Download pdf
Environmental Impact Assessment System: Case Analysis of Existing Legal Disputes
- 1 The University of Manchester
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) refers to the process of assessing the possible impact of planning activities on the environment. This paper contends that the current international legal framework does not adequately delineate the activation criteria for EIA and overlooks the significance of international collaborative duties that come into play when sovereign states embark on the initiation and execution of EIA processes. Only in relation to the general principles of international law can the nature of the EIA’s obligation be comprehended. When dealing with cross-border damage, the requirement for due diligence is complemented by an implicit responsibility to collaborate. This latter obligation arises under identical situations as the due diligence requirement, particularly in response to 'the likelihood of significant environmental damage,' and thus, it needs to be satisfied by the national government under equivalent circumstances. This paper argues that the court’s interpretation of environmental impact assessment is incomplete which is reflected in two aspects: (1) the ambiguity in the court's grasp of the EIA threshold's unpredictability. The International Court of Justice fails to clarify the criteria for establishing a 'substantial environmental risk'. (2) The court's oversight in considering the duty to collaborate could result in an overemphasis on the material aspects of EIA-treating it merely as a technical instrument. By reintegrating the cooperation duty, a more balanced perspective on the procedural elements of EIA could be achieved. Delving into strategies to rectify these two deficiencies and obtaining a holistic insight into the International Court of Justice's approach to EIA will yield substantial implications and relevance for future EIA-related endeavors.
Keywords
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), EIA general principle, Due Diligence, Cooperation Obligations, Legal disputes.
[1]. Convention on the Environmental Impact Assessment in a Context (adopted on 25 February 1991, entered into force 10 September 1997) 1989 UNTS 310, art 1, 3.
[2]. UNCED ‘Rio Declaration on Environment and Development’ (1992), 13 World Bull, Principle 17, 224.
[3]. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (adopted 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 November 1994) 1833 UNTS 3, art 206 (UNCLOS).
[4]. Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa)
[5]. Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v Costa Rica) (Judgment) ICJ Rep 2015.
[6]. Gillespie A. (2008) ‘Environmental Impact Assessments in International Law’ Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, (2/17, 2008) 222, paras 221–233.
[7]. Elferink, O. ‘Environmental Impact Assessments in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Identification of Gaps and Possible Ways Forward’ (2013) 1(13) IDDRI.
[8]. UNGA Res 66/2319 (6 July 2017) UN Doc A/RES/66/231, Annex.
[9]. Boyes, A. (2014) ‘Environmental Impact Assessment in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction’ Law of the Sea Research Paper 528.
[10]. Boyes, A. (2011) ‘Developments in the International Law of Environmental Impact Assessments and their Relation to the Espoo Convention’ Review of European Community and International Environmental Law (RECIEL) 20, 3, paras 227-231.
[11]. Connelly, R. G. (1999) ‘The UN Convention on EIA in a Transboundary Context: a Historical Perspective’ Environmental Impact Assessment Review 19, 1, paras 37-46.
[12]. Xing, S. (2011) ‘Research on transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment system’ Ocean University of China, PhD dissertation.
[13]. Craik, N. (2020) ‘The duty to cooperate in the customary law of environmental impact assessment’ The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 69, 1, paras 239–259.
[14]. Robinson, N. A. (1992) ‘International Trends in Environmental Impact Assessment’ Environmental Affairs Vol 19, 591, paras 611-616.
[15]. Gillespie, A. (2008) ‘Environmental Impact Assessments in International Law’ Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, Vol 17, 221 (Issue 2).
[16]. Tweedie, J. (2006) ‘Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment Under the North American Free Trade Agreement’ Washington and Lee Law Review, Vol 63, 870.
[17]. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA), Government of Canada's Kearl Decision, art 19, <http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/details-eng.cfm?CEAR_ID16237_ForceDecision_Y_DecisionID=20218>
[18]. ITLOS, (2011) ‘Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities with respect to Activities in the Area’ (1 February 2011) ITLOS/Advisory Opinion 50, para 145 <http://www.itlos.org/index.phpid=109_L=0> (Accessed 28 July 2024).
[19]. UNEP ‘Convention on Biodiversity’ (5 June 1992) UNTS/1760/142 Art 14 (1) (a).
[20]. UNEP (2009) ‘Environmental Impact Assessments in Marine Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction’ (20 November 2009) UNEP/CBD/EW-EIAMA/2, First preamble of UNEP Goals and Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment.
[21]. Iron Rhine (Ijzeren Rijn) Railway between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of the Netherlands Arbitration (2007) PCA Award Series.
[22]. Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project Case (Hungary v Slovakia) (Judgment) [1997] ICJ EB/OL <https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/92/092-19970925-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf> (Accessed 7 August 2024).
