Evolution of the Environmental Impact Assessment Process in Romania in the Context of Sustainable Development

Abstract

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a required systematic process of identifying, predicting, and assessing the environmental effects of proposed actions and projects such as nuclear power stations, long-distance railways, motorways, express roads, waste disposal installations for hazardous waste, and dams of a certain capacity. After presenting the EIA evolution at the international level, its introduction into Romanian legislation in 1973 is discussed, considering criticism regarding the main problems arising from its widespread implementation. Although some studies have included state-of-the-art synthesis of the EIA effectiveness concept, there are no reported studies using bibliometric analysis to describe in detail the historical development of the EIA process. The aim of this study is to analyze the evolution of the EIA process in Romania in the context of sustainable development (SD). To achieve this objective, the data obtained from the implementation of PRISMA methodology and bibliometric analysis were considered. For this purpose, 125 publications on the EIA evolution were selected, obtained from a systematic review in the Elsevier, Scopus, and Springer databases for the period 2000–2024. The research results provide practical recommendations for decision-makers and practitioners in Romania, aiming to strengthen EIA legislation and practices with the purpose of ensuring the effective implementation of sustainable development principles.

1. Introduction

The development of human society has led to wide-ranging global sustainability challenges, from maintaining biodiversity to managing freshwater resources, preservation of air quality, and socio-economic growth. The holistic approaches to understanding and integrating different components of human and natural systems are essential to understanding the socio-economic environmental interconnections and creating solutions for sustainable development.

Over the last 40 years, there has been an increased interest in environmental issues and sustainable development in order to better manage the development of the economy and society in an environmentally sound way. Sustainable development (SD) is the result of the growing global awareness of environmental, social, and economic problems, as well as issues such as poverty, gender inequality, and the living situation of future generations [1,2]. Solving these complex sustainability constraints does not only involve practical techniques and methods, but a deep conceptual understanding of these challenges’ origins is necessary.

Since its introduction in national legislation, the EIA process has followed an evolutionary trajectory marked by criticisms and legislative rectifications, aiming to solve the problems identified in its large-scale implementation in the country [3]. The analysis of the evolution of EIA in Romania has highlighted a number of implications that reflect both the progress made and the persistent challenges. The implications can be grouped into three main categories: legislative, social, and environmental. The legislative implications have resulted in the harmonization of European Union (EU) directives into national law, which has led to increased transparency in decision-making processes during evaluations [4,5]. The social implications have facilitated public consultations that resulted in the acceptance/denial of environmental projects by civil society [6,7]. The environmental implications play a crucial role in promoting sustainable development [8].

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is seen as a promoter of sustainable development, and its effectiveness is being increasingly monitored. This concept has become a research topic constantly addressed since the 1970s [9], which has led to the development of new effective practices in EIA and the strengthening of this process. The studies carried out have mainly focused on legislative elements resulting in the benefits of implementation [10] and its effectiveness at local, national, and international levels. The benefits of using a related impact assessment tool may vary depending on the assessment framework in which it has been applied.

Since the implementation of the EIA concept in the 1970s, the studies reviewed show a significantly positive development of EIA, which has led to a broadening of the scope of the assessment process, an increased emphasis on public participation and transparency, and the integration of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a priority [6,11,12,13].

In recent years, considering the importance of EIA, research has been carried out, resulting in the publication of numerous studies focused on the legislative implementation of EIA as a tool for direct and indirect quantification of environmental impacts resulting from human activities to provide a basis for decision-making. Thus, a large number of related concepts and tools have been generated to support the EIA process, which was referred to as “impact assessment”, i.e., the environmental, economic, and social impacts of certain activities, processes, and products. These tools refer to EIA [14,15], Risk Assessment (RA) [16,17,18], Social Impact Assessment (SIA) [3,19], Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) [20,21], Health and Technology Assessment (HTA) [22], and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) [10,23,24,25], and are the result of a certain level of dissatisfaction with the way in which EIA was applied [26]. These environmental assessment procedures are rarely rectified and are not mandatory [27].

Examples of EIA used in the context of sustainable development are available in the international literature in a significantly small number. For example, Roos et al. [28] reviewed the environmental footprint indicators as a tool to assess environmental sustainability, where the authors focused on systematizing environmental footprints in order to identify measures of progress toward sustainable development goals. Vanham Davy et al. [29] conducted an empirical study that provided insights into the perceived benefits of EIA to society, consistent with the SD model, from the perspective of decision-makers. Other authors [30] have addressed EIA issues globally by integrating first- and second-order impacts into a systemic framework for assessing social and environmental sustainability. Cashmore Matthew et al. [31] undertook an empirical analysis based on multiple case studies to achieve the objective of advancing the theory that environmental assessments contribute to sustainable development. The research findings provided important empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that environmental assessment has the potential to contribute to sustainable development through mechanisms that go beyond its development outcomes.

