2.0 LITERATURE SURVEY

2.1 General

The main areas covered under this section are history and development of EIA process, public participation in EIA process and EIA methodologies used in EIA reports. Central Environmental Authority of Sri Lanka as the lead agency for environmental concerns plays a prominent role in providing very useful information regarding EIA process and its current situation.

2.2 EIA process

Economic progress is the goal of all developing countries with the aim of improving the quality of life alleviating the pressures on them and on the land providing them with a better future. This development effort, in the global context of today, has translated itself into overexploitation of available resources, industrialization and technological development. These have resulted in deterioration, depletion and exhaustion of natural resources. The cumulative effect of all such manifestations will progressively threaten the resource base and the quality of life. Hence the overall impact of any technological application should be reviewed at its conception for its resulting effect on the human environment.

If the country wants to expand and sustain development, it is imperative that environmental resources are conserved and enhanced. This fundamental axiom, expressed in the concept of sustainable development, forms the basis for the Environmental Impact Assessment. EIA is an internationally accepted transparent process to predict and identify potentially significant environmental impacts of development proposals and to suggest mitigatory measures to minimize the negative impacts and to maximise the positive impacts.

2 .2 .1 Global Development of EIA Process

Concern over the protection of environmental quality dates back to several centuries. It was evident in 14 t h century London that coal burning was the major cause of an air pollution problem and consequently its use and movement were regulated. (Goodland 1994)

The development of towns and cities in England in the early 19 t h century led to a drastic increase in the mortality rates due to water transmitted diseases. The provision of clean, safe water in cities as a public Health measure in 1848 was a landmark in this respect.

2 - 1

Following this, in Europe and the United States, sewage systems were constructed to handle and dispose of contaminated water to areas outside the urban limits. This was the birth of sanitary engineering and it evolved into an integrated concept of water pollution control and solid and industrial liquid waste management in the 1940s. The massive photochemical smog that engulfed the cities of Los Angeles and London after world war II led to the incorporation of air pollution control into legislation and gave birth to the concept of comprehensive environmental pollution control. (Goodland 1994) In the late 1950s and early 1960s wildlife conservation groups in the United States provided the impetus for the growth of environmentalism. They managed to exert sufficient public pressure to force the government to upgrade water pollution control to a very high level. The intensification of air pollution and solid waste management activities led to the evaluation, in the late 1960s of the concept of environmental management and protection. (Goodland 1994)

This and other factors give rise to the development of environmental impact Assessment (EIA) as a tool to evaluate and analyze any new project for its environmental impact including the protection of natural and ecological resources. During the 1970s the concept o f environmental protection was further refined, especially as a new set of regulations was tested in the courts, (Goodland 1994) leading to the realization that environmental protection must encompass all environmental resources including economic development and the citizen's quality o f life.

The most significant is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 which became effective on January 1, 1970. This Act was the first signed in the 1970s thus signaling the importance of the environment in the decade. (Canter 1996) The United Nations conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972(Canter 1996) gave an impetus to the establishment of environmental protection agencies in most countries. EIA is now gradually becoming an essential part of the feasibility studies of new projects in most countries with environmental issues often playing a significant role in the planning and development process.

2.2.2. Development of EIA Process in Sri Lanka

As a developing country Sri Lanka has a long history of environmental management. The first wildlife sanctuary in the world was established in Sri Lanka in 3 r d Century B.C (Hennayake 1998).

The cultural life of the people greatly influenced by Buddhism and Hinduism is enriched with sound environmental ethics. The environmental management and protection is embedded to the life of the people in Sri Lanka from ancient time.

With the arrival of colonial powers, specially the British who introduced plantation agriculture in the mid 19 t h Century, the natural environment in the island came under severe pressure. The British introduced several laws to protect the environment . Today, the country has over hundred laws governing the use of the natural environment.

Most of these laws address specific aspects of the environment. The country did not have a comprehensive legislation that looked at the environment as a whole until the enactment of the National Environmental Act in 1980. (NEA 1980). The accelerated development efforts launched by the government of Sri Lanka in the late 70s such as Accelerated Mahaweli Development Project and Katunayake Free Trade Zone had a significant impact on the island's environment. With the rapid progress in development activities, protection and management of the environment became a major concern

The Government of Sri Lanka realized the need of integrating environmental, economic and social consideration with decision making process. To make it more formal, the Environmental Impact Assessment Process was introduced into the development projects. An environmental study of the entire Mahaweli program was conducted and completed in the year 1980. The government of Sri Lanka incorporated the recommended mitigatory measures into an environmental action plan for Mahaweli Development Program( Wijesekera1999). In 1982, the cabinet Ministers decided to make EIA mandatory for all state and private sector development projects with effect from l s tJanuary 1984.(Hennayake et al 1997) The year 1983 was devoted for the preparation of comprehensive guidelines and procedures for the training of officials. EIA is a procedure for assessing the environmental impacts of a project to be implemented and is widely accepted as a planning and decision making tool.

2.3. EIA Process in Sri Lanka

The National Environmental Act (NEA 1980) is the basic Act for protection and management of the environment. It was amended by Act No. 56(NEA 1988) to include a provision relating to EIA contained in Part IV C of the statute entitled "Approval of Projects".

Under the provision of section 23Z o f the NEA, the EIA process applies only to "Prescribed Projects" which have been specified by the Minster of Environment (Gazette extra-ordinary 1993, 1995) and will be implemented through designated Project Approving Agency as prescribed by the Minister under section 23Y of NEA. The Central Environmental Authority as the agency responsible for implementing the above provisions of the NEA, will immediately advise Project Approving Agencies of any amendments to the NEA relevant to Part IV C and other orders and regulations. Under Section 23CC of the NEA, regulations have been made by the Minister stating the procedures that should be followed in order to achieve the EIA requirements of the NEA(CEA guidelines No. 1-1998 pg.43 - 57)

Legal Provision for EIA in Sri Lanka was first included in the Coast Conservation Act together with the Coast Conservation (amendment) Act. (CCD 1981,1988)This zone is mainly "the area lying within a limit of three hundred meters landwards of the mean high water line and a limit o f two kilometers seawards of the mean low water line." Sri Lanka's initial EIAs were prepared under this law.

Under the discretion of the Director of the coast conservation, the developer should apply for a permit to furnish an EIA related to the development activity. The Coast Conservation Department interprets the provision as requiring an EIA when the impacts are likely to be significant. The Act requires the Director of coast conservation, on receiving the EIA report, to make it available for public scrutiny and to entertain public comments on it. Further, the act requires the Director of CCD to refer the EIA report to the Coast Conservation Advisory Council for comment. The council is an inter­departmental Inter-disciplinary advisory body. The Director of coast conservation may decide to grant approval for the implementation o f the project subject to specified conditions or refuse approval for the implementation of the project, giving reasons for doing so. (CCD 1981,1988)

In addition to the Act of CCD and NEA, the North Western Province has enacted its own provincial Environmental Statute under the 13 t h amendment to the Constitution which supersedes the NEA within the bounds of the Province. The NWP Council has gazetted EIA and EPL regulations under this Act and set up a Provincial Environmental Statute.(NWPES 1990) In every province the subject of environment is grouped with several other subjects in one Provincial Ministry. A s a result, environment receives a low priority in the provincial administration. None of the provinces of Sri Lanka except the NWP has an institutional structure to manage the environment. Only the NWP council has its own provincial environmental statute and a Provincial Environmental Authority.

