環境アセスメントからみたEBPM

―科学性と民主性に着目して―

抄録

This paper aims to clarify the issues and directions in which to improve the current EBPM (evidence-based policy making) in Japan from the scientific and democratic perspectives by identifying the differences between an environmental impact assessment (EIA) and EBPM. It points out that in the evaluation stage, impact assessment should be applied both ex-ante and ex-post, and that adaptive management based on ex-post evaluation is crucial to address uncertainty. The paper also states that evaluation should be conducted comprehensively, considering positive and negative impacts and environmental, economic, and social aspects, and that wise decision-making can be supported by alternative considerations based on that evaluation. Both EBPM and EIA emphasize quantitative evaluation; however, it is necessary to incorporate qualitative evaluation appropriately. Stakeholder engagement in EBPM is an issue that needs to be considered, as both practice and discussion are inadequate. In the future, it is hoped that measures will be found in EBPM to deal with “trans-science issues” by referring to the practical knowledge of EIA.