| Preface | 5 |
|---|
| Contents | 7 |
|---|
| Contributors | 8 |
|---|
| Abbreviations | 9 |
|---|
| Improving the Integrated European Impact Assessment? | 11 |
|---|
| Introduction | 11 |
| Community Framework: Environmental Issues in Impact Assessment | 13 |
| The EU Impact Assessment Procedure | 18 |
| Institutional Analysis of Agent Behaviour | 20 |
| Specific Problem Areas of the Current Impact Assessment | 32 |
| Case Study Analysis of EU Impact Assessment | 41 |
| Possible Solutions for Selection of Methods | 50 |
| Quality Control | 60 |
| Discussion Points for the Workshop | 65 |
| References | 66 |
| Impact Assessment – Experience from the European Commission | 69 |
|---|
| What Is Impact Assessment? | 69 |
| Why Do It? | 70 |
| Economic, Social and Environmental – Why? | 71 |
| What Is the Commission’s Impact Assessment Process? | 72 |
| Evolution of the IA System | 73 |
| Response to Chapter 1 | 74 |
| Planning Is Key | 77 |
| Stakeholders Contribute Transparently | 77 |
| What Does the Support Unit Provide? | 77 |
| Principles of the EU System | 78 |
| The Impact Assessment Board | 81 |
| Conclusion | 82 |
| Views of the European Environmental Bureau on the Commission’s Impact Assessment Procedure – With a Focus on Environment | 83 |
|---|
| Introduction | 83 |
| Is Impact Assessment a Tool for Better Decision-Making? | 85 |
| Proposals to Improve Impact Assessment for Better Decision- Making | 92 |
| Conclusion | 93 |
| The Proportionate Impact Assessment of the European Commission – Towards More Formalism to Backup “ The Environment” | 95 |
|---|
| Introduction | 95 |
| European Environmental Policy and Impact Assessment | 96 |
| IA Process: Formal or Discretional? | 99 |
| IA Contents: Environmental Quality Standards | 100 |
| Proposed Methodology for Strengthening “The Environment” in IA – Example of the Trans- European Transport Axes | 102 |
| Box 4.1 Roadmap Questions Subject to Decision-Making ( Annexes to EC IA Guidelines, EC, 2009) | 103 |
| Box 4.2 Examples of Additional Questions for a More Specific Roadmap Checklist | 104 |
| Conclusions and Recommendations | 110 |
| References | 111 |
| Proportionate Impact Assessment: Discretion, Formalism, and the Undefined Responsibilities of European Decision- Makers | 113 |
|---|
| Introduction | 113 |
| The Decision-Making Process for EU Policy Initiatives | 114 |
| Discretion or Formalism in the Screening and Scoping of Policy Proposals | 116 |
| Screening Criteria | 118 |
| Significance Criteria | 119 |
| Box 5.1 Draft IA Guidelines section “Assessing the Impact Assessment Procedure” | 119 |
| Box 5.2 Significance Criteria in the EU Directive for SEA ANNEX II. Criteria for determining the likely significance of effects referred to in Article 3( 5) | 120 |
| Significance Thresholds | 121 |
| Political Significance | 122 |
| Box 5.3 Draft IA Guidelines section “Methodology” | 122 |
| Box 5.4 Draft IA Guidelines Annex 7 | 123 |
| Limiting the Discretionary Power of the Lead Agency | 123 |
| Box 5.5 Example Review Criteria for IA Reports ( Lee et al., 1999) | 124 |
| Summary and Conclusions | 125 |
| References | 126 |
| Multi-Criteria Analysis for Policy Evaluation | 129 |
|---|
| Introduction | 129 |
| Structuring the Decision Problem | 130 |
| Deriving a Decision | 132 |
| Discussion | 136 |
| References | 138 |
| Conclusions | 141 |
|---|
| Introduction | 141 |
| Improving the Selection of Methods | 142 |
| Strengthening of Institutions Providing Support and Advice | 146 |
| Summary | 149 |
| References | 150 |
| Annexes | 151 |
|---|
| Annex to Chapter 1 | 151 |
| Annex to Chapter 3 | 161 |