2 - 4

The EIA process in Sri Lanka could be stated as very straightforward. According to the National Environmental Act regulations, EIA process of Sri Lanka consists of several steps and is therefore, briefly described here. Sequential steps of the process have been shown in anexure 1

1 . Preliminary Information

Preliminary information process starts with a Project Proponent submitting preliminary information on a prescribed project. It is the responsibility of the Project Approving Agency (PAA) to obtain information regarding the nature, location and impacts of the project. This information should be comprehensive and descriptive so that it will help the Project Approving Agency to decide whether and TEE or EIA is required. The PAA will decide on the adequacy of the information that is given by the project proponent. If the PAA is satisfied with the information provided by the project proponent it may even decide that the requirement is only an TEE. If the PAA decide otherwise, PAA will request more information on the project if those supplied are inadequate. The decision of calling an IEE/EIA is entirely at the discretion of the PAA.

2 . Scoping

This is the process of determining the important and significant issues that should be addressed in detail in the TEE / EIA. Since these issues cover a broad range of responsibilities, the EIA regulations state that the PAA should take into consideration the views of state agencies, non governmental organizations, affected groups and all interested parties.

In this process the PAA will determine the reasonable alternatives that should addressed and set the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the IEE/EIA. Scoping can be treated as a vital point in the IEE/EIA process and is the stage at which much can be done to smoothen out the rest of the process to follow. Successful scoping assists in setting realistic and measurable goals and objectives for the IEE/EIA. Also a successful scoping session can make the EIA effort an accelerated one.

3. IEE/EIA Preparation

It is the prime duty of the PAA to determine whether an TEE or EIA is required, based on the likely significance of the impacts of the proposed project. PAA should develop their own methodology to evaluate and assess the impacts from a particular development project. Significant impacts which crop up from a development project should be determined based on their context and intensity.

When considering the intensity of the impacts, the CEA guidelines should be followed. (CEA guidelines 1998). These guidelines further state, that the IEE/EIA should refer to the severity, magnitude or the degree of the environmental impact. PAA is responsible for preparing a TOR in order to obtain analytical and concise EIA report.

It is clearly stated that the TEE / EIA should be prepared early enough so that it can practically contribute to the decision making process and will not be used to rationalize or justify decisions already made.(CEA 2000) Guidelines for IEE / EIA process give the recommended format and content an IEE/EIA should have. The standard format of the IEE / EIA can be adopted by Project developers, but exceptions can be made as determined by the PAA. EIA content and format is also stipulated in the guide lines.(CEA guidelines No. 1-1998)

4. Public Comments

After receiving the EEE/ EIA, the PAA should check its adequacy against the TOR given by them. If PAA is satisfied with the EIAR, it will be opened for public scrutiny for a period of 30 working days this should be announced in the gazette and newspaper in all three languages, namely Sinhala, Tamil and English. PAA should make EEEs / EIAs readily available to the public in the relevant/concerned districts or divisions. Relevant agencies and special expertise or authorities have a duty to comment on the project within the time period specified. PAA should forward all the comments received to Project Proponent for review and response.

According to the National Environmental Act, public hearing held at the discretion of the PAA should realize that it would be in the public interest to do so. The magnitude or the intensity of the term public interest will mainly defined by the PAA. The CEA guidelines on IEE / EIA process has stated some of the factors upon which the public interest will depend. With the severity of the public interest, if PAA feels to hold a public hearing, it should be held immediately after the expiration of the 30 day commenting period. The final environmental clearance decision on the project is based on the recommendations of the EIA report as well as responses to public comments.

5. Implementing the Decision and Monitor ing

According to the National Environmental Act, approval should be granted for a project either subjected to conditions or be refused approval with reasons for doing so. PAA will appoint a Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) comprising of technically competent persons.

The technical evaluation committee is expected to evaluate an EIA report reliably and accurately.

The committee is authorized to highlight its errors, omissions and inadequacies and also to suggest measures to improve the EIA report. TEC is not involved in finalizing a decision but only limited to providing advice. PAA will make the final decision. But PAA is advised to consider the recommendations made by the TEC.

According the EIA regulations, the PAA should submit a monitoring plan to the CEA. Monitoring starts with the commencement of construction phase and continues through the operational phase. If a project is not properly monitored the purpose of the EIA process will not be fulfilled. Therefore, monitoring by the PAA would involve compliance with conditions and the assurance of effectiveness of the mitigatory measures.

2.4 Public Participation in EIA Process

2.4.1 General

One significant aspect of EIA is the involvement of the affected public in the environmental impact study. The success and sustainability of projects depend upon the understanding of approval and participation in all aspects of the project cycle.

The rationale behind public involvement is fairly simple. Public projects are implemented to serve a society. It is, therefore, necessary to determine whether the service being provided matches the perceived need. The public are knowledgeable and concerned about the economic growth within a sustainable environment. In the case of private projects, the motivation may be personal gain by investors or project developers. Here, public involvement is needed to ensure that "one man's gain does not become society's loss".

Some of the objectives in securing public participation :

• To inform or educate the public. • To identify problems, needs and values. • To seek approaches to problem solving. • To obtain a feedback on the proposed project. • To evaluate alternatives • To resolve conflicts.

In its broadest sense, public participation should be an on-going activity that takes place throughout the EIA. However, in more conventional interpretation, public involvement is the direct comments on the proposed action which are received towards the end of the EIA. It is said that public participation program does not occur by accident, therefore, public participation program must be carefully planned.

In summary, it should be repeated that public involvement is a useful part of any EIA. Each country should, therefore, seek the most effective ways of eliciting public comment. It is, however, important to note that the interaction between government and people varies from country to country. Therefore, a forum for public participation which works well in one country may fail in another.

2.4.2 Global Status : Based on Each Stage

The right to public participation has been accepted in the developed world for a long time. In 1972 United Nations Conference on Human environment states that " Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens. Nations shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making environmental infonnation widely available."

