The primary objective of an EIA is to systematically identify, predict, and evaluate the potential environmental impacts of a proposed project, including its alternatives, in order to inform decision-making.

Bias in the assessment process is not a common challenge associated with EIA. However, lack of public participation, insufficient baseline data, and uncertainties in predicting environmental impacts are common challenges.

Public participation in EIA involves providing input on the scope and methodology of the EIA, reviewing and commenting on the EIA report, and participating in decision-making on the project.

The accuracy of EIA predictions can be improved by using more sophisticated modeling techniques, collecting more baseline data, and involving experts from different disciplines.

The main purpose of mitigation measures in EIA is to minimize environmental impacts, not eliminate, compensate, or monitor them.

Conflicts between stakeholders with different interests is not a common controversy associated with EIA. However, allegations of bias in the assessment process, concerns about the accuracy of EIA predictions, and disputes over the scope and methodology of EIA are common controversies.

Regulatory authorities play a crucial role in EIA by reviewing and approving EIA reports, enforcing compliance with EIA requirements, and providing guidance on EIA procedures.

The effectiveness of EIA can be improved by strengthening legal and institutional frameworks, enhancing public participation, and improving the quality of EIA reports.

Considering alternatives in EIA is significant because it allows for the identification of the most environmentally friendly option, comparison of environmental impacts of different options, and selection of the option with the least environmental impacts.

EIA is legally binding in many jurisdictions. However, it is often criticized for being too costly and time-consuming, biased towards the project proponent, and not adequately addressing cumulative impacts.

Scoping in EIA serves to define the boundaries of the EIA study area, identify the key environmental issues to be assessed, and determine the level of detail required in the EIA report.

The quality of EIA reports can be improved by involving qualified and experienced professionals, using standardized methodologies and guidelines, and ensuring transparency and accountability in the assessment process.

Monitoring in EIA plays a crucial role in verifying the accuracy of EIA predictions, identifying any unexpected environmental impacts, and ensuring compliance with environmental regulations.

Effective public engagement in EIA involves providing timely and accessible information, creating opportunities for public consultation and participation, and addressing public concerns and incorporating feedback into the EIA process.

Considering cumulative impacts in EIA is important for assessing the combined effects of multiple projects, identifying potential synergistic or antagonistic interactions, and developing effective mitigation strategies.