The science of assessment : identifying and predicting environmental impacts

The historical challenge of environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been to predict project-based impacts accurately. Both EIA legislation and the practice of EIA have evolved over the last three decades in Canada, and the development of the discipline and science of environmental assessment has improved how we apply environmental assessment to complex projects. The practice of environmental assessment integrates the social and natural sciences and relies on an eclectic knowledge base from a wide range of sources. EIA methods and tools provide a means to structure and integrate knowledge in order to evaluate and predict environmental impacts.----- This Chapter will provide a brief overview of how impacts are identified and predicted. How do we determine what aspect of the natural and social environment will be affected when a mine is excavated? How does the practitioner determine the range of potential impacts, assess whether they are significant, and predict the consequences? There are no standard answers to these questions, but there are established methods to provide a foundation for scoping and predicting the potential impacts of a project.----- Of course, the community and publics play an important role in this process, and this will be discussed in subsequent chapters. In the first part of this chapter, we will deal with impact identification, which involves appplying scoping to critical issues and determining impact significance, baseline ecosystem evaluation techniques, and how to communicate environmental impacts. In the second part of the chapter, we discuss the prediction of impacts in relation to the complexity of the environment, ecological risk assessment, and modelling.

Why the “Big Deal” continues to persist

The advantages of bundling e-journals together into publisher collections include increased access to information for the subscribing institution’s clients, purchasing cost-effectiveness and streamlined workflows. Whilst cataloguing a consortial e-journal collection has its advantages, there are also various pitfalls and the author outlines efforts by the CAUL (Council of Australian University Libraries) Consortium libraries to further streamline this process, working in conjunction with major publishers. Despite the advantages that publisher collections provide, pressures to unbundle existing packages continue to build, fuelled by an ever-increasing selection of available electronic resources; decreases in, and competing demands upon, library budgets; the impact of currency fluctuations; and poor usage for an alarmingly high proportion of collection titles. Consortial perspectives on bundling and unbundling titles are discussed, including options for managing the addition of new titles to the bundle and why customising consortial collections currently does not work. Unbundling analyses carried out at Queensland University of Technology during 2006 to 2008 prior to the renewal of several major publisher collections are presented as further case studies which illustrate why the “big deal” continues to persist.