{"title":"价值链与环境影响评估:从法国两起生物能源设施法律案件中汲取的教训","authors":"Clément Lasselin, Sébastien Barot, Anouk Barberousse","doi":"10.1017/s2047102524000232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The scope of environmental impact assessments (EIAs) has traditionally been limited to on-site effects. This approach faces limitations when dealing with intricate value chains. Particularly for projects involving biomass-to-energy facilities, the primary environmental impacts often originate from off-site biomass production. This article considers the resulting limitations of EIAs by using two legal disputes in France as illustrative examples. In the <span>Gardanne</span> and the <span>La Mède</span> cases, French Administrative Courts sought to establish the necessity for project proponents to incorporate supply-related impacts into the EIA process. Strategies aimed at broadening the scope of EIAs, either by expanding the assessed project boundaries or by invoking the concept of cumulative impacts, were not deemed the most relevant approaches. Instead, the concept of ‘indirect impact’ emerged as a valuable tool for incorporating supply-related impacts. However, to prevent the indirect impact concept from being disregarded as too ambiguous or ineffective, it should be complemented by precise criteria to determine whether an impact may be considered indirect. We study these avenues within the broader evolving landscape of EIA laws, and by exploring ways to harmonize EIAs with other regulatory instruments governing value chains.</p>","PeriodicalId":45716,"journal":{"name":"Transnational Environmental Law","volume":"99 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Value Chains and Environmental Impact Assessments: Lessons from Two French Legal Cases on Bioenergy Facilities\",\"authors\":\"Clément Lasselin, Sébastien Barot, Anouk Barberousse\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s2047102524000232\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The scope of environmental impact assessments (EIAs) has traditionally been limited to on-site effects. This approach faces limitations when dealing with intricate value chains. Particularly for projects involving biomass-to-energy facilities, the primary environmental impacts often originate from off-site biomass production. This article considers the resulting limitations of EIAs by using two legal disputes in France as illustrative examples. In the <span>Gardanne</span> and the <span>La Mède</span> cases, French Administrative Courts sought to establish the necessity for project proponents to incorporate supply-related impacts into the EIA process. Strategies aimed at broadening the scope of EIAs, either by expanding the assessed project boundaries or by invoking the concept of cumulative impacts, were not deemed the most relevant approaches. Instead, the concept of ‘indirect impact’ emerged as a valuable tool for incorporating supply-related impacts. However, to prevent the indirect impact concept from being disregarded as too ambiguous or ineffective, it should be complemented by precise criteria to determine whether an impact may be considered indirect. We study these avenues within the broader evolving landscape of EIA laws, and by exploring ways to harmonize EIAs with other regulatory instruments governing value chains.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transnational Environmental Law\",\"volume\":\"99 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transnational Environmental Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s2047102524000232\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transnational Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s2047102524000232","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
环境影响评估(EIA)的范围传统上仅限于现场影响。在处理错综复杂的价值链时,这种方法面临着局限性。特别是涉及生物质转化为能源设施的项目,主要的环境影响往往来自于场外的生物质生产。本文以法国的两起法律纠纷为例,探讨了环境影响评估的局限性。在 Gardanne 和 La Mède 案中,法国行政法院试图确定项目提议者将与供应相关的影响纳入环评过程的必要性。通过扩大评估项目范围或援引累积影响概念来扩大环境影响评估范围的策略被认为不是最相关的方法。相反,"间接影响 "的概念成为纳入与供应有关的影响的重要工具。然而,为了避免间接影响概念因过于模糊或无效而被忽视,应该辅以精确的标准来确定影响是否可被视为间接影响。我们将在环境影响评估法不断演变的大背景下研究这些途径,并探索如何使环境影响评估与其他管理价值链的监管工具相协调。
Value Chains and Environmental Impact Assessments: Lessons from Two French Legal Cases on Bioenergy Facilities
The scope of environmental impact assessments (EIAs) has traditionally been limited to on-site effects. This approach faces limitations when dealing with intricate value chains. Particularly for projects involving biomass-to-energy facilities, the primary environmental impacts often originate from off-site biomass production. This article considers the resulting limitations of EIAs by using two legal disputes in France as illustrative examples. In the Gardanne and the La Mède cases, French Administrative Courts sought to establish the necessity for project proponents to incorporate supply-related impacts into the EIA process. Strategies aimed at broadening the scope of EIAs, either by expanding the assessed project boundaries or by invoking the concept of cumulative impacts, were not deemed the most relevant approaches. Instead, the concept of ‘indirect impact’ emerged as a valuable tool for incorporating supply-related impacts. However, to prevent the indirect impact concept from being disregarded as too ambiguous or ineffective, it should be complemented by precise criteria to determine whether an impact may be considered indirect. We study these avenues within the broader evolving landscape of EIA laws, and by exploring ways to harmonize EIAs with other regulatory instruments governing value chains.