Examination of recent hydroelectric dam projects in Canada for alignment of baseline studies, predictive modeling, and postdevelopment monitoring phases of aquatic environmental impact assessments.

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been widely criticized by the aquatic science community for poorly aligned approaches when selecting endpoints and collecting data during the baseline, predictive modeling, and postdevelopment monitoring phases. If these critical phases of the EIA process are not aligned properly, it can be difficult to evaluate the presence of postdevelopment effects. Examples of the misalignment of these phases include baseline studies failing to measure indicators that are monitored postdevelopment; predictive assessments that do not quantitatively predict conditions or potential impacts postdevelopment; and the failure to identify relevant indicators that may detect effects postdevelopment. For aquatic assessments, understanding how to protect critical ecosystem attributes to satisfy regulatory concerns could help to better align aquatic science monitoring activities across EIA phases. In this article we investigate recent Canadian hydroelectric dam EIAs to evaluate how well recent assessment approaches are meeting these necessary conditions of good aquatic EIA practice through the lens of ecosystem services from a fish's perspective. We found that larger facilities generally had baseline studies and modeling that better supported postdevelopment monitoring, but improvements in structure, linkages, and expectations would better align EIA phases in a manner that would improve assessments and environmental protection. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:616-644. © 2023 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Flood Risk Management in Canada's Prairie Provinces: an Analysis of Decision-Maker Priorities and Policy Preferences.

If the aim of flood risk management (FRM) is to increase society's resilience to floods, then a holistic treatment of flood risk is required that addresses flood prevention, defence, mitigation, preparation, and response and recovery. Progressing resilience-based management to flood risk requires both diversity and coordination of policy across multiple jurisdictions. Decision makers and the types of FRM policy decisions they make play a key role in implementing FRM policies and strategies that progress flood resilience. This paper explores how policy preferences held by FRM decision makers relate to the characteristics of resilient FRM policy. The research was conducted in three flood-prone provinces in western Canada using a multi-criteria analytical approach. The results show that while decision maker FRM priorities are similar across the Canadian Prairies, their preferred FRM policies differ. Further, preferred FRM policies were largely resistance-based and influenced at least as much by flood experiences and perceptions of flood risk as by more obvious administrative pressures such as cost, public acceptability, and environmental protection. Several observations emerge from these results for advancing a coordinated, diversified approach to FRM which is required for resilience, both for western Canada and for FRM more broadly.

Perspectives on Driving Changes in Project-based Cumulative Effects Assessment for Biodiversity: Lessons from the Canadian Experience.

Cumulative effects assessment (CEA), as a required practice for the environmental assessment (EA) of projects in many countries, faces several practical challenges, especially related to biodiversity. Drawing on the perspectives and experiences of Canadian EA practitioners, this paper explores options or drivers of change for improving project-based assessment to better tackle cumulative effects on biodiversity. An on-line survey was conducted with 40 professionals from the private sector, government departments/agencies, universities, and non-governmental organizations, examining the current challenges and opportunities regarding: CEA process for biodiversity; responsibilities for undertaking CEA tasks; resources to support and promote good CEA practice. In terms of process, there is shared understanding on: (i) the need of EA terms of reference to provide specific directions on CEA; (ii) CEA should capture both human and natural drivers of cumulative change; (iii) spatial boundaries for CEA should be based on ecological boundaries. There are dissenting views about: (i) whether CEA should consider all valued components (VCs) potentially affected by a project or only those for which residual effects are predicted; and (ii) delimitation of future temporal limits. In terms of responsibilities, participants agreed that project proponents should retain a central role in conducting CEA, but government agencies should lead the collection/provision of information about other projects in the study area and baseline VC conditions. Information and knowledge management resources could be also applied in the context of governmental agencies and consultancy firms to support CEA for biodiversity.

Integrating environmental monitoring with cumulative effects management and decision making.

Cumulative effects (CE) monitoring is foundational to emerging regional and watershed CE management frameworks, yet monitoring is often poorly integrated with CE management and decision-making processes. The challenges are largely institutional and organizational, more so than scientific or technical. Calls for improved integration of monitoring with CE management and decision making are not new, but there has been limited research on how best to integrate environmental monitoring programs to ensure credible CE science and to deliver results that respond to the more immediate questions and needs of regulatory decision makers. This paper examines options for the integration of environmental monitoring with CE frameworks. Based on semistructured interviews with practitioners, regulators, and other experts in the Lower Athabasca, Alberta, Canada, 3 approaches to monitoring system design are presented. First, a distributed monitoring system, reflecting the current approach in the Lower Athabasca, where monitoring is delegated to different external programs and organizations; second, a 1-window system in which monitoring is undertaken by a single, in-house agency for the purpose of informing management and regulatory decision making; third, an independent system driven primarily by CE science and understanding causal relationships, with knowledge adopted for decision support where relevant to specific management questions. The strengths and limitations of each approach are presented. A hybrid approach may be optimal-an independent, nongovernment, 1-window model for CE science, monitoring, and information delivery-capitalizing on the strengths of distributed, 1-window, and independent monitoring systems while mitigating their weaknesses. If governments are committed to solving CE problems, they must invest in the long-term science needed to do so; at the same time, if science-based monitoring programs are to be sustainable over the long term, they must be responsive to the more immediate, often shorter term needs and CE information requirements of decision makers. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:407-417. © 2018 SETAC.