[23]. Corfu Channel (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Albania) (Merits) [1949] ICJ Rep 22.
[24]. UNTS ‘Statute of the River Uruguay’ (1975) UNTS No I-21425, art 41.
[25]. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Arg v Uru) (Judgment) (10 April 2010), available <http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/135/15877.pdf> (Accessed 8 August 2024), para 197.
[26]. Case Concerning Land Reclamation By Singapore In and Around the Straits of Johor (Malaysia v Singapore) ITLOS Reports 2003,15
[27]. G Tunk, ‘Is General International Law Customary Law Only’ (1993) EJIL 534.
[28]. Statute of the International Court of Justice (1945) 39 AJIL Supp 215 175, art 38.
[29]. As per the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (adopted 18 April 1961, entered into force 24 April 1964) 1155 UNTS 331, art 31(3)(c).
[30]. L-A Duvic-Paoli, The Prevention Principle in International Environmental Law (CUP 2018) 213.
[31]. J Bendel and J Harrison, ‘Determining the Legal Nature and Content of EIAs in International Environmental Law: What Does the ICJ Decision in the Joined Costa Rica v Nicaragua/Nicaragua v Costa Rica Cases Tell Us?’ (2017) 42 Questions of International Law, Zoom-in, 13.
[32]. Aerial Herbicide Spraying (Ecuador v Colombia) (Memorial of Ecuador) Vol 1, p 295, para 8.41.
[33]. Bartlett and P Kurian, ‘The Theory of Environmental Impact Assessment: Implicit Models of Policy Making’ (1999) 27 Policy and Politics 415.
[34]. Zeleňáková, M., Labant, S., Zvijáková, L., Weiss, E., Čepelová, H., Weiss, R., Fialová, J. and Minďaš, J. (2020) ‘Methodology for environmental assessment of proposed activity using risk analysis’(Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 80.
[35]. Karkkainen, B. C. (2002) ‘Towards a Smarter NEPA: Monitoring and Managing Governments Environmental Performance’ 102 ColumL Rev 903.
[36]. Serge, T. (1984) Making Bureaucracies Think: The Environmental Impact Statement Strategy of Administrative Reform (Stanford University Press)
[37]. The MOX Plant Case (Ireland v the UK) (Order of 2001 ITLOS EB/OL), <http://www.itlos.org/index.php?id=102> (Accessed 9 August 2024).
[38]. The MOX Plant Case (n 52), Separate Opinion of Judge Mensah, p 122.
[39]. See Case above, Separate Opinion of Judge Székely, p 147, paras 16-17.
[40]. Partial Award in the Matter of The Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Pakistan v India) (18 February 2013), para 451.
[41]. The Nuclear Tests Case (New Zealand v France) (Judgment) [1974] ICJ EB/OL, <http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/59/6159.pdf> (Accessed 10 August 2024); The Nuclear Tests Case (Australia v France) (Judgment) [1974] ICJ EB/OL, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/58/6093.pdf (Accessed 10 August 2024).
[42]. Request for an Examination of the Situation in Accordance with Paragraph 63 of the Court’s Judgment of 20 December 1974 in the Nuclear Tests (New Zealand v. France) [1995] ICJ Rep 290, para 5.
[43]. Ibid Craik, ‘Deliberation and Legitimacy in Transnational Environmental Governance: The Case of Environmental Impact Assessment’ (2007) 38 Victoria University Wellington Law Review 381.
[44]. Poisner Jonathan, ‘A Civic Republican Perspective on the National Environmental Policy Act’s Process for Citizen Participation’ (1996) 26 Envtl 53.
[45]. Birnie, A., Boyle, P. and Redgwell, C. (2009) International Law and the Environment (3rd edn, Oxford University Press) 175.
[46]. Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (adopted 16 June 1972) (1972) 11 ILM 1416.
[47]. [47] Convention on the Protection of the Ozone Layer (adopted 22 March 1985, entered into force 22 September 1988) 1513 UNTS 293, art 2(2).
[48]. See discussion in ILC, ‘Second Report on the Protection of the Atmosphere’ (2015) UN Doc A/CN.4/681, 36–47; see also discussion in Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v Japan, New Zealand Intervening) (Merits) [2014] ICJ Rep 226, paras 83, 220–222 and 240.
[49]. Lac Lanoux Arbitration, 24 ILR (1957).
[50]. United Nations Convention on the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses (adopted 21 May 1997, entered into force 17 August 2014) (1997) 36 ILM 700, arts 11–19; Agreement on the Cooperation for the Sustainable Development of the Mekong River Bain (adopted 5 April 1995) (1995) 34 ILM 865; Convention on Co-operation for the Protection and Sustainable Use of the Danube River (adopted 29 June 1994, entered into force 22 October 1998), ECOLEX TRE-001207.
