Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Environmental Impact Assessment—State of the Art

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Using Risk Analysis for Flood Protection Assessment

Abstract

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is now 44 years old (beginning on 1 January 1970 when President Richard Nixon signed the National Environmental Policy Act in the USA). EIA is a systematic approach to identifying and evaluating positive and negative impacts on components of the environment that may arise from the implementation of infrastructure projects or policies (Petts 1999; Wang et al. 2006; Gilbuena et al. 2013). EIA is a mandatory process before approval of infrastructure projects with significant impacts on the environment (Tamura et al. 1994), such as roads (Zhou and Sheate 2011), water supply systems (Al-agha and Mortaja 2005) and flood protection constructions (Ludwig et al. 1995). Flood protection structures (FPS) have been created throughout the centuries to mitigate flood damage (Poulard et al. 2010; Gilbuena et al. 2013).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • ADB (Asian Development Bank) (1997) Risk and uncertainty in EIA. In: Lohani B et al (ed) EIA for developing countries in Asia. Asian Development Bank, Manila, pp 5-1–5-45

    Google Scholar 

  • Adelle C, Weiland S (2012) Policy assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 30(1):25–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • AGIP KCO (2004) Regulatory basis of environmental impact assessment current environmental status. Methodological aspects of environmental and socio-economic impact assessment. Methodological aspects of environmental and socio-economic impact assessment. http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/eia/documents/CentralAsiaGuidelines/Annex%204%20-%20English.pdfAGH (2012–2013) Visegrad Standard Grant No: 21210018. Assessment of the quality of the environment in the V4 Countries. http://www.environ.agh.edu.pl/

  • AIRMIC, ALARM, IRM (2002) A risk management standard. The association of Insurance and Risk Management, The association of insurance and risk managers, The national forum for risk management in the public sector, United Kingdom

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Agha MR, Mortaja RS (2005) Desalination in the Gaza Strip: drinking water supply and environmental impact. Desalination 173(2):157–171

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Bahar JF, Crandall KC (1990) Systematic risk management approach for construction projects. J Constr Eng Manage 116(3):533–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Hawari SF, Thabtah L, Karadsheh, Wa’el Musa Hadi (2008) A risk management model for project execution. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Business Information Management Association Conference (IBIMA), Conference on Information Management in Modern Organizations: Trends & Challenges, pp 887–893, 4–6 January, Marrakech, Morocco

    Google Scholar 

  • Altenbach TJ (1995) A comparison of risk assessment techniques from qualitative to quantitative. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Honolulu, pp 1–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Alverbro K, Nevhage B, Erdeniz R (2010) Methods for risk analysis. TRITA-INFRA-FMS, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews RNL (1990) Environmental impact assessment and risk assessment: learning from each other. In: Wathern P (ed) Environmental impact assessment: theory and practice. Unwin Hyman, London, pp 85–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Antunes P, Santos R (1999) Integrated environmental management of the oceans. Ecol Econ 31(2):215–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argent RM, Grayson RB, Ewing SA (1999) Integrated models for environmental management: issues of process and design. Environ Int 25(6–7):693–699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arquiaga MC, Canter LW, Nelson DI (1994) Integration of health impact considerations in environmental impact studies. Impact Assess 12(2):175–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur JR (2008) General principles of the risk analysis process and its application to aquaculture In: Bondad-Reantaso MG, Arthur JR, Subasinghe RP (ed) Understanding and applying risk analysis in aquaculture. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper. No. 519. FAO, Rome, p 304

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur JR, Bondad-Reantaso MG (2012) Introductory training course on risk analysis for movements of live aquatic animals. Samoa, FAO SAP, p 167

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashby E (1976) Background to environmental impact assessment. In: O’Riordan T, Hey R (eds) Environmental impact assessment. Saxon House, Farnborough, UK, pp 3–15

    Google Scholar 

  • ASIS (2003) General security risk assessment. ASIS, Alexandria, Virginia. http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/issues/defense/files/guidelinesgsra.pdf

  • Australia Standards (2004) AS/NZS 4360:2004 Risk management. Standards Australia International and Standards New Zealand, Sydney and Wellington

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Government (2013) Risk analysis framework 2013. Version 4 published in May 2013. Commonwealth of Australia. p 139