The common conclusions of these studies are linked to the idea that sustainable development as a guideline has led to a subtle repositioning of environmental assessment, legislation, and environmental assessment procedures in line with SD.

In Romania, studies on the evaluation of the EIA process [32] are limited. Most of the research has been carried out mainly on EIAs that generate a high level of interest from participants [33] or have harmful effects on the environment [34]. As the EIA effectiveness is an intensively studied topic that is expected to be a long-term research trend, state-of-the-art studies [35] have been prepared analyzing publications in terms of the evolution of the legislative framework [27,35], the dimensions of effectiveness [3], and the relationship between EIA and related assessment tools [32,36].

This research focuses on analyzing the evolution of the EIA in Romania in correlation with the objectives of sustainable development. To achieve the proposed objective, the research methodology includes two distinct stages: (a) the elaboration of a bibliometric analysis to present the evolutionary trajectory of EIA from the historical, legislative, and effectiveness points of view of the process and (b) the highlighting of the interconnection between sustainable development and EIA by analyzing and evaluating the results obtained. Consequently, instead of validating a singular theory, an empirical approach was applied in which data was collected and analyzed and then structured to reveal the full spectrum of outcomes generated by EIA implementation. This study is distinguished by addressing an under-explored area of research on the historical development of EIA using data collected through the application of the PRISMA methodology and bibliometric analysis for the time span 2000–2024. The results were critically analyzed in relation to existing theoretical frameworks on the contribution of environmental assessment to sustainable development.

2. Methodology

The selection and analysis of scientific literature was made considering the following criteria:

2.1. Literature Search and Eligibility Criteria

The present review is based on a methodological approach, which involves a broad survey of scientific literature. It consists of a methodological search that identified, selected, and analyzed studies with significant impact on the scientific community [32].

The advantages of this methodology are the minimization of biased influences, which ensures compliance with the review process, its replicability, and the confirmation of its result [37].

2.2. Bibliometric Database

The electronic databases that have been used in this study are Elsevier (https://www.sciencedirect.com/ (accessed on: 17 December 2024)), Scopus Elsevier (http://www.scopus.com (accessed on: 17 December 2024)), and Springer Elsevier (https://link.springer.com (accessed on: 17 December 2024)).

The analytical framework was developed by collecting data according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [38], a technique with a wide range of applications. The methodological framework used allowed for the review of a large number of articles selected according to well-defined parameters. The implementation of this protocol has strengthened the accuracy and reliability of the data obtained from systematic reviews.

This generates a control chart based on four steps: Identification, Screening, Eligibility, and Inclusion, which aim to ensure the transparency of the process of analyzing and selecting articles [38].

The PRISMA methodology was applied for data collection and systematic review phases, as presented in Figure 1. The following keywords were used in the following combination: environmental AND impact AND assessments AND sustainable AND development. The search returned 866 publications. The language of these documents is relevant, so only papers that were published in English (criterion 1) were included, resulting in 858 documents. We selected studies published between 2000 and 2024 (criteria 2) and obtained 577 documents. The papers selected in this study include research in environmental science (criterion 3), which included 254 papers, 213 articles, 33 reviews, 3 book chapters, and 5 books (criterion 4).

The compliance criterion was that the publications had to refer to the concept of EIA or mention aspects of EIA legislation, evolution, or implementation in the context of SD, resulting in the selection of 125 studies for this review.

3. Literature Review

This section includes an analysis of the evolution, legislation, and implementation of the EIA process at the international and national level, as well as the emergence and evolution of the SD concept. This is based on data from preliminary literature research, as well as on themes, models, debates, and comparisons from the literature review.

3.1. Definition of Environmental Impact Assessment

EIA has various definitions in the literature, including “a process of identifying, predicting, evaluating, and mitigating the biophysical, social, and other relevant effects of proposed projects before major decisions and commitments are done” [5,18]. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) has characterized it as “a systematic process of identifying, predicting and assessing the environmental effects of proposed actions and projects” [39].

The overarching objective of the Environmental Impact Assessment process is to ensure the sustainability of projects from the earliest stages of planning and design by anticipating, identifying, and managing potential negative environmental impacts. The EIA process facilitates the integration of environmental considerations into the engineering design process, thereby ensuring that the benefits of the projects are achieved in a sustainable manner without generating unforeseen environmental impacts. Furthermore, the EIA provides a sound basis for informing formal decisions and balancing development objectives with environmental protection.

