INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Concepts
What is the Environment –Environment is the surrounding of a living thing
Environmental Impact Assessment- is a systematic examination conducted to determine
whether or not an activity or project will have any adverse impact on the environment.
UNEP defines (EIA) as a tool used to identify the environmental, social and economic impacts of
a project prior to decision-making. It aims to predict environmental impacts at an early stage in
project planning and design, find ways and means to reduce adverse impacts, shape projects to
suit the local environment and present the predictions and options to decision-makers. By using
EIA both environmental and economic benefits can be achieved, such as reduced cost and time
of project implementation and design, avoided treatment/clean-up costs and impacts of laws and
regulations.
EIA does not itself determine whether or not a proposed development may proceed. It places
information before decision makers which decision makers must take into account alongside
other information in order to come to a conclusion whether to permit the project to proceed.

EIA is designed to identify, interpret, predict and communicate information about the impacts of
the projects.

The environment includes three closely related components: physical components, including
the geology, topography, soils, water resources, and air quality; biological components,
including fauna, flora, biodiversity, and ecosystems; and social components, including culture,
religion, and local values
The “environment” includes:
 The biological environment e.g. plants and animals
 The physical environment e.g. surrounding land-uses and physical character of the area,
air pollution, noise pollution, water pollution, infrastructure
 The social environment-relates to social and cultural lives of people e.g. population and
its density, community composition, social cohesion, educational factors, religion, norms,
values, sanctions governing the people, family structure, politics, etc.
 Economic environment – includes all economic factors like employment and
unemployment levels, levels and sources of income, economic base of the area and its
surrounding, availability of critical factors of production, demand patterns, land values,
taxes, economic administration, trade, etc. these factors have close link with social and
cultural factors and therefore constitute the socioeconomic environmental factors.
 Aesthetic environment – comprise of factors called significantly valued historical,
archaeological objects or sites; scenic areas, views and landscapes. People derive
pleasure by seeing such objects. They are quite relevant to define or identify cultural base
f the area and play important role in human lives.

Impacts are deviations from a baseline situation, or the likely future conditions in the absence of
the proposed activity. It is important to recognize that the baseline situation is not static, and that
conditions may be improving or deteriorating regardless of whether a proposed action is
undertaken. Defining this baseline situation, and more specifically the availability of sufficient
and accurate data to do so, is one of the most important constraints in assessing impacts,
particularly in developing countries.

Assessment is the exercise of identifying the impacts likely to arise from an activity or project,
forecasting or quantifying them, and assessing their significance. These activities are the
technical heart of the EIA process. Assessment is an activity that is part art and part science.
Environmental information should be gathered and analyzed using rigorous scientific methods.
However, environmental data are often lacking, analysis can never be complete, predictions are
always uncertain, and outcomes are not guaranteed. The interpretation and evaluation of the
results requires judgment; choices inevitably involve the subjective weighing of costs and
benefits and of the varied interests of different stakeholders. Assessing impacts involves far more
than science alone.

Why assess?
Environmental impact assessment (EIA) helps improve the design of activities and their long-
term sustainability, or to ensure that environmental factors and values are integrated into the
decision-making process. This means that the environmental effects (both beneficial and
adverse) of an action are considered along with other factors. Environmental assessment exists to
improve decision-making by ensuring that decisions improve the design and sustainability of
proposed actions.

EIA also encompasses the development of mitigation measures to address these impacts, and
suggested approaches for implementing mitigation and monitoring measures.

EIA has two important features which ordinarily take on the appearance of constraints
 The fact that EIA is project specific;
 The fact that EIA is a methodology that focuses only on proposed developments it does not
extend to existing or ongoing activities.
The need for EIAs has become increasingly important and is now a statutory requirement in many
developing countries. In the late 1970’s, the Kenyan government committed to improving
environmental impact assessments. By then, the National Environment Secretariat (NES) in Kenya
already viewed environmental impact assessment as a key tool for meeting its environmental
protection objectives. However, there was a lack of proper legal basis for EIA and NES was
ineffective in enforcing the practice of EIA. This prompted the formation of Inter-Ministerial
Committee on the Environment (IMCE). The IMCE provided NES with the ability to co-opt
Committee members and use the legislative mandates of those members to require EIA application
for industrial projects.

