Substantive, normative and transactive effectiveness of EIA: perception of key actors in Namibia

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal Pub Date : 2023-06-02 DOI:10.1080/14615517.2023.2214446
Dietlinde N Nakwaya-Jacobus, M. Hipondoka, S. Angombe, L. Stringer, A. Dougill
{"title":"Substantive, normative and transactive effectiveness of EIA: perception of key actors in Namibia","authors":"Dietlinde N Nakwaya-Jacobus, M. Hipondoka, S. Angombe, L. Stringer, A. Dougill","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2214446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT EIA has become an important environmental management tool because it is supported by enforceable legal backing. However, its effectiveness has been debated, especially in developing countries where systems are often mimicked from the Western world. EIA in Namibia has been in place since the enactment of the legislation in 2007 and 2012 respectively. This paper investigates EIA's substantive, normative, and transactive effectiveness in Namibia as perceived by key actors. Data were collected through survey questionnaires and triangulated with semi-structured interviews. A total of 110 actors responded to the survey and 25 experts were interviewed. Interviewees perceive EIA in Namibia as moderately and marginally effective in supporting substantive, normative, and transactive effectiveness. They further perceive that various contextual and administrative challenges affect EIA effectiveness in Namibia. Challenges include poor administration, restrained consideration of assessment findings in decisions, limited learning and environmental awareness opportunities, inadequate public participation, funding, and poor monitoring, and reporting. Interviewees also highlighted political will as necessary to improve funding and appropriate institutional arrangement. Actors perceive that projects meant to improve the livelihood of impoverished communities can be accepted while foregoing environmental objectives. With targeted improvements, EIA can effectively facilitate good environmental decisions, resource mobilisation, and sustainability in Namibia.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"280 - 300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2214446","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT EIA has become an important environmental management tool because it is supported by enforceable legal backing. However, its effectiveness has been debated, especially in developing countries where systems are often mimicked from the Western world. EIA in Namibia has been in place since the enactment of the legislation in 2007 and 2012 respectively. This paper investigates EIA's substantive, normative, and transactive effectiveness in Namibia as perceived by key actors. Data were collected through survey questionnaires and triangulated with semi-structured interviews. A total of 110 actors responded to the survey and 25 experts were interviewed. Interviewees perceive EIA in Namibia as moderately and marginally effective in supporting substantive, normative, and transactive effectiveness. They further perceive that various contextual and administrative challenges affect EIA effectiveness in Namibia. Challenges include poor administration, restrained consideration of assessment findings in decisions, limited learning and environmental awareness opportunities, inadequate public participation, funding, and poor monitoring, and reporting. Interviewees also highlighted political will as necessary to improve funding and appropriate institutional arrangement. Actors perceive that projects meant to improve the livelihood of impoverished communities can be accepted while foregoing environmental objectives. With targeted improvements, EIA can effectively facilitate good environmental decisions, resource mobilisation, and sustainability in Namibia.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
环境影响评估的实质性、规范性和交易有效性:纳米比亚主要行为者的看法
摘要环境影响评价已成为一种重要的环境管理工具,因为它有可执行的法律支持。然而,它的有效性一直存在争议,尤其是在发展中国家,那里的系统经常模仿西方世界。纳米比亚的环境影响评估自2007年和2012年立法以来一直在实施。本文调查了关键行为者认为的环境影响评估在纳米比亚的实质性、规范性和交易有效性。数据通过调查问卷收集,并通过半结构化访谈进行三角测量。共有110名演员对调查作出回应,25名专家接受了采访。受访者认为纳米比亚的环境影响评估在支持实质性、规范性和交易有效性方面具有适度和边际的有效性。他们进一步认为,各种背景和行政挑战影响了纳米比亚的环境影响评估有效性。挑战包括管理不善、决策中对评估结果的考虑有限、学习和环境意识机会有限、公众参与、资金不足以及监测和报告不力。受访者还强调了改善资金和适当体制安排的必要政治意愿。行动者认为,旨在改善贫困社区生计的项目可以在实现环境目标的同时被接受。通过有针对性的改进,环评可以有效地促进纳米比亚的良好环境决策、资源调动和可持续性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
22.70%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: This is the international, peer-reviewed journal of the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA). It covers environmental, social, health and other impact assessments, cost-benefit analysis, technology assessment, and other approaches to anticipating and managing impacts. It has readers in universities, government and public agencies, consultancies, NGOs and elsewhere in over 100 countries. It has editorials, main articles, book reviews, and a professional practice section.
期刊最新文献
A game theoretic decision-making approach to reduce mine closure risks throughout the mine-life cycle Consideration of risks to people and the environment related to accidents on natural gas transmission pipelines in LUP and SEA processes in Poland Landscape, EIA and decision-making. A case study of the Vistula Spit Canal, Poland SEA and EIA: uncertain boundaries in Spain Influence factors on the quality of regulatory impact analysis in Brazil
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1