為了解決經濟成長與環境保護相互衝突的問題，西方國家所使用的環境影響評估制度於1970年代逐漸的被引進臺灣，由於它是建構於科學及專業的評估，因此，被視之為是解決經濟成長與環保抗爭二者衝突的最佳利器。可是，雖然「環境影響評估法」已經通過並實施多年，許多重要的開發案件皆必須經過環境影響評估的審查，然而，許多已經通過環境影響評估的開發案仍然引起了環保抗爭運動，激烈衝突的景象仍然不斷的上演。本文探討的問題為：我國環境影響評估的通過比率是否過高？環境風險評估在我國是否出現了低估的現象？本文乃是透過環境影響說明書及環境影響評估報告書的製作成果，並與歐美國家類似資料來比較，嘗試回答上述課題。本文以環保署網站為基礎建立了計13年之資料庫，並深入分析「預防及減輕開發行為對環境不良影響對策摘要表」，發現在實施解決對策之前，被評定為有負面影響程度者為61%；但是，在實施解決對策之後，有負面影響程度者降低為33%，而且最為嚴重之程度皆僅是「輕微負面影響」，環境風險恐有低估之虞，而這可能也就是絕大多數的說明書（85.9%）及評估書（94.2%）都是以「有條件通過審查」通過的主要原因，這個比率是比歐美還來得高。

In order to resolve conflicts between economic growth and environmental protection, the mechanism of environmental impact statement (EIS), originally from the US, has been established in Taiwan from 1970s. The government hopes the controversy can be solved by science and technology, which are backbone of the Taiwan EIS. Unfortunately, many serious environmental protests still emerge against those development projects, whose EISs have been approved by the government. The paper tries to find out the approval rates of the Taiwan environmental assessment (EA) ＆ (EIS) and make comparison withtheir rates of the US and European countries. The major question of the paper is whetherTaiwan underestimates its environmental risk? The reports of EA and EIS in Taiwan invariably show that there will be no major harm to the environment or local people. It is because 85.9% of EA and 94.2% of EIS are accepted by “conditional approval” from 1996 to 2008. In the US, the approval rate is between 72.5% and 74.9%. Therefore, environmental risks in Taiwan are seemingly underestimated.