In the 1990s, this approach was still considered insufficiently effective and EIA was given legal
status and more recognition by incorporation into the Environmental Management and
Coordination Act (EMCA). This Act became effective on 14th January 2000. Subsequent to the
Act, Environmental Impact Assessment and Audit Regulations (EIAAR, 2002) and Environmental
Impact Assessment Guidelines and Administrative Procedures (EIAGAP, 2003) were formulated
to guide the EIA process.
Objectives of conducting EIA
The main objective of EIA is to provide decision-makers with information about the possible
effects of a project before authorizing it to proceed.

Other objectives include;

 To identify potential environmental impacts of proposed projects, policies, plans and

programmes
 To assess the significance of these impacts
 To assess the relative importance of the impacts of alternative plans, designs and sites;
 To propose mitigation measures for the significant negative impacts of the project on
the environment;
 To generate baseline data for monitoring and evaluation of how well the mitigation
measures are being implemented during the project cycle;
 To present information on the impact of alternatives;
 To present results of the EIA in such a way that they can guide informed decision-
making.

Purpose and function/ importance of EIA

 Leads to environmentally-sound and sustainable activities and as a consequence,

preserved or enhanced quality of life. Timely EIAs consistently lead to development
projects that are more sustainable, both environmentally and economically.
 Leads to lowered project costs in the long term (fewer costly changes later in the project
 Leads to lower probability of environmental disasters, court cases, or costly and
controversial remedial actions later;
 Leads to consideration of alternative designs, which provide options for decision-makers
and the public to choose from.
 Investment is facilitated. An environmental assessment facilitates the gathering of
information required by institutions that loan money or make investment decisions for
development activities.
 Leads to identification of mitigation actions that can be incorporated into project
activities in time to address and minimize adverse impacts.
 Leads to increased project acceptance by the public through public participation. Public
participation is a key component of the EIA process. It results in more transparent
decision-making in development projects, introduces views which may make the project
more appropriate to local needs, and can enhance public confidence in public and private
institutions

Principles of EIA
The main principle of EIA is that every person is entitled to a clean and health environment and
that every person has a duty to enhance and safe guard it.

The other principles include;

i. Environmental concerns must be accounted for in all development activities
 ii. Public participation in the development of projects, policies, plans and programmes is
important
iii. Recognition of social and cultural principles traditionally used in the management of the
environment and natural resources
iv. International cooperation in the use and wise management of shared resources
v. Intergenerational and intra-generational equity
vi. Polluter pay principle
vii. The precautionary principle
viii. It should be applied as a tool to achieve sustainable development
ix. It should be applied as a tool to implement environmental management rather than a
report to gain project proposals
x. It should be integrated in the project life cycle to ensure that environmental information
is provided at the appropriate stages
xi. It should be applied to all proposed actions likely to have a significant adverse effect on
environment and human health
xii. It should include an analysis of feasible alternatives to the proposed action;
xiii. Should include meaningful opportunities for public participation
xiv. Should be carried out in a multi-or inter-disciplinary manner using practicable science
xv. It should integrate information on social, economic and biophysical aspects
xvi. Communicate with clarity predictions and options to decision-makers and the public
before irrevocable decisions are made. The EIA should be presented in a manner that
facilitates understanding of quantifiable or qualitative environmental impacts as well as
technical and economic impacts.

