Environmental Systems and Construction Impacts

Introduction and context

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is based on a simple but powerful recognition: construction projects do not operate separately from the environment. A road, building, dam, mine, port or housing scheme changes flows of materials, energy, water, people and organisms. These changes may be beneficial, such as improved access and employment, or adverse, such as habitat loss, flooding, dust exposure and cultural-site damage.

The environment is best understood as an interconnected system rather than a collection of separate topics. Air pollution can affect vegetation and human health; vegetation removal can increase erosion and sediment in rivers; altered drainage can damage wetlands and archaeological deposits; and climate hazards can amplify all these impacts. EIA therefore requires more than listing impacts. It requires analysis of causal relationships, spatial and temporal boundaries, affected receptors, uncertainty and the effectiveness of proposed controls.

This chapter introduces systems thinking and the source–pathway–receptor model as foundations for assessing construction impacts. It considers air, water, soil, climate, biodiversity, landscape, communities, health and cultural heritage, and shows how these components interact in professional assessment and project decision-making.

Learning objectives

After studying this chapter, a student should be able to:

1. Explain environmental systems, boundaries, stocks, flows, feedbacks and cumulative effects.
2. Apply the source–pathway–receptor model to construction impacts.
3. Distinguish direct, indirect, induced, cumulative, residual and transboundary impacts.
4. Analyse interactions among construction activities and environmental receptors.
5. Select appropriate baseline information, indicators and mitigation measures.
6. Evaluate an impact pathway using professional judgement, evidence and uncertainty.
7. Recognise ethical, legal, community and cultural considerations in EIA.

1. Environmental systems thinking

1.1 Systems, components and boundaries

A system consists of interacting components linked by flows and processes. In environmental assessment, components may include atmospheric conditions, surface water, groundwater, soil, habitats, species, settlements, infrastructure and cultural resources. A system boundary defines what is included in the analysis. Boundaries may be spatial—for example, a construction site, river catchment or airshed—or temporal, such as the construction phase, operational life and decommissioning.

Boundaries must be appropriate to the impact. A site boundary may be adequate for topsoil storage but inadequate for a river sediment assessment. Similarly, a one-year study may miss seasonal groundwater variation or delayed biodiversity recovery. The assessment should state boundaries explicitly and revise them when pathways extend beyond the initial study area.

Environmental systems contain:

• Stocks: quantities accumulated at a particular time, such as groundwater storage, soil carbon or standing biomass.
• Flows: movements into, out of or within the system, such as runoff, emissions, traffic or groundwater recharge.
• Processes: transformations, including erosion, deposition, dilution, combustion, decomposition and habitat succession.
• Drivers: forces that initiate or modify change, such as excavation, rainfall, traffic demand, regulation or climate change.
• Receptors: people, ecosystems, resources or heritage assets that may experience effects.

A useful general accounting relationship is:

This relationship is a mass-balance concept. It applies when the stock and all relevant flows are defined consistently. For example, sediment stored in a settling pond increases when incoming sediment exceeds discharged and removed sediment. Units must be consistent, such as tonnes per day for all terms. The expression is conceptual; site-specific calculations require measured or defensible estimates of each term.

1.2 Feedbacks and thresholds

A feedback occurs when a change in one component alters a process that subsequently affects the original component. Removing vegetation can increase runoff, which increases erosion, which removes more soil and further reduces vegetation establishment. This is a reinforcing feedback. In contrast, sediment settling in a pond can reduce downstream sediment transport and act as a balancing feedback.

Environmental systems may also contain thresholds. A small increase in disturbance may produce little observable change until a threshold is crossed, after which turbidity, species displacement or slope instability increases rapidly. Thresholds are often uncertain and may differ by season, location and receptor sensitivity. EIA should therefore avoid assuming that impacts increase linearly with project scale.

1.3 Resilience, vulnerability and carrying capacity

Resilience is the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance while retaining its structure and function. Vulnerability reflects exposure, sensitivity and limited capacity to cope or recover. A robust floodplain may have high hydrological resilience, whereas an isolated wetland containing a rare species may be highly vulnerable.

Carrying capacity is the level of use or pressure that a system can sustain without unacceptable degradation. It is not a universal fixed number. It depends on ecological condition, existing pressures, regulatory standards, season and management objectives. In EIA, carrying-capacity analysis is especially important where several projects affect the same airshed, water body, road network or community.

2. The source–pathway–receptor model

The source–pathway–receptor (SPR) model provides a practical structure for causal analysis. An impact requires three linked conditions:

1. A source generates a pressure or hazard.
2. A pathway transfers that pressure through the environment or society.
3. A receptor can be exposed and affected.

For example, earthworks are the source of suspended sediment; stormwater runoff is the pathway; and a downstream fish nursery is the receptor. If any link is absent or effectively controlled, the complete impact pathway may be broken.

The model should not be interpreted as proving that no impact exists merely because evidence is incomplete. A missing link may reflect inadequate baseline investigation. Professional assessment therefore asks whether the link is physically plausible, supported by observations and relevant under likely weather, operating and failure conditions.

A more complete causal chain is:

The chain distinguishes a pressure from an impact. “Dust generation” is a pressure; “increased particulate exposure at a school” is an exposure; “adverse respiratory effects” is a potential consequence.

2.1 Significance in systems terms

Impact significance is not determined by magnitude alone. A small pressure may be significant where the receptor is rare, legally protected or highly sensitive. Conversely, a larger pressure may be acceptable where exposure is brief and the receptor is resilient. Common considerations include magnitude, extent, duration, frequency, reversibility, likelihood, receptor sensitivity, existing conditions and effectiveness of mitigation.

A qualitative significance matrix can support consistency, but it does not replace professional reasoning. Matrices may conceal interactions, double-count effects or imply false precision. The assessor should record the evidence and assumptions behind each rating.

2.2 Direct, indirect and cumulative impacts

A direct impact follows immediately from an activity, such as vegetation clearance causing habitat loss. An indirect impact occurs through a secondary process, such as increased access facilitating informal settlement and additional forest clearance. An induced impact results from growth or activities stimulated by the project, such as new commercial development around a transport corridor.

A cumulative impact is the combined effect of the project with past, present or reasonably foreseeable actions. Cumulative assessment requires a valued receptor, a suitable geographic and temporal boundary, and knowledge of other pressures. It is particularly important for traffic emissions, water abstraction, habitat fragmentation, noise and community displacement.

3. Construction pressures and environmental interactions

3.1 Air quality and climate

Construction sources include excavation, crushing, stockpiles, haul roads, cement handling, welding, asphalt production, diesel engines and generator sets. Pollutants may include particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds and greenhouse gases. Wind speed, atmospheric stability, rainfall, topography and source height influence dispersion.

Dust is not only an amenity issue. Fine particles can enter the respiratory system, soil and surface water. Deposition may reduce photosynthesis on leaves, soil crops and foul sensitive equipment. Controls should follow the hierarchy of control: eliminate unnecessary disturbance, reduce exposed area, stabilise surfaces, enclose dusty operations, use appropriate water or suppressants, maintain vehicles and monitor performance. Water suppression must be designed carefully where it could create contaminated runoff or slippery haul roads.

Construction also contributes to climate change through fuel combustion, cement manufacture, steel production, land clearance, transport and waste. A basic combustion-emissions estimate is:

where E is residual emissions, A is activity data such as litres of fuel consumed, EF is the emission factor in kilograms per unit of activity, and η is the fractional removal efficiency of a control device. The equation assumes the activity data and emission factor refer to the same fuel, pollutant and reporting boundary. If no control is present, η = 0. Units must be converted consistently. For greenhouse-gas inventories, emissions from different gases may be converted to carbon-dioxide equivalent using accepted global-warming-potential factors, with the applicable reporting standard clearly stated.

Climate change also affects project risk. More intense rainfall can overwhelm erosion controls; heat can reduce worker productivity and increase heat illness; drought can increase dust and water conflict; and sea-level rise can alter flood exposure. EIA should therefore address both the project’s contribution to climate change and the project’s vulnerability to changing climate conditions.

3.2 Water systems

Construction affects water through abstraction, diversion, dewatering, discharge, sediment mobilisation, accidental spills, concrete washout, wastewater, groundwater interception and changed impervious cover. Water impacts should be assessed across the catchment rather than only at the discharge point.

Important receptors include drinking-water sources, aquatic organisms, wetlands, irrigation users, groundwater-dependent ecosystems and downstream communities. Relevant indicators may include flow, level, temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, turbidity, nutrients, hydrocarbons, metals and microbial quality. Sampling design should reflect upstream reference conditions, discharge locations, seasons, storm events and background variability.

Sediment is a common pathway. Bare soil exposed during earthworks is mobilised by rainfall, transported in runoff and deposited in channels. Deposition can smother benthic habitat, fill drainage capacity and increase flood risk. Mitigation includes phased clearing, contouring, temporary drainage, sediment basins, check dams, prompt revegetation, wheel washing and inspection after storms. Controls should be maintained; an unmaintained silt fence is not an effective mitigation measure merely because it appears in a management plan.

Dewatering can lower groundwater levels, mobilise contaminants or damage wetlands and building foundations. A water balance should consider abstraction, rainfall, runoff, infiltration, storage, treatment and discharge. Where groundwater is important, monitoring wells and trigger-action-response plans can identify unexpected drawdown.

3.3 Soil and land resources

Soil is a biological and physical resource, not simply an excavated material. It supports vegetation, stores carbon, filters water and provides agricultural productivity. Construction can cause compaction, erosion, mixing of horizons, contamination, salinisation and loss of topsoil.

Topsoil stripping should be limited to required areas, carried out under suitable moisture conditions and followed by separate storage of topsoil and subsoil. Stockpiles should be stable, protected from erosion and not excessively high where this would reduce soil biological quality. Reuse should be planned before importing replacement soil. Contaminated soil requires characterisation, segregation, worker protection, lawful transport and approved treatment or disposal.

Land-use change can fragment habitats and alter drainage. Even where the total area cleared is modest, linear infrastructure may create edge effects, barriers to movement and increased human access. Avoidance and careful alignment are generally more reliable than attempting to restore all damage after construction.

3.4 Biodiversity and ecological systems

Biodiversity includes variation within species, between species and among ecosystems. Construction pressures include clearance, noise, vibration, light, dust, altered hydrology, invasive species, collision risk, hunting access and pollution. Effects may be immediate or delayed. For example, a wetland may appear intact after construction but lose ecological function if groundwater recharge has been reduced.

Assessment should identify protected areas, critical habitat, threatened species, ecological corridors, breeding sites, ecosystem services and culturally important species. Surveys must consider seasonal detectability and appropriate taxonomic expertise. A species absence in a poorly timed survey is not evidence that the species is absent.

The mitigation hierarchy is:

1. Avoid impacts through site selection, timing and design.
2. Minimise unavoidable disturbance through controls and good practice.
3. Restore or rehabilitate affected areas.
4. Offset or compensate only for appropriate residual impacts, subject to legal and ecological safeguards.

Offsets are not a substitute for avoiding irreplaceable habitat. Biodiversity decisions should address uncertainty, time lags and the risk that an offset fails.

3.5 Landscape and visual character

Landscape is both a physical system and a cultural perception of place. Construction changes landform, vegetation, skylines, colour, texture, views, tranquillity and night-time character. Receptors include residents, road users, tourists, recreational users and communities with cultural relationships to land.

A landscape assessment considers landscape character, visual sensitivity, viewing distance, duration of visibility, seasonal conditions and cumulative change. Measures include sensitive siting, reduced building height, landform restoration, retention of vegetation, coherent materials, screened lighting and progressive rehabilitation. Visual simulation can assist consultation but should state assumptions about viewpoint, season and completed planting growth.

3.6 Communities, health and safety

Construction affects communities through employment, procurement, access and services, but also through noise, dust, vibration, traffic, restricted access, displacement, conflict, unequal distribution of benefits and pressure on housing. Vulnerable groups may include children, older people, people with disabilities, low-income households, informal workers and those lacking political influence.

Health assessment links environmental changes to exposure and susceptible populations. It should consider occupational and community health, accident risk, communicable disease, mental well-being and cumulative stress. A noise assessment, for example, should examine source levels, propagation, timing, baseline noise, building insulation and sleep or learning sensitivity. Traffic safety requires attention to pedestrians, cyclists, school routes, heavy vehicles, road geometry and emergency access.

Meaningful engagement is more than informing the public after decisions have been made. It involves accessible information, adequate time, two-way communication, response to concerns and documentation of how input affected design. Consultation must not expose complainants or vulnerable people to retaliation.

3.7 Cultural heritage

Cultural heritage may be tangible—archaeological sites, historic buildings, graves, sacred places and cultural landscapes—or intangible, such as customary practices, oral traditions and spiritual associations. Damage can occur through excavation, vibration, groundwater changes, visual intrusion, restricted access or unauthorised collection of artefacts.

Heritage assessment should combine documentary research, field survey, community knowledge and specialist evaluation. Chance-find procedures should stop work in the discovery area, secure the location, notify the responsible authority and obtain qualified advice before resumption. Indigenous and local communities should participate in decisions affecting heritage, with respect for confidentiality where site information is sensitive. Consent, benefit sharing and culturally appropriate methods may be required by law or accepted professional standards.

4. Integrated assessment and mitigation

An integrated assessment begins with project description and alternatives. Alternatives may include location, alignment, construction method, schedule, materials, access route, energy source and the option not to proceed. Avoidance at the design stage is usually more effective and less costly than downstream treatment.

The assessment then establishes baseline conditions. Baseline data should be relevant to receptors and impact pathways, spatially representative, seasonally adequate and accompanied by quality assurance. Existing disturbances must be distinguished from project effects. Monitoring locations should be selected to test hypotheses, not merely to generate large quantities of data.

A practical workflow is:

1. Define project activities, phases and reasonable alternatives.
2. Identify pressures and construct SPR pathways.
3. Map receptors, sensitivity and legal status.
4. Establish baseline conditions and existing trends.
5. Predict magnitude, extent, duration, likelihood and reversibility.
6. Apply the mitigation hierarchy.
7. Reassess residual and cumulative impacts.
8. Specify monitoring, responsibilities, thresholds and corrective action.
9. Engage affected communities and disclose uncertainty.
10. Feed findings into design, procurement, contract conditions and adaptive management.

Mitigation should be specific, measurable and assigned to a responsible party. “Control dust” is weaker than “cover fine-material loads, limit vehicle speed on unsealed roads, inspect daily during dry weather and record corrective actions.” Contract documents should define environmental requirements for subcontractors, reporting, incident response and enforcement.

5. Worked application: illustrative urban bypass

Background

This illustrative case concerns a proposed 12-kilometre bypass around a growing town. The alignment crosses agricultural land, a seasonal stream, a remnant woodland and the edge of a historic settlement. Construction would require cut-and-fill earthworks, two bridges, a temporary workers’ camp and substantial truck movement.

Problem identification

The initial proposal identified dust, vegetation clearance and traffic disruption but treated them as separate effects. A systems review identified the following SPR pathways:

• Earthworks → exposed soil → storm runoff → seasonal stream → increased turbidity and fish-spawning disturbance.
• Diesel trucks → exhaust and road dust → prevailing wind → nearby school → particulate exposure and reduced amenity.
• Woodland clearance → habitat loss and corridor fragmentation → displaced fauna and increased road mortality.
• Bridge piling → vibration and groundwater disturbance → historic masonry and shallow wells → physical damage or reduced water availability.
• New access road → improved accessibility → induced development → additional land conversion and traffic.

Analysis and approach

The project team compared three alignments. The preferred alignment was not the shortest, but it avoided the most sensitive woodland and moved the road farther from the school. A seasonal constraint prohibited major instream works during the fish-spawning period. The design included a balanced earthworks plan to reduce spoil transport, temporary sediment basins sized for local storm conditions, covered loads, low-speed haul routes, wheel washing and progressive revegetation.

A heritage specialist surveyed the settlement with local historians. A vibration baseline was established before piling, and low-vibration construction methods were specified near vulnerable buildings. The community requested a safe pedestrian crossing and protection of access to a traditional gathering area; both were incorporated into the design.

Outcome and adaptive management

The environmental management plan assigned controls to named contractors and required inspections after significant rainfall. Turbidity, dust complaints, traffic incidents, groundwater levels and vibration were monitored against agreed trigger levels. If a trigger was exceeded, work would pause or change while the cause was investigated. The plan also required ecological monitoring for two years after construction and corrective planting where establishment failed.

The residual impacts were judged acceptable only because the alignment avoided the most sensitive habitat, protected heritage structures, maintained community access and included enforceable monitoring. The case illustrates that EIA is most effective when it changes project design rather than merely describing impacts after design is complete.

Learning points

1. A source without a credible pathway may not produce a material impact, but the pathway must be investigated rather than assumed absent.
2. Avoidance can address several receptors simultaneously.
3. A project can create indirect and induced effects beyond its construction footprint.
4. Monitoring is useful only when linked to thresholds, responsibilities and corrective action.
5. Community and specialist knowledge can reveal pathways missed by desktop assessment.

6. Limitations, uncertainty and professional judgement

Environmental prediction is uncertain because baseline data are incomplete, natural variability is high, construction methods may change and receptor responses are not always known. Models may be sensitive to assumptions about rainfall, emissions, traffic, dispersion, groundwater properties or population behaviour. Uncertainty should be stated explicitly, including its direction where possible: the estimate may understate risk, overstate it or be uncertain in either direction.

Common weaknesses include inadequate seasonal surveys, narrow site boundaries, reliance on unverified contractor claims, failure to assess alternatives, double-counting mitigation, treating standards as guarantees of no impact and ignoring cumulative effects. Regulatory compliance is a minimum requirement; compliance alone does not demonstrate that all significant impacts have been avoided or minimised.

Ethical practice requires competent analysis, transparent assumptions, independence from conflicts of interest, protection of confidential cultural information and fair treatment of affected people. Environmental justice asks who receives project benefits and who bears risks. A technically efficient project may be unacceptable if it systematically transfers harm to a less powerful community.

7. Contemporary practice and technology

Geographic information systems support overlay analysis of habitats, drainage, settlements, heritage and hazards. Remote sensing can identify land-cover change and construction progress, while drones can document erosion and stockpiles where aviation and privacy rules permit. Continuous sensors can improve evidence on dust, noise, turbidity and groundwater.

Artificial intelligence may assist image classification, anomaly detection, document review and prediction. However, AI outputs depend on training data, spatial resolution, validation and assumptions. It should support—not replace—field verification, specialist interpretation, community knowledge and accountable professional judgement. Data governance must address privacy, cybersecurity, ownership and the risk that automated systems reproduce biased or incomplete evidence.

Good practice increasingly combines life-cycle thinking, climate-risk screening, nature-positive design, circular materials management and adaptive management. These approaches strengthen EIA when they remain connected to legally enforceable commitments and measurable outcomes.

Chapter Summary

Environmental Impact Assessment requires construction to be analysed as part of interacting environmental and social systems. Systems thinking identifies stocks, flows, processes, feedbacks, thresholds, resilience and vulnerability. The source–pathway–receptor model explains how an activity becomes an exposure and then an effect, while distinguishing pressures from consequences.

Construction can affect air, climate, water, soil, biodiversity, landscape, communities, health and cultural heritage through direct, indirect, induced and cumulative pathways. Effective assessment establishes an appropriate baseline, considers alternatives, applies the mitigation hierarchy and specifies monitoring linked to responsibilities and corrective action. Avoidance through design is generally preferable to later restoration. Uncertainty, environmental justice, community participation, cultural rights and professional ethics are central to credible EIA. Technology can strengthen evidence, but it cannot replace field investigation, specialist knowledge or accountable judgement.

Key Terms

Environmental system: Interacting physical, biological and social components within defined boundaries.

Stock: Quantity accumulated in a system at a particular time.

Flow: Movement of material, energy, organisms, people or information through a system.

Feedback: A process in which an output influences a subsequent system process.

Threshold: Point beyond which a small additional pressure may produce a major change.

Resilience: Capacity to absorb disturbance while retaining structure and function.

Vulnerability: Degree to which a receptor is exposed, sensitive and unable to cope or recover.

Source–pathway–receptor model: Framework linking a pressure-generating activity, its transfer route and an affected receptor.

Receptor: Person, ecosystem, resource, asset or heritage feature that may be affected.

Exposure: Contact between a receptor and an environmental pressure.

Direct impact: Effect caused immediately by a project activity.

Indirect impact: Secondary effect arising through an intervening process.

Cumulative impact: Combined effect of a project with other past, present or foreseeable actions.

Residual impact: Effect remaining after mitigation.

Mitigation hierarchy: Sequence of avoidance, minimisation, restoration and, where appropriate, offsetting.

Baseline: Existing environmental and social conditions against which change is assessed.

Adaptive management: Management that uses monitoring and learning to adjust actions.

Environmental justice: Fair distribution of environmental benefits, burdens and decision-making power.

Chance find: Unexpected discovery of cultural heritage during construction.

Carrying capacity: Level of pressure a system can sustain without unacceptable degradation.

Review Questions

5 Short Answer Questions

1. What are the three essential elements of the source–pathway–receptor model?
2. Distinguish a stock from a flow in an environmental system.
3. Why can a project’s site boundary be inadequate for assessing water impacts?
4. State the four stages of the mitigation hierarchy.
5. What is a residual impact?

5 Long Answer Questions

1. Explain how systems thinking improves the assessment of construction impacts compared with a receptor-by-receptor checklist.
2. Discuss the relationships among construction earthworks, runoff, sediment transport, aquatic habitat and downstream communities.
3. Explain how climate change can both be an impact of construction and a source of risk to a construction project.
4. Describe the requirements of a credible biodiversity assessment and the limitations of biodiversity offsets.
5. Discuss ethical and governance issues in community consultation and cultural-heritage assessment.

3 Analytical / Application Questions

1. A contractor proposes to clear vegetation beside a river during the rainy season. Construct at least three SPR pathways, identify sensitive receptors and recommend measures following the mitigation hierarchy.
2. A proposed hospital construction site is next to a school and a historic building. Design an integrated monitoring and management approach for dust, noise, vibration, traffic safety and heritage protection.
3. A road project complies with all emission standards but is located in an already polluted airshed. Explain why compliance may not be sufficient and identify the information needed for a cumulative-impact decision.

Multiple Choice Questions with Answers

Question 1

Which sequence correctly represents the source–pathway–receptor model?

A. Receptor → source → pathway

B. Source → pathway → receptor

C. Pathway → receptor → source

D. Source → receptor → regulation

Correct Answer: B. Source → pathway → receptor

Question 2

Which example is an indirect construction impact?

A. Vegetation is cleared for a site

B. A pile-driving operation produces vibration

C. A new road stimulates additional development and land conversion

D. Concrete is poured into a foundation

Correct Answer: C. A new road stimulates additional development and land conversion

Question 3

In the relationship Change in stock = inflows − outflows + internal generation − internal removal, all terms must primarily have consistent what?

A. Colours

B. Units and accounting boundaries

C. Legal ownership

D. Construction schedules

Correct Answer: B. Units and accounting boundaries

Question 4

Which measure follows the highest-priority level of the mitigation hierarchy?

A. Offsetting a wetland after destroying it

B. Restoring habitat after construction

C. Avoiding sensitive habitat through alternative alignment

D. Monitoring the damaged habitat

Correct Answer: C. Avoiding sensitive habitat through alternative alignment

Question 5

Which construction activity most directly creates a sediment pathway to a river?

A. Phased earthworks on exposed soil during rainfall

B. Painting internal walls

C. Installing office computers

D. Surveying an existing building interior

Correct Answer: A. Phased earthworks on exposed soil during rainfall

Question 6

In the emissions equation E = A × EF × (1 − η), what does η represent?

A. Activity data

B. Emission factor

C. Fractional removal efficiency

D. Residual emissions

Correct Answer: C. Fractional removal efficiency

Question 7

Why may a seasonal ecological survey fail to demonstrate that a species is absent?

A. Species detectability can vary with season

B. All species are permanently underground

C. Baseline data are never relevant

D. Protected species cannot be surveyed

Correct Answer: A. Species detectability can vary with season

Question 8

Which is an example of a cumulative impact?

A. One excavator produces noise

B. Several projects together increase traffic emissions in the same airshed

C. A worker reads a construction plan

D. A contractor repairs a fence

Correct Answer: B. Several projects together increase traffic emissions in the same airshed

Question 9

What is the main purpose of a chance-find procedure?

A. To accelerate excavation of archaeological material

B. To provide a process for protecting unexpected heritage discoveries

C. To replace all heritage surveys

D. To authorise disposal of artefacts

Correct Answer: B. To provide a process for protecting unexpected heritage discoveries

Question 10

Which statement best describes adaptive management?

A. Applying one fixed control regardless of monitoring results

B. Using monitoring and learning to adjust management actions

C. Avoiding all environmental monitoring

D. Delegating all decisions to an automated system

Correct Answer: B. Using monitoring and learning to adjust management actions