The report of the world commission on Environment and Development adopted by the United Nations General assembly in 1987 states "public hearing on all projects and investment decisions that may impact the environment, public right to participate and submit comments as part of the EIA and EIA audit procedures, the right to initiative and referendums regarding environmental issues, the right to interview and question environmental officials involved in environmental decisions, the right to legal redress and remedies for environmental or personal damages".(Canter 1996) It has been identified that Sri Lanka permits greater public access to decision making in environmental issues than most other Asian countries. However, most Asian countries are permitting public participation in EIA process. Bangladesh, China, Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Vietnam are some countries that allow public participation. Public participation is not mandatory in the Philippines, China does not provide for public hearings. Thailand does not provide for public participation. Public participation is limited in India and Indonesia. Still public participation remains a controversial issue throughout the world. (Smith 1997). The above details are given in the Table. Table can be summarized as follows.

2 - 8

Public participation in the IEE /EIA Process in Asian Countries

Country Public Participation

Bangladesh Yes China Yes, but no public hearing India Limited Indonesia Limited Malaysia Yes Philippines Yes, but not mandatory PNG Yes Fiji Yes Sri Lanka Yes Thailand N o Vietnam Yes

The Council on Environmental Quality regulations(CEQ 1987) stipulates seven stages where the public can participate in impact assessment in the EIA process.

1. Identification of issues and impacts. 2. Conduction of baseline studies of the environment. 3. Prediction and evaluation of impacts. 4. Mitigatory Planning 5. Comparisons of alternatives. 6. Decision making relative to the proposed action. 7. Study documentation through the preparation of an

environmental assessment.

It is accepted that the public participation should be sufficiently ensured during the entire EIA process. Annex 2 shows the process of EIA and its link to public participation in the above Literature.

The public participation in environmental assessment at various stages of IEE/EIA could be summarized as below.

1 . Identification of Issues and Impacts

This is the first step of finding out the environmental concerns in every development project. Issues and impacts arising from a new project should be clearly identified, since every other steps will be carried out on the basis of these.

The initial identification of issues and impacts establishes the scope of the environmental impact study. Public participation activities at this stage are primarily devoted to informing the public about the project and determining what citizens feel about the need being addressed. At this early stage it will be possible to start identifying which groups see themselves as "winners" and which as "losers".

2. Baseline Studies of the Environment

This is the study carried out in identifying the project environment. These should look at basically on physical, biological and socioeconomic elements of the environment.

The baseline study records the environmental status in the study area. At this stage the information given to public is in the form of what is surveyed and why it is done so. Feedback to this information is often helpful in identifying existing databases and issues of concern. Thus the public's response can reduce the time and cost of the baseline survey enlightening the impacts and possible mitigatory measures.

3. Prediction and Evaluation of Impacts

At this stage already identified impacts should be evaluated and assessed. Impacts can be predicted by considering the changes that would result from the new project. During this stage prediction and evaluation of impacts can be combined together.

Impact evaluation consists of the prediction and interpretation of changes that would result from implementing the project or alternatives. The public can assist in this process by commenting in several ways. These comment will helpful to establish maximum levels of changes, where there is no standards by-laws.

4. Mitigatory Planning

This is the stage where the preventive measures are planned to minimize evaluated impacts resulting from the new project. This will reduce the undesirable projects effects. Major input at this stage is to ensure that the mitigation is itself acceptable. At this stage public could review all reasonable measures that should be implemented.

2- 10

5. Comparison of Alternatives

The comparison of alternatives is done to identify one or several preferred locations or ways to implement the project. First the developer should identify the alternatives, then by carrying out a comparison best option can be selected.

This comparison of alternatives is done to identify the best out of one or several preferred actions. Public opinions can be used to weigh the importance of environmental factors at this stage. Public recommendation is considered very important at this stage to decision makers.

^ 6. Decision Making Relative to the Proposed Action

This is where the actual decision will be made on the selected best option. This decision will be mainly based on the recommendations arising from the comparison of alternatives. The decision makers should be able to justify their decision on the project.

The decision will be taken on which alternative should be implemented. Here public involvement have three objectives. First, public should be informed of what the decision is and why it has been done so. Second, objective is the resolution of conflicts. Third, objective is the solicitation of feedback concerning the final decision.

A-7. Preparation of an EIS/EA

This is the preparation of the study document in the form of an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement. By considering all, the factors which assessed and evaluated, the final document can be completed. Here the public involvement will consist of reviews and comments on draft document. Since public participation program does not occur by accident, public participation program must be carefully planned.

A detailed checklist on preparation of EIAs together with the flow diagram of the EIA process which is accepted in USA is

^ annexed.(Annexure 3,4) (Canter 1996)

Need for the Public participation Public involvement in EIA is well established in economically developed countries such as Canada and United States.

2 - 11

International funding agencies such as the World Bank, TJNEP and the Asian Development Bank are also insisting that borrowing countries commit on public involvement in projects they fund. India, in 1994, issued a formal notification on EIA. In 1997, public involvement was introduced as a formal requirement for all projects requiring an EIA .The notifications reflect India's commitment to environmental protection and social development. However, there are still many deficiencies in relation to public involvement in EIA. These deficiencies include inadequate experience in conducting public involvement, limited opportunities for public involvement in the EIA process, and inadequate assessment of social impacts. (Kandasamy 1999)

In countries like USA and Canada the situation is much different from others. Public Involvement Plan is prepared by three leading environmental agencies in USA, in support of the environmental review process for the lower Colorado River Multi Species Conservation program. These agencies act jointly under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The main objective of this plan is to respond to the need to balance the legal use of Lower Colorado River water resources, as allowed by the law of the river entitlements, and the conservation of threatened and endangered species and their habitats(Fridmann 1999).

The European Environmental Bureau (EEB) which is a federation of about 135 European environmental organizations has made negotiations on a new convention on public information and participation in the field of environment.

EEB hope is for a convention that will significantly improve the condition for the public to participate in the decision making process and the conditions for access to environmental information in most European countries. It further states public participation means that when making decision about the environment the public authorities should involve the public in the process. It does not mean that the public should make the decision, but that the public is some how involved in the process. Jeramy Wates (1996) who represented EEB at an interview stated that "experience has shown that these kinds of process not only improve the decision but also improve the level of public acceptance. I think it is important to mention this because public participation is still regarded by certain officials as a nuisance which has increasingly to be tolerated but certainly not welcomed" (Wates 1996).

2.4.3 Global status : In Specific Projects

Maheshwar dam in the Narmada river (India)

The Narmada is one of the major rivers in India. Over 3000 dams (out of them 30 are major) are planned for construction over the river. The Maheshwar dam project is one of these. Data reveals that the Narmada valley project will displace over one million people, and this dam alone will flood 5000 hectares of agricultural land together with relocation of 2200 families.

It is said that totally the authorities have failed to address the socio -economic issues of the affected people. Public have not have involved in the impact assessment process. Due to the lack of public involvement at the initial stages, public have organized protest campaigns against the project.

Police have interfered and the protesters were arrested and some were beaten and hospitalized. The project was then suspended and now Government of India have promised the public to consider on a resettlement plan. Most environmentalists and developers feel that all these conflicts and violence occur due to the lack of effective public involvement in the project. If the project developers carried out their initial studies together with the public, this situation would not have arisen (jehagir 2000).

