EIA Methods

4.1 Introduction

EIA methods are usually taken to include the means of gathering and analyzing data, the
sequence of steps in preparing a report and the procedure (who does what and when). The
essential ingredients of the EIA process such as scoping, IEE, and detailed EIA are
universally agreed upon, but EIA techniques vary widely.

Considering the complexity of the interacting systems that constitute the environment, and
the infinite variety of possible impacting actions, it seems unlikely that a single method would
be able to meet all the above criteria. The general applicability of all methods also has to be
balanced against the administrative and economic constraints within which they are
employed.

There is no single approved method for an EIA study. Therefore, what is important taught
here are the abilities to think in a systematic way,

to understand the interactions of the environment and technological change,

to meet, in a practical way, the needs of the development manager, and

to follow the fundamental process of preparing an EIA.

A distinction between EIA methods and tools must be carefully noted.

Listed below are the four fundamental methods which are commonly used as methods for
conducing an EIA.

Checklists
Matrices
Networks
Overlays

Tools for EIA support the application of the above basic methods. Listed below are some of
the commonly used tools.

Prediction models
Geographical Information Systems
Expert Systems

These tools can be used for purposes other than EIA.

Generally, more than one methods and tools are used, depending on the tier of the EIA
process to accomplish the best results. Recommendations for the use of methods and tools
are made in the form of a comprehensive flow chart.


4.2 Checklists

Checklists serve as a reminder of all possible relationships and impacts, out of which a set
tailored for the specific assignment may be chosen.

It is always possible that an important local factor may be left out of the generic checklists that



2

appear in EIA manuals. The guidelines from the Asian Development Bank (various years) and
the sourcebook developed by the World Bank are a good example because they stimulate
investigation.

Checklists are designed to establish whether a proposed project is likely to have negative
impacts on the environment. For such projects, all possible negative impacts must be
assessed in detail in relation to the projects positive impacts. This is accomplished in the
next steps of the EIA.

The checklists help people in responsible positions to become more aware of what they
should be looking for when assessing a proposed project. They may also help to ensure a
higher degree of awareness of the environmental aspects of a project than would have been
possible without them.

Checklists can be classified into descriptive and weight-scaling categories.

4.2.1 Descriptive Checklists

The purpose of descriptive checklist is to provide a list of important issues for the purpose of
identification and scoping.

One of the simplest forms of the checklists is the one with project specific questions. Box 4.1
below shows an example of a checklist developed by the Norwegian Agency for
Development co-operation (NORAD) in assessing industrial projects. One must be careful of
the questionnaire-type checklists where the answers can be "yes" or "no". These discourage
thinking and may provide a false sense of assessment. If questions are asked, they should be
phrased "to what extent" and "under what conditions" and "in what ways" rather than simply
"Does A result in B?". However the questionnaire based checklists can serve as a good
starting point for the purpose of Project Screening.




3

Checklist can be also developed based on Issues. The issues can be later graded to identify
those of significance based on the project and environment features i.e. relevance. Issues of
high significance can be later decomposed into responsible activities and components of
concern to develop mitigation, protection and monitoring measures in the succeeding levels of
an EIA. Box 4.2 below shows an illustration of an issue based Checklist developed for projects
on Power Development. The issue based checklists thus assist in the exercise of Scoping and
Initial Environmental Examination (IEE).

Descriptive Checklists can also be exhaustive to capture the impacts during the various stages
of the project and provide a format for the assessor to identify obvious mitigations. Here, the
checklist can be used for the purpose of Scoping and Initial Environmental Examination.
Box 4.3 below presents an example of a detailed Checklist developed by the Asian
Development Bank for the Fisheries and Aquaculture Projects.

The checklist is divided into five parts such as below

A. Environmental Problems Related to Site Selection (which might be avoided or
minimized by better site selection)

B. Environmental Hazards Relating to Inadequate Design

C Environmental Hazards Related to Construction Stage

D Environmental Problems Relating to Operations Stage

E Critical Environmental Review Criteria: These are criteria of special interest to
environmentalist which should be applied to all major infrastructure or regional
development planning projects.





