mple methods for impact identification:

atrices, Networks and Checklists

EIA methodologies – interaction matrices, checklists and

networks (networks representing variation of interaction matrices)
Si l interaction
Simple i t ti matrices
ti di l
display project
j t actions
ti i one axis
in i
and appropriate environmental factors in the other. Potential
changes noted at the interaction points in terms if magnitude and
mportance considerations.
considerations Leopold matrix lists about 100
actions against 90 environmental factors (can be expanded/
contracted)
Checklists – listing of env. env factors to information on
measurement, prediction and interpretation of changes for
dentified factors (including assignment of importance weights
and scaling-rating
g g of impacts for each alternative))
 ACTIONS CAUSING IMPACT
L ITEMS
RONMENTAL

M I
ENVIR

LEOPOLD INTERACTION MATRIX

M = MAGNITUDE
mpact
p Ratingg
Beneficial or detrimental impact
p by
y pplus or minus
signs
Assigning maximum to minimum numerical scores
U off predefined
Use d fi d codes:
d SB = Significant
Si ifi t beneficial
b fi i l
mpact; SA = significant, adverse; B = beneficial
mpact;
p ; A = adverse;; b = small beneficial impact;
p ;a=
small adverse; O = no measurable impact is
expected to occur; M = some type of mitigation
measures can be used to reduce/ avoid impact; NA
= the environmental factor is not applicable, non-
elevant to proposed project
epped
pp Matrices
Also called
Al ll d “cross-impact
“ i t matrix”
t i ” used
d to
t address
dd secondary
d and
d
ertiary impact of initiating actions
Environmental factors displayed against other environmental
actors
Both letters and numbers used for impact rating. e.g.A =
adverse, always occur; B = adverse, usually occurs; C =
adverse, sometimes occur; X = beneficial, always occur; Y =
beneficial, usually occurs; Z = beneficial, sometimes occur; 1 =
strong, permanent; 2 = moderate, permanent;……..6 = minor,
emporary; Blank = no impact
 ACTION i PROJECT PHASE i

RATING FOR RATING FOR

FIRST PHASE PROJECT
FACTOR j
j
RATING FOR
RATING FOR CUMULATIVE
ALL PHASES IMPACTS OF ALL
TOGETHER PROJECTS

) TWO-PHASE TO MULTIPHASE PROJECT (2) CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

ACTION i

RATING WITHOUT
MITIGATION

FACTOR j

RATING WITH
MITIGATION

(3) MITIGATION MEASURES & EFFECTIVENESS

etwork methodologies
g for EIA

Networks”
Net orks” integrate impact ca ses
causes and
consequences through identifying interrelationships
between causal actions and impacted
p environmental
actors, including secondary and tertiary effects
Particularly useful for identifying anticipated impacts
associated with potential projects
Primary limitation is minimal information provided on
echnical aspects
p of impact
p prediction and means for
p
comparatively evaluating the impacts of alternatives.
Can be visually complicated.
irected ggraphs
p or “Digraphs”
g p

A variation of network
Numerical relationships
p can be developed
p
and integrated
Useful in depicting relationships between
biophysical and socioeconomic systems
A concern is visual complexity and validity of
established numerical relationships
hecklist methodologies
g

Range from listing of environmental factors to

highly structured approaches involving importance
weightings
i hti f factors
for f t and
d application
li ti off scaling
li
echniques for impacts of each alternative on each
actor.
t
Simple checklists list environmental factors but do
not provide id specific
ifi data
d needs,
d measurement
methods, impact prediction and assessment.
D
Descriptive
i ti checklists’
h kli t ’ provide
id these
th i l di
including
mitigation information.
ummaryy

Numerous EIA methodologies

N th d l i d
developed
l d providing
idi
prediction and assessment and systematic
evaluation of alternatives and selection of actions.
actions
nteraction matrices are of greatest value in impact
dentification and comparative alternatives
Networks provide information on interrelationships
Checklists pprovide identification, impact
p prediction
p
and assessment