paper.