The EIA process has undergone significant methodological evolution, expanding its applicability by analyzing the environmental impacts of projects and legislative frameworks [40,41] or use in multiple fields of interest. Currently, EIA is widely applied in water resource management projects [24,42,43,44], landfill management [43], and mining activities [45,46]. Furthermore, the EIA can be used to address a wide range of environmental problems resulting from the unsustainable implementation of different categories of human activities [39].

3.2. History of EIA: Emergence, Evolution, Implementation

EIA emerged as a response to the increasing environmental degradation resulting from urbanization, industrialization, and intensive agriculture, which has led to resource depletion and degraded quality of life. These effects are being recognized worldwide, and, as a result, more than 190 countries have adopted the EIA system to date. The concept of EIA emerged in 1969 with the emergence of the environmental movement in the United States. From a legislative perspective, the principles of EIA were established in 1969 in the United States with the adoption passage of the “National Environmental Policy Act”, an act required for the development of an emerging environmental impact statement [47,48,49]. Although the concept led to numerous debates about its role in the implementation process, it is seen as a means to evaluate actions, policies, plans, and programs that contribute to the achievement of objectives and serve as a link between the environment and sustainable development [50].

EIA can thus be regarded as one of the most effective environmental planning and management tools for this purpose, as it is considered an intrinsically complex multidimensional process [36,51,52]. As a result, this tool can be used to identify and screen out potentially environmentally damaging projects that induce negative impacts, engage communities to identify feasible alternatives, and assess the magnitude and potential biophysical changes as a result of an activity or policy [36]. It also helps convey this information to decision-makers, with the adoption and implementation of this process depending on the institutional framework and political context of each country [53].

The first countries (as presented in

Table 1. Environmental impact assessment evolution in various countries.

Country	Year	EIA Regulation
Austria	1993	Environmental Impact Assessment came into force in July 1994.
Belgium	1985	Various decrees and ordinances.
Finland	1994	Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure Act.
Denmark	1991	Planning Acts, 1991 and 1994, and a series of Executive Orders, 1988–1994.
France	1976	Formal provisions laid down by two laws adopted in 1976 and implemented by three implementing decrees in 1977.
Germany	1975	The EIA legislation was approved in 1990.
Greece	1986	The EIA legal framework was established in 1986 by Law 1650.
Ireland	1976	Planning Act (1976), with limited practical application.
Italy	1986	Framework law of 1986 and two decrees of 1988.
United States, California	1971	Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1971.
European Union	1985	EU implements the EIA Directive.
Portugal	1987	Environment Law 11/87.
Spain	1985	Royal Decrees 1302/1986, 1988, and 1994, supplemented by Law 25/1988 on highways and Law 4/1989.
Sweden	1964	EIA provisions were contained in 25 different laws since 1964.
United Kingdom	1985	Directive 85/337/EEC was adopted through 15 sets of basic regulations.
Romania	1995	EIA legislation was introduced in 1995.
Sri Lanka	1980	National Environment Acts, 1980, 1984, 1986.
Venezuela	1976	Organic Law of the Environment, 1976.
India	1986	Environment (Protection) Act No. 29, 1986.
Malaysia	1974	Environmental Quality Act, 1974, 1985.
Iran	1994	National Development Plan (NDP).

) that have implemented this environmental assessment tool in their legislation are examples to other nations to include this type of assessment process in their legislation and for the official procedures to plan any environmental decision-making [54].

It is unanimously recognized that an important factor for environmental reforms has been the process of harmonization of legislation with European Union (EU) requirements for the countries that are part of the EU.

The EIA process in developing countries is characterized by a dual dynamic, with progress in the implementation of legislative frameworks, but significant challenges also remain [55]. Shortcomings such as limited institutional capacity, systemic corruption, and ineffective enforcement continue to undermine the effectiveness of the EIA. However, there are opportunities for improvement by strengthening institutional capacity, integrating advanced technologies, promoting public participation, and enhancing international cooperation [51,55,56]. By addressing these challenges, developing countries can help strengthen EIA systems and advance the Sustainable Development Goals.

According to several authors, a positive relationship exists between economic development and environmental performance, which is complex and influenced by a number of factors. While there is evidence in favor of a positive relationship, it is important to consider counterarguments. Sustainable economic development requires a balance among economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity [57]. There is a significant correlation between the completeness of an EIA procedure and a nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) per capita [58]. A study examines EIA implementation in China, highlighting the country’s efforts to balance rapid economic growth with environmental sustainability [59]. While EIAs have improved environmental outcomes, their economic impacts vary by region, with wealthier provinces better able to absorb the costs of compliance.

The economic effects of EIA implementation are context-dependent, with developed countries generally realizing long-term benefits such as cost savings, job creation, and increased investor confidence. In contrast, developing and emerging economies often face challenges of rising project costs, delays, and uneven implementation. To maximize the economic benefits of EIA, it is essential to strengthen institutional capacity, streamline regulatory processes, and promote stakeholder involvement. These measures can help countries strike a balance between environmental protection and economic growth, as demonstrated by the results of numerous scientific studies [57,59,60].

Directive 85/337/EEC, 1985, was the first European legislative framework to formally recognize the environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedure as applicable to both public and private projects, as defined in its annexes. This legislation established the key parameters for the scope and usefulness of the EIA procedure and the mechanisms for public participation in the assessment [3,61,62]. The provisions of Directive 85/337/EEC and its three amendments were consolidated as Directive 2011/92/EU, while Directive 2014/52/EU introduced new amendments on EIA, with entry into force on 15 May 2014. EU Member States transposed these provisions into national law by 16 May 2017 [61]. In support of this directive, the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention, 1991) was drafted, which required the implementation of legislative measures [63,64]. The chronological evolution of these directives is illustrated in Figure 2.

EIA became a globally recognized practice, being used predominantly for large-scale projects. In view of the complexity, importance, and continuous need for optimization of legislation, a number of studies have analyzed the effectiveness of this process from several perspectives [35,65,66], including case studies that have been conducted tracking the history of this process [67,68], effectiveness across the four dimensions [69], and effectiveness evaluation case studies in different countries [35,70]. In conformity with its subjective nature, most authors agree that the effectiveness of EIA is multidimensional and plural in character [35,69]. According to Sadler (1992), the three dimensions of EIA effectiveness are procedural, substantive, and transactional. Baker and McLelland [71] developed and introduced the fourth dimension, normative effectiveness, based on the existing three dimensions.

Environmental impact assessment was introduced into Romanian legislation with the adoption of the Environmental Protection Law in 1973 [72], signifying a landmark moment in national legislation. Prior to this, the legal framework lacked specific provisions for the EIA process. The objective of this law was to assess at the planning stage the environmental implications of projects with the potential to exert a substantial influence on the environment. In the subsequent decade, the legislative framework for EIA underwent substantial improvement, materializing in a series of legislative acts imposing requirements for EIA, such as Order No. 619/1992, which established the procedure for defining the minimum content of EIA studies, including detailed provisions for informing and consulting the public in the assessment process (https://www.mmediu.ro/ (accessed on 25 December 2024)) [73,74].

Table 2. Evolution of EIA in Romania (source: https://www.mmediu.ro/, [72,74]).

Year	Framework Legislation	EIA Procedure
1973	Law 9/1973 on environmental protection	The object of this law is to regulate environmental protection based on the principles and strategic elements which lead to the sustainable development of society.
1992	Order 619/1992	Procedure for establishing the minimum content of studies and environmental impact assessment.
1995	Law 137/1995 on environmental protection	A new law on environmental protection is adopted, including provisions on EIA in Romania and the public debate procedure.
1996	Order 125/1996	Approval of Procedure for regulating economic and social activities with environmental impact—revoked Order 170/1990, Decision 113/1990, and Order 619/1992.
1999	Order 214/1999	Approval of procedure for the promotion of documentations and issues of environmental authorization for urban and spatial planning plans.
2002	GD 918/2002	Establishment of the framework procedure for EIA and approval of the list of public or private projects subjected to this procedure—revoked part of Order 125/1996.
2005	Ordinance 195/2005 on the Environment	This ordinance aims to regulate activities with an impact on the environment, to promote the conservation of natural resources and the protection of public health and biodiversity.
2006	Law 265/2006 approving Ordinance 195/2005	The object of this emergency ordinance is an assembly of legal regulations on environmental protection, an objective of the major public interest, based on the principles and strategic elements that lead to sustainable development.
	HG 1213/2006	This decision establishes the framework procedure for environmental impact assessments of public and private projects that are likely to have significant effects on the environment.
2007	Ordinance 114/2007 for amending and supplementing the Ordinance 195/2005 on environment protection	The aim of this emergency government ordinance is to improve the environmental factors in localities by ensuring a minimum area of 26 square meters for each inhabitant in the urban area.
2008	Ordinance 164/200 for amending and supplementing the Ordinance 195/2005 on environment protection	It creates a unitary and general framework laying down the principles governing all environmental protection activities, considering that these elements are of public interest and constitute emergencies and extraordinary situations, the regulations of which cannot be deferred.
2009	HG 445/2009	EIA of certain public and private projects—revoked HG 1213/2006.
2012	GD 17/2012 amending and supplementing GD 445/2009	EIA of certain public and private projects. Sets the general framework for EIA. Includes stipulations on the information to be contained in EIA Report without providing a detailed framework content of this report.
2014	Law No 86/2014	National framework for implementation of EIA procedure.
2018	Law No 292/2018	EIA of certain public and private projects, establishes the conditions and measures for environmental protection, which must be respected in the case of a project, including the issuance of building permits, authorization for intensive agricultural land use, afforestation, and water management within the “Danube Delta” and “Romanian Waters” projects.

illustrates the evolution of Environmental Impact Assessment legislation in Romania.