    Google Scholar 

  • Aven T (2008) Risk analysis. Wiley, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Backlund F, Hannu J (2002) Can we make maintenance decisions on risk analysis results? J Qual Maint Eng 8(1):71–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandyopadhyay K, Myktyn PP, Myktyn K (1999) A framework for integrated risk management in information technology. Manag Decis 37(5):437–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barthwal RR (2002) Environmental impact assessment. New Age International Publishers, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett RV, Kurian PA (1999) The theory of environmental impact assessment: implicit models of policy-making. Policy and Politics 27(4):415–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battelle Columbus Laboratories (1979) The selection on projects for EIA. Commission of the European Communities Environment and Consumer Protection Service, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck M, Drennan L, Higgins A (2002) Managing E-Risk. Association of British Insurers, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedford T, Cooke R (2001) Probabilistic risk analysis: foundations and methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boehm BW, Bose PA (1994) Collaborative spiral software process model based on theory. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on the Software Process. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond AJ, Morrison-Saunders A (2011) Re-evaluating sustainability assessment: aligning the vision and the practice. Environ Impact Assess Rev 31(1):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond A, Pope J (2012) The state of the art of impact assessment in 2012. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 30(1):1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond A, Morrison-Saunders A, Pope J (2012) Sustainability assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 30(1):56–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond A, Morrison-Saunders A, Howitt R (2013) Framework for comparing and evaluating sustainability assessment practice. In: Bond A, Morrison-Saunders A, Howitt R (eds) Sustainability assessment: pluralism, practice and progress. Taylor and Francis, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Boroush M (1998) Understanding risk analysis: a short guide for health, safety, and environmental policy making. American Chemical Society and Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bravante MA, Holden WH (2009) Going through the motions: the environmental impact assessment of nonferrous metals mining projects in the Philippines. Pac Rev 22(4):523–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs S, Hudson MD (2013) Determination of significance in ecological impact assessment: past change, current practice and future improvements. Environ Impact Assess Rev 38:16–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookes A (2001) Shared and integrative methods: environmental risk assessment and risk management. In: Morris P, Therivel R (eds) Methods of environmental impact assessment, 2nd edn. Spon Press, London, pp 351–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruckner RM, List B, Schiefer J (2001) Risk management for data warehouse systems. Lect Notes Comput Sci 2114:219–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bujoreanu IN (2012) Risk analysis series part one—why risk analysis? J Def Resour Manage 3(1):139–144

    Google Scholar 

  • CAC (2006) Codex Alimentarius Commission Procedural Manual. 16th edn. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. Available at ftp.fao.org/codex/Publications/ProcManuals/Manual_16e.pdf

  • Canter LW (1996) Environmental impact assessment, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Canter LW (1998a) Methods for effective environmental information assessment (EIA) practice. In: Porter AL, Fittipaldi JJ (eds) Environmental Methods review: retooling impact assessment for the new century. The Press Club, Fargo

    Google Scholar 

  • Canter LW (1998b) Integration of HIA and EIA. In: Barker A, Jones C (ed) EIA Newsletter, vol 16. University of Manchester, School of Planning and Landscape, EIA Centre, Manchester, pp 10–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Canter LW (1999) Environmental impact assessment. In: Liu DHF, Lipták BG (eds) Environmental Engineers’ Handbook. CRC Press, Florida

    Google Scholar 

  • Canter L, Ross B (2010) State of practice of cumulative effects assessment and management: the good, the bad and the ugly. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 28(4):261–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashmore M (2004) The role of science in environmental impact assessment: process and procedure versus purpose in the development of theory. Environ Impact Assess Rev 24(4):403–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashmore M, Gwilliam R, Morgan R, Cobb D, Bond A (2004) The interminable issue of effectiveness: substantive purposes, outcomes and research challenges in the advancement of environmental impact assessment theory. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 22(4):295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashmore M, Bond A, Cobb D (2008) The role and functioning of environmental assessment: theoretical reflections upon an empirical investigation of causation. J Environ Manage 88(4):1233–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashmore M, Bond A, Sadler B (2009) Introduction: the effectiveness of impact assessment instruments. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 27(2):91–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashmore M, Richardson T, Hilding-Ryedvik T, Emmelin L (2010) Evaluating the effectiveness of impact assessment instruments: theorising the nature and implications of their political constitution. Environ Impact Assess Rev 30(6):371–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catchpole S, Moreno R (2012) Environmental risk and natural hazards in EIA’s IAIA12 Conference Proceedings’ Energy Future The Role of Impact Assessment 32nd Annual Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Centro de Congresso da Alfândega, Portugal, 27 May–1 June 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman R (2007) Successful management of IT risk. http://www.insight.co.uk/files/other/successful%20Management%20%of%20IT%20risk.pdf