4

4.2.2 Weight-Scaling Checklists

Weight scaled checklists are used to

recognize the relative differences between the importance of environmental issues
allow for scoring and aggregation of impacts arising from the issues on the environmental
components and
permit a quanatitative comparision between alternatives.

The use of weighted checklists thus encompasses to Initial Environmental Examination.

One such weighted-scaling checklist referred in the literature is the Environmental
Evaluation System (EES) developed by the Battelle Columbus Laboratories, USA. BEES
was developed in 1973 in the US to address the water resource development projects.

Because properties of the environment are not commonly measured in commensurate units,
it is difficult to evaluate the net environmental effects of a project and to make trade-off in
selecting among alternatives. BEES attempts a solution to this problem by transforming all
parameters into commensurate units.

BEES provides for environmental impact evaluation in four major categories: ecology
environmental pollution esthetics, and human interest. These four categories are further
broken down into 18 environmental components and finally into 78 environmental
parameters. For each parameter, a value fucntion is developed using a delphi technique
which would translate the sensitivity or scale of the parameter into equivalent Environmental
Impact Units (EIUs). To allow a correct aggregation of EIUs across the components and
categories, each parameter is set an importance called as a Parameter Importance Unit
(PIU). PIUs thus provide weights for the purpose of aggregation. Results of using the EES
include a total weighted score in EIU with and without the proposed project; the difference
between the two scores is one measure of environmental impact

This technique consists of three steps.

Step1

Transforming parameter estimates into EIUs. In the evaluation system, environmental quality
is defined in the following fashion. It is a value between 0 and 1, where 0 denotes
extremely bad quality and 1 denotes very good quality. The transformation of a parameter
estimate into environmental quality is achieved through the use of a value function relating
the various levels of parameter estimates to the appropriate levels of environmental quality.

Step 2

Step 2 consists of weighing of parameters. Each of the parameters used in the BEES
represents only a part of the total environment. It is therefore important to view these parts
together as part of the environmental system. To reflect the relative importance of the EES
parameters, a total of 1000 points or PIU are distributed among the parameters. Socio-
psychological scaling techniques and the Delphi procedure were used to quantify the value
judgments. The process consisted of ranked pairwise comparisons and controlled feedback.

The EES is used by evaluating the expected future condition of environmental quality



5

'without' the project and then 'with' the project. The former evaluation is an expression of
the modified current condition of the environmental, whereas the latter is an expected
(predicted) condition of the environment with the proposed development. A difference in
environmental impact units (EIU) between these two conditions constitutes either an
adverse (loss in EIU) or a beneficial (gain in EIU) impact.

4.2.3 Advantages of the Checklist Method

(i) Checklists provide all possible relationships and impacts, out of which a set tailored for the
specific assignment may be chosen.

(ii) Checklists help people in responsible positions to become more aware of what they
should be looking for when assessing a proposed project.

(iii) They may also help to ensure a higher degree of awareness of the environmental
aspects of a project than would have been possible without them.

(iv) Quantification of impacts is possible using the weightscaling method.

4.2.4 Limitations of the Checklist Method

(i) Descriptive Checklists may be exhaustive capturing the impacts during the various stages of
the project however, no quantitative information is provided regarding magnitude and degree of
impact.

(ii)Another important drawback of this method, is the way it attempts to compartmentalize
the environment. Environmental systems comprise of complex web of interrelated parts,
often incorporating feedback loops. This fact is not accommodated in the weighted
checklists. This method should be therefore used with some caution. Its quantitative feature
may be used to distinguish between alternatives and only so when comparision needs a
quantitatve resolution.

(iii) The main drawback of the checklist method is the inability to relate individual activities to
environmental components affected by these activities.

4.3 Matrix

Matrices relate activities to environmental components so that the box at each intersection can
be used to indicate a possible impact. The term matrix does not convey here any
mathematical implication but merely a style of presentation.

