exploring cieem’s guidelines on ecia · additional text in relation to enhancement (paras...

www.cieem.net @InstEcolEnvMan

Exploring CIEEM’s Guidelines on EcIA

Key Revisions in the 2016 edition

Mike Dean CEcol CEnv MCIEEM

IEMA Webinar, 25th February 2016


Why update the guidance?

• Revised policy and legislation

• Increased applicability across the UK and Ireland

• Improved clarity

• Additional and expanded chapters

•Lessons learnt

•Alignment with the Marine Guidelines


Who and how?

Technical Review Group (2011)

• EcIA practitioners

• Included some of the authors of the 2006 version

Consultation process

External editors (2014)

CIEEM ‘internal’ review

• Vice Presidents of each country

• Professional Standards Committee

• Governing Board


What has changed?

No major change to the overall approach to EcIA

Changes in detail on some issues, particularly definition of significant effect

Refers to ecological ‘features’

Numerous changes designed to add clarity


Chapter 1: Introduction

Clarity over applicability of guidelines to non-EIA as well as EIA projects (Para 1.4)

Proportionality of approach (Paras 1.9-1.11)

Revised summary of the EcIA process in Box 3


Chapter 2: Scoping

2006 document also covered screening and establishing the baseline

Highlights the importance of ‘initial scoping’ and ‘ongoing scoping’ (Paras 2.6-2.9)

Zone of Influence clarified:

• 2006 suggested determining a single Zone of Influence

• 2016 highlights that ZoI will differ for different features


Chapter 3: Establishing the Baseline

New chapter

Clarity over factors to consider when predicting the baseline (Para 3.4)


Chapter 4: Important Ecological Features

Previously titled ‘Determining Value’

Refers to Importance rather than Value

Clear list of reference sources for identifying important ecological features (Box 13)

Geographic context has changed (Para 4.7)

• To be adapted to suit, based on availability of contextual information

• UK deleted

• County/District/Parish?

• Within ZoI only?


Chapter 4: Important Ecological Features

Legally controlled species (Para 4.24)

Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital (Paras 4.25-4.26)

• Rather than social / economic value

• Highlights the need to identify features underpinning ecosystem services

• Highlights the need to involve other specialists

• Upcoming CIEEM conference

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiuxquQkfDKAhXHuxQKHbX3B7cQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecocontrol.co.uk%2Fgallery.asp&psig=AFQjCNF_979eu_ANpBAiDkBKZQXfZ8Csyw&ust=1455294628170372

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiuxquQkfDKAhXHuxQKHbX3B7cQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecocontrol.co.uk%2Fgallery.asp&psig=AFQjCNF_979eu_ANpBAiDkBKZQXfZ8Csyw&ust=1455294628170372


Chapter 5: Impact Assessment

Changed definition of Significant Effect (Paras 5.25-5.29)

• An effect that either supports or undermines biodiversity conservation objectives for ‘important ecological features’

• Specific (e.g. for a designated site)

• Broad (e.g. local nature conservation policy)

Still relate to appropriate geographic scale

Still consider conservation status for habitats and species



Clarity over characterising ecological impacts – only need to describe characteristics which are relevant (Para 5.10)

Confidence in predictions

Definition of reversibility has changed slightly (Para 5.18-5.19)

Additional text in relation to assessment of cumulative effects (Paras 5.20-5.23)



Specific reference to not using the ‘matrix approach’ to assess impacts (Paras 5.37-5.38)

Clarifies that compensation is separate to residual effect (Para 5.24)

Acceptability of presenting assessment of effects (Para 5.40):

• Both with and without mitigation

• Only with mitigation


Chapter 6: Avoidance, Mitigation, Compensation and Enhancement

Clarity over avoidance vs mitigation (Para 6.2)

Additional text in relation to compensation (Paras 6.5-6.10)

Reference to Biodiversity Offsetting (Box 17)

Additional text in relation to enhancement (Paras 6.11-6.13)

New text on designing mitigation and compensation (Paras 6.14-6.20)

Clarity over when it is appropriate to describe significance of effects without mitigation (Para 6.23)

Clarity on purposes of monitoring, and circumstances when it is useful / not necessary (Paras 6.25-6.30)


Chapter 7: Consequences for Decision-makingAdditional text on key aspects to be considered by competent / determining authority when reviewing an EcIA report (Para 7.5)

• Soundness of technical content• Adequate description of impacts on important

ecological features• Whether effects are significant• Whether mitigation hierarchy has been applied• Consideration of effectiveness/certainty over

deliverability of mitigation• Can measures be secured (condition/S106, etc)• Compliance with statutory obligations/policy• Clear indication of likely significant losses and

gains• Anything identified that might require changes

to the application


What has changed?

Appendix 2: Template for Ecological Impact Assessment

• Template provided in-line with the Guidelines for Ecological Report Writing


Further information

CIEEM Spring conference ‘Advances in Ecological Impact Assessment’

CIEEM training courses on EcIA

• Beginners, Intermediate (2 day) and Advanced

• Beginners – 24 May (Cardiff)

• Intermediate – 10-11 May (Birmingham)

• Advanced – 17 May (London)

• October 2016 to February 2017 – London, Birmingham, Cardiff, Manchester, Edinburgh

exploring cieem’s guidelines on ecia · additional text in relation to enhancement (paras...

Documents