RADAR Research Archive and Digital Asset Repository An evaluation of ecological impact assessment in England Katherine Drayson (2012) https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/items/0d813ad8-3f82-48f2-a25d-f04f78444cca/1/ Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this work, the full bibliographic details must be given as follows: Drayson, K (2012) An evaluation of ecological impact assessment in England PhD, Oxford Brookes University Removed pp. 258-end: published papers WWW.BROOKES.AC.UK/GO/RADAR AN EVALUATION OF ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN ENGLAND Katherine Drayson A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the award of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Oxford Brookes University DECEMBER 2012 ABSTRACT Ecological impact assessment (EcIA) has historically been poorly performed, resulting in poor quality EcIA chapters. No research has been conducted to identify whether poor quality EcIA chapters result in poor quality mitigation and therefore potential net loss of biodiversity. A review of 112 EcIA chapters was conducted to determine whether there have been improvements since the last review in 2000 and which factors are linked with EcIA chapter quality, such as the introduction of professional guidance in 2006. The link between EcIA chapter quality and mitigation on completed development sites was also examined. Both mitigation implementation (whether the mitigation was put in place) and implementation effectiveness (how well mitigation was implemented) were investigated on seven case study sites. Implementation effectiveness was limited to a subset of habitat mitigation measures; grassland and marginal habitat creation and management. The EcIA chapter review identified significant improvements since the last review. However, considerable scope for improvement remains due to the low baseline established by the earlier reviews. The introduction of professional guidance has significantly improved EcIA chapter quality. Calculation of an EcIA chapter quality index identified that, on average, EcIA chapters only include half of the EIA legislation’s information requirements. Investigation of the case study sites identified high rates of mitigation implementation (84.1% of auditable measures were at least partially implemented). However, implementation effectiveness was found to be poor (only three out of ten measures achieved the goals stated in their EcIA chapters or Ecological Management Plans). EcIA chapter quality was found to be significantly linked to mitigation implementation but not to implementation effectiveness. This investigation has identified aspects of the professional guidance that require amendment to help improve EcIA chapter content. Recommendations have also been made for practitioners when recommending ecological mitigation measures. In addition, the requirement for further research into mitigation success has been highlighted. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS “Whether ecological problems are harder than those of other sciences or not, someone must address them” (Peters, 1991, p. 11). This research was made possible by funding from a Nigel Groome Research Studentship. Grateful thanks go to my supervisors Stewart Thompson and Graham Wood, who provided invaluable guidance during the writing of this thesis. Stewart, in particular, has been a rock and a good friend over the past three years, providing unwavering support, random snippets of 1970s history (how had I never heard of the cod wars?), and of course the Thompson’s Tours trip to Kenya. Thanks also go to all of the local planning authorities, developers and consultants who kindly allowed me access to sites, data and their photocopiers, and gave me their time and help. I would also like to thank particular members of staff at Oxford Brookes: Peter Grebenik for his early help with, and infectious enthusiasm for, Excel; Andrew Lack for his near‐miraculous identification of some shrivelled botanical samples; and Reza Oskrochi and Casper Breuker for their help with statistics. The S109/S107 crew provided their unconditional support, laughter and sage (mostly!) wisdom, which I’ll always remember and treasure. Nicola, Mary, Irene, Rien, Ruth and Laura, you’re the absolute best. May your custard creams and coffee never run low. Finally, thanks to my family and Martin for not letting their eyes glaze over whenever I waxed lyrical about great crested newts or planning policy – greater love hath no man than this… ABBREVIATIONS ANOVA Analysis of Variance BAI Biodiversity Assessment Index CPA Competent Planning Authority AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty BANC British Association for Nature Conservationists BAP Biodiversity Action Plan BES British Ecological Society CWS County Wildlife Site df Degrees of freedom Defra Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges EA Environment Agency EcIA Ecological Impact Assessment EcMP Ecological Management Plan EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIA Directive Council Directive on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the Environment (85/337/EEC), as amended EIA Regulations Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations (1999), as amended EMP Environmental Management Plan EMS Environmental Management System EPS European Protected Species ES Environmental Statement EU European Union GIS Geographic Information System GPS Global Positioning System IEEM Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management IEMA Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment IoB Institute of Biology ha Hectare Habitats Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations (1994), as Regulations amended JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee LNR Local Nature Reserve LWT Local Wildlife Trust NE Natural England NGO Non‐governmental Organisation NNR National Nature Reserve NPPF National Planning Policy Framework NTS Non‐Technical Summary PPS 9 Planning Policy Statement 9 RGS Royal Geographical Society RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds S106 agreement Section 106 agreement SAC Special Area of Conservation SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SINC Site of Importance for Nature Conservation SPA Special Protection Area SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest TPO Tree Preservation Order UK United Kingdom ZoI Zone of Influence CONTENTS PART 1 : ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ........................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1: Ecological Impact Assessment in the Context of EIA ........................ 2 1.1 Environmental Impact Assessment ............................................................. 2 1.2 EIA Audit .................................................................................................... 11 1.3 Biodiversity Loss and the Role of Ecology in EIA ....................................... 12 1.4 Research Focus .......................................................................................... 14 1.5 Aims and Objectives .................................................................................. 15 CHAPTER 2: Literature Review ............................................................................ 18 2.1 Effectiveness of EIA ................................................................................... 18 2.2 Procedural Effectiveness: Document Audit .............................................. 18 2.3 Procedural Effectiveness: Implementation Audit / Follow‐Up ................. 30 2.4 Substantive Effectiveness ......................................................................... 43 2.5 Theoretical Background of EIA .................................................................. 45 2.6 Need for Research ..................................................................................... 47 2.7 Changes in Legislation and Policy since 2011 ........................................... 53 CHAPTER 3: Research Strategy and Methodology .............................................. 59 3.1 Approaches to EIA Research ..................................................................... 59 3.2 Summary of Aims and Objectives ............................................................. 64 PART 2: ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW ............................................. 68 CHAPTER 4: Overview ......................................................................................... 69 4.1 Aims and Objectives .................................................................................. 69 4.2 Method ..................................................................................................... 69 CHAPTER 5: Thematic EcIA Chapter Review ....................................................... 72 5.1 Aims and Objectives .................................................................................. 72 5.2 Method ..................................................................................................... 72 5.3 Results and Discussion .............................................................................. 75 5.4 Auto‐Critique ..........................................................................................