  • City Office of Navotas (2009) EIA of 4.0-km coastal dike, detention pond with pumping station and incidental reclamation. Philippines

    Google Scholar 

  • Cloquell-Ballester VA, Monterde-Díaz R, Cloquell-Ballester V-A, Santamarina-Siurana M-C (2007) Systematic comparative and sensitivity analyses of additive and outranking techniques for supporting impact significance assessments. Environ Impact Assess Rev 27(1):62–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • College of Engineering and Engineering Technology Northern Illinois University (2006) Risk analysis methodologies. p 7. www.ceet.niu.edu/depts/tech/asse/tech482/risk_analysis_methodologies.doc

  • Cornford S (1998) Managing risk as a resource using the defect detection and prevention process. In: International conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, pp 13–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Covello V, Mumpower J (1985) Risk analysis and risk management: an historical perspective. Risk Anal 5(2):103–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DEAT (2002) Ecological Risk Assessment, Integrated Environmental Management, Information Series 6. DEAT, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • DEAT (2006) Risk Management, Integrated Environmental Management Information Series 23. DEAT, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Demidova O, Cherp A (2005) Risk assessment for improved treatment of health considerations in EIA. Environ Impact Assess Rev 25(4):411–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Health (2010) Health Risk Assessment (Scoping) Guidelines. A health risk assessment process for risk assessors for use within the scoping stages of environmental and health impact assessments. Government of Western Australia, Australia, p 23

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) (1998) Environmental impact statement: the Pasig-Marikina river channel improvement project. DPWH, Philippines

    Google Scholar 

  • DESEIN (2014) Environmental impact assessment. http://www.desein.com/Services/em-division.php

  • Duinker PN, Greig LA (2007) Scenario analysis in environmental impact assessment: improving explorations of the future. Environ Impact Assess Rev 27(3):206–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dziubiński M, Frątczaka M, Markowskib AS (2006) Aspects of risk analysis associated with major failures of fuel pipelines. J Loss Prev Process Ind 19(5):399–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eduljee G (1999) Risk assessment. In: Petts J (ed) Handbook on environmental impact assessment, vol 1. Blackwell Science, London, pp 374–404

    Google Scholar 

  • Elling B (2009) Rationality and effectiveness: does EIA/SEA treat them as synonyms? Impact Assess Proj Apprais 27(2):121–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engel J, Mihok J, Bosak M, Majerník M (2006) Basements of crises management of environmentally dangerous zones (in Slovak). TUKE, Košice

    Google Scholar 

  • Enserink B (2000) A quick scan for infrastructure planning: screening alternatives through interactive stakeholder analysis. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 18(1):15–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EPA (2009) Review of the environmental impact assessment process in Western Australia. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Esteves AM, Franks D, Vanclay F (2012) Social impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 30(1):34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2009) Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. On the application and effectiveness of the EIA Directive (Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended by Directives 97/11/EC and 2003/35/EC), COM(2009) 378 final. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Everdij MHC, Blom HAP (2013) Safety methods database. p 237. http://www.nlr.nl/downloads/safety-methods-database.pdf

  • FAA (2000) FAA system safety handbook. p 506. http://www.atcvantage.com/docs/FAA_System_Safety_Handbook_2001.pdf

  • Fairman R, Mead CD, Williams WP (1999) Environmental risk assessment—approaches, experiences and information sources. Monitoring and Assessment Research centre, King’s College, London. Published by European Environment Agency—EEA Environmental issue report No 4

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO (2009) Environmental impact assessment and monitoring in aquaculture. Requirements, practices, effectiveness and improvements. FAO, Rome, p 675. ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/i0970e/i0970e.pdf

