ABSTRACT

The need for simplifying Environmental Assessment (EA), and potential that simplification holds, has not only been raised by policymakers but also by scholars. Despite recent years’ focus and increased push for simplifying EA world-wide – hereunder argued because of the need for accelerating climate investments and green transition – and the fact that simplification is not a new agenda, studies exploring types and effects of simplification remain scarce. Although there is potential in simplifying EA, several concerns have also been raised, including the risk of ‘oversimplification.’ This letter outlines different reasoning behind simplification of EA and further presents a simplification triangle distinguishing between three interdependent types of simplification: Regulatory, administrative, and praxis. The reasoning and categorization of simplification is illustrated and discussed through four Danish cases, which reveal simplification as a multifaceted set of processes for which we need a more precise terminology. The reasoning and types of simplification presented in this letter may offer a basis for communicating the nature of the simplification processes that the EA may be facing – or needing.

摘要

简化环境评估 (EA) 的必要性以及简化所具有的潜力，不仅由政策制定者提出，而且由学者们提出。尽管近年来在全球范围内对简化 EA 的关注和推动力度不断加大——由于需要加速气候投资和绿色转型，下文对此进行了争论——而且简化并不是一项新议程，但探索简化类型和影响的研究仍然很少。尽管在简化 EA 方面存在潜力，但也提出了一些担忧，包括“过度简化”的风险。这封信概述了 EA 简化背后的不同推理，并进一步提出了一个简化三角形，区分三种相互依赖的简化类型：监管、行政和实践。简化的推理和分类通过四个丹麦案例进行说明和讨论，这些案例揭示了简化是一组多方面的过程，我们需要更精确的术语。这封信中提出的推理和简化类型可能会为传达 EA 可能面临或需要的简化过程的性质提供基础。