Pub Date : 2023-08-29DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2246727
Charla Patterson, Aurora Torres, M. Coroi, Katherine Cumming, M. Hanson, B. Noble, G. Tabor, J. Treweek, C. Iglesias-Merchán, Jochen A. G. Jaeger
ABSTRACT Case studies can highlight opportunities for mainstreaming connectivity into environmental assessment (EA) and reveal relevant conditions for success or failure. We examined five cases from Canada, Spain, Sweden, and the UK to address three questions: (1) What are major challenges? (2) What are relevant opportunities and lessons learnt? (3) What research directions should be promoted? We identified 15 challenges and 19 lessons that can help improve connectivity consideration. Common challenges include i) late consideration; ii) lack of resources; iii) lack of explicit requirements; iv) lack of guidance; v) limited recognition of the importance of connectivity; and vi) absence of a landscape-scale perspective. Lessons learnt include the need for rooting connectivity assessments in scientific knowledge and for considering multiple scales of analysis. The findings revealed multiple pathways that can lead to inclusion of connectivity, such as the involvement of knowledgeable EA practitioners, and governments providing a supportive framework. The findings can be applied to advance connectivity assessments in EA, emphasizing the need for guidance and the role of cumulative effects assessment and strategic environmental assessment.
{"title":"Pathways for improving the consideration of ecological connectivity in environmental assessment: lessons from five case studies","authors":"Charla Patterson, Aurora Torres, M. Coroi, Katherine Cumming, M. Hanson, B. Noble, G. Tabor, J. Treweek, C. Iglesias-Merchán, Jochen A. G. Jaeger","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2246727","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2246727","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Case studies can highlight opportunities for mainstreaming connectivity into environmental assessment (EA) and reveal relevant conditions for success or failure. We examined five cases from Canada, Spain, Sweden, and the UK to address three questions: (1) What are major challenges? (2) What are relevant opportunities and lessons learnt? (3) What research directions should be promoted? We identified 15 challenges and 19 lessons that can help improve connectivity consideration. Common challenges include i) late consideration; ii) lack of resources; iii) lack of explicit requirements; iv) lack of guidance; v) limited recognition of the importance of connectivity; and vi) absence of a landscape-scale perspective. Lessons learnt include the need for rooting connectivity assessments in scientific knowledge and for considering multiple scales of analysis. The findings revealed multiple pathways that can lead to inclusion of connectivity, such as the involvement of knowledgeable EA practitioners, and governments providing a supportive framework. The findings can be applied to advance connectivity assessments in EA, emphasizing the need for guidance and the role of cumulative effects assessment and strategic environmental assessment.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"374 - 390"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45949532","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-20DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2237294
Darrel Tiang Chin Fung, R. van der Ree, Nic McCaffrey, C. Gibbins, A. Lechner
ABSTRACT Road building is one of the greatest threats to biodiversity globally. This study addressed common challenges for spatially explicit ecological assessments of linear infrastructure EIAs, by first providing an overview of existing approaches and then applying a connectivity model with scenario analysis of alternative road alignments for a road bypass in Beaufort, Australia. The application included an expert-based connectivity model using a combination of least-cost paths, circuit theory, and graph theory to model five conservation targets (four species and one group) with different dispersal abilities and habitat requirements. For each of these targets, we modelled four different road alignments, then assessed mitigation options for the least impactful alignment. The results showed that each target species was dissimilarly impacted, with longer dispersers affected the most. The modelling clearly identified a single alignment with the least overall impact on connectivity and showed how wildlife crossing structures can mitigate impacts through improving overall connectivity for all target species. This real-world case-study demonstrated the potential to apply a transparent and quantitative approach to mainstreaming ecological connectivity modelling in EIAs.