Web site : www: users.globalnet.co.uk E - mail : jehangir@giasbma.vsnl.net.in

Nandanavanam , "Beautification" projects in India

The Nandanavanam project of the Government of Andra Pradesh, India's officially aimed at the beautification of the river Musi in Hydrabad. It is expected to displace nearly 20,000 people who have lived for 4 0 - 5 0 years in slums in the area affected by the project (cmap 2000).

The project which includes building of commercial complexes, parking places and lawns, will sweep away the results of many years of struggle of the slum dwellers to achieve stable homestead.

Many of them have spent the earnings of a hfetime to build houses for themselves. Until now the effected people are kept in uncertainty about who is financing the project.

2 - 13

The affected people and their organizations have been registering their strong protest. People have gone to the court, taken out rallies and sat in hunger strike. They are absolutely determined to stop the project if it means displacing them.

The affected people themselves have come up with alternatives. Due to the public protest Government of India has stopped commencing activities temporarily.

This is also another example where social issues have not taken into consideration. Affected people have come with alternative options, but authorities have not welcomed them. They have neglected the basic needs of a human, i.e. Food and Shelter. Without the public consent, it is difficult to implement a project.

On the other hand it is a wastage of money and time. Basically social aspects should be compulsorily addressed in a development project.

Web site : www: users.globalnet.co.uk E - mail : cmap@ ap.mic.in

Damning begins for San Roqque damsite residents, Philippines

This is a hydro power project in San Roqque, Philippines. It is a multi purpose dam project implemented by National Power Corporation of the Philippines.

Families residing in the area affected by the San Roqque Multi-Purpose Dam Project (SRMDP) have been asked to demolish their homes and relocate elsewhere. This dam will displace at least 925 families. Aside from the areas which will be directly submerged, many other communities in higherlying areas are also bound to be displaced because of the accumulation of silt resulting from the damming of the Agno river.

During a recent fact-finding mission it was learned that the displaced families voluntarily relocated their homes in the hope that the National Power Corporation (NPC) would give them an adequate relocation site. However, the NPC was only able to provide a few temporary shelters in a temporary site which are being rented and also with inadequate water supply and electricity. The promised alternative livelihood programs are nowhere to be seen. The displaced families are left to fend for themselves. There are no jobs available and their farmlands have already been taken over by NPC. During interviews, the affected families revealed that the NPC used a variety of tactics to convince the people to relocate.

2 - 1 4

One tactic used was deception through promises of compensation. In the succeeding meeting, people were made to sign attendance sheets, which were later on attached to statements supporting the project. The people of San Roqque are opposed to the dam project because it is destroying their homes and livelihood. This is an example which clearly shows that the project designers have misguided the public by giving false informations and promises. This makes the public more violent. They have lost their faith in the government. The government of the Philippines could not implement the project since they were not able to address the social issues(cpa 2000)

Web site : www: aotearoa.wellington.net.nz E - mail : cpa@ is.phil.gn.apc.org

Construction of N e w Tokyo International Airport (Narita) - 1966

The Ministry of transport of Japan began building the new Tokyo International Airport (NARITA) in 1966; both the farmers whose lands were appropriated and students who believed that Narita would be used for military purposes protested. The protests reached their peak in 1968 when five people were killed and 400 injured in riots. Construction was stopped for 5 years, and 1500 guards were needed to protect the air port from radical protesters. Over the twenty three year dispute, in December 1989 the administration stepped up its activities against the protesters. However, the Ministry of Transport finished the construction by overcoming the resistance of the radical groups and local farmers.

This situation is mainly due to the lack of awareness among the people about the project. Also the project designers have not thought about the social issues of the public. Now the public are much concerned about environmental issues. Environmental groups have also recently begun to create networks and share informations. Government has established regulations which allow citizens to challenge environmentally damaging developments and would strengthen the power of citizens(Yamamura and Yasuba 1987).

Authorities have now commenced introducing the public opinion into development projects, involving the public opinion into development projects and getting the public involvement effectively into the EIA process. This makes the implementation of development projects more smooth and easy.

2 - 15

2 .4.4 Sri Lankan Status : Stage-wise

Central Environmental Authority as the leading public sector organization for environmental concerns, has published a set of guidelines on Public participation.

It states that "the project proponent must respond to public comments by making every effort to modify alternatives including the proposed action, develop and evaluate alternatives not provided, give serious consideration to providing supplementary information in the document and make factual corrections."(CEA guidelines 1998)

A recent change took place in environmental assessment process was the exemption of IEE projects from public commenting. Cabinet approval has been granted in August, 2000. The gazette notification has not been finalized yet.

According to NEA, the EIA process in Sri Lanka has five stages where the public can participate (Annex 5). This is less when compared to the process accepted in USA. The major difference between these is that in USA public involvement exists explicitly throughout the EIA process. But in the case of Sri Lanka, out o f five stages two are optional. Therefore, public is mainly confined to involvement only three stages. The US based process have discussed the stages such as scoping, prediction and mitigation, preparation of Environmental Impact Statement etc. very descriptively. Involvement of public participation is very high in impact assessment phase (Annex 2).

In the scoping stage, all the agencies, federations, citizens, environmental groups, local authorities are invited. This is the major difference which is prominent when compared with the two processes. In the Sri Lankan system, the law entitles public participation in scoping. The provision for public participation in the EIA process is clearly stated in the National Environmental Act. The five stages mentioned above are briefly described below.

1 . Scoping

Scoping is the first stage where the public can be involved in the EIA process. The purpose of scoping is to find out what environmental effects and problems the project might have and to decide whether the developers must undertake an EIA or IEE.

2 - 16

Three main objectives of scoping is :

(1). To identify possible environmental effects of the projects, (2). To scope the duration, intensity and extent of the

environmental effects, and (3). To decide whether the project should have an EIA or EEE.

If the environmental effects are significant, then law states that the developer should be asked to perform an EIA. Projects that do not have significant environmental effects should only be asked to perform an IEE. At the end of this process the terms of reference will be drawn out by the PAA for the developer.

2. Meeting - Developers, Consultants, and Public

After completing the scoping session and the TOR, the developer will be engaged in preparing the EIA. During this stage (i.e., when the EIA is being prepared) there is regular contact between the developer, consultant and the public. Government does not usually get involved during this stage.

The developer, after receiving the TOR from the PAA, will hire the consultants to carry out the EIA. The developer's consultants will begin to prepare the EIA or IEE. According to the guidelines the consultants are advised to make contact with affected members of the public and discuss the anticipated effects of the project. Consultants are entitled to negotiate and attempt to find acceptable solutions to environmental problems. While considering individual interests it is important to give some attention to public and community interest as well.

