Curtailing environmental impact assessment unlikely to speed implementation of natural resource management

Abstract Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a central procedure that governments use to evaluate the merits and risks of natural resource management decisions and is often labeled red tape. Increasingly, decisionmakers from across the political spectrum are exempting EIA in order to expedite implementation of necessary actions for climate resilience and clean energy. Yet few studies have quantified the extent that EIA is the main barrier to efficient implementation of government priorities. We gather administrative data from the US Forest Service (USFS) on more than 4,500 silviculture, fuels, and invasive species management actions initiated 2009–2021 and use survival analysis to compare the time it takes agency offices to comply with the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) relative to other implementation tasks. Results indicate that for most actions the USFS takes as long or longer to award first contracts and rollout first on-the-ground activities than to complete NEPA processes, and that the NEPA process accounts for one-fifth of planned implementation time. Results call attention toward efficiency barriers that slow implementation after EIA and away from exemption strategies that deliver short-term political benefits at the expense of public trust and sound decision-making under a shifting climate.