Tanzania, like many other developing countries, is keen to attract foreign investments to foster the country’s socioeconomic development. However, the competition among developing countries to attract foreign investment preference has in many cases sacrificed policies geared towards sustainable development for short-term economic gains. With the intention of conserving the global environment, the multinational financing institutions have made it mandatory that all development projects should be subjected to EIA before they can be funded. Is this sustainable? This case study suggests that an effective (and sustainable) EIA regime is dependent on, among other things: • the government’s political will; • effective environmental legislation; • institutional support; • proper development objectives; and • trained personnel. Unfortunately, many of these factors are not in place in Tanzania (and probably not in place in most developing countries). This has led in many cases to frustration on the part of environmental impact assessors, governmental advisors and the public at large. Because of economic considerations some projects have been given a go ahead despite negative assessment and public outcry. In some cases, projects have been assessed positively even though the negative impacts are obviously overwhelming, which may be due to the fact that the investor is paying for the assessment and thus may influence the outcome of the assessment process. This case study examines the prawn project, which was subjected to EIA, rejected by the review team and approved for implementation by the government. The paper poses a question: For whose needs is the EIA conducted? The investor? The government? The assessor? The environment? The public?