Next generation impact assessment: Exploring the key components

References

• Acharibasam JB, Noble BF. 2014. Assessing the impact of strategic impact assessment. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 32(3):177–187. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2014.927557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Đereg N. 2011. Environmental impact assessment in a trans-boundary context in the SEE countries. In: Montini M, Bogdanovic S, editors. Environmental security in South-Eastern Europe: international agreements and their implementation. Dordrecht (The Netherlands): Springer; p. 183–196.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews RNL. 1976. Agency Responses to NEPA: a Comparison and Implications. Nat Resour J. 16:301–322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartlett R. 1990. Ecological reason in administration: environmental impact assessment and administrative theory. In: Paehlke R, Torgerson D, editors. Managing Leviathan: environmental politics and the administrative state. London: Belhaven Press; p. 81–96.
   Google Scholar
• Bartlett RV. 1997.The rationality and logic of NEPA revisited. In: Clark R, Canter L, editors. Environmental Policy and NEPA: Past, Present and Future. Boca Raton: St Lucie Press; p. 51–60.
   Google Scholar
• Bond A, Morrison-Saunders A, Howitt R. eds. 2012. Sustainability assessment: pluralism, practice and progress. London: Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Bond AJ, Pope J. 2012. The state of the art of impact assessment in 2012. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 30(1):1. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2012.669140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown AL, Thérivel R. 2000. Principles to guide the development of strategic environmental assessment methodology. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 18:3: 1883–189.
   Google Scholar
• Connelly RG. 1999. The UN convention on EIA in a transboundary context: a historical perspective. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 19(1):37–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell JW, Poth CN. 2017. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. Fourth ed. London: Sage Publishing Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Dalal-Clayton DB, Sadler B. 2014. Sustainability appraisal: a sourcebook and reference guide to international experience. London: Earthscan/Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• deBoer JJ. 1999. Bilateral agreements for the application of the UN–ECE convention on EIA in a transboundary context. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 19(1):85–98. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(98)00034-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doelle M. 2008. The federal environmental assessment process: a guide and critique. Markham (ON): LexisNexis.
   Google Scholar
• Doelle M, Bankes N, Porta L. 2013. Using strategic environmental assessments to guide oil and gas exploration decisions in the Beaufort Sea. Lessons Learned Atlantic Can RECIEL. 22:103–116.
   Google Scholar
• Doelle M, Sinclair AJ. 2021. The Next generation of impact assessment: a critical review of the canadian impact assessment act. Toronto: Irwin Law.
   Google Scholar
• Duinker PN, Greig LA. 2007. Scenario analysis in environmental impact assessment: improving explorations of the future. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 27(3):206–219. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2006.11.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Expert Panel. 2017. Expert panel report - building common ground: a new vision for impact assessment in Canada. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency: Ottawa. Accessed 2021 March. http://eareview-examenee.ca
   Google Scholar
• Fischer TB. 2003. Strategic environmental assessment in post-modern times. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 23(2):155–170. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(02)00094-X.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer TB. 2007. The theory and practice of strategic environmental assessment: towards a more systematic approach. London: Eacthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick P, Sinclair AJ. 2016. Multi-jurisdictional environmental assessments in Canada. In: Hanna KS, editor. Environmental Impact Assessment: practice and Participation. Toronto: Oxford University Press; p. 182–197.
   Google Scholar
• Fonseca A, Gibson RB. 2020. Testing an Ex-ante framework for the evaluation of impact assessment laws: lessons from Canada and Brazil. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 81:106355. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106355
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, et al. 2005. Sustainability assessment: criteria and processes. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson RB. 2013. Avoiding sustainability trade-offs in environmental assessment. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 31(1):1–12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2013.764633.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson RB. ed. 2017. Sustainability assessment: applications and opportunities. London: Routledge/Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson RB, Doelle M, Sinclair AJ. 2016. Fulfilling the promise: basic components of next generation environmental assessment. J Environ Law Practice. 29(1):257–283.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson RB, Hassan S, Holtz S, Tansey J, Whitelaw G. 2005. Sustainability assessment: criteria and processes. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Gunn JAE, Noble BF. 2015. Sustainability considerations in regional environmental assessment. In: Morrison-Saunders A, Pope J, Bond A, editors. Handbook of sustainability assessment. Camberley (UK): Edward Elgar; p. 103–127.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes S, Fischer TB. 2015. Setting and measuring objectives in sustainability assessment. In: Morrison-Saunders A, Pope J, Bond A, editors. Handbook of sustainability assessment. Camberley (UK): Edward Elgar; p. 265–284.
