Evaluation of the assessment process for major projects: a case study of oil and gas pipelines in Canada

Over the next several decades, oil and gas production in Canada is expected to increase to meet growing demand in the United States and the Asia Pacific Region. Currently, eight major pipeline projects are being proposed in Canada to transport increased oil and gas production to market. This paper reviews potential impacts of the pipeline projects and develops a methodology for evaluating the current regime for assessing and managing project impacts based on best practices criteria. The results of the evaluation show that only three of 14 best practices criteria are met. The most significant deficiencies are: lack of clear decision-making criteria and methods; absence of decision-making processes that contain a legal obligation to provide compensation to those negatively affected by a project and ensure project benefits are equitably distributed; and no provision for comparative evaluation of competing projects. This paper identifies improvements required in environmental assessment and planning processes.

[1]  A. Vining,et al.  Policy analysis : concepts and practice , 1989 .

[2]  B. Richardson.  Unnatural Law: Rethinking Canadian Environmental Law and Policy , 2004 .

[3]  Sven-Olof Ryding.  Environmental Management Handbook , 1992 .

[4]  J. Elliott.  Tourism: Politics and Public Sector Management , 1997 .

[5]  Douglas Baker,et al.  Evaluating the effectiveness of British Columbia's environmental assessment process for first nations' participation in mining development , 2003 .

[6]  Timothy Van Hinte.  Managing impacts of major projects: An analysis of the enbridge gateway pipeline proposal , 2005 .

[7]  P. Mulvihill.  Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment: A Guide to Principles and Practice , 2006 .

[8]  Robert P. LaBelle,et al.  Update of Comparative Occurrence Rates for Offshore Oil Spills , 2000 .

[9]  J. R. Treweek,et al.  Environmental Impact Assessment: Cutting Edge for the Twenty-First Century. , 1995 .

[10]  D. Hardy.  International Association for Impact Assessment , 1989, Environmental Conservation.

[11]  M. Narayan,et al.  Environmental assessment. , 1997, Home healthcare nurse.

[12]  Daniel A. Mazmanian,et al.  Implementation and public policy , 1983 .

[13]  Thomas R. Berger,et al.  Northern frontier, northern homeland : the report of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry , 1977 .

[14]  I. Columbia.  A REVIEW OF OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT , 2004 .

[15]  John F. Piatt,et al.  How many seabirds were killed by the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill , 1996 .

[16]  B. Singh,et al.  Environmental management handbook , 1993 .

[17]  Jill Baker,et al.  INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT , 2000 .

[18]  Gina Solomon,et al.  Pollution prevention at ports: clearing the air , 2004 .

[19]  C. Cocklin,et al.  Large-scale energy projects in New Zealand: Whither social impact assessment? , 1992 .

[20]  Mim Harris Dixon,et al.  What Happened To Fairbanks?: The Effects Of The Trans-alaska Oil Pipeline On The Community Of Fairbanks, Alaska , 1980 .

[21]  T. Gunton,et al.  The role of collaboration in environmental management: an evaluation of land and resource planning in British Columbia , 2004 .

[22]  V. James,et al.  Environmental impact assessment, a comparative review , 1996 .

[23]  C. Peterson,et al.  Long-Term Ecosystem Response to the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill , 2003, Science.

[24]  Judith E. Innes,et al.  Consensus Building and Complex Adaptive Systems , 1999 .

[25]  P. André.  Environmental Impact Assessment: Practice and Participation , 2006 .