AhmedTanvir EvaluationoftheEIASysteminBangladesh
AhmedTanvir EvaluationoftheEIASysteminBangladesh
AhmedTanvir EvaluationoftheEIASysteminBangladesh
net/publication/304526684
CITATIONS READS
6 4,437
2 authors:
All content following this page was uploaded by Tanvir Ahmed on 28 June 2016.
Abstract
EIA has been practiced in Bangladesh since the late 1980s but it is through the enactment of the
Environment Conservation Act, 1995 and the Environment Conservation Rules, 1997 EIA gained formal
status in the country. Although a rigorous administrative procedure of submission and approval of
necessary environmental documents are in place, evidence suggests that EIA has not yet evolved
satisfactorily in Bangladesh. In this paper, an established set of evaluation criteria has been applied to
evaluate the departure from ideality of the Bangladesh EIA system. The nature of the shortcomings of
the EIA system in practice is discussed. Despite the many shortcomings, the basic structure of the
Bangladesh EIA system can be considered to be sound. It is important for the country to improve on
these limitations with an aim to building a robust EIA system for sustainable development.
Introduction
In order for EIA to be effective, it has to be intertwined with the country’s legal system and backed by a
clear set of administrative protocols with sufficient institutional capacity. With a decent set of sectoral
guidelines for conducting environmental assessment, a sound legal basis and established institutional
framework for EIA review and approval, Bangladesh has a systematic mechanism in place for
examining the environmental consequences of development initiatives. But evidence suggests that EIA
has not yet evolved satisfactorily in Bangladesh in several aspects (Kabir and Momtaz 2013, Momtaz
2002). It is a widely speculated that in Bangladesh EIA still remains an instrument for project approval
and not a tool that can promote the environmental sustainability of the project.
3. Detailed assessment
Does the EIA system require that reports Yes DoE has to approve the Terms of Reference of the study which
meet prescribed content requirements? usually contains an outline of the contents
Are the relevant environmental impacts of No Depends on the quality and expertise of the consultants.
all significant actions assessed?
Do checks on content (by Government No Report is reviewed by the DoE but not publicly disclosed.
assessing agencies) occur before publication
of the proponent’s EIA study?
4. EIA study review
Are the EIA studies presented for public No The current EIA system in the country does not have such a scope
review, and is the proponent required to for public consultation and disclosure.
respond to issues raised?
5. Decision making
Is the decision-making process of Yes The proponent gets an opportunity to present his EIA to the DoE
Government transparent?
Is the decision, and the reasons for it, Yes The minutes of the decision meeting is made public through the
published? DoE website.
Do these reasons include an explanation of No No such explanation is provided.
how the EIA report and review influenced
the decision?
Does the EIA system require that legally Yes The conditions put forward in the EMP (and additional conditions
binding conditions be set? set by DoE, if any) is set as legally binding
Does the law/administrative procedures Yes The proponent needs to make amendments and resubmit the
allow for a decision to be postponed until an report; the decision is postponed until the report meets the
EIA report has been prepared and reviewed? expectations of the DoE
6. Follow-up
Does the EIA system require post-approval Yes through the legally binding conditions set through the EMP
monitoring of action impacts to be
undertaken?
Does the EIA system require that mitigation Yes Same as above.
of action impacts be considered at various
stages of the EIA process?
Is there a process for auditing proponents’ No No such formal process is in place. The ECC renewal requirement
commitments? can serve as a pseudo auditing mechanism.
Is there a process for monitoring and No Same as above.
auditing the EIA system as a whole?
7. Administrative support
Is the EIA system given adequate resources? No DoE does not have enough staff to conduct post-EIA monitoring
and follow up on the commitments in the EIA
Do existing staff have the appropriate skills Yes DoE has the skills and expertise to review EIS, conduct
to operate the EIA system? monitoring
Does a well-qualified, private local No
consulting sector exist?
2
Evaluative principles Rating Comments
Is the ‘across-Government’ environmental Yes The relevant government agencies implementing projects are
administrative system supportive of EIA? sensitized with the need for EIA. However, some agencies may
lack in technical expertise to monitor impacts and mitigation
measures
Superficially looking at Table 1 one can find that the Bangladesh EIA system is quite far from an 'ideal'
system as it scored only 13 'yes' responses of the 23 criteria under consideration. The specific areas
where the Bangladesh EIA system is lacking under the framework of the abovementioned evaluative
criteria are discussed as follows:
Analysis of Alternatives
The DoE approves site clearance for the project before issuing the ECC which is issued after the EIA
report has been reviewed. As per ECR 1997, the project proponent is allowed to develop the land (and
invest resources) on the project site before approval of EIA when the site clearance is issued. This
undermines the importance of the ECC and any analysis presented in the EIA (or any analysis of
alternate sites) would only be there to justify the site already selected for the project. This greatly
diminishes the value of any analysis of alternatives.
