Brian D. Clark PADC Environmental Impact Assessment and Planning Unit Project Director Events throughout the world substantiate the view that planning and decision-making systems need a better integration of environ­ mental, economic and social considerations. Many organizations are showing considerable interest in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and its role in project planning and policy evaluation and as an aid to decision-making. Consequently, it was decided to hold a NATO Advanced Study Institute on EIA for the following reasons. First there is evidence of uncertainty, particularly amongst many scientists and decision-makers, as to the nature, scope and object­ ives of EIA. Secondly, there is much confusion over the objectives and utility of certain EIA methods. Third, there appears to be a gulf developing between decision-makers and what they require from EIA, and the ability of the scientist to provide information which is scientifically rigorous. Finally, there appears to be little concern as to the relationship between "impact prediction" and the actual consequences ofa development activity, suggesting that if EIA is not to become both politically and scientifically disreput­ able greater emphasis should be placed on prediction, monitoring and post-audit studies. As will be seen from the contents of this volume the ASI attempted to address all of the above topics and indeed many more. It was perhaps inevitable that the ASI raised more questions than were answered but this is indicative of the vigorous debate that is now taking place about the role and utility of EIA.

Brian D. Clark PADC Environmental Impact Assessment and Planning Unit Project Director Events throughout the world substantiate the view that planning and decision-making systems need a better integration of environ­ mental, economic and social considerations. Many organizations are showing considerable interest in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and its role in project planning and policy evaluation and as an aid to decision-making. Consequently, it was decided to hold a NATO Advanced Study Institute on EIA for the following reasons. First there is evidence of uncertainty, particularly amongst many scientists and decision-makers, as to the nature, scope and object­ ives of EIA. Secondly, there is much confusion over the objectives and utility of certain EIA methods. Third, there appears to be a gulf developing between decision-makers and what they require from EIA, and the ability of the scientist to provide information which is scientifically rigorous. Finally, there appears to be little concern as to the relationship between "impact prediction" and the actual consequences ofa development activity, suggesting that if EIA is not to become both politically and scientifically disreput­ able greater emphasis should be placed on prediction, monitoring and post-audit studies. As will be seen from the contents of this volume the ASI attempted to address all of the above topics and indeed many more. It was perhaps inevitable that the ASI raised more questions than were answered but this is indicative of the vigorous debate that is now taking place about the role and utility of EIA.