IEMA’s existing guidance on environmental assessment, including Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), has played a critical role in shaping best practices. Drawing from this expertise, IEMA has provided key recommendations to strengthen the proposed model.
Key Recommendations from IEMA Experts
On Delivery Plan design:
- Evidence-Based Policy: Conduct and publish research to justify system changes and ensure the new approach is effective.
- Integration with Existing Frameworks: Clearly define how Delivery Plans align with Local Plans, SEA, LNRS, BNG, EIA, HRA, and any future EORs.
- Core Environmental Principles: Uphold precautionary measures, polluter pays, proximity, and rectification at source. Apply the prevention principle first, using the mitigation hierarchy to prioritise avoidance before compensation.
On Delivery Plan development:
- Expert-Led and Transparent Process: Require qualified professionals to develop Delivery Plans, with public consultation and strategic impact assessment.
- Resource-Backed Implementation: Ensure sufficient funding and that Delivery Plans are operational before projects proceed to offset impacts effectively.
- Strong Governance and Oversight: Maintain transparency with accessible data on effectiveness and environmental outcomes.
On Delivery Plan implementation:
- Site-Specific Assessments: Ensure local environmental and community impacts are fully evaluated, as many features are location-dependent.
- Flexibility for Developers: Allow developers to choose between direct mitigation or contributing to a broader Delivery Plan, depending on which is more effective.
- Adaptive Management: Ensure Delivery Plans respond to monitoring data and incorporate evidence-based improvements.
Potential Challenges and Areas for Improvement
While Delivery Plans may simplify developer obligations, concerns remain regarding their effectiveness. Key risks include:
- Loss of site-specific environmental scrutiny: A shift towards strategic mitigation could weaken local environmental protections.
- Uncertain implementation and funding: The effectiveness of centralized nature recovery mechanisms remains untested, and resources must be secured before implementation.
- Disconnection from affected communities: The benefits of nature restoration should be distributed to the areas impacted by development, not just through generalized offsetting.
Impact Assessment’s Role in Sustainable Development
IEMA continues to advocate for a robust, evidence-based approach to planning reform. The role of impact assessment in shaping policy cannot be overstated—it ensures that development decisions account for long-term environmental and social impacts.
As the government progresses with its reform agenda, IEMA will continue to engage with policymakers, industry stakeholders, and environmental professionals to promote a system that works for both development and nature.
For more details on IEMA’s response, visit iema.net or contact [email protected].
To read the IEMA consultation response in full click here.
To learn more about the IEMA EIA Quality Mark click here.