Public consultation
Although the current EIA legislations do not recognize public consultation as a means for environmental
decision-making, often the project proponent engages in some form of public interaction in various
degrees typically for donor-funded projects where the requirement for public consultation is obligatory.
It has been found that in most of the cases, the public consultation is made in a limited nature during
EIA preparation stages but totally absent during the implementation of the EMP. Arrangements to
record any complaints by the community people about any environmental impacts and a mechanism for
redressing the grievances are also typically not found present in most cases (Kabirand Momtaz, 2011).
The current legislations do not also require the proponent to disclose information regarding the outcome
of the EIA to the public. So the stakeholders, though consulted in the early stages of the EIA, are usually
unaware of the issues related to the EIA in the long run.
3
Underdeveloped private consulting sector within the country
Some of the above deficiencies are associated withthe inadequate number of qualified consultants in the
country to carry out EIA studies.There is no code of conduct for EIA consultants; nor there is any
requirement of registration. A private consulting sector specialized in performing EIA studies is not
totally developed yet, a situation which can only be improved through extensive capacity building.
Number of Projects recieving
10000
2000 5427
4076
1000 5000 2226 1409
0 73
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 0
Red 201 205 269 278 290 2011 2012 2013 2014
Orange B 2495 2768 3272 2874 2953 Cumulative Number of Orange and Red category projects
Orange A 2266 2454 2709 2151 2610 approved since 2010
Incremental number of ECC renewed since 2010
Green 25 9 32 8 14
Figure 1: Number of different categories of projects given ECC during 2010-2014 in Bangladesh (left)
and comparison between the expected number of ECC renewals and the actual number of renewals since
2010 (right). (Data source: Department of Environment)
References
Annandale, D., 2001, Developing-country EIA: Developing and evaluating environmental impact
assessment systems for small developing countries, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal,
19(3):187-193.
DoE, 1997, EIA Guideline for Industries, Department of Environment, Ministry of Environment and
Forest, Govt. of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.
ECA, 1995, The Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act 1995, (Act no. 1 of 1995) Department of
Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forest, Govt. of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.
ECR, 1997, The Environment Conservation Rules 1997, Department of Environment, Ministry of
Environment and Forest, Govt. of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.
Kabir, S.M.Z., and Momtaz, S., 2011, Implementation of environmental mitigation measures and
effective EIA practice in Bangladesh: a study of three development project, International Journal of Arts
& Sciences, 4(27):1-18.
Kabir, S.M.Z., and Momtaz, S., 2012, The quality of environmental impact statements and
environmental impact assessment practice in Bangladesh, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal,
30(2):94-99.
Kabir, S.M.Z., and Momtaz, S., 2013, Fifteen years of environmental impact assessment system in
Bangladesh: current practice, challenges and future directions, Journal of Environmental Assessment
Policy and Management, 15(4):1-30.
Kabir, S.M.Z., and Momtaz, S., 2013, Sectorial variation in the quality of environmental impact
statements and factors influencing the quality, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management,
57(11):1595-1611.
Momtaz, S., 2002, Environmental impact assessment in Bangladesh: a critical review, Environmental
Impact Assessment Review, 22:163-179.
Nadeem, O., and Hameed, R., 2008, Evaluation of environmental impact assessment system in Pakistan,
Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28(8):562-571.
Paliwal, R., 2006, EIA practice in India and its evaluation using SWOT analysis, Environmental Impact
Assessment Review, 26:492-510.
5
Wood, C., 1995, Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review (Longman, Harlow)
Sadler, B., 1988, The Evaluation of assessment: Post-EIS research and process development In P.
Wathern (ed.),
Environmental Impact Assessment: Theory and Practice, Unwin Hyman: Boston. pp. 129-142.
Modak P.and Biswas, A. K., 1999,Conducting environmental impact assessment for developing
countries, Tokyo: United Nations Press.
Fuller, K. 1999, Quality and quality control in environmental impact assessment. InHandbook of
Environmental Impact Assessment, J Petts (ed.), Vol. 2, Chapter-4, pp.55–84. Oxford:Blackwell Science
Ltd.
Sanchez, L.E. and Gallardo, C.F., 2005,On the successful implementation of mitigationmeasures, Impact
Assessment and Project Appraisal, 23(3):182–190.