EIA studies can’t save unsustainable projects, says ERA chair

For the past decades, planning debates as to whether large-scale projects can take place in sensitive areas like Hondoq ir-Rummien or the Dingli cliffs, have been prolonged by endless studies despite the inherent incompatibility of such projects with their surroundings.

This reality was recently denounced by Environment and Resources Authority’s chairman Victor Axiaq in the ERA’s annual report, reaffirming a recent objection of the ERA to a tourism development in Marsaxlokk.

“There is the myth that an EIA would by itself solve all environmental issues arising from big developments. Not necessarily so,” Axiaq wrote. For when “a proposed project is inherently unsustainable and by its very nature, is bound to lead to significant environmental degradation, an EIA would be worthless.”

On the other hand, according to Axiaq it would be far more useful for the ERA to engage into detailed discussions with developers at the earliest possible stage of planning, to ensure that what is being proposed is not “only economically but also environmentally and socially sustainable”.

“I have personally witnessed this happening on a number of occasions, even during the past year. Such initiatives very often go unnoticed and never gain the recognition that is due to our staff. But then, recognition and praise are not our top priority. Having said so, it helps,” Axiak said.

And in this case the ERA is also practicing what its chairman is preaching as in the case of a seven-unit tourist accommodation complex instead of disused farming structures in Marsaxlokk, adjacent to an Area of Ecological Importance and a Natura 2000 site. The ERA said the development would effectively commit an 8,300sq.m area with significant uptake of undeveloped rural land – currently a large open field, only partly occupied by a small farm – and the urbanisation of land outside development zones, to accommodate residential development. The site lies very close to the Magħluq coastal marshland, well within the protected area surrounding it, which should be kept free from development.

The ERA insisted that such projects cannot be assessed on an ad hoc basis, as these have cumulative impacts introducing additional pressure on nearby lands.

Since such impacts would effectively prejudice the long-term integrity of the Natura 2000 site, these cannot be effectively addressed through case-by-case studies, which would not change their fundamental reality.

In fact proposals deemed “incompatible” with the protected status of the site should be “pre-empted at source through the avoidance”, Prof. Axiaq said.

And while such a development requires a project development statement so that the ERA can determine whether a full environment impact assessment is needed, such studies cannot resolve “the more basic environmental impacts” which are should be simply avoided.