Until 1989, Romania carried out a number of environmental impact studies, which were mainly theoretical, and their results had limited direct influence on the development of certain environmental projects. The research data was considered to be confidential.

The year 1995 marked a significant turning point in the evolution of the Romanian legislative framework with the adoption of the Environmental Protection Law. This legislative act introduced explicit provisions for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), including the obligation to organize public debates. The procedural framework for EIA was further delineated and regulated by Order of the Ministry of the Environment no. 125/1996, which established the procedure for the assessment of socio-economic activities with potential environmental impact (https://www.mmediu.ro/) [73,74].

The environmental impact assessment system in Romania has gradually evolved since 1973. The procedure was continuously improved, but despite this, researchers have shown that there are substantial differences between the practical performances of this process and the results generated by its application [49,75].

Because of the increased number of amendments, comparing them is a difficult process because each revocation aims to ensure perfection. However, critics have noted that by following these procedures, a negative impact on the national economy could be generated, and that, because of the principles of EIA, sustainability and interdisciplinarity could lead to the expression of national administrations moving the national economy to a sustainable economy [76].

The EIA process has been a recurring research topic since the 1970s and this has contributed to the development of good practices in environmental assessment and policies aimed at strengthening the process [77]. EIA databases do not systematically contain information on all environmental assessment procedures, in many cases being limited to those that follow the full procedure; therefore, it has been impossible to determine the number of projects completed with the EIA procedure in the early stages.

Romania’s accession to the European Union in 2007 marked a transition characterized by the transposition of the EU environmental acquis into national legislation. This generated the imperative of efficient management of allocated European funds and compliance with the conditions and objectives set by the EU [13].

The literature review reveals that although Romania has made sustained efforts to align with European standards in the field of EIA, it still faces several distinct challenges that differentiate it from other EU Member States. Thus, countries such as Germany, Sweden, and Denmark, which are characterized by stable economies, have oriented their EIA processes towards sustainable development objectives [78,79,80].

Romania is currently a developing European country with an economy associated with driving forces represented mainly by the consumer sector and considerable direct investments, which has led to little attention being paid to environmental issues. The case study of the Rosia Montana mining project illustrates this issue, highlighting the prioritization of economic aspects to the detriment of cultural heritage and environmental and human health impacts. Although Romania has transposed EU directives on EIA into national legislation, there are gaps in the implementation and evaluation process because of insufficient human and technical resources. This situation contrasts with the German model, in which rigorous mechanisms have been put in place to implement EIA procedures and ensure compliance with legal requirements [81]. Romanian institutions responsible for EIA assessment and implementation face financial and human limitations, leading to incomplete environmental assessments. In antithesis, the Finnish system is characterized by adequately funded and staffed environmental institutions, thus ensuring effective EIA implementation.

Thus, Romania, in order to achieve its sustainable development goals and optimize the effectiveness of the EIA, needs to implement concrete strategies aimed at strengthening institutional capacity, promoting public participation, transparency in decision-making, and combating corruption.

The purpose of the EIA process is to provide decision-makers with an assessment of integrated nature-society systems at the global to local level, in short- and long-term perspectives, to help them determine which actions should or should not be taken in an attempt to make society sustainable.

In 2015, a large majority of the world’s governments committed to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) proposed by the United Nations (UN), and it became clear that EIA is a relevant mechanism through which the incorporation of SDGs is possible [82], while other researchers go further, stating that SDGs are “likely to become a central component of future environmental assessments” [83].

Romania, as well as other 193 countries, has implemented strategies to support the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development by addressing a Global Plan of Action that focuses on reducing poverty, reducing social inequality, and protecting the environment by 2030. This plan is a promoter of poverty eradication, climate change, economic growth, and global peace [84]. Basically, the complex web of indicators lies at the center of these paradigms and has become the foundation for the implementation of SDGs. The national sustainable development strategy is illustrated in Figure 3.

Several studies have been carried out, with a focus on the implementation of EIA as a tool for direct and indirect quantification of environmental impacts resulting from human activities, in order to enable decision-making organizations to track and quantify progress towards sustainable development goals (SDGs). Such information would be extremely useful in identifying for which type of projects EIA reports are most frequently required.