The matrix can be used to identify impacts by systematically checking each development
activity against each environmental component. If it were thought that a particular development
activity was to affect an environmental component, a mark is placed in the cell which occurs at
the intersection of the activity and the environmental component. A matrix analysis can
systematically identify potentially important effects warranting more careful attention or
analysis or focus attention on possible effects that might otherwise be overlooked. Matrix is
thus an extension of the basic checklist.

There are three types of commonly used matrices.




6

Descriptive matrices
Symbolic matrix and presentation matrices.
Scaled / Weighted or Numeric matrices

4.3.1 Descriptive Matrix

In descriptive matrices, short written descriptions are used. In descriptive matrices, short
written descriptions are used. For each phase of a project viz.,site selection, construction,
operation and closure (if applicable) the various impacts associated with each activity is
identified and short descriptions provided. There is no scaling or quantification of these
impacts. Presented below is a structure of the descriptive matrix for a quarry.


Environmental Matrix for a Quarry


Phase Development
Action
Social Physical Biological
Planning Consents,
District plan,
EIS Timetable
Law, regulation, Public
participation,
Employment, Land
values, Alternative sites,
J ustification, Risks and
anxieties,
Cultural/historical.
Location of
access road
Water table
effects on
adjacent land
Engineering
Design
Design of quarrying
plan, Resolve
environmental
factors, Evaluate
options
Landscape effects Design of
quarry,
Restoration
plan
Design of
drainage
system,
including
sediment traps
to protect water
quality in the
river.
Construction Access Road
Drainage system Site
crushing plant
Energy supply,
Traffic Discharge -
Stormwater, Silt,
Sewage.
Site staff facilities
Cultural/historical
Safety
Noise
Vibrations,
Effect on farm
animals
Disposal of
stripping,
Stability,
Nuisance,
Landform
Noise,
Blasting,
Drilling





Sedimentation,
Surface water
pollution
Operation Stripping overburden,
Drilling, Blasting,
Excavation,
Crushing, Loading,
Traffic, Review and
adjust environmental
measures.
Landscape,
Farm animals,
Noise/vibration/dust,
Emissions, Safety/risk,
Staff facilities,
Working environment
Landscape
effect
Progressive
restoration plan
Sedimentation,
Surface water
pollution

Termination Remove plant, Check
stability, Replace
Safety,
Landscape
Maintain and
monitor



7

topsoil, Plant ground
cover, Maintain
restoration sediment traps

4.3.2 Symbolized Matrix

A most noteworthy matrix presentation is that it points essentially improves the
communicability between the impact analysts, decision makers and the people. In the
symbolized matrices, symbols are used to capture the undestanding of the impacts.

Environmental impacts may be described by words such as "important" or "significant". These
subjective, qualitative words are difficult to deal with because their interpretation depends on
cultural values and specific circumstances. Even when quantitative data are available, they
must be gauged against some standard and there often is none or at least none widely
accepted. There are, however, some useful guides for ranking impacts or assessing impact
assessment.

There are several factors that must be taken into account when assessing the significance of
an environmental impact arising from a project activity. The factors are interrelated and must
not be considered in isolation. For a particular impact some factors may carry more weight
than others but it is the combination of all the factors that determines significance.

Example is to use abbreviations and scales. e.g. S for Short Term and L for Long Term or 10
to denote a very high order of the impact and 1 to denote almost negligible scale of impact
etc. In this way, a symbolized matrix becomes a combination of descriptive and numeric
scales.

There are, however, some useful guides for grading or classification of impacts. and these are
listed below

1. Sign of the impact.

Positive or Negative. This is unfortunately not that simple.

2. Magnitude

This is defined as the probable severity of each potential impact. Will the impact be
irreversible? If reversible, what will be rate of recovery or adaptability of an impact area? Will
the activity preclude the use of the impact area for other purposes? The answer to this
question may be difficult and may have to be speculated on a subjective basis. The size
often depends on the source release, mitigation measures adopted if any, and the
assimilative capacity of the receiving environment etc.