Guiding principles of EIA good practice

Principles Practical application
Source: Sadler, 1996; IAIA and IEMA, 1999.
EIA should meet its aims of informing decision making and ensuring an appropriate
Purposive
level of environmental protection and human health.
EIA should concentrate on significant environmental effects, taking into account the
Focused
issues that matter.
EIA should be adjusted to the realities, issues and circumstances of the proposals
Adaptive
under review.
EIA should provide appropriate opportunities to inform and involve the interested
Participative
and affected publics, and their inputs and concerns should be addressed explicitly.
Guiding principles of EIA good practice
Principles Practical application
EIA should be a clear, easily understood and open process, with early notification
Transparent procedure, access to documentation, and a public record of decisions taken and
reasons for them.
EIA should apply the ‘best practicable’ methodologies to address the impacts and
Rigorous
issues being investigated.
EIA should identify measures for impact mitigation that work and can be
Practical
implemented.
EIA should be carried out with professionalism, rigor, fairness, objectivity,
Credible
impartiality and balance.
EIA should impose the minimum cost burden on proponents consistent with meeting
Efficient
process requirements and objectives.
Nature of EIA
 EIA is anticipatory by nature, it talks of future plausible events that might occur if the
proposed development is carried out
 Systematic to assure that all feasible alternatives are considered and compared and that
all measures that could protect important environmental resources are given full
consideration in the planning process;
 Reproducible to permit independent verification of the findings and conclusions;
 Interdisciplinary and interdisciplinary to ensure that experts in the relevant physical,
biological, cultural, and socioeconomic disciplines contribute their expertise to the
overall assessment so that important perspectives and analyses are not missing.
 Public to gives communities and individuals a voice in issues that may bear directly on
their health, welfare, and quality of life.
 EIA calls for the adoption of a common language and a common procedure to ensure
effective communication and objectivity. This is because EIA is multidisciplinary and
interdisciplinary study.
 Several actors play a role in EIA e.g. ;the developer, the public, the Authority(NEMA),
the lead agencies and other stakeholders these actors/ stakeholders roles include:

(a) The developer provides funds for EIA and provides information about project (i.e.
project proposal).

(b) The Authority (NEMA): registers experts for EIA, put in place measures to safeguard
the field from quacks, reviews the EIS and publishes reports in media, makes decision
on final project and makes follow-up through control auditing.
 (c) Public: watchdogs because the project is in their vicinity, can report the matter to the
public complaint committee and are source of information during the EIA study.

(d) Lead agencies: those in which the project is in their fields or those who have interest
in that project, they provide technical information and also provide information on
policy matters
(e) Any other stakeholders like CBO, NGOs. The DC’s office can be used to get alist of
genuine CBos and NGOs
Misconceptions about EIA

EIA is anti-development. EIAs rarely lead to the cancellation of a project. EIA provides the
decision maker with environmental information, just as an economic feasibility provides
economic information—they do not mandate decisions. An EIA can show a project to be
environmentally unsound, just as an economic study may show a project to be economically
unsound. Few rational observers would condemn economic analysis for this reason.

EIA is too expensive or a waste of money. The median estimate for EIA cost is on the order of
one half to one percent of a project’s construction cost. In Thailand, for instance, suggested
allowances for EIA costs are from 0.1% to 1.1%, with higher percentages for smaller projects
(less than $1 million US). The cost savings in improved project design and avoided
environmental impacts is often many times this amount. In the long run, not doing an EIA can
turn out to be far more expensive.

EIA is ineffective. Common criticisms of EIAs are that they are carried out too late to affect
decisions, and often simply justify decisions already taken. EIAs conducted too late in the
decision process or as mere formalities are ineffective and a waste of human resources, time and
money. Well-timed EIAs, however, do have major benefits.

Limitations of EIA

EIA is also a way of ensuring that environmental factors are considered in decision-making process
along with the traditional economic and technical factors. Importantly EIA requires the scientific
(technical) and value issues to be dealt with in a single assessment process. This helps in the proper
consideration of all advantages and disadvantages of a proposal. Environmental considerations
may, therefore, be set aside in favour of what are felt to be more important considerations.
Alternatively, predicted adverse effects on the environment might lead to strict conditions being
imposed to avoid these effects or remedy any adverse effects, or perhaps lead to the complete
abandonment of a proposal.

However, it is most important to recognise that EIA cannot be regarded as a means of introducing
an environmental “veto” power into administrative decision-making processes. Decisions that are
unsatisfactory from an environmental point of view can still be made, but with full knowledge of
the environmental consequences. The final decision about a proposal depends upon the likely
severity of the adverse effects, balanced against other expected benefits.
In other words, EIA is an administrative process that identifies the potential environmental effects
of undertaking a proposal, and presents these environmental effects alongside the other advantages
and disadvantages of the proposal to the decision-makers. In the vast majority of EIA procedures
this means that the outcome of the EIA process provides advice to the decision-makers – it does
not provide a final decision. So, by itself, the EIA procedures cannot be expected to stop a proposal
– although this is an outcome that some members of the general community and environment
groups may expect.

