Scientific shortcomings in environmental impact statements internationally

1. Governments around the world rely on environmental impact assessment to understand the environmental risks of proposed developments. 2. To examine the basis for these appraisals, we examine the output of environmental impact assessment processes in jurisdictions within seven countries, focusing on scope (spatial and temporal), mitigation actions, and whether impacts were identified as ‘significant’. 3. We find that the number of impacts characterized as significant is generally low. While this finding may indicate that environmental impact assessment is successful at promoting environmentally sustainable development, it may also indicate that the methods used to assess impact are biased against findings of significance. To explore the methods used, we investigate the environmental impact assessment process leading to significance determination. 4. We find that environmental Impact assessment reports could be more transparent with regards to the spatial scale they use to assess impact...1. 世界各国政府均依赖环境影响评价（Environmental Impact Assessment）来了解拟议开发项目所面临的环境风险。 2. 为检视此类评估的依据，我们对七个国家管辖区域内的环境影响评价流程产出物展开研究，重点关注评估范围（空间与时间维度）、减缓措施，以及影响是否被认定为‘重大’。 3. 我们发现，被归类为重大影响的数量普遍偏低。这一发现一方面或许意味着环境影响评价在推动环境可持续发展方面成效显著，但另一方面也可能表明，当前用于影响评估的方法对重大影响的判定存在偏向。为探究所采用的评估方法，我们对指向重大性判定的环境影响评价流程展开了调研。 4. 我们发现，环境影响评价报告在其用于开展影响评估的空间尺度维度上，透明度仍有进一步提升的空间。