Problem overview:

     Awareness and visions: Integrating the EIA in project assessment will help project approval agencies have a clearer picture on what kind of impact, in terms of environment, that could occur as a consequence of pursuing a development project.

     Meeting information requirements: The Environmental Impact Assessment is a tool that needs to be used to assure that development projects will not be at the cost of environmental destruction. Many countries have enforced the requirement for EIA assessments before project approval. This example is about enactment of EIA in Korea.

Background in summary:

     Enactment of the EIA requirement for development project approval: The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system was introduced by the Environment Preservation Act in 1977 and later strengthened in a new EIA Act enacted in 1993. The EIA Act mandates that Urban development projects, industrial sites building, energy developments have to be tested by the EIA. All the projects subject to the EIA must be approved through a public hearing.

     Enhancement of transparency and efficacy of the process: Since the beginning of this year, in order to enhance the transparency and efficacy of evaluation, the administrative agency responsible for project approval must request consultation and review of the assessment by the Korea Environment Institute (KEI).

     What is the Korea Environment Institute (KEI) ?: The KEI is a government research institute under the guidance of the MOE. The KEI consists of 20 experts in EIAs and is responsible for all the evaluation of the EIA report from the project manager. The administrative agency responsible for project approval should implement the consultation results in the project process, monitor the implementation of consultation results, and assign responsibilities for keeping records of the implementation procedures.

     Post environmental impact assessment after project approval: After the project is approved, the project manager evaluates the post-environmental impact by each assessment factor and submits the results of the evaluation to the MOE and to the administrative agency. Improper project implementation may result in the suspension of construction, sentence up to five years in prison, or fines up to 5,000,000 won.

Peer Review Committee Good practice rating: (1 for the best, 5 for the lowest score)
Sustainability		Efficiency
1	Improvement in either the environment of economic condition with no harm to the other.	2	Cost efficient.
2	Sustainable over time (not one-off)	Process
Adaptability		2	Participation of the community
3	Location adaptability (can the project be done in other places?)	2	Participation of resource owners/users
3	Socio-cultural adaptability.	2	Partnerships between various actors (Governments, NGO, Academia, Private)
2	Level of development adaptability.	2	Degree of coordination and cooperation between government departments.
2	Style of government adaptability.	2	Ability to attract political interest/support
2	Degree of decentralization adaptability.	2	Procedures for feedback and review.
Comments on this example:      The establishment of KEI will enhance transparency and efficacy of EIAs done by private companies. However, if such EIAs were for government projects, would the public trust KEI that it will consider these government projects with equivalent criticism as private projects, or would they have doubts that government projects may receive support from KEI. Sustainability of the project:      Awareness and visions: In early days before the EIA was made a requirement in development project assessments, decision makers who are responsible for issuing the approval of project, make decisions from only one perspective Does that project truly enhance development? If it does, then it will receive approval. Consequences of that kind of decision making is seen today as irreversible damage to the environment.      Fortunately today, project assessments in many countries have integrated the EIA within the process and often the EIA is considered a main feature. With the EIA, decision makers are now aware of negative consequences of development projects on the environment and could reject to approve the project unless changes have been made to reduce environmental impacts to a safer scale. Adaptability of the project to other situations:       Process of decision making and implementation:      Meeting information requirements: EIAs are a common method of avoiding costly environmental destruction by new projects. They force developers to examine the possible negative impacts of their project and foster considerate planning. But it is not difficult to subvert the process by either omitting important details, falsifying information, or by providing a huge amount of technical information, placing effective review beyond the capacity of most environmental ministries.      Procedures for feedback and review: The new EIAs review system guided by the KEI is expected to enhance the transparency and efficacy of the EIAs system. And there will be a benefit from accumulation of expertise in EIAs and a consistent and efficient procedure for consultations for project formulation feedback and review. Cost efficiency: