The document summarizes the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process in Nepal and identifies challenges. It outlines the key steps in an EIA, which includes scoping, terms of reference, detailed studies, public consultation, and report preparation and approval. Major challenges include perceptions of EIA as just a formality, low-quality reports, lack of alternative analysis, delays in approval, and ineffective implementation of environmental management plans. The conclusions recommend strengthening implementation and following standards to make EIAs more project-specific and effective in mitigating environmental impacts.

1. Environmental Impact Assessment
Report Preparation and its Challenges
Presenter
Amit Chaudhary
Faculty, of Forestry, AFU
14 Dec. 2022

2. Outline of Presentation
• Introduction
• Objective
• Methodology
• EIA Process
• Challenges
• Conclusion and Recommendations
• References

3. Introduction
 The Environment Protection Act, 2019 of Nepal defines EIA as a “detailed
study and evaluation to be made to ascertain as to whether, in implementing
a proposal, the proposal does have significant adverse impacts on the
environment or not, and as to the measures to be adopted for avoiding or
mitigating such impacts.”
 The general EIA process encores objectives (Khadka et al., 1996):
Identifying the potential environmental impacts
Examining the significance of environmental implications
Assessing the ways of impact mitigation
Recommendation of preventive and corrective mitigating measures
Informing stakeholders
Advising the environmental management plan for the approved projects

4. Introduction
 Key activities in the EIA process are Screening, Scoping, Terms of Reference,
Public Consultation, Impact Prediction, Determining Significance of impacts,
Report Preparation and approval, and Monitoring and follow-up process
including implementation of the Environmental Management Plan
(Environment Protection Act, 2019; Morgan, 2012).
 There are several challenges in the EIA process from the drafting to the
implementation and auditing (Uprety, 2021 Bhushal, 2022).
EIA just for projects approval
 Low-quality faulty EIA
Insufficient strong control measures
Delayed EIA Approval (Koirala, 2017; Bhushal, 2022)

5. The proponent then prepares
the Scoping report in the format
given in Schedule-5.
Scoping Report helps in
developing and selecting
alternatives to the proposed
action. Scoping helps in
identifying issues to be
considered in the EIA through
public consultations. It helps in
identifying the stakeholders and
their affected interests by the
proposed action. For this notice
has to be sent in accordance to
Schedule 4.
(Schedule2, EPR 2020)
(Schedule1, EPR 2020)
Proposal Identification
Environmental Screening
Proposal Requiring EIA (Schedule 3 of EPR, 2020)
Scoping
Terms of Reference (TOR)
Approval of Scoping and TOR
Detailed Environmental Study (Field and Lab)
Public Hearing
Final Draft EIA Report, with EMP
Figure1:
EIA
Process
BES
IEE
In EPR 2020, there are over 350
categories of projects, using
mostly threshold criteria, of 12
sectors (forest; health; education;
tourism; transport; energy-water
resources and irrigation;
drinking water; housing-
building-settlements and urban
development; waste
management; industry; mining
and agriculture) for the
Environmental studies; of which
the thresholds are set up in the
Schedule 3 of the EPR, 2020 that
requires EIA (Environment
Protection Regulation, 2020).
Stakeholder’s Participation

6. Submission for Approval
Reviewed by the committee
Opened for Public Review
Final EIA Report
EIA report Approved
Project Implementation
Monitoring
Environmental Auditing
Restriction/ Feedback
People’s Participation
Figure1:
EIA
Process
Adapted from: (Roy, 2002)
The EIA report is then made
publicly available through
website of respective line
ministry or provincial agency
which can be downloaded by the
interested stakeholders for
review. The respective agency
also publishes notice in a
national newspaper to collect the
suggestion from the concerned
stakeholders. The stakeholders
can post their suggestion within
seven days of notice.
The approving agency
based on the suggestion
received, is convinced that the
implementation of the proposed
action is not going to impact the
environment severely then the
EIA report is approved within
thirty-five days of receipt.

7. The EIA process: EPR, 2020
1. The threshold of schedule 3 determines if the project needs EIA
2. Scoping report as per schedule 5 is prepared with consultation with
stakeholders by the proponent and approved
3. ToR is prepared and approved based on scoping and guides the EIA
4. Detailed Environmental study by measuring different biophysical
parameters is accompanied by the active public consultations
5. Based on the ToR and the suggestions from the stakeholder the
EIA report along with the Environmental management plan is
drafted subject to review by a team of experts and the public.
6. Competent Authority approves EIA if the impacts are manageable.

8. Challenges in effective EIA process
 Perception of the EIA process among stakeholders: Taking EIA as just a
procedural step before implementing any project rather than a tool to mitigate
environmental impacts and safeguard investment encourages the consultants to
deviate from the provisioned regulations (Bhushal, 2022).
 Lack of sincerity in EIA report preparation: The consultants are not serious
about following the approved ToR strictly, mainly due to cost factors.
 Low-quality EIA reports produced and approved: Even the national pride
project of the Second International Airport (SIA) in Nijgadh had faulty EIA
reports which had provisions for generating electricity, making evident its
source of the Hydropower sector EIA. Such kind of practice is more in the same
sector proposals (Uprety, 2021)
 Lack of proper alternative analysis: Case of SIA, and Modikhola hydropower
where more adverse impact alternate chosen(Uprety,2021).

9. Challenges in effective EIA process
 EIA process to fulfill the individual objective: Liability of the Private
consulting firms, Proponents, and the Government is assumed different due
to the lack of stringent law enforcement.
 Participation: The duration of the collection of the suggestion has been
reduced to seven days only while the notification to the concerned authority
may not be effective or the time is not sufficient to review the bulky technical
document in such a short period.
 Lack of effective implementation of the EMP: Impractical rules in mitigating
the environmental impacts based on a whim than in science, as for the rule
of compensation plantation implies 10 trees must be planted which was
previously 25 trees but the aftercare and implementation are not properly
addressed (Bhushal, 2022). It is more important in climate change.
 Delayed Approval: Lack of adequate technical human resources.

10. Conclusion and Recommendations
The EIA ensures environmental considerations through the process of research
suggestion collection, and public hearings organized with the concerned
stakeholders. The core objective is to bring the impacts to an acceptable level.
Inadequate human resources hampers the review and approval, and the effective
implementation of EIA-identified alternatives is the most challenging.
The implementation experience of EIA in Nepal urges the multi-stakeholders
should collaborate to make the EIA reports specific to the designated project and
follow the standards as required for its effectiveness.

11. References
Bhatt, R. P., & Khanal, S. N. (2009). Environmental impact assessment system in
Nepal – an overview of policy, legal instruments, and process. 5(ii), 160–
170.
Bhushal, R. (2022, November 15). ‘ A waste of time and money ’: Why are
environmental assessments so ineffective in Nepal ? The Third Pole, 1–12.
https://www.thethirdpole.net/en/nature/why-are-eias-so-ineffective-nepal/
Khadka, R. B., Bisset, R., & Neame, P. A. (1996). EIA Training Manual for
Professionals and Managers (pp. 1–192). IUCN.
Environment Protection Act, (2019). lawcommission.gov.np
Environment Protection Regulation, (2020).
Environment Protection Act, (1997).
Morgan, R. K. (2012). Environmental impact assessment: The state of the art.
Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), 5–14.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2012.661557

12. Thank You!
for your attention
Any Queries are duly welcome
