Assessing the Assessors: An Examination of the Impact of the Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process on Federal Decision Making
ABSTRACT. Since its inception in 1974, the Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP) has provided a unique forum for decision-making processes among developer-proponents and between government departments at federal, provincial and territorial levels. In the past decade, a wealth of...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
1986
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.550.5797 http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/arctic39-3-240.pdf |
| Summary: | ABSTRACT. Since its inception in 1974, the Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP) has provided a unique forum for decision-making processes among developer-proponents and between government departments at federal, provincial and territorial levels. In the past decade, a wealth of panel reports and recommendations has been assembled in a series of publications, many of which focus n development proposals on federal lands in the Canadian north. Here, the degree to which EARP recommendations have influenced the federal decision-making process is assessed generally. It is concluded that most EARP panel reports have exerted a profound effect on proponent developers, proponent-departments or associated federal, provincial or temtorial agencies. In most cases, the review process has worked to enhance the coordination and delivery of a complex matrix of government services. One of the major benefits o he EARP is that it provides an arena for the numerous government departments to openly consult, communicate and begin to negotiate future roles, responsibilities and involvement in projects. The force of s rutiny, in a forum open to members of the general public, appears to have facilitated the resolution of jurisdictional responsibilities and roles in project developments among regulatory bodies. Importantly, EARP panel consultations allow government agencies and interest groups to openly assess proposals without concern over conflicts of interest. I Critics have pointed out several significant drawbacks and jurisdictional verlaps of the EARP process. Given the existing complexity of the Canadian regulatory system, these concerns may be less significant than the advantages provided by the process for inter- and intra-governmental coordination and public consultations. In many cases, it is considered that the existence of the EARP has forced government departments to factor environmental and/or |
|---|