{"title":"Ecological connectivity in environmental impact assessments: modelling alternative highway bypass scenarios","authors":"Darrel Tiang Chin Fung, R. van der Ree, Nic McCaffrey, C. Gibbins, A. Lechner","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2237294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2237294","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Road building is one of the greatest threats to biodiversity globally. This study addressed common challenges for spatially explicit ecological assessments of linear infrastructure EIAs, by first providing an overview of existing approaches and then applying a connectivity model with scenario analysis of alternative road alignments for a road bypass in Beaufort, Australia. The application included an expert-based connectivity model using a combination of least-cost paths, circuit theory, and graph theory to model five conservation targets (four species and one group) with different dispersal abilities and habitat requirements. For each of these targets, we modelled four different road alignments, then assessed mitigation options for the least impactful alignment. The results showed that each target species was dissimilarly impacted, with longer dispersers affected the most. The modelling clearly identified a single alignment with the least overall impact on connectivity and showed how wildlife crossing structures can mitigate impacts through improving overall connectivity for all target species. This real-world case-study demonstrated the potential to apply a transparent and quantitative approach to mainstreaming ecological connectivity modelling in EIAs.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"349 - 373"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48533652","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-10DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2239587
G. Matome, K. Mulale
ABSTRACT Botswana recently introduced strategic environmental assessment (SEA) into her national environmental management framework and the SEA approach used in is anchored on the South African approach which is reported defective where it originates. Furthermore, there is a dearth of literature on the performance of SEA in Botswana. In response, this paper studies the quality of SEAs of three of Botswana’s development plans, prepared between 2011 and 2018. The study employs European SEA Directive-based SEA report quality review package. Findings demonstrate that SEA practice in Botswana is generally satisfactory albeit with some critical challenges. Shortcomings relate to the description of the baseline environment; the listing of baseline documents; the identification of problems relating to, and effects of proposed plan on areas of ecological significance; evaluation of secondary, cumulative, and synergistic effects; the elaboration of various properties of effects; consideration given to effects on various sustainability receptors and health implications; the conduct of SEA following applicable national SEA frameworks; the uncertain effects of public participation and SEA on proposed plan; and, the description of how developed monitoring arrangements can be used to reduce duplication of efforts between SEA and EIA.
{"title":"A review of the quality of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) reports in Botswana","authors":"G. Matome, K. Mulale","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2239587","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2239587","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Botswana recently introduced strategic environmental assessment (SEA) into her national environmental management framework and the SEA approach used in is anchored on the South African approach which is reported defective where it originates. Furthermore, there is a dearth of literature on the performance of SEA in Botswana. In response, this paper studies the quality of SEAs of three of Botswana’s development plans, prepared between 2011 and 2018. The study employs European SEA Directive-based SEA report quality review package. Findings demonstrate that SEA practice in Botswana is generally satisfactory albeit with some critical challenges. Shortcomings relate to the description of the baseline environment; the listing of baseline documents; the identification of problems relating to, and effects of proposed plan on areas of ecological significance; evaluation of secondary, cumulative, and synergistic effects; the elaboration of various properties of effects; consideration given to effects on various sustainability receptors and health implications; the conduct of SEA following applicable national SEA frameworks; the uncertain effects of public participation and SEA on proposed plan; and, the description of how developed monitoring arrangements can be used to reduce duplication of efforts between SEA and EIA.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"403 - 415"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44831877","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-07DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2239586