   Google Scholar
• Hunsberger CA, Gibson RB, Wismer SK. 2005. Citizen involvement in sustainability-centred environmental assessment follow-up. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 25(3):609–627. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2004.12.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IAPA (Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal). 2012. The state of the art of impact assessment. Spec Issue. 30:1.
   Google Scholar
• IAPA (Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal). 2013. Special focus on understanding and managing trade-offs in impact assessment. Special Issue. 31:1.
   Google Scholar
• Imai S. 2017. Consult, consent, and veto: international norms and Canadian treaties. In: Coyle M, Burrows J, editors. The right relationship. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; p. 370.
   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 Project Appraisal. 27(2):133–144. doi:https://doi.org/10.3152/146155109X454302.
   Google Scholar
• Kennett S. 1993. Hard law, soft law and diplomacy: the emerging paradigm for intergovernmental cooperation in environmental assessment. Alta Law Rev. 31(4):644–661. doi:https://doi.org/10.29173/alr1192.
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence DP. 2013. Environmental impact assessment: practical solutions to recurrent problems. second ed. Hoboken (New Jersey): John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• MacLean J, Doelle M, Tollefson C. 2016. Polyjural and Polycentric Sustainability Assessment: A Once-in-a-Generation Law Reform Opportunity, J Env L & Prac. 30(1):35–66.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall R, Arts J, Morrison-Saunders A. 2005. International principles for best practice EIA follow-up. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 23(3):175–181. doi:https://doi.org/10.3152/147154605781765490.
   Google Scholar
• Meredith T. 2004. Assessing environmental impacts in Canada. In: Mitchell B, editor. Resource and environmental management in Canada: addressing conflict and uncertainty. 3rd ed. Don Mills (ON): Oxford University Press; p. 467–496.
   Google Scholar
• MIAC (Multi-Interest Advisory Committee). 2016. Advice to the Expert Panel Reviewing Environmental Assessment Processes [Canada]. Available at: eareview-examenee.ca/
   Google Scholar
• Morgan RK. 2012. Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 30(1):5–15. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2012.661557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison-Saunders A, Marshall R, Arts J. 2007. EIA follow-up: international best practice principles, special publications No.6. Fargo (USA): International Association for Impact Assessment, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Morrison-Saunders A, Pope J. 2013. Conceptualising and managing trade-offs in sustainability assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 38(2):54–63. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2012.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison-Saunders A, Pope J, Bond A. eds. 2015. Handbook of sustainability assessment. Camberley (UK): Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Morrison-Saunders A, Pope J, Bond A, Retief F. 2007. Towards sustainability assessment follow-up. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 45:38–45. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2013.12.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Faircheallaigh C. 2010. Public participation and environmental impact assessment: purposes, implications and lessons for public policy making. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 30(1):19–27. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2009.05.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Riordan T. 1976. Beyond environmental impact assessment. In: O’Riordan T, Hey RD, editors. Environmental Impact Assessment. Westmead: Saxon House; p. 202–221.
   Google Scholar
• O’Riordan T, Sewell WRD. 1981. From project appraisal to policy review. In: O’Riordan. T, Sewell WRD, editors. Project appraisal and policy review. New York: John Wiley & Sons; p. 1–28.
   Google Scholar
• Papillon M, Rodon T. 2017. Proponent-Indigenous agreements and the implementation of the right to free, prior, and informed consent in Canada. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 62:216–224. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2016.06.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Partidario MR. 1996. Strategic environmental assessment: key issues emerging from recent practice. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 16(1):31–55. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0195-9255(95)00106-9.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson EB, Chan YH, Peterson NM, Constable GA, Caton RB, Davis CS, Wallace RR, Yarranton GA. 1987. Cumulative effects assessment in Canada: an agenda for action and research. Hull: Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council, Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz J. 2000. Integrated Assessment for Sustainability Appraisal in Cities and Regions. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 21(1):31.
