SEGH Articles

Health in Impact Assessment: primer published

02 July 2017
The changes to the EIA directive as recast in April this year (2017) brings human health very firmly into consideration. Any project which is subject to EIA (Environmental Impact assessment) is required to evaluate the impact from the project on human and population health.

The changes to the EIA directive (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/52/oj)  as recast in April this year (2017) brings  human health very firmly into consideration. Any project which is subject to EIA (Environmental Impact assessment) is required to evaluate the impact  from the project on human and population health.  Projects may range from major infrastructure projects, such as new railways and airport runways, waste incinerators, industrial scale agricultural activities, to applications for fracking, open cast mines, amongst others.

 

In order to move the consideration of human and population health central stage within the process of impact assessment, the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) has worked with Ben Cave Associates, and the Faculty of Public Health, to produce a primer which is intended to spark discussion across all professionals. Impact assessment requires the input of many different specialists; it is hoped that all of them will become engaged in this debate.

Although Health Impact Assessment  (HIA) has been carried out successfully for many projects, evaluation of human and population health has sadly been missing from many projects. It is worth remembering that the impacts can be both positive and negative. Getting the balance right is imperative. Impacts may derive from release of contaminants during the construction phase, through to contamination of water, release of proposed use of chemicals of concern, or equally may be the health benefits of the construction of a new health care facility, with release of dust and noise during the construction phase, but with a longer term overall benefit. Likewise, the disruption and impact from construction of a railway may be negative, but a shift in mode of transport away from the car in developed nations brings about improved air quality, and in developing nations provides transport which may previously have been absent, improving quality of life, not least of which may be access to healthcare facilities, or the ability to transport perishable goods to market in a timely manner. It should not be assumed that a HIA will try to get in the way of development, but rather that it will look at appropriate outcomes.

 

Balancing the various impacts is context sensitive. The geology and geography of the land to be developed will vary.  For example, water availability, permeability of rocks, or fragility of habitats, will vary, depending upon the location of a project, as will a wide number of other considerations. Identifying these issues correctly and evaluating health impacts is imperative.

The directive also requires adherence to the principle of resource efficiency. A move away from mining for new materials for production, to a requirement for re-use of materials, helps to decrease the impact on many communities, as well as the land itself. The directive requires a move towards sustainability.

Health Impact Assessment takes into account not only the ‘hard’ environmental impacts, but also the less visible ones, such as social cohesion, engagement with hard to reach communities, loss of amenity as well as impact on employment.

The EIA directive does not explicitly ask for a full  HIA to be carried out. However, in order for meaningful evaluation of human and population health to be taken into account, engagement needs to be early, and cross sectoral, as well as competent. HIA can do this. The primer does not argue for full HIAs to be undertaken, simply that human and population health is evaluated in a timely and competent manner.

As an organisation which promotes consideration of health from many directions, the research which SEGH members undertake can often be influential in the decision –making which Impact Assessment needs to undertake. Personally, I have often quoted pieces of research which have been presented at SEGH conferences. Although HIA professionals work with a good evidence base, sometimes it is necessary to err on the side of caution. Extending our evidence base is imperative. One of the stated aims of SEGH is the sharing of knowledge. Using that knowledge wisely for the good of others is the outcome we should seek.

Although the  IEMA primer is intended to be used initially in the UK, the questions which we pose are legitimate in other countries too. (Like SEGH, IEMA is an international organisation.)  Early intervention and engagement can ensure best outcomes for all concerned, driving best practice, and improving the health outcomes of   wider communities.

 The pdf is free to download from IEMA.  (https://www.iema.net/assets/newbuild/documents/IEMA%20Primer%20on%20Health%20in%20UK%20EIA%20Doc%20V11.pdf) Hard copies are available from IEMA, but the cost of these is £25.00.

Please feel free to use this within your various communities.


By Gillian Gibson, Gibson Consulting and Training

Keep up to date

Submit Content

Members can keep in touch with their colleagues through short news and events articles of interest to the SEGH community.

Science in the News

Latest on-line papers from the SEGH journal: Environmental Geochemistry and Health

  • Membrane fouling control by Ca 2+ during coagulation–ultrafiltration process for algal-rich water treatment 2019-04-16

    Abstract

    Seasonal algal bloom, a water supply issue worldwide, can be efficiently solved by membrane technology. However, membranes typically suffer from serious fouling, which hinders the wide application of this technology. In this study, the feasibility of adding Ca2+ to control membrane fouling in coagulation–membrane treatment of algal-rich water was investigated. According to the results obtained, the normalized membrane flux decreased by a lower extent upon increasing the concentration of Ca2+ from 0 to 10 mmol/L. Simultaneously, the floc particle size increased significantly with the concentration of Ca2+, which leads to a lower hydraulic resistance. The coagulation performance is also enhanced with the concentration of Ca2+, inducing a slight osmotic pressure-induced resistance. The formation of Ca2+ coagulation flocs resulted in a looser, thin, and permeable cake layer on the membrane surface. This cake layer rejected organic pollutants and could be easily removed by physical and chemical cleaning treatments, as revealed by scanning electron microscopy images. The hydraulic irreversible membrane resistance was significantly reduced upon addition of Ca2+. All these findings suggest that the addition of Ca2+ may provide a simple-operation, cost-effective, and environmentally friendly technology for controlling membrane fouling during coagulation–membrane process for algal-rich water treatment.

  • Evaluation of the raw water quality: physicochemical and toxicological approaches 2019-04-13

    Abstract

    Environmental degradation has increased, mainly as a result of anthropogenic effects arising from population, industrial and agricultural growth. Water pollution is a problem that affects health, safety and welfare of the whole biota which shares the same environment. In Goiânia and metropolitan region, the main water body is the Meia Ponte River that is used for the abstraction of water, disposal of treated wastewater and effluents. In addition, this river receives wastewater from urban and rural areas. The aim in this present study was to evaluate the quality of raw water by some physical, chemical and toxicological tests. The physicochemical results found high levels of turbidity, conductivity, aluminum, phosphorus and metal iron, manganese, copper and lithium when compared to the standards of the Brazilian legislation. The values found of toxicity demonstrated a high degree of cytotoxicity and genotoxicity. Therefore, it was concluded that the Meia Ponte River has been undergoing constant environmental degradation, causing the poor quality of its waters. Thus, measures for the prevention and recovery should be adopted for the maintenance of the Meia Ponte River.

  • Review of the nature of some geophagic materials and their potential health effects on pregnant women: some examples from Africa 2019-04-11

    Abstract

    The voluntary human consumption of soil known as geophagy is a global practice and deep-rooted in many African cultures. The nature of geophagic material varies widely from the types to the composition. Generally, clay and termite mound soils are the main materials consumed by geophagists. Several studies revealed that gestating women across the world consume more soil than other groups for numerous motives. These motivations are related to medicinal, cultural and nutrients supplementation. Although geophagy in pregnancy (GiP) is a universal dynamic habit, the highest prevalence has been reported in African countries such as Kenya, Ghana, Rwanda, Nigeria, Tanzania, and South Africa. Geophagy can be both beneficial and detrimental. Its health effects depend on the amount and composition of the ingested soils, which is subjective to the geology and soil formation processes. In most cases, the negative health effects concomitant with the practice of geophagy eclipse the positive effects. Therefore, knowledge about the nature of geophagic material and the health effects that might arise from their consumption is important.