An approach for evaluating eias— deficiencies of eia in mexico

An approach is presented for evaluating the contents of environmental impact statements (EISs) for decision-making. This approach is presented through the review of a set of EISs of highway projects in Mexico. Since the highway projects were already approved, the basic premises of the study were that the EISs were accurate and comprehensive, and if so, the EIS should not differ significantly in achieving at least a minimum quality standard. We focused on the following points: (1) organization of reports, in terms of clarity and coherence; (2) scientific and technical rigor of the data and the performed analyses; and (3) usefulness for decision-making, as a function of the relevant issues’ treatment. The evaluation was carried out in two ways: conformity of contents with respect to official guidelines, and the examination of the quality of data, analyses, and conclusions. Results showed that, in general, the EISs tended to contain rather inadequate descriptions, and a biased and subjective assessment of impacts. The EIA reflected implicit values and failed to focus on the environmental conflicts likely to be generated by the projects. Consequently, the approach presented here provides a precise framework for judging the worth of EISs as decision-making tools. This study challenges the notion that EIAs are valuable tools for improving the decision-making process in Mexico, and it depicts the problems to be addressed for improving EISs in the future.