The SDGs are based on 17 interlinked goals that present an overarching framework for addressing global challenges and promoting the concept of sustainable development and 169 target indicators that highlight global issues, which aim to balance the three SD dimensions: environmental, social, and economic [85,86].

The 17 SDGs require a common understanding that all these overarching objectives should be treated as interlinked and interdependent [87,88,89]. Putting these objections into action is an attempt to steer the world on a more sustainable and transformative trajectory [89]. Figure 4 presents the 17 SDGs, which cover almost all areas of life [87].

According to the annual 2023 report on assessing progress on SDGs, it was concluded that member countries are far from achieving the targets set by the 2030 Agenda. Upon querying the individual reports provided by member states, it was concluded that out of 169 indicators, only 135 indicators provided data on progress and future prospects. Thus, only 17% show the expected progress to be achieved by 2030, approximately half (48%) show moderate to severe deviations from the desired trajectory, and 30% show insignificant progress. Alarmingly, 18% have stagnated, 17% have regressed below 2015 baselines, and 18% show moderate progress [91].

The SD concept has become an important objective for policy-makers [57]: “Sustainable development must be understood as a type of economic development that ensures meeting the needs of present generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own requirements and applicable measures aimed at long intervals and long-term effects” [92]. Comparing the SD definition with the EIA principles, it may be noted that both are concerned with the well-being of present and future generations. One of the objectives of this concept is to find an optimal point between the interaction of four systems: social, economic, technological, and environmental. In this context, the most important international conferences, at which a number of issues related to sustainable development have been discussed, are depicted in Figure 5.

Achieving development goals depends on transforming social values through structured dialogue, thus promoting collective awareness and acceptance of the importance of long-term strategic planning in contrast to approaches that focus on immediate results. EIA acts as an inclusive mechanism by incorporating principles of accountability, transparency, and public involvement [93]. Through these tools, EIA contributes to promoting constructive social discourse and stimulating social learning processes, which are indispensable for reorienting societal values towards a sustainable and forward-looking paradigm [94]. EIA is vulnerable to subjectivity, which can lead stakeholders, evaluators, and public authorities to focus more on cost-benefit analysis and practical aspects of financial constraints and short-term timeframes, to the detriment of long-term environmental considerations [95].

The common objective of all these regulations is to eliminate or prevent pollution at source and, where this cannot be achieved, to reduce and eliminate contamination. This is the main objective of environmental action plans and strategies that, together with “sustainable development”, are among the basic principles of the EU’s environmental policy. To achieve the SD objectives, the “polluter pays” principle has been defined as a cornerstone. In the given context, the EIA procedure can be seen as the mechanism through which SD goals may be included; however, the inclusion of SDGs in the procedure is seen as contextual in some countries without producing an impact on SD [3,96].

In many articles, the SDGs and EA are referred to from the perspective of how these two concepts relate to sustainable development or sustainability.

So far, several studies in the field of environmental impact assessment have used one of the related environmental assessment tools. As a result of the literature review, examples of EIA and other tool applications in Romania are summarized in Table 3.

Numerous studies have been identified that had the effectiveness of the EIA process as a central study objective; however, only a small number of studies have addressed and elaborated bibliometric analyses regarding the evolution of the EIA process, with many studies focusing on addressing this concept through literature review [39,66,73,82,97,98]. This study analyzed the evolution of the EIA concept, considering first of all, the emergence and evolution of the concept, where a distinction was made between EIA-based and SD-based processes.

Table 3. State-of-the-art SD and EIA in the Romanian context.

Type of Assessment	Year	Based on SD Objectives	Proposed Evaluation Models	Reference
Environmental Impact Assessment—Strategic Environmental Assessment (EIA-SEA)	2022	NO	YES	[39]
	2015	NO	YES	[99,100]
	2012	NO	YES	[73,98]
	2024	NO	YES	[18,101,102]
	2018	NO	YES	[19]
	2019	NO	YES	[42]
	2020	NO	YES	[103]
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)	2014	NO	YES	[104]
	2019	NO	YES	[105]
	2007	NO	YES	[23]
	2023	NO	YES	[43,106]
	2007	NO	YES	[23]
	2021	NO	YES	[25]
Sustainability Assessment (SA)	2013	NO	YES	[107,108]
	2021	NO	YES	[109]
	2016	YES	YES	[108,110]
	2022	YES	YES	[111]
Health Impact Assessment (HIA)	2021	NO	YES	[112]
	2016	NO	YES	[113]
	2023	NO	YES	[114]
	2007	NO	YES	[115]
	2021	NO	YES	[116]
Social Impact Assessment (SIA)	2022	NO	YES	[117]
	2017	NO	YES	[17]
	2019	NO	YES	[118]
	2019	NO	YES	[119,120,121]
Other tools	2013	YES	YES	[107]
	2022	YES	YES	[6,122,123,124]

Table 3. State-of-the-art SD and EIA in the Romanian context.