3. Type of Change: Reversible or Irreversible

Irreversibilities always command attention because they signal a loss of future options.
Species extinction, severe soil erosion, and habitat destruction are examples of irreversible
changes. Pollution of groundwater is often essentially irreversible because of its slow
movement. Urbanization of agricultural land is virtually impossible to undo once the land use
trend has begun.

4. Prevalence



8


This is defined as the likely eventual extent of the impact as for example the cumulative
effect(s) of a number of stream crossings. Each one taken separately might represent a
localized impact of small importance and magnitude but a number of such crossings could
result in a widespread effect. Coupled with the determination of cumulative effects is the
remoteness of an effect from the activity causing it. The deterioration of fish production
resulting from access roads could affect subsistence fishing in an area many miles away, and
for months or years after the project activity has ceased.

5. Duration and Frequency

The significance of duration of frequency is reflected in the following questions. Will the
activity be long term or short-term? Or sporadic like leaks from a storage tank. If the activity is
intermittent, will it allow for recovery during inactive periods?

6. Risk

This is defined as the probability of serious environmental effects. To accurately assess the
risk, both the project activity and the area of the environment impacted must be well known
and understood.

7. Importance

This is defined as the value that is attached to an environmental component in its present
state. For example, a local community may value a short stretch of river for bathing or a small
swamp for hunting. Alternatively, the impacted component may be of regional, provincial or
even national importance.

8. Mitigatability

Are solutions to problems available? Existing technology may provide a solution to a siting
problem expected during construction of an access road, or to bank erosion resulting from a
new stream configuration.

9. Understanding

For example, if an access road is to cross a stream and the assessor does not know the
extent of use of that stream (for fish spawning, fish migration, subsistence fishing, river
transport, etc.), then the impact would be classed as unknown. Similarly, the nature of the
river crossing (ford, bridge, ferry or causeway) may not yet have been planned and the
significance of the environmental impact of that stream crossing is therefore unknown.

The assessment of significance should be best done by holding at least two group discussion
meetings with an interdisciplinary expertise.

The most frequently used presentation of a comparison of alternatives is a matrix, in which
+, 0 and - show how each alternative affects the different environmental aspects. This can
be a useful way to provide a quick overview of the differences between the alternatives.

* The impacts of each alternative are evaluated against a reference (usually the
existing situation): or:



9


* For each alternative it is shown, how it contributes to the environmental objectives;
or:

* The impacts of each alternative are compared with the preferred alternative.

++and -- give extra possibilities for differentiation.



10

Example of Plus-Minus Matrix on the theme `Why does the proposed activity improve the
soil condition?'


existing
situation
proposed
activity
process
alternative
envir. most
friendly
air o - - 0
soil o + + +
surface water o - o o
waste o + + +
noise o - - -
safety o (-) (-) (-)
nature o o o o
energy o - o +
costs 0 - - -

Legend

- deterioration compared to the existing situation,
+ improvement,
o no difference
(-) insignificant deterioration

In each case it is important that the signification of the symbols is properly defined. If
necessary, a page reference should guide the readers to more ample information.

4.3.3 Numeric and Scaled Matrices

Simple Numeric Matrix

Simple numerical matrices are useful to drive facts to assist the degree of impact or help in
the comparision. Presented below is a simple numeric matrix used for assessing the
alternatives at an IEE level.



11

Numeric Matrix lending a Quick but factual overview

lead
concentration
in air (g/m
3
)
NO
x
emission
g/m
3

noise level at
periphery area
dB(A)
tons/year
hazardous
waste
produced
alternative l 0.8 35 55 2674
alternative 2 0.7 20 50 2350
background
level existing
situation
1.0 80 43 -
predicted
backgr. level
2005
1.2 110 45 -
environmental
standard
1.5 100 55 -

Numeric, Ordinal and interval scaled evaluations are given by numerical scores. Leopold et
al. (1971) use a scale of 1 to 10 to score two impact attributes significance and importance.
Fischer and Davies (1973) use one score on a scale of -5 to +5 to indicate both positive and
negative degrees of impact. An inter-scaled impact matrix has been attempted by Ross
(1976; discussed under mathematical matrices).