   Google Scholar
• Raworth K. 2017. Doughnut economics: seven ways to think like a 21-st Century economist. Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler B. 1996. Environmental assessment in a changing world: evaluation practice to improve performance, international study of the effectiveness of environmental assessment, final report. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and International Association for Impact Assessment, Ottawa 263.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler B. 2002. From environmental assessment to sustainability appraisal? In: Billing L, Sadler B, Walmsley J, Wood C, editors. Environmental assessment yearbook 2002: the EA agenda for Johannesburg and beyond. University of Manchester, UK, Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment and the EIA Centre; p. 145–152.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler B, Ashemann R, Dusik J, Fischer TB, Partidario MR, Veerheem R. eds. 2011. Handbook of strategic environmental assessment. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Sheate WR. 2012. Purposes, paradigms and pressure groups: accountability and sustainability in EU environmental assessment, 1985-2010. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 33(1):91–102. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2011.11.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheate WR, Partidario MR. 2010. Strategic approaches and assessment techniques: potential for knowledge brokerage towards sustainability. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 30(4):278–288. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2009.10.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair AJ, Diduck AP. 2016. Public participation in Canadian environmental assessment: enduring challenges and future directions. In: Hanna KS, editor. Environmental impact assessment: practice and participation. Third ed. Toronto: Oxford University Press; p. 65–95.
   Google Scholar
• Sinclair AJ, Diduck A, Fitrzpatrick P. 2008. Conceptualizing learning for sustainability through environmental assessment: critical reflections on 15 years of research. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 28(7):415–428. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2007.11.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair AJ, Diduck AP, Parkins JP. 2021. Innovative approaches to achieving meaningful public participation in next generation impact assessment. In: Hanna K, editor. the handbook of environmental impact assessment. Abingdon: Routledge
   Google Scholar
• Sinclair AJ, Doelle M, Duinker PN. 2017. Looking up, down, and sideways: reconceiving cumulative effects assessment as a mindset. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 62:183–194. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2016.04.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair AJ, Doelle M, Gibson RB. 2018. Implementing next generation assessment: a case example of a global challenge”. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 72(1):166. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2018.06.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair AJ, Peirson-Smith TJ, Boerchers M. 2017. Environmental assessment in the Internet age: the role of E-Governance and social media in creating platforms for meaningful participation. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 35(2):148–157. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2016.1251697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spaling H, Smit B. 1993. Cumulative environmental change: conceptual frameworks, evaluation approaches, and institutional perspectives. Environ Manag. 17 (5):587–600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steffen W, Rockstrom J, Lenton TM, Folke C, Liverman D, Summerhayes CP, Barnosky AD, Cornell SE, Crucifix M, Donges JF, et al. 2018. Trajectories of the earth system in the anthropocene. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 115(33):8252–8259. doi:https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810141115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinemann A. 2001. Improving alternatives for environmental impact assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 21(1):3–21. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(00)00075-5.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor S. 1984. Making bureaucracies think. Stanford (USA): Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. 1972. Report of the United Nations conference on the uman environment (Stockholm Conference). Accessed 2021 March. Online: https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.48/14/REV.1
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. 2019. Sustainable development goals report 2019. Online: United Nations Sustainable Development goals. Accessed 2021 March. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2019.pdf
   Google Scholar
• United Nations General Assembly. 2007. United Nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples (No. A/RES/61/295).
   Google Scholar
• WCEL (West Coast Environmental Law. 2016. Federal environmental assessment reform summit. available at. Vancouver (B.C): West Coast Environmental Law. Accessed 2021 March. www.wcel.org/sites/default/files/publications/WCEL_FedEnviroAssess_ExecSum%2Bapp_fnldigital.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Webler T, Kastenholz H, Renn O. 1995. Public participation in impact assessment: a social learning perspective. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 15(5):443–463. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0195-9255(95)00043-E.
   Google Scholar
• Wood C. 2003. Environmental impact assessment: a comparative review. Second ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar