Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-fb4gq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T07:01:14.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluating the Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process with Special Reference to South Davis Strait, Northeastern Canada

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Janet E. King  and
J. Gordon Nelson
Janet E. King
Affiliation:
Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto, Ontario M7A 1W3, Canada
J. Gordon Nelson
Affiliation:
Professor of Geography & Dean, Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario 2NL 3G1, Canada.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A study of the 1978 application for permission to undertake exploratory drilling in South Davis Strait, northeastern Canada, resulted in the identification of problems with the federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP). These problems have recurred in other environmental impact assessments since 1978 in other parts of northern Canada, and some improvements have been made in approaches to them. However, further progress is needed if the EARP process is to become a more widely accepted method than at present of conducting evaluations of development impacts and the means of managing them in northern Canada.

This paper focuses on the procedural rather than the scientific aspects of EARP in northeastern Canada. Recommendations include: 1) applying environmental impact assessment to policies as well as development activities; 2) strengthening socio-economic expertise and approaches; 3) financing of interveners and support for a more balanced range of interests than was displayed in this case; 4) provision of sufficient notification and adequate information; 5) documentation of rationale for decisions; and 6) monitoring and evaluation by the Canadian Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Office (FEARO) to ensure compliance with set conditions and to facilitate the tackling of unforeseen problems.

Type
Main Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , Winter 1983 , pp. 293 - 301
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andrews, R.N.L. (1973). A philosophy of environmental impact assessment. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 28(5), pp. 197–204.Google Scholar
Armour, A. (1977). Understanding environmental assessment. Plan Canada, 17(2), pp. 8–19.Google Scholar
Beanlands, G. & Duinker, P. (1983). Environmental Impact Assessment in Canada: An Ecological Contribution. Institute for Research and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada: 132 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Department of Energy, Mines and Resources [cited as EMR] (1976). Statement of Policy: Proposed Petroleum and Natural Gas Land Regulations. Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 22 pp.Google Scholar
Canada Department of Energy, Mines and Resources [cited as EMR] (1978). Review of the Environmental Impact Statement: Exploratory Drilling South Davis Strait. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 23 pp. (mimeogr.).Google Scholar
Canada Department of Environment, Regional Hydrocarbon Committee [cited as DOE] (1978). Review of the Environmental Impact Statement for Exploratory Drilling in the Davis Strait. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: 59 pp. (mimeogr.).Google Scholar
Canada Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development [cited as DIAND] (1977). Eastern Arctic Marine Environmental Studies (EAMES): Outline of a Program, October 19, 1977. Minister of Supply and Services, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: iii + 76 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development [cited as DIAND] (1978). List of EIS Deficiencies Identified by the Initiator (DIAND). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 32 pp. (mimeogr.).Google Scholar
Canada Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development [cited as DIAND] (1981). People, Resources and The Environment—Perspectives on the Use and Management of the Lancaster Sound Region: Public Review Phase. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 66 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development [cited as DIAND] (1982). The Lancaster Sound Region 1980–2000: Lancaster Sound Regional Study Green Paper. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 102 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Office [cited as FEARO] (1976). Guidelines for Preparing Initial Environmental Evaluations. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: xx + 181 pp.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1978 a). Sitting in the Settlement Hall Boardroom, Frobisher Bay, Northwest Territories, September 13–14, 1978. Nethercut & Company, Toronto, Ontario, Canada: 401 pp. (mimeogr.).Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1978 b). Report of the Environmental Assessment Panel. Eastern Arctic Offshore Drilling—South Davis Strait Project. Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 80 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1978 c). Report of the Environmental Assessment Panel, Shockwak Highway Project. Ministry of Supply and Services, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: viii + 60 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1979 a). Revised Guide to The Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process. Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 12 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1979 b). Report of the Environmental Assessment Panel, Lancaster Sound Drilling. Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 127 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1980). Report of the Environmental Assessment Panel Arctic Pilot Project (Northern Component) Northwest Territories. Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 125 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1981). Report of the Environmental Assessment Panel, Norman Wells, Oilfield Development and Pipeline Project. Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 98 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1982 a). Guidelines for the Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. The Beaufort Sea Hydrocarbon Production Proposal. (Beaufort Sea Environmental Assessment Panel.) Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 42 pp.Google Scholar
Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Panel [cited as FEARO] (1982 b). Beaufort Sea Hydrocarbon Production Proposal Interim Report of the Environmental Assessment Panel. Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 12 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
DIAND—See Canada Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.Google Scholar
DOE—See Canada Department of Environment.Google Scholar
Eames Advisory Board (1979). Report of the Eames Advisory Board on Exploratory Drilling in South Davis Strait Region. (May 1979.) Canada: 39 pp. (mimeogr.). (Available from Mr A. Thériault, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Frobisher Bay, Baffin Island, NWT, Canada.)Google Scholar
Emond, P.D. (1978). Environmental Assessment Law in Canada. Emond-Montgomery, Ltd, Toronto, Ontario, Canada: 365 pp.Google Scholar
EMR—See Canada Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.Google Scholar
Esso Resources Canada Limited, Aquitane Company of Canada Ltd & Canada Cities Service Ltd (1978). South Baffin Socio-Economic Impact Statement for Exploratory Drilling in Davis Strait Region. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: 34 pp., illustr. (mimeogr.).Google Scholar
Esso Resources Canada Limited, Aquitane Company of Canada Ltd & Canada Cities Service Ltd (1979). Supplement Environmental Impact Statement for Exploratory Drilling in South Davis Strait Region. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: iv + 86 pp. (mimeogr.).Google Scholar
FEARO—See Canada Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Office.Google Scholar
Fenge, T. (1982). Towards comprehensive conservation of environmentally significant areas in the Northwest Territories of Canada. Environmental Conservation, 9(4), pp. 305–13, map.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, C.D. & Lucas, A.R. (1980). Environmental Regulation—Its Impact on Major Oil and Gas Projects: Oil Sands and Arctic. Economic Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 178 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Imperial Oil Limited, Aquitane Company of Canada Ltd & Canada Cities Service Ltd (1978). Environmental Impact Statement for Explanatory Drilling in South Davis Strait Region. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: 384 pp., illustr. (mimeogr.).Google Scholar
King, J.E. (1981). An Evaluation of the Federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process: The Case of South Davis Strait. M.A. thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada: xiii + 143 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Lang, R. & Armour, A. (1980). Environmental Planning Resource Book. Minister of Supply and Services Canada & Multiscience Publications, Montreal, Quebec, Canada: xii + 355 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Lee, N. & Wood, C. (1978). EIA—A European perspective. Built Environment, 4(2), pp. 101–10.Google Scholar
Lucas, A. & McCallum, S. (1976). Looking at environmental impact assessment. Pp. 306–19 in Environmental Assessment and Public Participation (Ed. Elder, P.S.). Canadian Environmental Law Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada: 384 pp.Google Scholar
Mitchell, B. (1979). Geography and Resource Analysis. Longman Group Limited, London, England, UK: xvi + 399 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Munn, R.E. (Ed.) (1975). Environmental Impact Assessment: Principles and Procedures. Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE), International Council of Scientific Unions, SCOPE Report 5, Paris, France: 173 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Nelson, J.G. (1980). Northern pipelines and environmental strategies: Some reflections on a management assessment model. Pp. 257–79 in Environmental Management Strategies; Past, Present and Future: A Symposium. Alberta Society of Professional Biologists, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: 308 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Nelson, J.G. & Jessen, S. (1981). The Scottish and Alaskan Offshore Experience and the Canadian Beaufort Sea. Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: xix +155 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Nettleship, D.N. & Smith, P. A. (Ed.) (1975). Ecological Sites in Northern Canada. Canadian Committee for the International Biological Programme: Conservation Terrestrial— Panel 9, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: v + 330 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Paget, G. (1976). Towards a Theory for Environmental Planning: Student Discussion Paper (No. 2). Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada: 84 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Rees, W.E. (1979). Reflections on the Environmental Assessment and Review Process (EARP): CARC Working Paper (No. 1). Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: 37 pp. (mimeogr.).Google Scholar
Rees, W.E. (1980 a). Environmental assessment and review: the case of McKinley Bay. Northern Perspectives, 7(2), and Canadian Arctic Resources Committee: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: pp. 2–10, illustr.Google Scholar
Rees, W.E. (1980 b). EARP at the crossroads: Environmental assessment in Canada. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 1(4), pp., 355–79.Google Scholar
Rigby, B. (1982). Environmental Impact Assessment and the Need for Environmental Monitoring. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: iii + 74 pp., illustr.Google Scholar