  • FAO, WHO (2006) Food safety risk analysis: a guide for national food safety authorities. FAO Food and Nutrition paper 87, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Fera M, Macchiaroli R (2010) Appraisal of a new risk assessment model for SME. Saf Sci 48(10):1361–1368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick P (2006) In it together: organizational learning through participation in environmental assessment. J Environ Assess Policy Manage 8(2):157–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan R, Norman G (1993) Risk management and construction. Blackwell Publication, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Frosdick S (1997) The techniques of risk analysis are insufficient in themselves. Disaster Prev Manage 6(3):165–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fundingsland Tetlow M, Hanusch M (2012) Strategic environmental assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 30(1):15–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GESAMP (2008) (IMO/FAO/UNESCO-IOC/UNIDO/WMO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Joint Group of Experts on Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection). Assessment and communication of environmental risks in coastal aquaculture. FAO, Reports and Studies GESAMP (76), Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbuena R, Kawamura A, Medina R, Amaguchi H, Nakagawa N, Bui DD (2013) Environmental impact assessment of structural flood mitigation measures by a rapid impact assessment matrix (RIAM) technique: a case study in Metro Manila, Philippines. Sci Total Environ 456–457:137–147

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gough JD (1988) Review of environmental impact assessment and risk assessment procedures. Unpublished report for the Ministry for the Environment, Centre for Resource Management, University of Canterbury and Lincoln College, Christchurch

    Google Scholar 

  • Gough JD (1989) A strategic approach to the use of environmental impact assessment and risk assessment within the decision-making process. Information Paper no. 13. Centre for Resource Management. University of Canterbury and Lincoln College

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham JD (1995) Historical perspective on risk assessment in the federal government. Toxicology 102(1–2):29–52

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Greiving S (2005) Impact Assessment as procedural framework for risk governance. Paper presentation at the final conference of the IMP3 Project “Improving European EIA-Implementation”, Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Austria, 22 November 2005

    Google Scholar 

  • Grima AP, Timmerman P, Fowle CD, Byer P (1986) Risk management and EIA: research needs and opportunities. Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council, Quebec

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday S, Badenhorst K, Solms R (1996) A business approach to effective information tech-nology risk analysis and management. Inf Manage Comput Secur 4(1):19–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding R (1998) Uncertainty, risk and the precautionary principle. In: Harding R (ed) Environmental decision-making. The roles of scientists, engineers and the public. The federation press, Sydney, pp 164–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris-Roxas B, Viliani F, Bond A, Cave B, Divall M, Furu P, Harris P, Soeberg M, Wernham A, Winkler M (2012) Health impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 30(1):43–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrop DO, Nixon JA (1999) Environmental assessment in practice. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Higuera RP, Haimes YY (1996) Software risk management. Technical Report CMU/SEI-96-TR-012, ESC-TR-96-012, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill RA (2005) Conceptualizing risk assessment methodology for genetically modified organisms. Environ Biosafety Res 4(2):67–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IEMA (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment) (2011) The state of environmental impact assessment practice in the UK. IEMA, Lincoln, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Ijäs A, Kuitunen MT, Jalava K (2010) Developing the RIAM method (rapid impact assessment matrix) in the context of impact significance assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 30(2):82–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO/IEC Guide 73: (2009) Risk management—Vocabulary, ISO/IEC

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2000) IUCN guidelines for the prevention of biodiversity loss due to biological invasion. The World Conservation Union (approved by the IUCN Council, February 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • JaE (2009) Access to justice in Slovakia. In: Toolkits A (ed) Access to justice in environmental matters. Justice and Environment—European Association of Environmental Law Organisations, Brno, pp 1–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Jay S, Jones C, Slinn P, Wood C (2007) Environmental impact assessment: retrospect and prospect. Environ Impact Assess Rev 27(4):287–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jha-Thakur U, Gazzola P, Peel D, Fischer TB, Kidd S (2009) Effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment-the significance of learning. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 27(2):133–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson H, Jönsson H (2007) Methods for risk analysis—system perspectives (in German). Lunds universitet, Lund