The second option is to lay down separate matrices describing each impact characteristics.
For example, one can make a matrix presentation only to show the size attribute impacts
and other on the nature etc. It is also possible to use some order of shading or color codes
to draw attention to some of the critical cells. Against the apparent disadvantage of handling
more number of matrices, advantage of improved communication as well as focus lies in
such separate presentations. We can call this approach as a thematic matrix approach.

To get a quick overview of the results of an EIA, a comparison of alternatives can be
presented as a graph, a map, a diagram or other kind of picture. Colors or shades of gray
can enhance the presentation.




12

Scaled Matrices

Weighted/Scaled matrices typically use a scale of 1 to 10 to score two impact attributes
significance and importance. One of the most popularly known scaled matrix is the "Leopold
Matrix" named for Dr. Luna Leopold of the U.S. Geological Survey who developed it in the
early 1970s

All development activities are listed across the top and all environmental components that
might be impacted are listed at the side. Leopold matrix attempts to assign numerical ratings
of magnitude and importance so that the completed matrices for alternative sites or
technologies could each be added and compared. In the original Leopold matrix, scores from a
1-10 scale can be assigned to describe the importance and magnitude of individual impacts.
Importance refers to the significance of an impact and magnitude of its scale and extent.
Leopold-type matrices are easy to use and perhaps the most widely employed and successful
of all EIA methods.
Such matrices have been used for the comparision of alternatives as shown below.




13

Environmental Impact Matrix with and without Mitigation (from Biswas and Agarwal,
1992)

A conventional technique for summarizing environmental impacts utilizes the matrix method.
Initially, the predicted impacts are converted into an ordinal scale (ranking) of impact
severity, as the following example :

Severity Impact Score

No Impact 0
Negligible 1
Minor (slight or short term) 2
Moderate 3
Major (irreversible or long term) 4
Severe (permanent) 5

A Positive sign denotes a beneficial impact, while a Negative sign denotes an adverse
impact.

A significant value (weighting) is attached to each environmental component (independent of
the predicted levels of impact) based upon some expert or consensual (Delphi) system.
Individual impact scores can then be calculated as the product of impact severity and
significance. These may be summed by row and/or column to gauge the net impact of the
project on a particular environmental component or conversely, the net effect of a single
project activity on the environmental as a whole.

In this way, project alternatives can be systematically compared, and possible mitigation
measures can be explored. In addition, this method can draw attention to the most
significant impacts in the matrix, as revealed by individual cell scores. This procedure can
also be used to identify negative impacts on environmental components that surpass a
critical threshold. Such instances will have to be addressed through mitigation or project
alternatives.




14

a) without mitigation


Environmental Parameters Importan
ce Value
Impacting Actions Impac
t
Score
Premining phase Operational phase
A B C D E F G H I J K
Air quality 100 -1 -1 -2 -2 -1 -700
Water resources 75 -1 -1 -1 -225
Water quality 100 -1 -2 -1 -1 -500
Noise and vibration 75 -1 -1 -1 +1 -2 -1 -1 -450
Land use 150 -3 -1 +1 -2 -1 -900
Forests and vegetation 150 -4 +1 -450
Wildlife 50 -2 +1 -1 -1 -150
Human settlements 75 -1 +1 +1 +75
Health 100 +1 -3 +1 -100
Infrastructure and support
services
50 +2 +1 +2 +250
Employment 50 +1 +1 +2 +1 +250
Places of tourist or archaeological
importance
25 0
Total 1000 -
135
0
-275 -75 +52
5
-
1000
-
27
5
-
52
5
+7
5
-
75
-
175
+20
0
-2900


A - Land acquisition and transformation +sign shows beneficial impact ;
B - Civil works construction - sign shows adverse impact
C - Erection of mechanical and mining Equipment
D - Green belt formation
E - Mining operations including CHP
F - Disposal of liquid effluent



15

G - Disposal of solid wastes on land for reclamation
H - Housing provision
I - Provision of water, sewage, electricity and other civic amenities
J - Transportation
K - Medical facilities





