Environmental Assessment
| Author | Jamie Benidickson |
| Pages | 254-274 |
254
CHA PTER 12
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
A. OVERVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
Environmental assessment, in the opinion of the Supreme Court of
Canada, is “a planning tool that is now generally regarded as an inte-
gral comp onent of sound dec ision-mak ing.”1 It is important, again in
the words of the court, because, “the grow th of modern societies has
shown the serious problems that ca n result from anarchic development
and use of land, in part icular those problems concerning public health
and the environment.”2
The basic idea is that certain proposed activities should be scrutin-
ized in advance from the perspective of their possible environmental
consequences. However, challenging design and operat ional questions
may arise in t he process of implementing this idea, and t here has been
considerable divergence of opinion about the legal status and weight
to be given to assessment processes. At one extreme of the spectr um
of opinion are those who think that assessment — not a bad idea in
principle — is something that should be dispensed w ith in the interests
of getting on with the real job of economic development. At the other
end are those who view the sati sfactory completion of a rigorous and
SCR 3 at 71 [Oldman River].
Environment al Assessment 255
comprehensive environmental asse ssment as an essential precondition
of proceeding with any proposal. Yet, even among those who accept
the importance of environment al assessment, there are significant di-
vergences of opinion concerning the scope and implications of such
proceedings.
The components of a generic environmental assessment regime
raise questions such as the following:
1) To what activities does the environmental assessment process
apply? To large or small operations; public or private operations;
projects only, or also plans, programs, and even policies th at are
less directly as sociated with immediate physical impacts?3
2) By whom should the assessment be car ried out? By the initiator of
the proposal, professional consultants or an independent body?4
3) What is the standard and scope of assessment, including t he mean-
ing of environment?5 Does environment include social, cultur al,
and economic factors? Will the assessment dea l only with “direct”
and “significant” impact, or wil l “indirect” and “cumulative” im-
pact also be addres sed?6
4) Is environmental asses sment primarily concerned w ith the tech-
nical dimensions of specific proposed activity, or should it extend
to consideration of the very purpose a nd utility of the proposal, or
to other means of accomplishing the same goals?
5) Will the asses sment documents be subject to some further process
of review and scrutiny? By departments of government; by t he pub-
3 2004 October Rep ort of the Commissioner of the Environment a nd Sustainable
Develop ment (Ottawa: Office of the Auditor G eneral, 2004) c 4, “Assess ing the
Environment al Impact of Policies, Plans, and Prog rams.”
4 H Benevides, “Re al Reform Deferred: Ana lysis of Recent Amendments to t he
Canadian Environmental Assessment Act” (2004) 13 J Envtl L & Prac 195.
5 Projects under as sessment contribute, throug h greenhouse gas emis sions, to
climate ch ange at the global level with ext raordinary envi ronmental impacts
outside the vici nity or locale of the project itsel f, and well beyond the jurisd ic-
tion in which the prop osed activity would be under taken. How to incorporate
these envi ronmental impacts into t he assessment proces s has been challengi ng.
See, for example, 2003 Octob er Report of the Commissioner of th e Environment
and Sustainable Development (Ottawa: Office of the Auditor Genera l, 2003) c 2,
“Road Transport ation in Urban Areas: Account ability for Reducing Greenhouse
Gases”; and T Kruger, “The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and Globa l
Climate Cha nge: Rethinking Sign ificance” (2009-2010) 47 Alta L Rev 161.
6 C Tollefson & K Wipond, “Cumulat ive Environmental Impact s and Aboriginal
Rights” (1998) 18 Environmental I mpact Assessment Rev iew 371; 2011 October
Report of the Commi ssioner of the Environment and Sust ainable Develo pment, (O t-
tawa: Office of the Aud itor General, 2011) c 2, “Assessing Cumul ative Environ-
mental Effect s of Oil Sands Projects.”
To continue reading
Request your trial