3. Public Comments

After the PAA has examined the EIA or IEE that has been sent by the Developer and if the former is satisfied that the document meets with the requirements of the TOR, the PAA will open the EIA for public comment. Notices are published in the newspapers in Sinhala, Tamil and English inviting the public to study the EIA and make comments within 30 days. This is the appropriate time to send in written comments on the EIA. The 30 days include Saturday but exclude Sundays and public holidays. EIA will be available for reference and study at the CEA, PAA and usually at several other offices mentioned in the notice. The law states that the public is entitled to request a photocopy of the EIA from any of these offices.

2 - 17

According to the guidelines comments on an EIA will fall into one of these categories.

1. Suggestion of alternatives 2. Comments on data 3. Comments on calculations 4. Comments on conclusions 5. Comments on assumptions 6. Comments on misrepresentations 7. Comments on legal or procedural grounds 8. Assertion of interests

Suggesting alternatives to the whole project or to a part of the project is the most useful way in which public can participate in the EIA process.

Commenting on data given in an EIA is very important because it is through a good estimate of the existing situation that the environmental effects of a project could be evaluated. Commenting on calculations is a little bit complicated. There could be instances where the data might be correct but the calculations based on that data might be incorrect. It is said that calculation errors are not always easy to find.

Commenting on conclusions, the public has the every right to support or oppose the conclusion in an EIA. Some times the public may find that the consultants have made incorrect conclusions. Logical errors in reasoning can be pointed out. Comments on assumptions arise in two ways. Some assumptions may be "patent or apparent assumptions" such assumptions are usually found in the text and can be readily seen. But there are other assumptions that are hidden and are not so clear. They are called latent assumptions. The public has the right to comment on any of these assumptions and disagree or agree with them(CEA guidelines 1998).

Misrepresentation is a very common problem. The EIA may state that local people said something when in fact what they said was different. Misrepresentations are commonly referred to as "half truths". Agreements with agencies and people can also be misrepresented. The EIA may say" all the displaced people are happy with compensation package offered". This may be untrue or only partly true.

Comments can also contain legal and procedural challenges. The definition of an EIA is found in section 31 of the National Environmental Act(NEA 1980,1988). EIA must, therefore, satisfy this legal definition.

2 - 18

According to this definition some of the important elements required in an EIA are :-

1. A statement of the environmental effects of the project, 2. A statement about the alternatives to the project that are less

harmful to the environment and 3. A statement giving reasons, why environmentally better

alternatives to the project were not accepted.

Assertion of interests is that the public may simply assert their interest. The public has the right to say that they are not prepared to accept some features in the proposed project since this have not been adequately compensated for being subject to such effects.

4 . Public Hear ing

The only people who are entitled in law to attend a public hearing are those who have sent in written comments. But often the PAA will allow others also to participate. The PAA will invite every member of the public who has sent comments during commenting period. The number of such invitees are large; the PAA may in addition publish notice in the news papers in all three languages giving information about the public hearing. Creating a disturbance at a public hearing is an offence and police can take action against those who do so.

Public hearings are held at the option of the PAA. They are not a compulsory part of the ETA process. The National Environmental Act of 1980 in amended is3 988 [section 23 BB (3) ] states that a public hearing may be held where the PAA "considers appropriate in the public interest" to afford an opportunity of being heard to any person who has made written comments on an IEE/EIA. The guide for implementing the EIA process(CEA1998) gives several instances in which it would be appropriate to hold a public hearing. This allows a fair way in which the PAA can get additional information and clarification so that it may make a better decision.

5. EIA Appeals

Only the developer has a right to appeal against the decision taken by the PAA to reject an EIA or IEE. Such an appeal has to be made to the secretary of the ministry in charge of environment. The public has no right to appeal against a decision to allow a project. Under these circumstances if a person is dissatisfied with such a decision , he /she has to challenge that decision in court. This is usually done by applying for a writ of certiorari to the court of appeal or high court.

7 2 7 0 0

2 - 19

The parties permitted to participate at an EIA or IEE appeal are the Developer, the CEA, the PAA and members of the public who have participated by sending comments or made submissions at public hearings. Also it states that a person cannot participate at an appeal unless he/she has been involved in the earlier stages of an EIA and IEE process.

When an appeal is made, all those who have participated earlier will be sent a notice to send in objections, if they wish. At this stage the public can participate in the process by sending their objections. Also at an appeal hearing the developer gets the first opportunity first chance to make an oral presentation. Thereafter others who oppose or support the appeal can make presentations.

Some examples of major public participation.

Upper Kotmale Hydro Power Project

This project has an estimated cost of approximately US$ 260 million. Ceylon Electricity Board is the project developer and the PAA Ministry of Power and Energy. Project targets the construction of the lower Kotmale dam along the western slope of the central hill country, about 160 km southeast of the capital of Colombo. Construction of dam and the reservoir would inundate about 50 ha. of prime land.

Talawakelle site was selected to construct a run off river type reservoir covering 25 sq. km, damming five streams and digging 22 kms of tunnel to divert water from those streams for power generation. The project proposes to have a generating capacity of 150 MW.

Public, NGOO, and other organizations made huge protests over the project. Several issues which arose were loss of water falls due to the construction of main dam and associated diversions, soil erosion due to the construction of tunnels totaling about 21km long and loss of cultural and aesthetic beauty etc.

Non Government Agencies organized a campaign requesting modifications to the project. The NGOO organized seminars to educate public on the environmental and social issues related to the project. Campaign of postcards and petitions to be sent to relevant government officials , politicians and the President of Sri Lanka. NGOO encouraged the villagers and students to launch a leaflet and poster campaign to educate the public in the affected area. These objections and protests resulted in the submission of Addenda to the EIA reports.

2 - 20

Ceylon Electricity Board was finally granted the environmental clearance by the Secretary to the Ministry of Forestry and Environmental.

Coal Fired Thermal Power Project - West Coast in Kalpitiya.

On the request made by the government of Sri Lanka a pre-feasibility study was conducted in 1992/ 93 by Japan Consulting Institute (JCI) to develop a 300 MW coal power project at the West Coast of Sri Lanka. JCI identified four sites, one at Negombo, two at Marawila and one at Kalpitiya peninsula for coal power development. The report recommended Kalpitiya as the most suitable site to carryout this development work with particular consideration to environmental and social aspects. Subsequently M/S Electrowatt Engineering Ltd., were appointed as consultants to this project. After the detailed studies in site selection, it was recommended that a site at Narakkalali Village which is about 12 km south of the Talawila shrine was suitable.

Briefly, the project consists of the construction of a deep offshore sea jetty of approximately 4km. and will be built on piles. Coal will be unloaded from the ships to the jetty and transferred to the stockyard by a conveyor belt installed on a trestle. The trestle platform will be supported every 42m by a pair of piles of 91cm. diameter each. In addition a short jetty of 500m will be built for the purpose of transporting heavy equipment for the power plant site.

