Avoid delays: By taking onboard relevant information from consultees to tailor the assessment. relations with stakeholders: Stakeholder benefits include enhanced trust in the competence of EIA and thus the quality of IA. Practitioner benefits include improved quality of inputs into the assessment and development of contacts that could generate efficiency in future work. Speed up decision-making: By setting a marker for the content of the IA and potentially reducing the number of documents submitted alongside the application. Wilkinson (2007) adds that effective scoping can reduce the potential for disagreement between the regulator and proponent over the adequacy of an IA when it is submitted for consideration. This results in less requests for further information a process that can be – resource intensive and frustrating for all ACT Planning (n.d.) notes that IAs that are not well scoped can result in: extensive and unnecessary information collection with a decrease in efficiency and effectiveness a lack of identification of/or focus on key impacts slower assessment process increased Simply stated, scoping involves the bringing together of the ideas for the contents of the IA held by a variety of people in the community the proponent, government, – government organisations and interested individuals for a particular development proposal, action or policy. Hogg (2006) suggests scoping is of the most fundamental ‘one skills required by general practitioners working in environmental planning and assessment, and should be applied, if only subconsciously, to every project’. What are the current issues with scoping? Good scoping must reflect the community’s interests while achieving efficiency and effectiveness in the IA process. Snell and Cowell (2006) argue that scoping practices can be seen as emerging from the interplay between the somewhat conflicting aims to give effect to the precautionary principle, but to make decision-making processes more efficient. Scoping has been identified as a common weakness in the IA processes of many countries (Abaza et al. 2004 in Barnes et al) and has been an issue within the Australian context for some time. Issues commonly identified by participants in the IA process include the following. Lack of on the things that matter While scoping is used to identify the matters that need to be assessed as part of the IA for a project, the biggest challenge is often deciding on the matters that do not require further assessment. Scoping out matters can be difficult for participants. Inexperienced practitioners may struggle in assigning significance to potential impacts. Matters may also be included that more reflect the personal interests of the practitioner preparing the
Avoid delays: By taking onboard relevant information from consultees to tailor the assessment. relations with stakeholders: Stakeholder benefits include enhanced trust in the competence of EIA and thus the quality of IA. Practitioner benefits include improved quality of inputs into the assessment and development of contacts that could generate efficiency in future work. Speed up decision-making: By setting a marker for the content of the IA and potentially reducing the number of documents submitted alongside the application. Wilkinson (2007) adds that effective scoping can reduce the potential for disagreement between the regulator and proponent over the adequacy of an IA when it is submitted for consideration. This results in less requests for further information – a process that can be resource intensive and frustrating for all ACT Planning (n.d.) notes that IAs that are not well scoped can result in: extensive and unnecessary information collection with a decrease in efficiency and effectiveness a lack of identification of/or focus on key impacts slower assessment process increased Simply stated, scoping involves the bringing together of the ideas for the contents of the IA held by a variety of people in the community – the proponent, government, organisations and interested individuals for a particular development proposal, action or policy. Hogg (2006) suggests scoping is ‘one of the most fundamental skills required by general practitioners working in environmental planning and assessment, and should be applied, if only subconsciously, to every project’. What are the current issues with scoping? Good scoping must reflect the community’s interests while achieving efficiency and effectiveness in the IA process. Snell and Cowell (2006) argue that scoping practices can be seen as emerging from the interplay between the somewhat conflicting aims to give effect to the precautionary principle, but to make decision-making processes more efficient. Scoping has been identified as a common weakness in the IA processes of many countries (Abaza et al. 2004 in Barnes et al) and has been an issue within the Australian context for some time. Issues commonly identified by participants in the IA process include the following. Lack of on the things that matter While scoping is used to identify the matters that need to be assessed as part of the IA for a project, the biggest challenge is often deciding on the matters that do not require further assessment. Scoping out matters can be difficult for participants. Inexperienced practitioners may struggle in assigning significance to potential impacts. Matters may also be included that more reflect the personal interests of the practitioner preparing the government
Draft%20Scoping%20Discussion%20Paper%20-%20Oct%2015.docx