• 
• Japanese
• 
• IETC's Focal Area
• Waste Management
• Publications & Tools
• Meetings & Workshops
• Water and Sanitation
• Publications & Tools
• Meetings & Workshops
• Disaster Management
• Publications & Tools
• Meetings & Workshops
• Resources
• Publications & Tools
• About IETC
• Background and History
• Director
• Activity Reports
• Supporting Foundations
• Procurement
• Internship
• Contact Us

2.7  EnTA is not a linear process

Although Figure 1 may be taken to suggest that the five steps of the EnTA process are sequential, this is not the case. In many instances the various steps in the assessment can be undertaken simultaneously, or in a different order to that outlined above, depending upon circumstances such as the timeframe and resources available to the assessment team. Also, EnTA should be an incremental and circular process (as Figure 1 implies), continually incorporating new information and understanding as they become available.

2.8  Alternative approaches

The Workbook can be used in two ways, depending upon the resources and time available to the assessment team. The two methods, designated the "short form" and the "long form", are distinguished by the way in which they examine the impacts associated with alternative technological options. The differences in approach are outlined below.

Short Form

In its short form the focus of the assessment is on one technology option. The relative impacts of alternative technologies are examined in a comparatively cursory manner, in Step 4. This provides only a preliminary comparison of the alternatives.

Long Form

In this approach the environmental pressures and impacts are identified for each of the alternative technological options, in the same manner and detail as was the case when the principal technology was assessed. Thus the worksheets associated with Step 2 and Step 3 are completed for each of the options. This approach gives a more detailed analysis of the environmental consequences of the alternative options, but requires considerably more time and information.

2.9  Evaluating environmental consequences

The primary goal of EnTA is to identify, characterise and evaluate the range of environmental consequences associated with each technology option. The approach taken in the Workbook is to encourage assessors to identify the pressures the technology will place on the environment and to subsequently evaluate the potential environmental impacts of these pressures. This is basically a four-stage process involving Description, Identification, Characterisation and Evaluation (DICE) (see Figure 2).

• Describe the proposed technology intervention, any alternatives, their requirements, and the operating environment;
• Identify the pressures the technology places on the environment;
• Characterise the environmental impacts these pressures may cause; and
• Evaluate the overall consequences of the impacts in light of local conditions.

For example, when investigating the impact of a manufacturing technology the assessor would need to describe the technology, its requirements and the context within which it will operate, identify the wastes produced, characterise the potential impacts of the waste streams on the environment, and then evaluate the consequences in relation to the cumulative effects of the other environmental pressures, impacts and local conditions.

The DICE procedure proposed in this Manual is related to the more commonly used Pressure-State-Response model (more information on the PSR model can be found by consulting the relevant resources listed in Annex 1). Development of policy and other responses are an integral part of the PSR model while EnTA is designed to inform the policy making process, rather than it being integral to the assessment itself. Both the DICE procedure and the PSR model have "pressure" as a common element, and hence some familiarity with the PSR model may be advantageous when undertaking an EnTA. The "state" element in the PSR model is expanded and more explicit in the DICE procedure, involving as it does both characterisation and evaluation of the impacts likely to arise from the identified pressures.

Figure 2. The DICE procedure

The relationship between the more general DICE procedure and the five steps of EnTA are indicated in Figure 3.

In EnTA broad categories of pressures are considered, along with their potential environmental impacts. The main pathways by which a technology interacts with it surroundings can normally be divided into the following categories; the material, labour and energy resources used by the technology, the wastes and hazardous products released into the environment, and the impacts of the supporting infrastructure and services.

The environmental consequences of a technology will vary with both the characteristics of the pressures (e.g. the nature and quantity of resources consumed and wastes released) and of the receiving environment (e.g. community values, hazard pathways, number of people or animals exposed, and sensitivity of the receiving environment).

Therefore, the same technology operating in different locations may have very different environmental impacts. The aim of the assessment is to determine in a systematic manner the factors, if any, that make a proposed technology unsuitable for a particular application in a specific location. The assessment attempts to locate the ‘weak links' (i.e. pressure points) in the technology-environment chain. In many instances the pressure points will often be associated with the use of one or two resources, or the discharge of one or two waste products.

Figure 3. The DICE procedure in the context of the five steps of EnTA

[back to index]

• Brochure
• 
• 
• International Year of Biodiversity
• 
•