Presently there is a huge public outcry over this project, which has led the project to a very controversial one. Public comment over several issues such as legal issues, coastal erosion, disturbance to fishing activities, land use and displacement of farmers, security problems and environmental impacts such as air pollution, acid rains and sea water warming emerged. Because of the strong public protest and due to some political issues, implementation of this project has been temporarily suspended.

2 - 21

2.5 Legal Framework for EIA in Sri Lanka

2. 5 . 1 Introduction

Presently in Sri Lanka three legislations on Environmental Assessments have been enacted mainly and three institutions are in charge of these legislations. They are namely,

.1. Central Environmental Authority in charge of the National Environmental Act (NEA 1980,1.988)

2. Department of Coast Conservation in charge of the Coast Conservation Act (CCA 1981,1988)

3. North Western Provincial Council in charge of the North Western Provincial Council Environmental Statute (NWPES 1990)

2.5.2. National Environmental Act

Act No. 47 of 1980 and the amendment Act No. 56 of 1988 made the legal frame work for the EIA process in Sri Lanka. The provision is for two types of reports Initial Environment Examination (EEE) and Environment Impact Assessment report. These reports are compulsory for "prescribed projects". Once the report is submitted, NEA provides for a public commenting period mandatory for 30 working days. If necessary a public hearing may be held as decided by the PAA.

The procedures laid down in the N E A are supplemented by orders and regulations published in the Government Gazette by the Minister of Environment. The first (2) orders and regulations (18) were published on June 24, 1993. One order designated 14 state agencies as Project Approving Agencies.

The other order specified the prescribed projects. The regulations provide the guidelines which the PAAs should adhere. An order which was published in Feb. 1995 divided the PAAs into two groups. The first group comprises of ministries and the other includes government departments.

The prescribed projects are also included in two groups in a ministerial order of June 24, 1993. Part 1 of the schedule includes 31 prescribed projects. The projects located within coastal zone must undergo the approval process laid down by the coast conversation department. The other projects will be subjected to the approval process laid down in the NEA.

2 - 22

Item 19 in this list described as the "Development of Industrial estate and parks exceeding an area of 10 hectares". Once the park gets approved, any project or undertaking even though it is prescribed, will be exempted from the approval process.

Part II o f the prescribed project schedule includes item 32 - 52 (20 industries). They are not described by magnitude and are subject to the approval process only if located within the environmental sensitive areas mentioned in Part II of the schedule.

If a PAA which is also the project proponent, then that agency is disqualified from acting as the PAA for that project by NEA - EIA regulation 2 (1) o f June 1993. In such a case CEA should designate an appropriate PAA. If there is any difficulty in finding an appropriate PAA, it has been the practice of the CEA to take on the role of PAA by itself.

2.5.3 Coast Conservation Act

This comprises of the coast conservation act No. 57 of 1981 together with the coast conservation (amendment) Act No. 64 of 1988. This act is to administer the coastal area and this is restricted to the coastal zone.

The coastal zone covered by this Act is described as " the area lying within a limit o f 300 m landwards of the mean high water line and a limit o f 2 km seawards of the mean low water 1ine"(CCA 1981,1988). This Act will cover the projects which are coming under the coastal zone.

Section 16 of the Coast Conservation Act confers on the Director of coast conservation, the discretion to request a developer applying for permit (Activity within the coastal zone) to furnish an EIA related to the development project. The CCD interprets that EIA is required when impacts of the project are significant.

The Act requires the Director of coast conservation, on receiving an EIA report, to make it available for public inspection and to entertain public comments on it. Also the Act requires Director of CCD to refer it to the Coast Conservation Advisory Council for comments. However, the CCD is guided by their own rules and regulations when determining whether EIA is required or not.

Certain parts of the coastal zone which are environmentally sensitive, have been declared as " N o build areas". If projects are proposed in these areas then it is required to go through the approval process specified in the NEA.

2 - 23

Then technical divisions in the CCD recommend the issue of a permit with or without an EIA. If an EIA is recommended, scoping sessions are convened with relevant authorities to determine the Terms of Reference for the EIA. The CCD is the final authority in determining whether to permit a development activity or not.

2.5.4 North Western Province Environmental Statute

Of all the provinces in Sri Lanka, only the North Western Province has enacted a provincial statute which has superseded the writ of NEA in that province. NWP has also established a provincial EIA under the statute. This authority which is approximately 8yrs. Old now reviews all EIAs in the North Western Province. The NWPC has enacted legislation on environmental protection by statute No. 12 of 1990. The National environmental Act.(NEA 1980, 1988) remains suspended and inoperative within the NWP with effect from the date assent given to the statute. The NWP environmental statute received assent on January 10, 199.1. By having discussions with CEA, NWP representatives, identified the sections in the NWP environmental statute pertaining to the EPL and EIA procedures, published by the NWPC on Nov. 20, 1992.This statute will cover the small scale projects within the boundary of the province.

In case of EPL and the EIA procedures, there is a basic difference between NEA and the NWP environmental statute. NEA contains separate provisions for the EPL process and the EIA process. EPL provisions control the discharge of waste into the environment while the EIA process is applicable to prescribed projects. NWP environmental statute has prescribed the projects and undertakings which are required to obtain the EPL subsequent to a procedure containing certain elements of the EIA process. That means the EIA process and the EPL process have been amalgamated under the NWP environmental statute, one following the other.

The projects listed under the NWP Environmental statute do not include large scale development projects such as those of power generation and transmission, transportation and major irrigation works. They include only small scale development projects. A large scale project which is not prescribed by the NWP environmental statute would be required to undergo the process in accordance with the NEA. The impacts of a large scale projects, which will become a national issue should be confined to the EIA process under NEA.

2 - 24

2.5.5. Legal Framework and Public Participation

The above legislations laid under NEA cover the EIA and Environmental Protection License. It also specifies how and where the public should participate in the process. But i f and when the public is not satisfied with a particular project or the decision given, it is not clearly defined, what alternative to adopt. This situation can arise due to various factors. In adequate considerations given to public concern, neglect of their alternatives and suggestions and overlooking of individual concerns are some of the factors. Within the legal framework the public can make a request for a public hearing. Again allowing a public hearing is also at the discretion of the PAA. P A A has the authority of granting a public hearing or not. There is no remedy provided to the public in the legislation, if they are not satisfied with discussion of the public hearing; only option open is the courts.

The public has no corresponding right to appeal against a decision to allow a project. According guidelines published by CEA under public participation, if the public is dissatisfied with a decision they can challenge it in court. This is usually done by applying for a writ of certiorari to the court of appeal or high court.

Example where the public challenge the PAA's decision at the court of appeal 1. Appeal under section 23 DD(i) o f the NEA No. 47 of 1980 made by

Ceylon Electricity Board - environmental clearance for upper Kotmale Hydropower Project.

Petitioner - Environmental Foundation Ltd., No. 3, Campbell Terrace, Colombo 10.

