Supplementary material The tables and figures provided here offer brief overviews of the selected 59 articles that characterize the effectiveness literature between 1996 and 2016. Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 categorize the studies first by procedural, substantive, transactive, normative, and multidimensional effectiveness dimensions, respectively. Next, within each effectiveness dimension table, studies are grouped by their respective methods with a brief study description, methods used, strengths, and weaknesses. Figures 1, 2, and 3 highlight geographic, thematic, and temporal trends, respectively. Note that the totals for the figures below may differ due to studies having no or multiple location foci or one or more effectiveness dimension themes. Table 1 Procedural Effectiveness Methods Description Method(s) Strengths Weaknesses References National EIA Case study or Provide various Lower external (Androulidakis and systems: provide comparative case frameworks for validity; difficulty Karakassis 2006; historical and legal studies; interviews; highlighting the in repetition; Appiah-Opoku context; focus on workshops procedural and cannot evaluate 2001; Arts et al. EIA process with structural EIA outcomes 2012; Badr et al. occasional peculiarities of other than 2011; Bassi et al. descriptions of EIA systems; high efficiency of 2012; Clausen et EIA systems; some internal validity process al. 2011; El-Fadl descriptions of and El-Fadel 2004; EIA practice via Glasson and interviews Bellanger 2003; Glasson and Salvador 2000; Haydar and Pediaditi 2010; Heinma and Põder
Supplementary material The tables and figures provided here offer brief overviews of the selected 59 articles that characterize the effectiveness literature between 1996 and 2016. Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 categorize the studies first by procedural, substantive, transactive, normative, and multidimensional effectiveness dimensions, respectively. Next, within each effectiveness dimension table, studies are grouped by their respective methods with a brief study description, methods used, strengths, and weaknesses. Figures 1, 2, and 3 highlight geographic, thematic, and temporal trends, respectively. Note that the totals for the figures below may differ due to studies having no or multiple location foci or one or more effectiveness dimension themes. Table 1 Procedural Effectiveness Methods Description Method(s) Strengths Weaknesses References National EIA systems: provide historical and legal context; focus on EIA process with occasional descriptions of EIA systems; some descriptions of EIA practice via interviews Case study or comparative case studies; interviews; workshops Provide various frameworks for highlighting the procedural and structural peculiarities of EIA systems; high internal validity Lower external validity; difficulty in repetition; cannot evaluate EIA outcomes other than efficiency of process (Androulidakis and Karakassis 2006; Appiah-Opoku 2001; Arts et al. 2012; Badr et al. 2011; Bassi et al. 2012; Clausen et al. 2011; El-Fadl and El-Fadel 2004; Glasson and Bellanger 2003; Glasson and Salvador 2000; Haydar and Pediaditi 2010; Heinma and Põder
1-s2.0-S0195925516303420-mmc1.docx