[51]. Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (adopted 13 November 1979, entered into force 16 March 1998) 18 ILM 1442 art 5; Agreement between United States and Canada on Air Quality (adopted 1991 March 13) (1991) 30 ILM 676, arts V–VII.
[52]. ILC, ‘Draft Articles on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses’ (1994) 46th Session, Yearbook of the ILC, vol II, Pt Two, 89, arts 12–19; ILC, ‘Draft Articles on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers’ (2008) 60th Session, 2008, Yearbook of the ILC, vol II, Pt Two, 22, art 15.
[53]. Corfu Channel Case (UK v Albania) (Merits) [1949] ICJ Rep 4, 22 (discussed in Draft Articles on Transboundary Harm art 8, commentary 3).
[54]. Territorial Jurisdiction of the International Commission of the River Oder (Czechoslovakia, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, Sweden/Poland) (1929) PCIJ Series A No 23 (referring to a ‘community of interest’).
[55]. Draft Articles on Transboundary Harm, art 9(2).
[56]. Benvenisti, E. (2013) ‘Sovereigns as Trustees of Humanity: On the Accountability of States to Foreign Stakeholders’ 107 AJIL 295, 314.
[57]. Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada v United States) (Provisional Measures) [1984] ICJ Rep 292, 299.
[58]. Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Espoo Finland (25 February 1991) 30 ILM 802 (in force 14 January 1998) (Espoo Convention), art 6 (2)
[59]. McIntyre, O. (2011) The World Court’s Ongoing Contribution to International Water Law: the Pulp Mills Case Between Argentina and Uruguay, Water Alternatives Vol 4, Issue 2, p 124.
[60]. Boyle, A. ‘Pulp Mills Case: A Commentary’, <http://www.biicl.org/files/5167_pulp_mills_case.pdf> (Accessed 25 Aug. 2024).
[61]. Bystroe Canal Project, <http://assets.panda.org/downloads/bystroyecanalqa.pdf> (Accessed 26 August 2024).
[62]. Radio Romania International News (2023), <http://old.rri.ro/arh-art.shtml?lang=5&sec=197&art=13871> (Accessed 20 August 2024).
[63]. Koester, V. (2007) ‘The compliance committee of the Aarhus convention-an overview of procedures and jurisprudence’ 37 Envtl Pol’y & L 83.
[64]. Marsden Simon, Non-compliance procedures (2017) Yearbook Int Envtl vol 28, 111–115.
[65]. Compliance with and implementation of the Convention Report of the 11th meeting of the Implementation Committee ECE/MP.EIA/WG.1/2007/4, para 21, 2023.
[66]. Study on current situation and likely development of the Bystroe canal and Kiliya arm, Final report, (January 2016), 47, < https://mtu.gov.ua/files/31110551_dod.pdf >(Accessed 26 August 2024).
[67]. United Nations Environment Programme, ‘Assessing Environmental Impacts- A Global Review of Legislation’ (2018), http://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/22691/Environmental_Impacts_Legislation.pdf. (Accessed 26 August 2024).
[68]. Cogan, J.K. (2016) ‘Sovereignty over disputed territory-international environmental law-transboundary harm-due diligence-environmental impact assessment’ (The American Journal of International Law 110), 320–326.
[69]. Draft Articles and Commentaries, supra note 24, at 387-90 [2001] 2YB Int'L Comm'nat 152-53 (commentary to draft Article 2).
[70]. Sands, P. (1994) ‘ International Law in the Field of Sustainable Development’, 64 British Yearbook of International Law, at 357-358; and Alan Gilpin, Environmental Impact Assessment, supra note 1, at 9-10.
[71]. IAEA ‘Japan to release Fukushima water into ocean from Aug. 24’. Available at: https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/08/1140037 (Accessed 25 August 2024).
[72]. Chen, X and Xu, Q. (2024) ‘The implementation of the environmental impact assessment in Fukushima contaminated water discharge: an analysis of the international legal framework’ 2 Frontiers in Marine Science Vol 11.
[73]. The International Legally Binding Instrument under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction.
[74]. Intergovernmental Conference on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, <https://www.un.org/bbnj/>, visited on 20 August 2024.
[75]. Friedman Wolfgang, The Changing Structure of International Law (Columbia University Press 1964).
[76]. Simma, B. (1994) ‘From Bilateralism to Community Interest in International Law’ 250 Recueildes Cours 217
[77]. Benvenisti, E. and Nolte, G. (2018) Community Interests Across International Law (OUP).
Cite this article
Pang,S. (2024). Environmental Impact Assessment System: Case Analysis of Existing Legal Disputes. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,69,95-108.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on International Law and Legal Policy
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).