    Google Scholar 

  • Jurison J (1999) Software project management: a manager’s view. Commun Assoc Inf Syst 2(17):1–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Kandráč J, Skarba D (2000) Methodical approach for risk assessment of dangerous enterprises and study about companies in the Slovak republic (in Slovak). Risk Consult, Bratislava

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenis M, Bacher S, Baker RHA, Branquart E, Brunel S, Holt J, Hulme PE, MacLeod A, Pergl J, Petter F, Pyšek P, Schrader G, Sissons A, Starfinger U, Schaffner U (2012) New protocols to assess the environmental impact of pests in the EPPO decision-support scheme for pest risk analysis. Bull OEPP/EPPO Bull 42(1):21–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick C, George C (2006) Methodological issues in the impact assessment of trade policy: experience from the European Commission’s Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) programme. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 24(4):325–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjorven O (1998) Environmental risk assessment in development programmes: the experience of the World Bank. In: Calow P (ed) Handbook of environmental risk assessment and management. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK, pp 506–519

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontio J (1997) The riskit method for software risk management, version 1.00. University of Maryland. http://www.soberit.hut.fi/T-76.115/02-03/palautukset/groups/pmoc/de/riskit.pdf

  • Kozová M, Drdoš J, Pavličková K, Úradníček Š (1996) Environmental impact assessment. Comenius University in Bratislava, Bratislava

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruopiené J, Židoniené S, Dvarioniené J (2009) Current practice and shortcomings of EIA in Lithuania. Environ Impact Assess Rev 29(5):305–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence DP (1997) The need for EIA theory-building. Environ Impact Assess Rev 17(2):79–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence DP (2000) Planning theories and environmental impact assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 20(6):607–625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence DP (2007a) Impact significance determination—designing an approach. Environ Impact Assess Rev 27(8):730–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence DP (2007b) Impact significance determination—pushing the boundaries. Environ Impact Assess Rev 27(8):770–788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leknes E (2001) The roles of EIA in the decision-making process. Environ Impact Assess Rev 21(4):309–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lexer W, Paluchova K, Schwarzl B (2006) Risk assessment. IMProving the IMPlementation of Environmental IMPact Assessment, “(IMP)3”. Risk Assessment D 3.2 Report WP 3. Österreichisches Institut für Raumplanung, Vienna. http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/umweltthemen/UVP_SUP_EMAS/IMP/IMP3-Risk_Assessment.pdf

  • Lohani B, Evans JW, Everitt RR, Ludwig H, Carpenter RA, Tu SL (1997) Environmental impact assessment for developing countries in Asia volume 1—overview. Asian Development Bank. http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/pub/1997/eia-developing-countries-asia.pdf. Accessed Jan 2012

  • Luciak M (2012) Application of the Act on Environmental Impact Assessment (in Slovak) In: ELSEWA Ltd. (ed) Proceeding from 2nd international conference: Environment—problems and solutions; air—water—soil, Košice, pp 12–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Luciak M, Nižňanský G (2013) Environmental Impact Assessment. In: ELSEWA Ltd. (ed) Proceeding from 2nd international conference: Environment—problems and solutions; air—water—soil, Košice, pp 5–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig HF, Gunartnam D, Yuming S (1995) Environmental impact assessment for Xiaolangdi Yellow River multi-purpose economic-cum-environmental improvement project. Environmentalist 15:45–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandelik Y (2005) Issues and dilemmas in ecological scoping: scientific, procedural and economic perspectives. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 23(1):55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marara M, Okello N, Kuhanwa Z, Douven W, Beevers L, Leentvaar J (2011) The importance of context in delivering effective EIA: case studies from East Africa. Environ Impact Assess Rev 31(3):286–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marhavilas PK, Koulouriotis D, Gemeni V (2011) Risk analysis and assessment methodologies in the work sites: on a review, classification and comparative study of the scientific literature of the period 2000–2009. J Loss Prev Proc Ind 24(5):477–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall R, Arts J, Morrison-Saunders A (2005) International principles for best practice EIA follow-up. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 23(3):175–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniels T, Small M (2004) Risk analysis and society: an interdisciplinary characterization of the field (ed). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • McVicar AH (2004) Management actions in relation to the controversy about salmon lice infections in fish farms as a hazard to wild salmonid populations. Aquacult Res 35(8):751–758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mobey A, Parker D (2002) Risk evaluation and its importance to project implementation. Work study 51(4):202–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MoE (2010) State of the Environment of the Slovak Republic in 2009 (in Slovak). Ministry of Environment/Slovak Environmental Agency, Bratislava/Banská Bystrica

    Google Scholar 

  • MoE, SEA (2012) Conclusions from 2nd international conference SEA/EIA 2012 (in Slovak). Ministry of Environment/Slovak Environmental Agency, Bratislava/Banská Bystrica, Tále. http://www.enviroportal.sk/clanok/eiasea-zhodnotenie-konferencie. Accessed 17 July 2012

  • MoE (2013) State of the Environment of the Slovak Republic in 2012 (in Slovak). Ministry of Environment/Slovak Environmental Agency, Bratislava/Banská Bystrica

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan RK (1998) Environmental impact assessment: a methodological perspective. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan RK (2012) Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 30(1):5–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison-Saunders A, Arts J (2004) Assessing impact: handbook of EIA and SEA follow-up. Earthscan James & James, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison-Saunders A, Bailey M (2009) Appraising the role of relationships between regulators and consultants for effective EIA. Environ Impact Assess Rev 29(5):284–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosler D (2006) Risk assessment of dams by FMECA (in Czech). In: Student scientific and practice activity. 2006. VUT FAST, Brno

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullai A (2006) Risk management system—risk assessment frameworks and techniques. DaGoB Project Office, Turku

    Google Scholar 

  • Munier N (2004) Multicriteria environmental assessment, a practical guide. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustow SE, Burgess RF, Walker N (2005) Practical methodology for determining the significance of impacts on the water environment. Water Environ J 19(2):100–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences (2011) Improving health in the United States: the role of health impact assessment. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of the Slovak Republic (2005) Act of Law No. 24/2006 from December 14th 2005 on Environmental Impact Assessment and on amendments to certain acts

    Google Scholar 

  • Natural Resources Commission (2013) Risk management policy and framework. Document No: D12/4540. http://www.nrc.nsw.gov.au/content/documents/Policy%20-%20Risk%20management%20-%20Mar%202013.pdf

  • N.E.M. Business Solutions (2002) Risk analysis methodologies. N.E.M Business Solutions, United Kingdom. www.cip.ukcentre.com/risk.htm

  • Nijkamp P (1980) Environmental policy analysis. Operational methods and models. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Riordan T, Sewell WRD (1981) From project appraisal to policy review. In: O’Riordan T, Sewell WRD (ed) Project appraisal and policy review. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortolano L, Shepherd A (1995) Environmental impact assessment: challenges and opportunities. Impact Assess 13(1):3–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pačaiová H, Sinay J, Glatz J (2009) Security and risks of technical systems (in Slovak). TUKE, Košice

    Google Scholar 

  • Paustenbach DJ (1995) Retrospective on U.S. health risk assessment. How others can benefit. Risk: Health Saf Environ 6:283–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry JG, Hayes RW (1985) Risk and its management in construction projects. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Part 1, v78, Design and Construction, Engineering Management Group, pp 499–521

    Google Scholar 

  • Petts J (1997) Environmental assessment and risk assessment, teaching-materials prepared for the course Environmental Assessment and Audit as part of the collaborative programme on Environmental Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal in Developing Countries at the Environmental Impact Assessment Center, School of Planning and Landscape, Manchester

    Google Scholar 

  • Petts J (1999) Environmental impact assessment—overview of purpose and process. In: Petts J (ed) Handbook of environmental impact assessment, vol 1. Blackwell Science, London, pp 3–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Petts J, Eduljee G (1994) Environmental impact assessment for waste treatment and disposal facilities. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips MJ, Subasinghe RP (2008) Application of risk analysis to environmental issues in aquaculture. In: Bondad-Reantaso MG, Arthur JR, Subasinghe RP (ed) Understanding and applying risk analysis in aquaculture. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper. No. 519. Rome, FAO. pp 101–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinho P, McCallum S, Santos Cruz S (2010) A critical appraisal of EIA screening practice in EU Member States. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 28(2):91–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope J, Annandale D, Morrison-Saunders A (2004) Conceptualising sustainability assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 24(6):595–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope J, Bond A, Morrison-Saunders A, Retief F (2013) Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: setting the research agenda. Environ Impact Assess Rev 41:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulard C, Lafont M, Lenar-Matyas A, Łapuszek M (2010) Flood mitigation designs with respect to river ecosystem functions—a problem oriented conceptual approach. Ecol Eng 36(1):69–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainer RK Jr, Snyder ChA, Carr HH (1991) Risk analysis for information technology. J Manage Inf Syst 8(1):129–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajaram T, Das A (2011) Screening for EIA in India: enhancing effectiveness through ecological carrying capacity approach. J Environ Manage 92(1):140–148

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche T (2001) Risk analysis methods—a brief review. The University of Queensland. Mineral Industry Safety and Health Center. http://www.mishc.uq.edu.au/Publications/Risk_Analysis_Methods_a_Brief_Review.pdf

  • Raspotnig Ch, Opdahl A (2013) Comparing risk identification techniques for safety and security requirements. J Syst Softw 86(4):1124–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rechard RP (1999) Historical relationship between performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal and other types risk assessment. Risk Anal 19(5):763–807

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reniers GLL, Dullaert W, Ale BJM, Soudan K (2005) Developing an external domino prevention framework: Hazwim. J Loss Prev Process Ind 18(3):127–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Retief F (2010) The evolution of environmental assessment debates: critical perspectives from South Africa. J Environ Assess Policy Manage 12(4):375–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Říha J (1987) Multicriteria assessments of investments projects (in Czech). SNTL, Praha

    Google Scholar 

  • Říha J (2001) Environmental impact assessment. Methods for preliminary decision analysis (in Czech). ČVUT, Praha

    Google Scholar 

  • Říha J (1995) Environmental impact assessment of investments. Multicriteria analysis and EIA (in Czech). Academia, Praha

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouvroye JL, van den Bliek EG (2002) Comparing safety analysis techniques. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 75(3):289–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler B (1996) Environmental assessment in a changing world: evaluating practice to improve performance. Final Report of the International Study of the Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler B et al (2011) Taking stock of SEA. In: Sadler B (ed) Handbook of strategic environmental assessment. Earthscan, London, pp 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez LE, Morrison-Saunders A (2011) Learning about knowledge management for improving environmental impact assessment in a government agency: the Western Australian experience. J Environ Manage 92(9):2260–2271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schierow LJ (2004) The role of risk analysis and risk management in environmental protection, CRS Issue Brief for Congress, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segudovic H (2006) Qualitative risk analysis method comparison. Infigo IS d.o.o, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Shine C, Williams N, Gündling L (2000) A guide to designing legal and institutional frameworks on alien invasive species. International Union for Conservation of Nature, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  • Šimák L (2006) Risk management (in Slovak). ZU, Žilina

    Google Scholar 

  • Smejkal V, Rais V (2013) Risk management in firms and other companies (in Czech). Expert. Grada Publishing, Praha

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith PG, Merritt GM (2002) Proactive risk management: controlling uncertainty in product development. Productivity Press, New York, p 246

    Google Scholar 

  • Snell T, Cowell R (2006) Scoping in environmental impact assessment: balancing precaution and efficiency? Environ Impact Assess Rev 26(4):359–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sommerville I (2010) Software engineering. 9th ed. Addison-Wesley, USA, p 790. http://poincare.matf.bg.ac.rs/~vladaf//Courses/Matf%20RS2/Text/Software%20Engineering%209ed.pdf

  • SRA (2004) Glossary of risk analysis terms. McLean, VA. http://www.sra.org/sites/default/files/docs/SRA_Glossary.pdf

  • Srinivas H, Nakagawa Y (2008) Environmental implications for disaster preparedness: lessons learnt from the Indian Ocean tsunami. J Environ Manage 89(1):4–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Startienė G, Remeikienė R (2007) Methodology of business risk analysis and its practical application in the enterprises working in the global market. Eng Econ 3:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinemann A (2001) Improving alternatives for environmental impact assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 21(1):3–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart JMP, Sinclair AJ (2007) Meaningful public participation in environmental assessment: perspectives from Canadian participants, proponents, and government. J Environ Assess Policy Manage 9(2):161–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • STN 01 0380: (2003) Risk management (AS/NZS 4360:1999). Bratislava

