Is a Quality Mark Is a Quality Mark

a Mark of Quality?Josh Fothergill - IEMA

Florence

April 2015

Outline

• EIA Quality Mark Scheme

• A systems approach to quality EIA practice

• 4 years of trends in quality of UK EIA practice

• Summary• Summary

EIA Quality EIA Quality Mark Scheme

The State of EIA Practice in the UKAugust 2011

Background:

Download:

www.iema.net/eiareport

Qmark Commitments

1. EIA Management

2. EIA Team Capabilities

3. EIA Regulatory Compliance

4. EIA Context

5. EIA Content5. EIA Content

6. EIA Communication

7. Improving EIA Practice

51 Registrants

April 2015

A systems approach to A systems approach to quality EIA practice

Systems approach to continually

improving EIA

EIA

Qu

ality

Increasing nos. high quality EIA

High

Improvement Cycle 1: 2009-13

EIA

Qu

ality

% EIA completed

Higher Quality standard

Removing poor

quality EIALow

0 100

EIA legislative compliance

EIS reviewed by Year of Publication

40

50

60

70

~10% of UK ES

0

10

20

30

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Yr1&Pilots Yr2 Yr3 Yr4

4 Years of Trends4 Years of Trends

Improving Quality Across

UK EIA Practice

EIA Management & Team Capabilities

Key Trends:

• Ensuring consistent EIA & ES quality across the

organisation - Up from ~85% to >96%

• Progressing EIA staff development through mentoring

- Up 20%in 4yrs to 97% of registrants- Up 20%in 4yrs to 97% of registrants

• Maintaining and updating EIA knowledge across the

organisation - Up 10% in 4yrs, now stands at 98%

EIA Regulatory Compliance

Key Trends:

• Majority maintained >90% Pass rate

BUT…

• Coverage of Interaction between topics in EIA is poor

– Variability in Yr4 fell back to <60% Pass rate– Variability in Yr4 fell back to <60% Pass rate

• Coverage of Climatic Factors is poor

– See Graph

Poor Coverage of Climate

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Pass Rate for Climatic Factors - UK EIA

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

EIA Context & Content

Key Trends:

• Clarity on how decided what topics scoped into EIA

– Improved from 75% to >90% Pass rate

• Clarity on main alternatives / iterations considered

– 3rd of ES reviewed from 2013 did not Pass

• Justifying approach to significance evaluation - up from ~80%

2010 to >95% in 2013

• Detail on mitigation uncertainty & responsibility

improved - See Graph

COM5: EIA Content

Key Trends:

• Justifying approach to significance evaluation - up from

~80% 2010 to >95% in 2013

• Detail on mitigation uncertainty & responsibility

improved - See Graph

Improving coverage of Mitigation

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

ES defines How & Who on Mitigation

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

EIA Presentation

Key Trends:

• Length of main text (vs significance of effects) - See Graph

• Overall quality of Non-Technical Summary improved - See

Graph

Proportionate ES length

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

NTS: Overall Good Progress

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

2010 2011 2012 2013

SummaryIs the QMark a mark of quality?

YES!�Market recognition – specified in contracting

�On-going growth - >7%/yr

�Overall, positive data trends – some issues remain

�Recognised by peers – 2012 IAIA Institutional Award�Recognised by peers – 2012 IAIA Institutional Award

� International Interest

�Active community of practice – beginning phase 2

But, QMark (like any audit) cannot guarantee the quality of every EIA undertaken within it…