Understanding EIA scoping in practice: A pragmatist interpretation of effectiveness

•Practitioner notions of effectiveness are explored within EIA scoping in England.•Pragmatism is used to examine the interpretations and actions of practitioners.•Risk management shapes the conduct of ‘effective scoping’, given the actors role.•Scoping approaches limit opportunities for the co-production of knowledge.•Implications of the research are considered in light of the revised EIA Directive.

Despite widespread recognition of the need to consider IA effectiveness in terms of practice, the literature is dominated by normative approaches that do little to advance understanding of the causal process that lead to particular outcomes. Focusing upon EIA scoping in England, we examine notions of effectiveness directly from the perspective of key practitioner communities. The ‘received view’ of scoping asserts that effectiveness is constrained by a failure to narrow the assessment focus. Using an alternative, pragmatist interpretation (inspired by American philosophical pragmatism) we analyse the understandings and actions of professional practitioner communities. We find that risk management ‘ends-in-view’ shape the interpretation of the purpose of scoping and hence effective practice. Amongst EIA consultants the ends-in-view emphasise managing the risk of project delays, whilst planning officers seek to minimise the risk of legal challenge, and statutory consultees aim to provide advice that is proportionate to potential environmental risks. Practitioner ends-in-view shape the scoping approaches employed and the opportunities for knowledge formulation and ‘learning in action’. Whilst practitioners demonstrate pragmatism in managing uncertainty and there is some awareness of potential power-play, we find that knowledge formation and learning is predominately instrumental and incremental. Instrumental in serving to refine technical details (rather than co-constructed, drawing on multiple rationalities and types of understanding), and incremental in that over time practitioners learn that the most effective way to achieve their ends-in-view is to include impacts — resulting in a broad, precautionary scoping outcome. Finally, we conclude with reflections on future research directions and the implications for practice given forthcoming changes to the regulatory framework.