In summary then:

 only a very small fraction of proposals are halted, permanently or temporarily, as a direct
result of EIA at the end of the review process;
 preemption or early withdrawal of unsound proposals has been reported though it has
proved difficult to document;
 EIA has been useful in developing support for and confirmation of positive
environmentally sound proposals;
 the greening or environmental improvement of proposed activities is frequently seen; and
 particular indirect effects of EIA are both instrumental (such as where policy or
institutional adjustments are made as a result of EIA experience) and educational where
participation in the EIA process leads to positive changes in environmental attitudes and
behavior.

With regard to the last point there is considerable advantage to the general community where those
people involved with the proposal, as well as decision-makers, are required to think about the
environmental effects (and thence avoid negative effects), and the public can be made aware of
the details of the proposal.

The limited power of EIA may seem to greatly reduce its value. However, as you have seen there
are many benefits that come from using EIA.

IMPACTS
Impacts are deviations from a baseline situation, or the likely future conditions in the absence of
the proposed activity.

Direct Impacts (First Order Impacts) - Are direct consequences of a project implementation
and operation e.g. displacement of people, water pollution, air pollution, land loss and loss of
biodiversity

Multiplier Impacts (Second Order Impacts) - Are indirect impacts of human activities
associated with the project implementation and operation e.g. emergency of crime due to job
loss, family instability, diseases due to water pollution and even death of aquatic organisms, also
prostitution due to displacement during post-violence (PEV).

Cumulative Impacts (Third-Order Impacts) - Are gradual an occur in traces (small quantities)
and over time, create a crisis example is the exposure to carcinogenic substances, smoking,
fluoride water which makes the teeth to turn brown and makes bones to become weaker, nature
of occupation, alcohol etc.

Synergistic Impacts (Fourth Order Impacts) - Are additive in nature, where two or more
impacts, combine and cause problems e.g. variety of fertilizers around Lake Naivasha and traces
of these fertilizers find their way in the lake. They combine and make complexes in the lake
affecting life in the lake
N/B. Multiplier Impacts arise from the other three types of impacts, multiplier impacts are
therefore used to explain the severity of the other three types of impacts.

Other Classes of impacts

 Direct (Primary) vs. Indirect (Secondary) Impacts. Direct impacts are those effects
that are generally associated with the construction, operation, or maintenance of a facility
or activity. They are generally obvious and quantifiable. Indirect impacts are induced
changes in the environment, population, economic growth and land use. Examples of
indirect impacts include: strip settlement associated with new roads, waterborne disease
associated with abandon construction borrow pits, or siltation of rivers and streams
caused by construction activity.

 Short-Term (Temporary) vs. Long-Term (Permanent) Impacts. Impacts can be short-

term or long-term depending upon the persistence or duration of the impacts. The
duration of impacts may have a lot to do with the project phase in which they occur: pre-
operational (e.g., construction), operational, or post-operational (e.g., after project
completion or decommissioning).

 Impacts can also occur in anticipation of a project. The threat of an activity or project
considered undesirable can lead to loss of land value, making it difficult to transfer
nearby properties, even before the project occurs. Likewise the promise of an action
considered desirable may induce people to move to the location, in hopes that they will
become project beneficiaries. Concerns about relocation can be more intense before a
move than the actual relocation. It is a common pitfall to ignore those impacts occurring
in the planning and assessment phase or those that occur after the project has served its
useful life.
 Positive (Beneficial) and Negative (Adverse) Impacts. Although the term
"environmental impact" has come to be interpreted in the negative sense, many actions
have significant positive effects that should be clearly defined and discussed. This is
particularly appropriate for redevelopment or remedial actions whose specific purpose
and need is to remedy any undesirable condition.

 Cumulative Impacts. Cumulative impacts are those environmental impacts that result
from the incremental impact of the proposed action on a common resource when added to
other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Circumstances generating
cumulative impacts could include: water quality impacts from an effluent discharge that
is combined with other point source discharges or from non-point source runoff; or loss
and/or fragmentation of environmentally sensitive habitats (forests, wetlands, farmlands)
 resulting from several separate development projects. The assessment of cumulative
impacts is difficult, in part due to the speculative nature of the possible future actions,
and in part due to the complex interactions that need to be evaluated when considering
collective effects. Water and air quality modeling provide a means to study effects of
cumulative impacts.

Methods for predicting the characteristics of impacts include:

 ‘best estimate’ professional judgement;

 quantitative mathematical models;
 experiments and physical models; and
 Case studies as analogues or points of reference.

