C.3: What Is Significant To SNH In The EIA Process?
[See Case Studies 1 - 5 and Appendices 1 - 5]
The word "significant" appears in several different contexts in relation to the EIA process. It can, and often does, cause confusion. This section is intended to help to explain the different contexts when significance is likely to be encountered and to provide an explanation as to what is significant to SNH and cross references to other sections of the Handbook where the differing questions of significance arise. Reference should also be made to the paper on Likely Significant Effect (38) prepared in the context of the Habitats Regulations 1994 (24) but of relevance here.
There are five aspects of “significance” which SNH may need to distinguish in the context of the EIA process.
- Whether the potential environmental impacts are likely to be "significant" in terms of Regulation 2 and Schedule 2 of the EIASR 99 and should therefore trigger the EIA process;
- How the "significance" of impacts is described and analysed in the Environmental Statement;
- What is "significant" to SNH;
- What is "significant" to other parties; and
- Whether an impact is "significant" in relation to a Natura 2000 site and Regulation 48 of the Habitats Regulations 1994.
Significance in the Meaning of the Regulations
Whether the potential environmental impacts are likely to be "significant" in terms of the EIASR 99 and should therefore trigger the EIA process for an Schedule 2 project is considered in Section D.1 below. This describes how significance is relevant to the decision as to whether an Environmental Statement should be submitted in the first place, thus starting the EIA process.
Significance Analysis in the Environmental Statement
The Environmental Statement itself should clearly set out the magnitude of all the likely effects on the environment in absolute (x ha of loss of habitat) and relative terms (affects 3% of the sub species population in Scotland) and the significance of these effects. Many impacts do not readily lend themselves to relatively precise statements of this kind. There is a danger of being more sophisticated and prescriptive as to the effects of a proposal than is justified by scientific or professional judgements and available data. Good practice guides (21), (22), (23) tend to favour relatively simple approaches with, for example: high / severe; moderate / medium; low / slight and no change / no detectable or discernible change categories. The rationale behind these categories of impact significance should be clearly explained in the Environmental Statement. This is described more fully in Section D.8 on Assessing the Significance of Impacts.
Impact significance is the product of the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude and nature of the change. The Environmental Statement should set out an impact matrix showing how significance categories are derived from impact magnitude and receptor sensitivity.
Section D.8 and Appendices 1 to 5 and 7 and of this Handbook provide more detailed guidance in respect of the various aspects of the natural heritage that should be considered. Appendix 8 provides general guidance on the likely significant effects on the natural heritage of different project types.
It is important for SNH, when commenting on an Environmental Statement, to examine the way in which impact significance has been analysed and whether the categories of significance used are a sound basis for informing the conclusions of the Environmental Statement and the decision on the project. Inappropriate application of techniques, inconsistent or incomplete analysis of impact significance should be drawn to the attention of the Competent Authority.
Box C.3.1
When commenting on an Environmental Statement, SNH should examine the way in which impact significance has been analysed and whether the categories of significance used are a sound basis for informing the conclusions of the Environmental Statement and the decision on the project. Inappropriate application of techniques, inconsistent or incomplete analysis of impact significance should be drawn to the attention of the Competent Authority.
What is Significant to SNH?
Determining whether an impact is ‘significant’ is, to some extent, a value judgement which SNH has to make in each case. It depends on whether an impact permanently affects the natural heritage (at a local, regional or national level), either by destroying an important feature of the natural heritage present on a specific site, or by causing extensive changes to the natural heritage over a wide area. Note that some impacts would enhance the natural heritage or access to it.
Thus, the type of impacts which SNH would consider significant would include:
- Impacts on the qualities or features for which areas or sites have been designated under statutory processes;
- Impacts on protected species;
- Impacts which would conflict with, or which strongly support, policies relating to the natural heritage in national planning guidance or development plans;
- Impacts which would conflict with, or support, the achievement of the objectives of local Biodiversity Action Plans or Species or Habitat Action Plans, or other important programmes for the natural heritage;
- Permanent changes to the quality of the natural heritage at a local or regional level, either as a result of destruction of important features, or through extensive changes (including a contribution to cumulative impacts) which result in a net loss of quality; and
- Major constraints on, or improvements to, access to the natural heritage placed on the community.
What is Significant to Other Parties?
SNH should bear in mind that other parties, including the Competent Authority, may consider that some impacts are much more or less significant than SNH considers them to be. This is not surprising and need not necessarily cause concern. Planning authorities, for example, will often consider problems affecting local communities eg. noise, dust or heavy traffic to be the most serious impacts of a development. That is not to say that they would disregard the natural heritage impacts.
Box C.3.2
Significant Effects on the Natural Heritage: The SNH Approach From SNH’s perspective, an impact would be considered to be significant if SNH:
would be minded to object to the project by virtue of the impact; and/or
would wish to see conditions attached to the project to mitigate this impact; or
would wish to support a project which may in other respects be contentious (not necessarily on natural heritage grounds) in recognition of the beneficial effects on the natural heritage.
Footnote to Box C.3.1 The latter case might be illustrated by, say, a native woodland regeneration project, which might have clear natural heritage benefits, but which was controversial because local communities felt it would have disadvantages to the local economy.
The key point is whether the Competent Authority considers that the impact justifies a refusal of the consent. A planning authority, for example, can refuse permission for several reasons without having to indicate which reasons they consider to be the most serious. If an appeal is lodged the appellant must demonstrate that none of the reasons is a sound reason for refusal. The planning authority must show that they all are. The Reporter may place different weight on the different impacts but may nevertheless refuse to grant the permission if, on hearing all the evidence, he decides that only one reason - eg the landscape issues raised by SNH - is a sound reason for dismissing the appeal (See for example, Case Study 5, Tarfhaugh Quarry).
Box C.3.3: SNH and the Views of Other Parties
SNH should seek to avoid commenting on the views of other bodies in relation to an Environmental Statement consultation, particularly the views of the public and Community Councils and other representative bodies.
SNH should concentrate on what is important to SNH as a body and to the natural heritage. It is for the Competent Authority to weigh the significance of other impacts.
Significant Effect on a Natura 2000 Site
Reference is made here to section F.2 of this Handbook, to Appendix VIII of the Local Authorities Handbook, to Circular 6/1995 as modified by SEERAD in 2000, Annex D Appendix A and the paper on Likely Significant Effect (38). A significant effect on a Natura 2000 site would require an “appropriate assessment” under the Habitats Regulations 1994 (24), Regulation 48 as described in these references.