Skip to main content
Log in

The precision and accuracy of U.S. environmental impact statements

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A post-project audit was conducted of 239 impacts forecast in an representative cross-section of 29 U.S. environmental impact statements. Results must be qualified because of the imprecision of EIS forecasts and the quality of data available to a retrospective evaluator. Relatively few forecasts were found to be inaccurate and even fewer unanticipated impacts were identified. However, only 30% of the impacts were unqualifiedly close to their forecasts, with almost as many rated accurate principally by virtue of the vagueness of the forecasts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrews, R. N. L.: 1976, Environmental Policy and Administrative Change: Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act, D.C. Heath, Lexington, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beanlands, G. E. and Duinker, P. N.: 1983, An Ecological Framework for Environmental Impact Assessment in Canada, Institute for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisset, R.: 1984, ‘Post-Development Audits to Investigate the Accuracy of Environmental Impact Predictions’, Zeitschrift für Umweltpolitik, 463–484.

  • Brewer, G. and deLeon, P.: 1983, The Foundation of Policy Analysis, Dorsey Press, Homewood, Ill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, L. K.: 1982, Science and the National Environmental Policy Act, University of Alabama Press, University, Ala.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canter, L. W.: 1977, Environmental Impact Assessment, McGraw Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commoner, B.: 1971, The Closing Circle, Knopf, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, T. D. and Campbell, D. T.: 1979, Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortner, H.: 1976, ‘A Case Analysis of Policy Implementation: The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969’, Natural Resources Journal 16, 323–338.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Culhane, P. J., Armentano, T. V., and Friesema, H. P.: 1985, ‘State-of-the-Art Science and Environmental Assessments: The Case of Acid Deposition’, Environmental Management 9, 365–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Culhane, P. J., Friesema, H. P., and Beecher, J. A.: forthcoming, Forecasts and Environmental Decisionmaking: The Contents and Accuracy of Environmental Impact Statements, Report to the National Science Foundation under Grant PRA-8119299, Westview Press, Boulder, Colo.

  • Environmental Resources Ltd.: 1984, Prediction in Environmental Impact Assessment, Ministerie van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer, 's-Gravenhage, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairfax, S. and Andrews, B.: 1979, ‘Debate Within and Debate Without: NEPA and the Redefinition of the ‘Prudent Man’ Rule’, Natural Resources Journal 19, 505–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friesema, H. P. and Culhane, P. J.: 1976, ‘Social Impacts, Politics, and the Environmental Impact Statement Process’, Natural Resources Journal 16, 339–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kmenta, J.: 1971, Elements of Econometrics, New York, Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K.: 1980, Content Analysis, Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liroff, R. A.: 1976, A National Policy for the Environment: NEPA and Its Aftermath, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Ind.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loucks, O. L. (ed.): 1982, ‘Evaluating and Predicting Ecological Effects of Coal Combustion for Electric Power: An Overview of the Wisconsin Power Plant Study’, discussion draft ms., Indianapolis, Ind., and Madison, Wisc., January, 203 pp.

  • Murdock, S. H., Leistritz, F. L., Hamm, R. R., and Hwang, S.: 1982, ‘An Assessment of Socioeconomic Assessments: Utility, Accuracy, and Policy Considerations’, Environmental Impact Assessment Review 3, 333–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quade, E. S.: 1964, ‘Systems Analysis Techniques for Public Policy-making’, Rand Corp., Santa Monica, Calif., March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stimson, J. A.: 1985, ‘Regression in Time and Space: A Statistical Essay’, American Journal of Political Science 29, 914–947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S.: 1984, Making Bureaucracies Think: The Environmental Impact Statement Strategy of Administrative Reform, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: 1980, ‘Cumulative Index of Environmental Impact Statements, arranged by Agency and Bureau’, [computer printout] EPA Office of Federal Activities, Washington, D.C., May 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wichelman, A.: 1976, ‘Administrative Agency Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969’, Natural Resources Journal 16, 263–300.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Culhane, P.J. The precision and accuracy of U.S. environmental impact statements. Environ Monit Assess 8, 217–238 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00404266

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00404266

Keywords

Navigation