Morrison-Saunders Angus, Bailey John
Division of Science, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia.
Environ Manage. 2003 Jun;31(6):683-95. doi: 10.1007/s00267-003-2709-z.
A large body of literature addresses the role of science in environmental impact assessment (EIA) but less attention has been given to the views of practitioners themselves. In this research a survey of 31 EIA practitioners in Western Australia was undertaken to determine their perceptions of the quality and importance of science in EIA. The survey results are compared with previous theoretical, empirical, and survey studies of the role of science in EIA. Interview questions addressed the role of science in impact prediction, monitoring activities, mitigation and management, and EIA decision-making. It was clear from the interviews that many practitioners are satisfied with the quality of science currently used in EIA, but do not believe that it is given sufficient importance in the process. The quality and importance of science in the predecision stages of EIA was rated higher than in the postdecision stages. While science was perceived to provide the basis for baseline data collection, impact prediction, and mitigation design, it was seen to be less important during decision-making and ongoing project management. Science was seen to be just one input to decision-makers along with other factors such as sociopolitical and economic considerations. While time and budget constraints were seen to limit the scientific integrity of EIA activities, pressure from the public and regulatory authorities increased it. Improving the scientific component of EIA will require consideration of all these factors, not just the technical issues.
大量文献探讨了科学在环境影响评估（EIA）中的作用，但从业者自身的观点却较少受到关注。在本研究中，对西澳大利亚州的31名环境影响评估从业者进行了一项调查，以确定他们对科学在环境影响评估中的质量和重要性的看法。将调查结果与先前关于科学在环境影响评估中作用的理论、实证和调查研究进行了比较。访谈问题涉及科学在影响预测、监测活动、缓解和管理以及环境影响评估决策中的作用。从访谈中可以明显看出，许多从业者对目前在环境影响评估中使用的科学质量感到满意，但不认为其在该过程中得到了足够的重视。科学在环境影响评估决策前阶段的质量和重要性被评为高于决策后阶段。虽然科学被认为是基线数据收集、影响预测和缓解设计的基础，但在决策和项目持续管理过程中，其重要性被认为较低。科学被视为与社会政治和经济等其他因素一样，只是决策者的一个输入因素。虽然时间和预算限制被认为会限制环境影响评估活动的科学完整性，但来自公众和监管机构的压力却提高了这种完整性。改善环境影响评估的科学部分需要考虑所有这些因素，而不仅仅是技术问题。
