Environmental Impact Assessment in NSW and Water Conservation in Australia

Running head: SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS
SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1
SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS
Question 1
The most common conceptions of environmental impact assessment (EIA) is referred to
as a planning tool which helps assessments to be done in order to forecast and assess the impacts
of a proposed project as well as its alternatives. This perspective of EIA as a planning tool has
been considered as the technocratic paradigm because it is understood as a view, which is widely
used by engineers, and scientists who perform EIAs (Planning.nsw.gov.au 2019). EIA as a
planning tool has been serving significantly in order to inform interested agencies of the potential
environmental impacts of an expected project as well as its alternatives. The technocratic
paradigm for EIA has been facing criticisms because it overlooks politics as well as models of
decision making in an unrealistic approach. In NSW, the Environment Planning and Assessment
Act introduced in the year 1979 (EP& Act) has established two directions in support of EIA
where the first has been executed under Division 5.2 of the EP&A Act which has been offering
EIA of ventures for State (Planning.nsw.gov.au 2019). While, the second part has been executed
under Part 4 of the EP&A Act management of significant developmental evaluations for local,
state as well as State of Major Developments has been done apart from the State Significant
Infrastructure.
EIAs have created an industry of their own in which several consulting firms,
industrialists as well as green level associations generate income as well as employment at the
cost of private sector activity. As per reports, the acclimatizing part of Environmental Impact
Assessment procedure has been consequential to substantial cost shifting from administration
agencies, government to the private sector (Planning.nsw.gov.au 2017). While, the obligation of
requisites, governments are enable to force the private sector for enactment of social, ecological
and economic policy but devoid of any sustenance of attendant budgetary outlays. Conditions

2
SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS
imposed by Ministers show implication of being extensive. Moreover, Riley et al. (2018) have
mentioned implications of situations where ventures have been delayed of almost a year at which
up a third of planned mining projects would be cancelled resulting in substantial reduction in
creation of employment, investment, incomes and royalties.
As per Wallbank, MacKenzie and Beggs (2017), the Productivity Commission asserts
that a project initiated with about 1500 conditions, which had eventually generated almost 8000
sub-conditions. Such an imposition of conditions has certain drawbacks as it amplifies the
outlays of governmental policy off budget, which tends to eliminate prominent discipline on
decision-making. According to Riley et al. (2018), the decision-making procedures have been
cleared by monetary considerations claiming that there has become quite insignificant to restrict
Ministers’ obligations on range of draconian conditions. Another limitation of current EIA in
NSW shows that imposition of conditions on project proponents serves as a ‘de-facto’ business
tariff, which tends to lessen the revenue and discourages further investments in NSW. Such
limitation has been taking place in an environment where Australia already has considerably
high corporate tax rate. As per reports, while other developed nations like the U.S has aimed for
a 15% reduction from 30% and UK has aimed to reduce company excise duty to 17% from 20%,
Australia’s tax rate has decreased from 30% to only 25% in last 10 years (Planning.nsw.gov.au
2017). For these reasons, NSW in internationally competitive market has been unable to add
costs to business and consequentially losing opportunity to attract global ventures. Furthermore,
these current limitations of EIA in NSW have been posing threats to the Baird Government’s
competence of accomplishing its commitments of creating over 140,000 jobs by 2019.
On the other hand, in Queensland projects, which primarily incorporate considerably
increased level of environmental hazard, tend to follow an EIA process. As per reports, in order