    Google Scholar 

  • STN ISO 31000: (2011) Risk management. Principles and guidelines. SÚTN, Bratislava

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoneburner G, Goguen A, Feringa A (2002) Risk management guide for information technology systems recommendations of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-30/sp800-30.pdf

  • Strutt J (1993) Risk management. Unpublished paper, Centre for Industrial Safety and Reliability, Cranfield University

    Google Scholar 

  • Suh B, Han I (2002) The IS risk analysis based on a business model. Inf Manag 41(2):149–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tamura H, Fujita S, Hiroshi K (1994) Decision analysis for environmental impact assessment and consensus formation among conflicting multiple agents—including case studies for road traffic. Sci Total Environ 153(3):203–210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor CN, Bryan CH, Goodrich CG (2004) Social assessment: theory, process and techniques, 3rd edn. Ecology Press, Wisconsin

    Google Scholar 

  • The E7 Network of Expertise for the Global Environment (1997) Environmental impact assessment. An electric utility overview. The E7 Network of Expertise for the Global Environment, Canada. http://www.e8.org/upload/File/E7_EIA_Manual_EN.pdf

  • Tichý M (2006) Risk control: analysis and management. C. H, Beck, Prague

    Google Scholar 

  • Treweek J (1999) Ecological impact assessment. Blackwell Science, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (1992) Framework for ecological risk assessment. EPA Risk Assessment Forum. EPA/630/R-92/001

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (1998) Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. US Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington D.C., EPA/630/R-95-002F

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay F, Bronstein DA (1995) Environmental and social impact assessment. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan EJ (1997) Risk management. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldeck S, Morrison-Saunders A, Annandale D (2003) Effectiveness of non-legal EIA guidance from the perspective of consultants in Western Australia. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 21(3):251–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker LJ, Johnston J (1999) Guidelines for the assessment of indirect and cumulative impacts as well as impact interactions. EC DG XI, Environment, Nuclear Safety & Civil Protestion, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang YM, Yan JB, Xu DL (2006) Environmental impact assessment using evidential reasoning approach. Eur J Oper Res 174(3):1885–1913

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wathern P (1988) An introductory guide to EIA. In: Wathern P (ed) EIA: theory and practice. Unwin Hyman, London

    Google Scholar 

  • WB (1991) Environmental assessment sourcebook. World Bank Technical Paper 154. Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsh T (2012) Full Monte—The better approach to Schedule Risk Analysis. User guide. Tony Welsh, Barbecana

    Google Scholar 

  • Weston J (2011) Screening for environmental impact assessment projects in England: what screening? Impact Assess Proj Apprais 29(2):90–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White D (1995) Application of systems thinking to risk management: a review of the literature. Manag Decis 33(10):35–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood Ch (2003) Environmental impact assessment: a comparative review, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall, Harlow

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeleňáková M (2009) Flood risk assessment (in Slovak). TUKE, Košice

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelený J (2006) Analysis, assessment and evaluation of risks, principle of duality and probability (in Slovak). TUZVO, Zvolen

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou K, Sheate WR (2011) EIA application in China’s expressway infrastructure: clarifying the decision-making hierarchy. J Environ Manage 92(6):1471–1483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zvijáková L (2013) Aplikácia rizikovej analýzy v procese posudzovania vplyvov (vybraných stavieb) na životné prostredie. [The application of risk analysis in the environmental impact assessment (selected constructions)]. Dissertation, Technical university of Košice

    Google Scholar 

  • Zvijáková L, Zeleňáková M, Purcz P (2014) Evaluation of environmental impact assessment effectiveness in Slovakia. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 32(2):150–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Košice, Košice, Slovakia

    Martina Zeleňáková & Lenka Zvijáková

Authors
  1. Martina Zeleňáková
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lenka Zvijáková
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martina Zeleňáková .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zeleňáková, M., Zvijáková, L. (2017). Environmental Impact Assessment—State of the Art. In: Using Risk Analysis for Flood Protection Assessment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52150-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation