In this paper, the author, who has had considerable experience in the resolution of environmental disputes, outlines the principal arguments both for and against the judicial and non-judicial models for the determination of environmental issues. The writer then concludes that the quasi-judicial adversarial model provides a more credible and effective alternative. In the course of this analysis, reference is made to the processes employed by the Ontario Environmental Assessment Board and the federal Environmental Assessment Review Process (EARP) panels in order to illustrate the inherent strengths and weaknesses of each model, although the comments made and positions taken are equally applicable to a number of jurisdictions both in Canada and other countries.
|Number of pages||11|
|Journal||Environmental and Planning Law Journal|
|Publication status||Published - 1988|