16

b) with mitigation


Environmental Parameters Importan
ce Value
Impacting Actions Impact
Score
Premining phase Operational phase
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Air quality 100 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 +1 -300
Water resources 75 -1 -1 -1 -225
Water quality 100 -1 -1 +1 -100
Noise and vibration 75 -1 -1 -1 +1 -1 -1 -1 -375
Land use 150 -3 -1 +1 -1 +1 +2 -150
Forests and vegetation 150 -4 +1 +4 +150
Wildlife 50 -2 +1 -1 -1 +1 -100
Human settlements 75 -1 +1 +1 +75
Health 100 +1 -1 +1 +100
Infrastructure and support
services
50 +2 +1 +2 +250
Employment 50 +1 +1 +2 +1 +250
Places of tourist or archaeological
importance
25 0
Total 1000 -
135
0
-275 -75 +62
5
-375 -
17
5
-
12
5
+7
5
75 -
175
+20
0
+115
0
-425


A - Land acquisition and transformation +sign shows beneficial impact ;
B - Civil works construction - sign shows adverse impact
C - Erection of mechanical and mining Equipment
D - Green belt formation
E - Mining operations including CHP
F - Disposal of liquid effluent
G - Disposal of solid wastes on land for reclamation



17

H - Housing provision
I - Provision of water, sewage, electricity and other civic amenities
J - Transportation
K - Medical facilities
L - Land reclamation



18


4.3.5 Advantages of the Matrix approach

(i) A matrix presentation has a better structure framework than the checklist approach. It in
fact makes a summarized analytical presentation of project and environment related
checklists in a way.

(ii) Matrix structure allows for speculation of impact characteristics, albeit in a subjective way.
This lends a gradation in the impacts thereby providing a focus for further studies,
verification or discussions. It also helps in taking priorities on some mitigation measures
which are estimated to alleviate the impacts speculated.

(iii) It presents an easily understood summary of a large number of primary impacts.

(iv) It is a generalized but well defined approach forcing a comprehensive consideration of
environmental components and primary impacts.

(v) It is an easily performed process which can specify the overall character of a project early
in the design phase.

(vi) In an extended form, the method can include information about many impact attributes,
and clarify the assumptions supporting the assessment.

(vii)Matrices have low resource requirements.

4.3.6 Limitations of the Matrix approach

Despite the elegance of matrix presentation, there are certain limitations which need to be
addressed.

(i)Unless weight-scaled impact scores are used, the comparison of many project alternatives
is difficult.

(ii)Scaling the multitude of scores contained in a matrix is also not a tractable proposition, as
ability to independently replicate the method is undermined by a dependence on highly
subjective judgments.

(iii)The impact characterization step of the matrix does a kind of subjective prediction as well
as assessment.

(iv)There is a little opportunity for much quantification. However, further detailing is possible
to accommodate in the matrix presentation if prediction/ evaluation techniques are
separately used.

(v)While developing matrix structure, it becomes apparent that higher order impacts are not
accounted for using this approach.

For example, impacts propagate from one component to another and are not necessarily
linked directly with the project activities. In the case of a thermal power plant, waste
emissions alter the air quality and the altered air quality in turn affects the crops or public
health or materials. A water resources project upstream a river mouth entering sea, alters
the fresh river flow into the sea and this in turn changes the saline zone of the river mouth.



19

This change in the saline zone influences the marine life nourishing near the saline wedge
which influences the income of the fishermen as well as the marine ecosystem in general.
Both these examples question our rudimentary understanding of impacts. This implies that
impacts on n
th
In the case of component-component or secondary impacts, the project activity
specificity ends. In other words, if a particular project activity alters a particular
component, then regardless of the project activity, this changed component would
affect the linked component. e.g. if the temperature of the water of the river is raised
above a certain threshold (by any activity) then the fish life in the river water would be
affected.
environmental component can be due to simultaneous and/or successive
changes in the other interlinked components.

There is a lot be learned from this improved understanding of impacts.