Assessing sustainable remediation frameworks using sustainability principles.

The remediation industry has grown exponentially in recent decades. International organizations of practitioners and remediation experts have developed several frameworks for integrating sustainability into remediation projects; however, there has been limited attention to how sustainability is approached and operationalized in sustainable remediation frameworks and practices - or whether sustainability plays any meaningful role at all in sustainable remediation. This paper examines how sustainability is represented in remediation frameworks and the guidance provided for practical application. Seven broad sustainability principles and review criteria are proposed and applied to a sample of six international remediation frameworks. Not all review criteria were equally satisfied and none of the frameworks fully met all criteria; however, the best performing frameworks were those identified as sustainability remediation frameworks. Intra-generational equity was addressed by all frameworks. Integrating social, economic and biophysical components beyond triple-bottom-line indicators was explicitly addressed only by the sustainable remediation frameworks. No frameworks provided principle- or rule-based guidance for dealing with trade-offs in sustainability decisions.

Strategic Environmental Assessment Framework for Landscape-Based, Temporal Analysis of Wetland Change in Urban Environments.

This paper presents and demonstrates a spatial framework for the application of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) in the context of change analysis for urban wetland environments. The proposed framework is focused on two key stages of the SEA process: scoping and environmental baseline assessment. These stages are arguably the most information-intense phases of SEA and have a significant effect on the quality of the SEA results. The study aims to meet the needs for proactive frameworks to assess and protect wetland habitat and services more efficiently, toward the goal of advancing more intelligent urban planning and development design. The proposed framework, adopting geographic information system and remote sensing tools and applications, supports the temporal evaluation of wetland change and sustainability assessment based on landscape indicator analysis. The framework was applied to a rapidly developing urban environment in the City of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada, analyzing wetland change and land-use pressures from 1985 to 2011. The SEA spatial scale was rescaled from administrative urban planning units to an ecologically meaningful area. Landscape change assessed was based on a suite of indicators that were subsequently rolled up into a single, multi-dimensional, and easy to understand and communicate index to examine the implications of land-use change for wetland sustainability. The results show that despite the recent extremely wet period in the Canadian prairie region, land-use change contributed to increasing threats to wetland sustainability.

Capacity for watershed cumulative effects assessment and management: lessons from the Lower Fraser River Basin, Canada.

This study examines the capacity to support the cumulative effects assessment and management for watersheds. The research is set in the Lower Fraser River Basin, a densely populated sub-watershed in British Columbia's lower mainland. Eight requirements or requisites for the watershed cumulative effects assessment and management are applied to evaluate current capacity for implementation in the Lower Fraser, and to identify the areas in need of capacity development. Results show that advancing watershed cumulative effects assessment and management requires not only good science but also leadership in the coordination of monitoring programs, and in ensuring the appropriate incentives and penalties for engagement and nonengagement. The lack of leadership in this regard is the result of existing governance structures arranged around the political boundaries, which have produced over time multiple agencies and jurisdictional fragmentation. Notwithstanding this, we argue that the watershed is the most appropriate scale for assessing and managing the cumulative effects to complex ecosystems.

Valued ecosystem components for watershed cumulative effects: an analysis of environmental impact assessments in the South Saskatchewan River watershed, Canada.

