（Environmental Impact Assessment Experience in Taiwan: Reflections on the Aarhus Convention）ABSTRACT
      This paper intends to provide a critical review of the Taiwanese experience with Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) since 1995 in light of the Aarhus Convention. The paper will be divided into 6 sections, mainly following the EIA process while focusing on the practice of those rights enshrined in the Convention, i.e., access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters. The author believes that in view of the flag-ship status of the EIA Act of 1994 in the Taiwanese environmental law regime, her comprehensive coverage and relative abundance of cases, the paper will be highly consistent with the main theme of the Conference—environmental governance and sustainability.
      Section One provides a general background of the legal system of Taiwan by briefly introducing the most pertinent laws, including the Constitution and its Amendments, Administrative Procedure Act, Administrative Litigation Act, Freedom of Information Act, Data Protection Act as well as EIA Act within the context of the Taiwanese environmental law regime.
      Section Two analyses the pre-EIA procedures, including the so-called “threshold” and “screening”. The former defines the applicable scope or coverage of the EIA Act. The Act requires all “development activities” for which there is concern of adverse impact on environment shall conduct an EIA, and then defines the development activities subjected to an EIA by enlisting their categories with a supplement of a “to-be-further-announced” catch-all provision. The screening procedure is to separate, by requiring the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), those development activities which might have significant adverse impact on environment for further assessment, from the others which are marked with a finding of no significant impact (FONSI).
Section Three elaborates the procedure for conducting an EIA, including notice and comment (public disclosure of the development project and submission of written comments by the public), on-site inspection with public hearing, scoping, preparation of Draft EIA Report, review of the Draft Report by the Competent Authority, and preparation of Final EIA Report by revising the Draft Report pursuant to the review opinion.
      Section Four examines the post-EIA procedures, including the subsequent monitoring of the implementation of EIA, by requiring submitting Environmental Impact Survey regularly if necessary, and the submission of Environmental Difference Analysis and Response Strategy when a developer has not started conducting the development activity until three years after the approval of its EIS or EIA report.
      Section Five investigates all access to court in environmental matters, including the “public-interest suits” based upon §23-VIII of EIA Act, §34 of Environmental Basic Law and §9-I of Administrative Litigation Act, etc. for failure to take enforcement action by the competent authority. It shall be noted that according to EIA Act, the responsible agency having jurisdiction over the development project may not issue a construction permit until the competent authority of EIA, i.e., Taiwan’s Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA), completes the EIA review process. In addition, the Section will study the access to court because of a denial of request for government information, including environmental information, and a procedural violation of the due process requirements prescribed in Administrative Procedure Act in general and in EIA Act in particular.
      Section Six summarizes all the findings and suggestions for subsequent law revision and future judicial decision as a Taiwanese reflection on the Aarhus Convention.

作者：汤德宗