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…