These are discussed in general below. Specific examples of the use of predictive techniques can
be found in the references listed at the end of this topic.

Professional judgement

As noted earlier, all methods of analysis involve professional judgement and the use of advanced
tools and models will require expert knowledge. Sole reliance on ‘best estimate’ professional
judgement may be unavoidable when there is a lack of data to support more rigorous analyses or
there is a lack of predictive methodology (as in the analysis of certain social impacts).

Examples include the prediction of the effect of a water supply proposal on:

 the activities of women or community interaction; and

 the loss of a communal place or sacred site.

Such predictions should be made by specialists, who are familiar with the type of proposal, the
geographic region and/or similar cases that are analogous to the situation. Where professional
judgement is used without also employing other methods, the judgement and values of the
specialist concerned may be open to challenge. Peer review and the use of agreed concepts and
frameworks can be useful to corroborate findings.

Quantitative mathematical models

Quantitative models express cause-effect relationships as mathematical functions, derived from

deterministic or probabilistic relationships. A number of such models are used in EIA to predict
certain types of impacts, for example, on air, water, soil and habitat. More complex computer-
based simulations are data demanding and often their use in EIA requires certain simplifying
assumptions to be made.

The choice and use of quantitative models for impact prediction should be suited to the particular
cause-effect relationship being studied; for example, transport and fate of oil spills, sediment
loadings and fish growth and pesticide pollution of groundwater aquifers. Attention also needs to
be given to the consistency, reliability and adaptability of models. Usually operational changes are
made to the input conditions for the model to see how the outputs are affected. For instance,
differences in air pollution can be calculated by changing the height of a stack or the rate of output
of emissions.

Examples of the use of quantitative models include:

 air dispersion models to predict emissions and pollution concentrations at various locations
resulting from the operation of a coal-fired power plant;
 hydrological models to predict changes in the flow regime of rivers resulting from the
construction of a reservoir; and
 ecological models to predict changes in aquatic biota (e.g. benthos, fish) resulting from
discharge of toxic substances.

Although traditionally this type of analysis has been carried out for physical impacts, there is
increasing use of mathematical models to analyse biological, social/demographic and economic
impacts.

When interpreting the results of quantitative mathematical models it should be remembered that
all models are simplifications of the real world. They require the specialist to make a number of
assumptions in both their development and their use. If these assumptions are inappropriate then
there can be significant implications for the accuracy and usefulness of the output data. EIA project
managers should ask all specialists carrying out mathematical analyses to clearly state the
assumptions inherent in the use of their models, together with any qualifications to be placed on
the results.

Experiments and physical models

Experiments and scale models can be used to test and analyse the effects of project-related
activities and the effectiveness of proposed mitigation techniques. These methods have not been
used extensively in impact prediction. However, they can be appropriate, depending upon the
nature of the impact and the resources available, and providing certain cautions are remembered.
When using the results of experiments or models, note that unpredicted outcomes can occur when
the data are ‘scaled up’ to life size.

Experiments can be undertaken directly in the field or under laboratory conditions. Examples of
their use include:

 the exposure of fish in a laboratory to concentrations of pollutants to determine mortality

levels; and
 field trials of the effectiveness of different methods of erosion control.

Physical models can be built to predict the behaviour and effect of the actual project on the
environment. For example, a physical model could be used to simulate changes to patterns of sand
or sediment deposition resulting from port and harbour works.
Case studies

Reviewing case studies of projects in similar environments can inform and assist impact prediction
and analysis. Comparisons will be especially helpful if impact monitoring and auditing data are
available. Otherwise, the results obtained by a comparable use of EIA methodology should be
consulted. Sometimes, relevant case material will not be readily accessible or available. In that
event, there is a large body of general information on the impact ‘footprints’ of major types of
projects, such as dams, roads, airports and power stations. However, this should be read with care
as to its source and provenance.

Uncertainty is a pervasive issue at all stages of the EIA process but is especially important for
impact prediction. Put simply, uncertainty is a state of relative knowledge or ignorance. Where
cause-effect relationships are ‘known’ and understood, however imperfectly, impacts can be
forecast (or at least described). Certain impacts are unknown until they occur; for example, ozone
depletion caused by release of CFCs and inter-species transmission of the human variant of Bovine
Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) or ‘mad cow’ disease.