Impacts have non-linear relationships and due participation of more than one
components in some cases, there are possibilities of delays in there realization,
especially in terms of time. Again impacts delayed do not mean that the "size" of the
impact is attenuated. It is possible that the size can be more especially of there are
processes such as "biomagnification" or if the receiving environment is fragile (e.g.
mangrove ecosystems)

The matrix style needed to be expanded to allow for component-component
interactions. This is technically possible by writing a matrix adjacent to another and so
on but in can become rather clumsy if therefore multi-component (or multi-order)
impacts. One may need here a presentation style which allows to depict the
interconnections in a causal style. Network presentation as discussed later is
perhaps a better choice.

Writing of a single matrix for infrastructure or spatial projects becomes rather difficult.
For a thermal power plant for instance, impact of waste emissions on air quality
depends whether the region under consideration is mostly falling into the downwind or
not. If a region (or portion of the neighboring environment) falls beyond a hillock, then
the waste emissions from the power plant gets almost screened or isolated. Similar
arguments would hold good for describing the impacts on the upstream or downstream
of water resources reservoir. In other words, the impact association attempted in the
matrix style assumes homogeneity or isotropy in the region which is not a case in most
situations. This may call for writing more than one (five or six) matrix presentations for
a project describing specific situations happening in the spatial elements. This leads to
once again technical as well as communication difficulties. Use of Geographical
Information Systems (GIS) coupled with impact assessment methodology
becomes an attractive alternative.





20

4.4 Networks

Investigation of higher order linkages in two dimensions can be carried out by using
directional diagrams called networks. Networks, although widely discussed in the EIA
literature, have not been used as extensively as matrices and simple checklists. Networks
were essentially developed to explicitly consider the secondary, tertiary and higher order
impacts that can arise from an initial impact. Here, any effect on the biophysical and socio-
economic environments that arises from a cause directly related to the project activities is
termed a first order or primary impact. Whereas, the secondary impacts are those effects on
the biophysical and socio-economic environments which arise from an action, but which are
not initiated directly by that action.

Presentation matrices can only clearly show the primary or first order impacts within any
particular activity-component framework. It is possible however, to investigate higher order
linkages in two dimensions by using directional diagrams called networks. Networks,
although widely discussed in the EIA literature, have not been used as extensively as matrices
and simple checklists. Networks were essentially developed to explicitly consider the
secondary, tertiary and higher order impacts that can arise from an initial impact.

Environmental impact analysis has been defined as a process aimed at the recognition of
causes and effects, a cause being any action of the proposed project which has an effect
upon the environment.

Any effect on the biophysical and socio-economic environments that arises from a cause
directly related to the project activities is termed a first order or primary impact.

Secondary impacts are those effects on the biophysical and socio-economic environments
which arise from an action, but which are not initiated directly by that action.

Various authors have used different terms to describe secondary impacts, but most are
compatible with the above definition. J ain and Webster (1977), however, use the term
"higher order impacts" to mean secondary impacts as given above, while reserving the terms
"indirect" or "secondary" to cover impacts resulting from an induced action.




21




Box- 4.4 Example of Secondary Order Impacts : Use of Pesticides in Irrigation
Projects


Use of pesticides/ insecticides/ weedicides etc. in excessive quantities and the
persistent nature of pesticides can contaminate the soil.
Pesticide contaminated soil through leaching contaminates the ground water.
Contaminated ground water through ingestion by humans affect human health.
Contaminated soil reduces crop yield.
Contaminated soil through run off of soil contaminates surface water.
Contaminated surface water through toxic contamination affects aquatic biota.
Contaminated surface water decreases yield of fish.
Use of pesticides/ insecticides/ weedicides etc. often kill the natural predators. These
predators eat the pests and hence are useful in maintaining the crop yield. Thus
killing of natural predators by pesticides increases the population of pests and thus
reduces yields.
Use of pesticides/ insecticides/ weedicides etc. through deposition affect crops.



The objective of the network approach is to display, in an easily understood format, the
intermediary links between a project and its ultimate impacts. And this type of network
includes identification of probable importance of temporal effects as well as list of data
requirements.