Aurora Torres, Charla Patterson, Jochen A. G. Jaeger
Despite a rapidly growing body of research about ecological connectivity, studies explicitly examining and advancing its inclusion and consideration in environmental assessment (EA) have remained surprisingly sparse. The primary purpose of this special issue is to compile and catalyse research that explicitly links connectivity and EA practice, showcasing the work of researchers and practitioners that recognizes the significance of connectivity and addresses knowledge gaps. We are pleased to introduce the second part of this special issue, featuring three additional papers that delve deeper into the topics and insights presented in the first 7 articles and first editorial. The first part of this special issue, published in November 2022 (IAPA vol. 40, no. 6), emphasized the need for studies that combine EA and ecological connectivity and aimed to promote interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral collaboration and to improve current EA practices. It started with an overview of current practices and common issues regarding the treatment of connectivity in EA, drawing on a global survey of EA actors (Patterson et al. 2022b), followed by national overviews about urban planning in Sweden (Karlsson and Bodin 2022) and road planning in Brazil (Oliveira Gonçalves et al. 2022), as well as the EA process in Canada (Patterson et al. 2022a) and in the United Kingdom (Kor et al. 2022). Subsequent papers zoomed into specific cases that (1) explicitly incorporated connectivity assessments in the EA process across scales and EA tiers ranging from project-level environmental impact assessments to strategic environmental assessments (Cumming and Tavares 2022), (2) developed and applied strong quantitative approaches to model habitat connectivity for certain target species in EAs (Kor et al. 2022), and (3) explored the contribution of mitigation measures to the connectivity of ecological networks for amphibians (Clevenot et al. 2022). The first editorial summarized the findings of these studies in terms of challenges, uncertainties, and opportunities associated with quantifying, assessing, and mitigating impacts on connectivity as part of the EA process (Torres et al. 2022). It laid out the need for systemic changes and further research efforts for better integration of connectivity into EA practice. Some of the challenges identified refer to the accurate quantification of the effects of development projects on connectivity and the use of the results. For instance, they point to the need to avoid the Fallacy of Stressed Systems and the Shifting Baseline Syndrome to prevent an underestimation of impacts on connectivity, to the danger of mis-use of connectivity assessments to mask or ‘compensate’ for habitat loss, and to the need to set up and follow through with monitoring for sufficiently long time periods. In the planning and regulatory perspective, the editorial highlighted that it is crucial to raise awareness and explicitly consider connectivity in national planning
尽管关于生态连通性的研究迅速增长，但明确检查和推进其在环境评估(EA)中的纳入和考虑的研究仍然少得惊人。本期特刊的主要目的是汇编和促进明确将连通性和EA实践联系起来的研究，展示认识到连通性重要性并解决知识差距的研究人员和实践者的工作。我们很高兴地介绍本期特刊的第二部分，其中包括三篇额外的论文，这些论文更深入地探讨了前7篇文章和第一篇社论中提出的主题和见解。这期特刊的第一部分，于2022年11月出版(IAPA第40卷，no. 10)。(6)强调有必要将生态环境评估与生态连通性结合起来进行研究，旨在促进跨学科和跨部门合作，并改进当前的生态环境评估实践。本文首先概述了EA中连通性处理的当前实践和常见问题，借鉴了对EA参与者的全球调查(Patterson等人，2022b)，然后概述了瑞典(Karlsson和Bodin 2022)和巴西(Oliveira gonalves等人，2022)的城市规划国家概况，以及加拿大(Patterson等人，2022a)和英国(Kor等人，2022)的EA过程。随后的论文聚焦于具体的案例(1)明确地将连通性评估纳入EA过程中，从项目级环境影响评估到战略环境评估(Cumming and Tavares 2022);(2)开发并应用了强大的定量方法来模拟EA中某些目标物种的栖息地连通性(Kor et al. 2022)。(3)探讨了缓解措施对两栖动物生态网络连通性的贡献(Clevenot et al. 2022)。第一篇社论总结了这些研究的发现，包括与量化、评估和减轻作为EA过程一部分的连通性影响相关的挑战、不确定性和机遇(Torres et al. 2022)。它提出了系统变革和进一步研究工作的必要性，以便更好地将连接性集成到EA实践中。确定的一些挑战涉及发展项目对连通性的影响的准确量化和结果的使用。例如，他们指出需要避免压力系统谬论和转移基线综合症，以防止低估对连通性的影响，指出滥用连通性评估来掩盖或“补偿”栖息地丧失的危险，并指出需要建立并坚持足够长时间的监测。从规划和监管的角度来看，社论强调，在国家规划和战略环境评估中提高认识并明确考虑连通性至关重要，必须建立环境影响评估利益相关者之间明确的角色和责任，以证实问责制。这些努力将有助于推进基于证据的环境评估，并加强决策过程。特刊的第二部分旨在增进对第一部分中没有仔细研究的环境评估阶段的连通性分析的理解，即替代设计与缓解和补偿阶段的比较。它通过对案例研究的考察，展示了EA中连接性分析的好例子，从而扩展了应用知识。这些文章还扩大了特刊的地理范围，包括来自巴西和澳大利亚的研究，以及来自英国、加拿大、西班牙和瑞典等国的案例研究的比较。在第一篇文章中，Sales Rosa等人(2023)强调了连通性评估对规划缓解策略和补偿方案(如生物多样性补偿)的重要性。他们的研究模拟并比较了巴西大西洋热带雨林矿区大型哺乳动物的生态连通性，以及实施生物多样性抵消的未来情景。研究结果表明，补偿可以通过为受影响物种提供替代栖息地来改善生态连通性，并强调仔细规划恢复区域的位置以最大限度地提高其对连通性和栖息地质量的贡献的重要性。为了改善EA中连通性的处理，该研究建议结合生物多样性监测，为保护和恢复偏移区域建模，以及对项目替代方案进行彻底分析。来自澳大利亚的Fung et al.(2023)的第二篇文章做出了两个主要贡献。 它首先概述了EA中空间明确的研究，这些研究评估了线性基础设施对影响评估和项目评估的影响，2023,VOL. 41, NO. 1。5,330 - 332 https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2239586