The accumulating effects of human development are threatening water quality and availability. In recognition of the constraints to cumulative effects assessment (CEA) under traditional environmental impact assessment (EIA), there is an emerging body of research dedicated to watershed-based cumulative effects assessment (WCEA). To advance the science of WCEA, however, a standard set of ecosystem components and indicators is required that can be used at the watershed scale, to inform effects-based understanding of cumulative change, and at the project scale, to inform regulatory-based project based impact assessment and mitigation. A major challenge, however, is that it is not clear how such ecosystem components and indicators for WCEA can or should be developed. This study examined the use of aquatic ecosystem components and indicators in EIA practice in the South Saskatchewan River watershed, Canada, to determine whether current practice at the project scale could be "scaled up" to support ecosystem component and indicator development for WCEA. The hierarchy of assessment components and indicators used in a sample of 35 environmental impact assessments was examined and the factors affecting aquatic ecosystem component selection and indicator use were identified. Results showed that public environmental impact statements are not necessarily publically accessible, thus limiting opportunities for data and information sharing from the project to the watershed scale. We also found no consistent terminology across the sample of impact statements, thus making comparison of assessment processes and results difficult. Regulatory compliance was found to be the dominant factor influencing the selection of ecosystem components and indicators for use in project assessment, rather than scientific reasoning, followed by the mandate of the responsible government agency for the assessment, public input to the assessment process, and preexisting water licensing arrangements external to the assessment process. The current approach to project-based assessment offered little support for WCEA initiatives. It did not provide a standard set of aquatic ecosystem components and indicators or allow the sharing of information across projects and from the project to the watershed scale. We suggest that determining priority assessment parameters for WCEA requires adoption of a standardized framework of component and indicator terminology, which can then be populated for the watershed of concern based on both watershed-based priorities and project-specific regulatory requirements.

Environmental effects of oil and gas lease sites in a grassland ecosystem.

The northern Great Plains of Saskatchewan is one of the most significantly modified landscapes in Canada. While the majority of anthropogenic disturbances to Saskatchewan's grasslands are the result of agricultural practices, development of petroleum and natural gas (PNG) resources is of increasing concern for grassland conservation. Although PNG developments require formal assessment and regulatory approval, follow-up and monitoring of the effects of PNG development on grasslands is not common practice. Consequently, the effects of PNG activity on grasslands and the spatial and temporal extent of such impacts are largely unknown. This paper examines the spatial and temporal extent of PNG development infrastructure from 1955 to 2006 in a grassland ecosystem in southwest Saskatchewan. The effects of PNG development on grassland ecology were assessed from measurements of ground cover characteristics, soil properties, and plant community composition at 31 sites in the study area. PNG lease sites were found to have low cover of herbaceous plants, club moss (Lycopodiaceae), litter, and shallow organic (Ah) horizons. Lease sites were also characterized by low diversity of desirable grassland plants and low range health values compared to off-lease reference sites. These impacts were amplified at active and highly productive lease sites. Impacts of PNG development persisted for more than 50 years following well site construction, and extended outward 20 m-25 m beyond the direct physical footprint of PNG well infrastructure. These results have significant implications with regard to the current state of monitoring and follow-up of PNG development, and the cumulative effective of PNG activity on grassland ecosystems over space and time.

Strategic environmental assessment of greenhouse gas mitigation options in the Canadian agricultural sector.

This article presents a methodological framework for strategic environmental assessment (SEA) application. The overall objective is to demonstrate SEA as a systematic and structured policy, plan, and program (PPP) decision support tool. In order to accomplish this objective, a stakeholder-based SEA application to greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation policy options in Canadian agriculture is presented. Using a mail-out impact assessment exercise, agricultural producers and nonproducers from across the Canadian prairie region were asked to evaluate five competing GHG mitigation options against 13 valued environmental components (VECs). Data were analyzed using multi-criteria and exploratory analytical techniques. The results suggest considerable variation in perceived impacts and GHG mitigation policy preferences, suggesting that a blanket policy approach to GHG mitigation will create gainers and losers based on soil type and associate cropping and on-farm management practices. It is possible to identify a series of regional greenhouse gas mitigation programs that are robust, socially meaningful, and operationally relevant to both agricultural producers and policy decision makers. The assessment demonstrates the ability of SEA to address, in an operational sense, environmental problems that are characterized by conflicting interests and competing objectives and alternatives. A structured and systematic SEA methodology provides the necessary decision support framework for the consideration of impacts, and allows for PPPs to be assessed based on a much broader set of properties, objectives, criteria, and constraints whereas maintaining rigor and accountability in the assessment process.

Integrating strategic environmental assessment with industry planning: a case study of the Pasquai-Porcupine forest management plan, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is gaining widespread recognition as a tool for integrating environmental considerations in policy, plan, and program development and decision-making. Notwithstanding the potential of SEA to improve higher-order decision processes, there has been very little attention given to integrating SEA with industry planning practices. As a result, the benefits of SEA have yet to be fully realized among industrial proponents. That said, SEA practice is ongoing, albeit informally and often under a different label, and is proving to be a valuable tool for industry planning and decision-making. Based on a case study of the Pasquai-Porcupine forest management plan in Saskatchewan, Canada, this paper illustrates how an integrated approach to SEA can contribute to industry environmental decision-making and can enhance the quality and deliverability of industry plans.