Type of Assessment	Year	Based on SD Objectives	Proposed Evaluation Models	Reference
Environmental Impact Assessment—Strategic Environmental Assessment (EIA-SEA)	2022	NO	YES	[39]
	2015	NO	YES	[99,100]
	2012	NO	YES	[73,98]
	2024	NO	YES	[18,101,102]
	2018	NO	YES	[19]
	2019	NO	YES	[42]
	2020	NO	YES	[103]
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)	2014	NO	YES	[104]
	2019	NO	YES	[105]
	2007	NO	YES	[23]
	2023	NO	YES	[43,106]
	2007	NO	YES	[23]
	2021	NO	YES	[25]
Sustainability Assessment (SA)	2013	NO	YES	[107,108]
	2021	NO	YES	[109]
	2016	YES	YES	[108,110]
	2022	YES	YES	[111]
Health Impact Assessment (HIA)	2021	NO	YES	[112]
	2016	NO	YES	[113]
	2023	NO	YES	[114]
	2007	NO	YES	[115]
	2021	NO	YES	[116]
Social Impact Assessment (SIA)	2022	NO	YES	[117]
	2017	NO	YES	[17]
	2019	NO	YES	[118]
	2019	NO	YES	[119,120,121]
Other tools	2013	YES	YES	[107]
	2022	YES	YES	[6,122,123,124]

The interconnection between EIA and SD is an emerging field of research, characterized by a lack of scientific literature. Consequently, 38 articles were analyzed to identify the types of linkages between the EIA and SD. The analyzed articles were selected and classified into several groups (based on the type of assessment), as shown in Table 3. The analysis of these articles indicates that only a limited number of them address environmental assessment based on sustainable development objectives, thereby underscoring the practical difficulty of integrating environmental, social, and economic factors in a manner that reflects the interaction between the two processes, with the objective of minimizing negative effects and optimizing the concordance of the processes. A review of the extant literature reveals a tendency for EIA studies to evolve from general procedural descriptions to operational models, a trend that is not observed in other types of evaluations. Due to the emerging nature of the field, the literature provides an overview of the linkages between EIM and SDGs, but the literature review did not reveal any insights [7].

The selected examples presented below are remarkable events reflected in Romanian media and, therefore, are very well known to the public.

The Rosia Montana mining project is a complex process marked by controversy and intense debate. The implementation of the EIA was subject to criticism from civil society, which challenged the validity of the impact studies and public consultation procedures. Public participation was a central element of the debates, highlighting the importance of transparency and access to information in environmental decision-making [12]. Public consultations provide a framework for dialogue between developers, authorities, and local communities, highlighting the need to integrate social and economic considerations into environmental impact assessment processes. Public input into the decisions of the parties involved is significant, generating project modifications and imposing higher standards of environmental protection. The debates highlighted the importance of active public participation and information in EIA processes and the need to strengthen institutional capacities to ensure a rigorous and transparent assessment of environmental impacts [6,7].

Another important study that had national echoes was the development of wind turbine projects in Dobrogea, Romania, which showed a complex interplay between the drive for renewable energy and the risks of environmental impacts. Although this project contributes to the production of green energy, it has raised concerns about its impact on local biodiversity, particularly bird migration and natural habitats [124,125]. The public consultations concluded that wind energy development requires careful strategic planning and the implementation of effective mitigation measures to minimize environmental impacts [124]. This process must appropriately balance the need for renewable energy, essential for the transition to a green economy, with the preservation of the region’s unique natural heritage, which includes sensitive ecosystems and significant biodiversity. Ensuring this balance is crucial for promoting sustainable development and protecting an area’s ecological and cultural values.

Recent studies highlight the growing importance of access to public and environmental information, as well as the need for active public participation and stakeholder involvement in environmental protection and spatial planning processes [80,123].

The literature review carried out indicates that while impact assessment academia is indeed committed to SD and recognizes and acknowledges the potential for impact assessment to deliver sustainable development, there has been limited interest in the SDGs, particularly to date. This is mainly a result of the absence of published case studies reflecting the consistency between elements of EIA practice or theory and the SDGs, as shown by the limited number of research studies published so far. A few of the articles analyzed show specific potential in terms of the link between the SDGs and EIA, exploring the possibility of including health security aspects in EIAs of mining projects and suggesting the use of SDGs to achieve this. It was found that in some articles, the mention of SDGs and EA appears because of the link these two concepts have with sustainable development or sustainability.

