W.J. Couch, J.F. Herity, R.E. Munn

1. INTRODUCTION

  • Examination of Canadian approaches to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) begins.

  • Discussion includes:

    • Historical context from late 1960s leading to EM process adoption in Canada (1973).

    • Understanding Canada's nature and government structures influencing EIA evolution.

    • Key features of Canadian EIA processes:

      • Project screening

      • Formal public review

      • Relationship of EIA to planning and regulatory activity

      • Scientific methodology in sociology and public participation.

2. HISTORICAL REVIEW

  • EIA, as a term, recognized in the 1970s; prior assessments existed for 50+ years in Canada.

  • Notable historical instances include:

    • Trail Smelter Investigation (1930s): First Canadian EIA incident due to international concern over SO2 pollution.

    • 1960s investigations for industrial site establishments: Lake Erie complex and New Brunswick power station.

    • Canadian nuclear power assessments required baseline studies since late 1950s; however, public hearings were lacking.

3. FACTORS LEADING TO EIA INSTITUTIONALIZATION

  • Influences in late 1960s that motivated EIA overview:

    1. Environmental Literature: Works like "Silent Spring" raised alarm on environmental future.

    2. UN Stockholm Conference (1972): Public engagement and media coverage increased awareness.

    3. Public Distrust in Technology: Emergence of a skeptical generation amid social upheaval.

    4. Environmental Accidents: Events like the Torry Canyon oil spill heightened concern.

    5. Large-Scale Development Projects: Massive projects necessitated balanced environmental considerations.

    6. Economic Growth: Increased funds for pollution control fueled public demands.

    7. Emergence of Environmental Organizations: Groups like Sierra Club emerged, raising public environmental issue awareness.

4. DIVERSITY IN CANADA

  • Canada as a diverse nation:

    • Different legal systems: British Common Law vs. civil law system in Quebec.

    • Population distribution: Significant concentration in a 1,100 km corridor (Windsor-Toronto-Montreal-Quebec City).

    • Geographical variety affecting EIA approaches: From rich resources in northern territories to agricultural bases in the prairies.

  • Federal and provincial EIA responsibilities defined by a history of decentralized powers

  • Need for cooperation across jurisdictions highlighted through intergovernmental communications.

5. GENERAL VIEWS ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

  • Common characteristics across Canadian EIA processes:

    • Notable similarities in philosophy and methodology despite variations.

    • Stress on public consultation and involvement in assessments.

    • EIA ideally should not result in legal disputes.

6. SCREENING IN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

  • Developers’ responsibility to screen for potential significant adverse environmental impacts:

    • Different screening laws and requirements vary across provinces.

    • Quebec: Specific regulations for major industries (pulp, petrochemical).

    • Ontario: Comprehensive Environmental Assessment Act merits screening.

7. INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF EIA

  • Establishment of special offices and agencies for EIA at federal and provincial levels:

    • Alberta: Developers seek EIA guidance from the Environmental Assessment Division.

    • Nova Scotia: Screens projects and advises the Environment Minister based on potential environmental impacts.

    • Federal Level: Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office (FEARO) coordinates EIA amongst federal departments.

8. FORMAL PUBLIC REVIEWS

  • Independent reviews of projects with significant public concern:

    • Boards derive their authority from legislation; operate under quasi-judicial procedures.

    • Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) must encompass detailed project descriptions, potential impacts, and mitigation.

9. EIA AND LAND/RESOURCE PLANNING

  • EIA is evolving to become integrated into resource planning:

    • Shift from project-specific assessments to comprehensive regional planning.

    • Late reviews minimized by planning frameworks initiated before specific developments.

10. REGULATORY PROCESSES IN EIA

  • EIA often precedes regulatory approvals, ensuring environmental concerns addressed beforehand:

    • New Brunswick and Alberta examples showcase coordination across DEAs and regulatory agencies.

11. SCIENCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

  • Scientific rigor essential for predicting ecological effects:

    • Environmental assessments must rely on government agencies staffed with scientists.

12. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (SIA)

  • Social impacts garner public interest and engagement:

    • Evolving definitions and frameworks to address social dimensions within EIAs.

13. FUNDING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

  • Discussions evolving on funding mechanisms for public intervention:

    • Grant practices have emerged in some reviews, but the overall necessity remains debated.

14. CONCLUSIONS

  • Environmental assessment principles applied variably across Canada:

    • Developers typically oversee screening; administering agencies coordinate EIA.

    • Public participation is integral, with elected officials retaining ultimate decision-making powers.