Respondents - 1. Secretary-Ministry of Forestry and Environment.

2. Ceylon Electricity Board Colombo 02.

2.6 Methodology used for Environmental Impact Study

2.6.1 General

EIA was first established in the United States in 1969 under the NEPA. (Canter 1996)The most important and critical element in the EIA process is the EIA report. Developed countries have generated different techniques on EIA process.

2 - 25

Early Environmental Impact Assessment methods have now developed into more methodical and scientific technologies with time. Most of these methods have been generated in developed countries. The EIA methods used varies, depending on the type, scale and location of the project. Also it is governed by the resources available, time and information, or data.

EIA methodologies are categorized according to the stages in the EIA process.(Bandara and Bhuvendralingam 1995) and they are methods used in,

I. Scoping sessions, EL Comparison of alternatives, HI. Identification of potential impacts, IV. Prediction, evaluation and quantification of impacts and V. Mitigatory measures

Usually a single method has not been sufficient to conduct a comprehensive assessment. Therefore, the practice is to modify and combine the available methods.

2.6.2 Scoping Sessions

According to the description given by the CEA guidelines, this is the process to determine the scope of the issues to be addressed and the significant issues to be analyzed deeply in the IEE/EIA report. Since this is the beginning or the foundation of the EIA report, it should be done carefully and accurately. Care should be taken to include all the possible significant issues in the assessment. To fulfil this requirement a systematic method should be adopted so that the designer will not miss any of the impacts. Though the CEA guideline says, " invite the formal and informal participation of all interested persons and affected public and others who might not be in accord with the action on environmental grounds," none of the PAA s nor CEA has invited them.

The advantage of getting the ideas from public is that the significant issues discussed can be cross-checked. The chance of missing any important issues can be minimized. Specially the affected parties will come up with their ch'fficulties and problems. This makes it easy for the PAA to prepare the terms of reference on the project. For this stage in the EIA process, Expert Opinion Methodology can be adopted.

2 - 26

(i) Expert Opinion Methodology

This is the method of obtaining opinions expressed by specialists from their relevant field. Expert knowledge is much useful in preliminary stages such as scoping, which involves identification of significant issues. (Hennayake et al 1997). This can be facilitated by having meetings and discussions among the specialists. A number of meetings could be helpful to generate a list of significant impacts. The group will take some time on reviewing past EIA reports done on similar projects. If the group of participants are large, it is advised to hold I - 2 half day seminars or conferences. This is the basics behind the Delphi Technique.( Bandara and Bhuvendralingam 1995).

Main drawback using this method is the lack of participation of all members in the discussion. Delphie technique can be used to overcome this constraint.

As the first step in Delphi technique, preliminary discussion is held amongst all members. Then individual members are allowed to work independently to prepare lists of impacts prioritized in order of significance.

These lists are then sent to a coordinator to evaluate and prepare a common list. This is sent back to members for re-evaluation. Process can be reiterated till a consensus is arrived. The use of the Delphi technique will ensure that all the experts can participate freely in the assessment.

Expert Opining Methodology is very valuable in the 'scoping process' which needs to identify the significant issue for a detailed study. It will be useful in the preparation of the Terms of Reference for the EIA of a project.

Though this methods have been used in the past EIAs, the researches say that it is not adequate even for the preparation of an Initial Environmental Evaluation reports.

2.6.3 Comparison of Alternatives.

The recommended IEE/EIA format which comes under NEA requires to address the proposed action and reasonable alternatives. Also it further says, "state clear reasons for rejecting the alternatives in preference to the one recommended." Some of the check list methods can be adopted in this stage.

2 - 27

(i) Checklist Methods

This is an effective and systematic approach used for Environmental Impact Assessment. This is a compulsory list of environmental factors that should be addressed in an assessment. It gives a clear format to the audience. This method is much frequently utilized in the EIA process. Checklist approach range from simple listings of environmental factors to complex methods involving assignment of relative importance weights.

This approach involves reviewing a pre-done checklist and identifying the parameters which will come up in a particular project. Pre-done checklists are generally a collective effort of professional knowledge. In identifying primary impacts associated with a project, simple

^ checklist will be much useful. Typically, checklists contain a series of items, impact issues or questions which the user should address or answer as part of the impact study. Such checklists are useful reminders of impacts and provide a systematic basis for EIA process. (Canter 1997).

(ii) ICID Checklist

The International Commission of Irrigation and Drainage (ICID) is a non governmental professional association involved in the planning, design, operation and management of irrigation, drainage and flood control works throughout the world. One of the main tasks which the ICID Environmental Impacts Working Group has been undertaking is the drafting of a check list. The check list provides a comprehensive guide to the areas of environmental concern which should be considered in the planning, design, operation and management of irrigation, drainage and flood control projects. The ICID Environmental check list was compiled from contributions received from experts from various sections of the ICID.

The components in ICID Check List can be briefly described as follows.

a) The check-list summary table : Check list of those environmental effects which must be considered in relation to irrigation, drainage and flood control projects and their dams. The list categorizes the different effects under eight headings. Hydrology, pollution, soil, sediments, ecology,

^ socio economics, health and imbalances.

b) The check-list -Detailed description : Detailed descriptions have been prepared to define the scope of each check list items. Under each description a space has been provided to record the observations during the assessment. It has been given in the form of a matrix.

2 - 2 8

c) Related References - This is a selected list of references related to each item of the check list. These references have been chosen to provide the non-specialist reader who already has a broad scientific or technical education with an introduction to the nature and causes of each item in the check list and details of available mitigating measures.

d) General data sheet: This sheet enables the user to systematically collect and record data and information from a specific project which will be relevant to the assessment of environmental effects.

e) Look-up table showing linkages : Look-up table shows which items of data collected in the data sheet are relevant to which environmental effects listed in the check list.

f) Result Sheet : Using all the components described above, the user is guided in making an assessment using the result sheet. (Mock and Bolton 1993)

However, the list could be reviewed for different types of projects and specific lists could be prepared for different categories of projects. Checklists can be sub divided into further categories

• Simple checklist • Descriptive checklist • Questionnaire type checklist

(iii) Simple Checklist

This will provide only a list of environmental indicators. This will not provide any specific data needs, methods for measurement, or impact identification/assessment. It will helpful to identify the primary impacts of a project. It is best used in the preliminary stages of the study for impact identification.(Bandara and Bhuvendralingam 1995).

(iv) Descriptive Checklist

Descriptive checklist generally provides lists of environmental factors along with detailed information of the impact, impact identification methods and impact prediction and assessment techniques. These are generally prepared for specific project categories. Asian Development Bank in 1987 has developed a descriptive checklist for water resources development projects. This type is useful for planning an environmental impact study.

