Lauren M. Arnold’s research while affiliated with University of British Columbia and other places

Cumulative effects assessments are often expected to include an analysis of environmental and social effects despite a relative lack of clarity around how include a broad spectrum of social and cultural impacts. In Canda, these expectations are evolving in part in response to the need to consider the impacts of development on Indigenous communities, and the emergence of Indigenous-led Led Impact Assessment. Led by a team from the Tŝilhqot’in National Government and the University of British Columbia’s Centre for Environmental Assessment Research, this project explored how to improve processes for assessing cumulative effects drawing from an Indigenous-led approach. We identify six guiding principles, and discuss how they are integrated in the Tŝilhqot’in Nation’s evolving Impact Assessment and Cumulative Effects Assessment processes.

Cumulative effects assessments in Canada are increasingly expected to include social impacts from resource development and land-use actions on people, their communities, and livelihoods. As processes and methods for assessing cumulative social effects develop, it is important to understand the capacity needs for implementing such an assessment. This paper explores the regulatory and professional capacity required to assess cumulative social effects of resource development projects. Semi-structured interviews were completed with professionals involved in environmental assessments for hydroelectric development in British Columbia and Manitoba, Canada. A number of key capacity needs are identified in terms of the availability regulation and guidance, the professional expertise needed, and understanding responsibilities and management for cumulative social effects. The paper concludes with a discussion of capacity needs and recommendations for improvements to support the implementation of a social cumulative effects assessment.

Increasingly, protocols for assessing the impacts of land-uses and major resource development projects focus not only on environmental impacts, but also social and human health impacts. Regional and Strategic Environmental Assessment (RSEAs) are one innovation that hold promise at better integrating these diverse land-use values into planning, assessment, and decision-making. In this contribution, a realist review methodology is utilized to identify case studies of “integrated RSEA”—those which are strategic, have a regional assessment approach, and seek to integrate environmental, community and health impacts into a singular assessment architecture. The results of a systematic literature review are described and six RSEA-like case studies are identified: Kimberly Browse LNG SEA; HS2 Appraisal of Sustainability; Lisbon International Airport SEA; Beaufort Regional Environmental Assessment; Nordstream 2 Transboundary EIA; and the Portland Harbour Sustainability Project. The case studies are examined according to their unique contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of their assessment protocols to determine the degree to which they consider more than environmental valued components, and the means by which they were included. Findings suggest that RSEA has a contentious relationship with the integration of more than environmental values, but that there are significant lessons to be learned to support project planning, especially for assessment contexts characterized by large, transboundary projects.

Cumulative effects assessments are often expected to include an analysis of cumulative social effects to people, their communities, and livelihoods caused by resource development projects and land use activities. Understanding cumulative social effects is important for decisions about prospective resource development projects, but there has been limited attention devoted to how to complete such an assessment. This paper critically examines how cumulative effects frameworks are applied to social impacts during environmental assessments. We do this by analyzing semi-structured interviews exploring practitioner experience in environmental assessments for hydroelectric development in British Columbia and Manitoba, Canada. The results provide a conceptual framework for cumulative social effects and illustrate how identified challenges for cumulative effects assessment are exacerbated by social impacts that introduce additional complexities in impact identification, assessment, and decision-making. The paper concludes with a discussion of how these challenges can be addressed and recommendations for improving environmental assessment practice.

The outcomes of environmental impact assessment (EIA) influence millions of hectares of land and can be a contentious process. A vital aspect of an EIA process is consideration of the accumulation of impacts from multiple activities and stressors through a cumulative effects assessment (CEA). An opportunity exists to improve the rigor and utility of CEA and EIA by incorporating core scientific principles of landscape ecology into EIA. With examples from a Canadian context, we explore realistic hypothetical situations demonstrating how integration of core scientific principles could impact EIA outcomes. First, we demonstrate how changing the spatial extent of EIA boundaries can misrepresent cumulative impacts via the exclusion or inclusion of surrounding natural resource development projects. Second, we use network analysis to show how even a seemingly small, localized development project can disrupt regional habitat connectivity. Lastly, we explore the benefits of using long-term historical remote sensing products. Because these approaches are straightforward to implement using publicly available data, they provide sensible opportunities to improve EIA and enhance the monitoring of natural resource development activities in Canada and elsewhere.

There is a recognized need to advance cumulative effects assessment to regional and ecologically meaningful scales, but such initiatives are often critiqued for being isolated from management contexts and the regulatory practices of project-based environmental assessment. A major challenge is that there has been limited attention devoted to understanding decision-making at the project level, and the value of monitoring data to support cumulative effects analysis. This article examines how cumulative effects are considered during environmental assessment decision-making within the context of freshwater management in the Mackenzie Valley, Northwest Territories. Interviews with representatives from organizations involved in environmental assessment, regulation, and monitoring are used to identify challenges to applying information about cumulative effects at the project scale. Results reinforce the need for regional approaches and improvements in information and monitoring capacities to support cumulative effects analysis, but also the need to address institutional and organizational deficiencies to ensure that the data and information generated are useful to and applied within project-based decision-making.