Session Description
Impact assessment practice has changed substantially in many countries over the past several years, driven above all by criticism that EIA reviews delay and inflate the cost of approving and building projects, especially critical infrastructure. In the United States, after five decades of relative stability since the National Environmental Policy Act was enacted in 1970, NEPA practitioners have more recently faced an avalanche of change: congressional amendments to the statute in 2023, implementing regulations repeatedly revised and ultimately removed, emergency authorities that compress impact reports for energy and critical mineral projects from years to weeks, and federal court rulings narrowing NEPA's scope and increasing deference to agencies. Australia has seen major changes as well. The 2025 Environment Protection Reform Act and related legislation has been criticized for exempting numerous projects from analysis requirements, omitting climate change impacts, and de-emphasizing deforestation and land clearing. Other changes, such as the creation of Environment Information Australia, have been welcomed as strengthening practice through better aggregation of and access to national environmental data. This session will offer a detailed comparative overview of these developments in both countries, covering the origins and history of their laws and policies, their implications, and where they appear to be heading — or should head — in the future. Presenters include former government officials, attorneys, and practicing consultants from both countries, well positioned to discuss what these changes mean for the future of EIA practice.
Session Summary
Over recent years, impact assessment has shifted sharply in the US and Australia — NEPA upended by amendments, deregulation, and court rulings; Australia's 2025 reforms drawing both praise and criticism. This session compares both trajectories, their origins, implications, and likely future direction.
Session Chair
Michael Smith
WSP
United States