Sources of uncertainty in impact prediction include:

 scientific uncertainty – limited understanding of an ecosystem (or community) and the

processes that govern change;
 data uncertainty – restrictions introduced by incomplete or noncomparable information, or
by insufficient measurement techniques; and
 policy uncertainty – unclear or disputed objectives, standards or guidelines for managing
potential hazards and effects.

There are a number of approaches that can be used to address uncertainty in impact prediction,
including:

 ‘Best’ and ‘worst’ case prediction to illustrate the spread of uncertainty;

 Attaching confidence limits to impact predictions; and
 Sensitivity analysis to determine the effect of small changes in impact magnitude.

The relationship between impact, size and severity may not be linear. Small changes in impact
magnitude may cause larger than expected increases or decreases in the severity of environmental
change. Where necessary, an assessment should be made of the effect that small changes in the
magnitude of the impact (say less than 10 per cent) have on the environment, particularly if
significant or valued resources are potentially affected. This is referred to as a sensitivity analysis.

A broader range of impacts and interrelationships are now routinely integrated into EIA. These
include the social, economic and health aspects of environmental change. In comparison to
biophysical impacts, less experience has been gained in analysing these and other non-biophysical
impacts.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Impact assessment involves;
1. Impact identification using various methods. This is the listing of possible impacts.
Such impacts include; water pollution, air pollution, land degradation, displacement of
people.
2. Impact analysis. This is the attempt to understand the nature and characteristics of the
listed impacts. Impact analysis builds on impact identification. Both primary and
secondary information can be used to shed more light on the impacts identified.
3. Impact prediction. The consequences of each impact are predicted here.
4. Impact significance (severity). This is prioritizing as serious (severe) or mild
5. Mitigation, monitoring, auditing, compensation. After understanding the impacts,
mitigation can be suggested. Monitoring can also be suggested so that control audit can
be done during project implementation. Compensation can be suggested on the
displacement of people and loss of immobile property.
6. Communication in the form of environmental impact statement (EIA). This is the
compilation of the EIA report.
Why conduct an EIA?
Projects that require an EIA
 The governing principles of EIA
• Participation
– The process should include adequate participation of
all stakeholders.
• Transparency
– EIA should be conducted through an established
process. All elements of the process should be clearly
understood by all participants.
• Certainty
– The process should have clear objectives, be
consistent, and be conducted within agreed time-
frames.
 The governing principles of EIA
• Accountability
– Decision makers within government need to be able
to provide clear and detailed reasons for their
decisions to all stakeholders.
– Appeal provisions to an independent authority should
exist.
– The EIA process should cover the life of the proposal,
through project design, construction, operation and
finally decommissioning: project operators must be
accountable for commitments made during project
approval.
 The governing principles of EIA
• Integrity
– Decisions need to be based on the best available
information, and all relevant factors need to be taken
into account by decision-makers.
– Where impacts are uncertain, outcomes should rely on
sound risk assessment and management.
• Cost-effectiveness
– The process should meet its objectives while imposing
the least cost to society.
– It ensures fair and equitable distribution of project
costs and benefit.
• As a minimum, local people in a project area must not be worse-off
than they were before a project was implemented.
 The governing principles of EIA
• Flexibility
– The process should be able to accommodate
proposals varying in type, scope of impact, and
complexity.
– Flexibility is desirable in terms of the form of EIA
process, issues to be addressed, process time-frames,
and degree of public participation.
• Practicality
– The process should recognise community concerns,
commercial realities, best practice technology, and
scientific uncertainties.
 The governing principles of EIA
• Precautionary
Principle #15 of the Rio Declaration notes:
“In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach
shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities.
Where there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental
damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason
for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation’’.
In other words….
The precautionary principle holds that if a product, action,
or policy is suspected of causing harm to the public or the
environment, protective measures should be taken before
comprehensive scientific proof of the danger is available.

The principle argues that there is a social obligation to

safeguard the public from potential damage in the absence
of scientific consensus.

This is a "better safe than sorry" or "precaution in advance"

principle that applies to both human and environmental
health.
• Polluter pays
– The people who cause pollution should pay for the
expense of removing it in order to avoid harm to
human health or the environment.

– For example, a factory that creates a potentially

dangerous material as a by-product of its
operations, is typically held responsible for its safe
disposal.