The research also considered other types of impact assessment, such as LCA, SA, HIA, and SIA, to identify ways in which the authors could relate these assessments to the SDGs and found that if such an impact assessment is carried out within a study, the SDGs are not considered. No clear patterns were identified in how the studies addressed the SDGs in their assessments.

Only one study has highlighted the vulnerabilities of the EIA system to corrupt practices, highlighting the lack of comprehensive research on this topic. In this context, the need for in-depth research to assess the real contribution of EIAs to the achievement of the SDGs was noted, given that decision-making processes marred by corruption and lack of transparency compromise progress towards sustainable development.

The case studies reviewed demonstrate that EIAs contribute to the incorporation of environmental and sustainability considerations into economic and social development plans, but this is reluctantly being done because of current procedural limitations and shortcomings.

A review of the studies found that EIA-based integrated assessment tends to focus on minimizing negative impacts and reducing unsustainable practices but does not address the concept of sustainable development as a societal-level goal. It was found that integrated assessments focusing on SD objectives are more compatible with the concept of sustainability as they assess a proposal’s contribution to aspirational goals, rather than against baseline conditions. Impact assessment tools are playing an increasingly prominent role in contemporary policies. In line with the changes to EIA regulations, they cannot operate at a fully adequate level in terms of administrative structure and functioning. The main objective of Romania, considering the EIA process, should be to implement a legislative framework that makes it realistically responsive to the needs of the country.

4. Discussion

This study introduced a bibliometric review of the evolution of the environmental appraisal process in Romania in the context of sustainable development, highlighting gaps and future prospects for remedies. To strengthen the EIA processes in Romania and support the achievement of SDGs, several research directions and policy measures are required.

It is crucial to develop a deep understanding of the concepts of EIA and sustainability among civil servants, academics, and practitioners, adapted to the specific context of each country. It is also necessary to identify the types of actions to which EIA can contribute and how it can be integrated into practice, considering its relationship with existing policies and planning systems. At the local level, it is imperative to invest in specialized training in EIA, to develop simple and flexible EIA systems, and to support additional scientific research. The lack of relevant case studies and research related to EIA methodologies can compromise the effective application of these concepts in practice. Failures in the implementation of impact management (EIM) underline the importance of effective practical application and highlight the problem of limited power and influence across sectors, ministries, and departments in many developing countries.

Public participation, including both citizens and non-governmental organizations, is essential to strengthen the credibility and transparency of the EIA preparation and implementation process. This involvement ensures a balanced and responsible approach to promoting sustainable development.

On the policy front, Romania should prioritize institutional capacity building through investments in training and additional resources, implement anti-corruption measures, and promote public-private partnerships for sustainable projects. In addition, it is crucial to explicitly integrate the SDGs into the EIA processes, ensuring that each project contributes to goals such as clean energy (SDG 7), climate action (SDG 13), and life on land (SDG 15). By addressing these directions, Romania can strengthen its EIA’s role as an essential tool for sustainable development.

5. Conclusions

This paper analyzes the evolution of the EIA process in various countries, with a focus on Romania. In addition to previous studies on this topic, a bibliometric framework for analysis was compiled. The environmental impact assessment process is one of the most important preventive approaches to detect and remedy environmental problems, and the public is better informed and aware of the environmental, economic, and social issues that have a direct and indirect impact on humans. Developing clear and accurate linkages between EIA and SDGs could help inform the contribution of strategic environmental assessment to sustainable development while supporting implementation and dissemination to support the 2030 Agenda. EIA continues to evolve as one of the means of implementing sustainable development in the context of project-based activities. In light of developments in recent years, important steps have been taken in terms of environmental quality and environmental management.

As it is a holistic approach that includes social, economic, and environmental concepts that lead to easy implementation and problem-solving, the EIA approach is beneficial for stakeholders, national governments, and the public, with the latter addressing problems in an integrated way and having, as a starting point, permanent and complete problem solutions. The effectiveness of EIA is closely linked to public participation and feedback; for this to be concrete, the public needs to be familiarized with the whole process. In Romania, the lack of transparency and coherence is preventing the public from taking part in this process.

In this study, the EIA process was evaluated in general terms in terms of its origin, evolution, and implementation in the context of SD in Romania, as well as the studies carried out in order to implement related environmental assessment practices. It was found that the limited experience of implementing the EIA process in Romania is accompanied by the lack of transparency, low quality of environmental reports, and a low impact on the sustainable development of society.