2 - 29

(v) Questionnaire Checklist

This method is often employed to initiate thinking. Also it is used by the Project Approving Agency as a format to get preliminary information from the Developer. Questionnaire type checklists are used often in TEE reports, since it concerns more on the direct impacts o f the project (Canter1997).

This type will make the assessor to respond on the given questions rather than making him to think analytically on the project.

Key impacts which should be mitigated can be identified through the systematic usage of a simple or descriptive checklist.

(vi) Scaling and Weighing Checklist

This is a modified version of descriptive checklist. Decision making is easier with modified ones than with the earlier discussed cases of simple and descriptive checklist methods (Canter 1996).

Bettelle Environmental Evaluation System is a recently developed checklist of this nature. It was developed by Battelle Northwest Laboratories in U S A for water resources development project.

The fundamental behind this checklist is the evaluation of change in the quality of the environment due to the project. This will be evaluated on the weights assigned to individual environmental parameters. Scaling and weighing type checklists could be used to compare the project alternatives to decide on the best option. Impact quantification and comparison to relevant standards can provide a valuable basis for the assignment o f impact ratings to different project actions and environmental factors (Canter 1997).

2.6.4 Impact Identification

After obtaining the best possible alternative, next is to identify the maximum possible impacts that will come up due to project activities. Systematic approach should be adopted to obtain this result. Checklist method also can be adopted to identify impacts. Other than the check list method, following methods also can be used for impact identification.

2 - 30

(i) Matrix Method

This provides a two dimensional chart, one axis having project actions and the other with environmental parameters. This shows the inter-active effect between impacts. Assignment of weights and subsequent quantification are based on the value judgement of experts. In early years simple matrices were used to identify impacts. But with the passage o f time matrices have been developed and modified into more advanced forms where numerical ratings are assigned to thus identified impacts.

The development of one or more preliminary matrices can be a useful technique in discussing a proposed action, and its potential environmental impacts. This can be helpful in the early stages of a study to assist each team member in understanding the implications of the project and developing detailed plans for more extensive studies on particular factors and impacts.

A Simple matrix is good in identifying the impacts in a more structured manner than in the checklist method. One advantage of this method is the assessor can develop the matrix for different types of projects and for specific localities. This method will enable the assessor to identify more primary impacts than the secondary or higher order effects (Canter and Saddler 1997).

2.6.5 Impact Quantification, Evaluation and Prediction.

After identifying the impacts of a project, they need to be quantified and assessed. The section (f) - Environmental consequences, under the guidance on EIA content (CEA 1998), states that "the section on impact quantification provides the scientific and analytic basis for comparing and evaluating the environmental impacts of the alternatives, including the proposed action." To evaluate or assess the significance of the impact a quantitative method should be adopted. It is better to adopt an evaluating system with a quantification of the magnitudes of the impacts. Some of the best options adopted in impact quantification can be cited as follows.

(ii) Leopold Matrix

The matrix includes one axis o f the actions which cause environmental impact and on the other existing environmental conditions that might be affected. This provides a format for comprehensive review to remind the investigators of the variety of interactions that might be involved. It helps the planners to identify alternatives which might lessen impact.

2- 31

The number of actions listed horizontally in this sample matrix is 100 and the vertical list of environmental characteristics contain 88, which give a total of 8,800 possible interactions (Leopold et al 1971).

This is a quantified and graded matrix , which was developed by Leopold in 1971. The project actions are categorized into main groups. Environmental conditions have been categorized as Physical and Chemical characteristics, Biological conditions, cultural factors and ecological relationships.

This needs a group of experts to fill the matrix. These are the basic steps to follow in a simple matrix (Leopold et al 1971).

• Identification of project actions of the specified project. • For identified action, impact on the environmental parameters

should be considered by each subject specialist. • The cell at the interaction point was intersect with a diagonal • (+) sign to indicate a positive impact and (-) to indicate negative

impacts. • Top half of the cell indicates the magnitude (M) of the impact

and other half indicates the significance or the importance (I) of the impact.

• The multiplication of magnitude into significance (M x I ) gives the impact value.

• Commutative value gives the total impact of that project. • Leopold matrix is said to be useful in comparison of project

alternatives.

(iii) Network Approach

This is a Network connected with environmental parameters and functions of the project. They are interconnected through which most of the indirect impacts can be identified. Network analysis is much useful in identification of higher order or secondary effects. In this approach, after identifying the main project actions separate charts should be drawn for individual project actions. In the case of a big project which involves numerous activities, it is difficult to draw number of flow charts. Comparison of alternatives is also difficult with this method. Researchers say it is an excellent tool in impact identification. Since the project action and the impact is clearly linked, designing of mitigatory measures also becomes easy. However, they further say, arriving at a conclusion on alternatives or to decide on a particular project can not be done because there is no rating or scaling system (Canter 1997).

2 - 32

Network displays are useful in communicating information about an environmental impact study to interested public. The primary limitation of the network approach is the minimal information provided on the technical aspects of impact prediction and the means for comparatively evaluating the impacts of alternatives. In addition, networks can become visually complicated (Canter 1996).

(iv) Overlay Techniques

This is a mapping techniques developed to analyze the suitability of land for different uses. Here a set of maps drawn for different environmental characteristics for a project area. These environmental characteristics are subdivided into categories such as climate, geology, hydrology, soil, vegetation, wildlife habitats, land use etc. Map is drawn for each environmental parameter to indicate the value or quality of the parameter. These maps are then super imposed and photographed. Final or the resultant map will illustrate all the parameters and their compatibility with the project activities.

This technique is very useful to identify the suitability of an area for a particular project. Before the assessment study this can be used to screen the alternative sites or routes involved with the project. The application of computer based geographical information systems (GIS) has been emphasized in recent years. GIS technology represents an emerging type of method in the EIA process. Overlay mapping, either physical or computerized , can be used for describing existing conditions and displaying the potential changes resulting from a proposed action (Bandara and Bhuvendralingam 1995).

(v) Simulation Models

Simulation model is a simplified representation or real field condition with important features. Unlike the other methods, it is usually expensive and time consuming. To predict the changes of environmental resources, researchers have developed lot of simple models. However, simulation models provide a tool for impact prediction. These play a vital role in assessing impacts of any project. Models are helpful to select the best option by comparing all the other alternatives of a project.

2 - 3 3

Main categories of Simulation models are; 1. Physical Model - Scaled version of the actual system,

2. Analogue Model - Experimental system which differs from the actual system, but the behavior is analogous from the actual system and

3. Mathematical Model - This represents the important physical, chemical and biological behavior of the actual system. Since the impacts of an individual projects are in and integrated manner, it is much helpful in decision making process. Such models can range from simplified versions to very complicated. 3 - D computer - based simulations require extensive data input (Bandara and Bhuvendralingam 1995).

2.6.6 Mitigatory Measures

After quantifying the environmental impacts of the project and their consequences, mitigatory measures should be planned and designed. Only after identifying and assessing the impacts, the mitigatory measures can be designed.