Methods are available for translating networks into mathematical models. These methods
structure the relationships implied in qualitative simulations. Two common quantitative
simulation models are GSIM and KSIM. In GSIM the verbal expression of relationships is made
explicit at the simplest level by saying "if A increases then B will decrease (or increase or be
unaffected)". In KSIM models the relative magnitude of the relationship must be specified; "if A
doubles the B will decrease by 25%. The KSIM models at an extreme level, approaches
quantitative simulation modeling.

4.4.1 Advantages of the Network Method

(i) Presentation matrices can only clearly show the primary or first order impacts within any
particular activity-component framework. It is possible however, to investigate higher order
linkages in two dimensions by using networks.

(ii) It is possible to translate networks into mathematical models for more quantitative
judgement. The method structures the relationships implied in qualitative simulations.

4.4.2 Limitations of the Network Method

(i) One of the main limitations of the network method is that since impacts are not scored in
any quantitative way, the comparison of project alternatives is not readily achieved.




22

(ii) Spatial representation of impacts is not possible using the network method.

4.5 Overlays

The overlay approach to impact assessment involves the use of a series of transparencies to
identify, predict, assign relative significance to, and communicate impacts in geographical
reference frame larger in scale than a localized action would require. The approach has been
employed for selecting highway corridors, for evaluating development options in coastal areas,
and in numerous other applications.

The McHarg overlay is based on a set of transparent maps, each of which represents the
spatial variation of an environmental parameter (e.g. susceptibility to erosion, or recreational
value). The maps are shaded to show three degrees of parameter compatibility with the
proposed project. A composite picture of the overall social cost of affecting any particular
area is approximated by superimposing all the transparent maps. Any number of project
alternatives can be located on the final map to investigate the degree of associated impacts.
The validity of the analysis is related to the type and number of parameters chosen. For a
readable composite map, the number of parameters in a transparency overlay is limited to
about 10 (Munn, 1975). Parameter maps present data in a summarized and easily
interpreted form, but are unable to reflect the possibility of secondary impacts. They also
rely heavily on cartographic skills and their effectiveness depends to a large degree on
cartographic execution.

This method is easily adaptable for use with a computer which may be programmed to perform
the tasks of aggregating the predicted impacts for each geographical subdivision and of
searching for the areas least affected. Automated procedures are also available for selecting
sequences of unit areas for routing highways, pipelines, and other corridors. The computer
method is more flexible, and has an advantage whenever the reviewer suggests that the
system of weights be changed.

The overlay approach can accommodate both qualitative and quantitative data. The weakness
of the overlay approach is that it is only moderately comprehensive because there is no
mechanism that requires consideration of all potential impacts. When using overlays, the
burden of ensuring comprehensiveness is largely on the analyst. Also, the approach is
selective because there is a limit to the number of transparencies that can be viewed together.
Finally, extreme impacts with small probabilities of occurrence are not considered. However a
skilled assessor may indicate in a footnote or on a supplementary map.

4.5.1 Advantages of the Overlay Method

(i) This method is adaptable for use with a computer which may be programmed to perform the
tasks of aggregating the predicted impacts for each geographical subdivision and of searching
for the areas least affected (i.e. an integrated system of predictive models and Geographical
Information Sytem).

(ii)Automated procedures are also available for selecting sequences of unit areas for routing
highways, pipelines, and other corridors.

(iii)The computer method is more flexible, and has an advantage whenever the reviewer
suggests that the system of weights be changed.

(iv)The overlay approach can accommodate both qualitative and quantitative data.



23


4.5.2 Limitations of the Overlay Method

(i)The weakness of the overlay approach is that it is only moderately comprehensive because
there is no mechanism that requires consideration of all potential impacts.

(ii)When using overlays, the burden of ensuring comprehensiveness is largely on the analyst.

(iii)Also, the approach is selective because there is a limit to the number of transparencies that
can be viewed together.

(iv)Finally, extreme impacts with small probabilities of occurrence are not considered. However
a skilled assessor may indicate in a footnote or on a supplementary map.