{"title":"Advancing the consideration of ecological connectivity in environmental assessment – Part 2 of the special issue","authors":"Aurora Torres, Charla Patterson, Jochen A. G. Jaeger","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2239586","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2239586","url":null,"abstract":"Despite a rapidly growing body of research about ecological connectivity, studies explicitly examining and advancing its inclusion and consideration in environmental assessment (EA) have remained surprisingly sparse. The primary purpose of this special issue is to compile and catalyse research that explicitly links connectivity and EA practice, showcasing the work of researchers and practitioners that recognizes the significance of connectivity and addresses knowledge gaps. We are pleased to introduce the second part of this special issue, featuring three additional papers that delve deeper into the topics and insights presented in the first 7 articles and first editorial. The first part of this special issue, published in November 2022 (IAPA vol. 40, no. 6), emphasized the need for studies that combine EA and ecological connectivity and aimed to promote interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral collaboration and to improve current EA practices. It started with an overview of current practices and common issues regarding the treatment of connectivity in EA, drawing on a global survey of EA actors (Patterson et al. 2022b), followed by national overviews about urban planning in Sweden (Karlsson and Bodin 2022) and road planning in Brazil (Oliveira Gonçalves et al. 2022), as well as the EA process in Canada (Patterson et al. 2022a) and in the United Kingdom (Kor et al. 2022). Subsequent papers zoomed into specific cases that (1) explicitly incorporated connectivity assessments in the EA process across scales and EA tiers ranging from project-level environmental impact assessments to strategic environmental assessments (Cumming and Tavares 2022), (2) developed and applied strong quantitative approaches to model habitat connectivity for certain target species in EAs (Kor et al. 2022), and (3) explored the contribution of mitigation measures to the connectivity of ecological networks for amphibians (Clevenot et al. 2022). The first editorial summarized the findings of these studies in terms of challenges, uncertainties, and opportunities associated with quantifying, assessing, and mitigating impacts on connectivity as part of the EA process (Torres et al. 2022). It laid out the need for systemic changes and further research efforts for better integration of connectivity into EA practice. Some of the challenges identified refer to the accurate quantification of the effects of development projects on connectivity and the use of the results. For instance, they point to the need to avoid the Fallacy of Stressed Systems and the Shifting Baseline Syndrome to prevent an underestimation of impacts on connectivity, to the danger of mis-use of connectivity assessments to mask or ‘compensate’ for habitat loss, and to the need to set up and follow through with monitoring for sufficiently long time periods. In the planning and regulatory perspective, the editorial highlighted that it is crucial to raise awareness and explicitly consider connectivity in national planning","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"330 - 332"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60044702","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-04DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2243019
Rajib Biswal, A. Sinclair, H. Spaling
ABSTRACT Undertaking environmental assessments for small, rural development projects has proven to be both vexing and essential. Our research considers one approach to assessing such projects, community-based environmental assessment (CBEA). The purpose of our work was to gauge current CBEA practice and consider next generation approaches in the face of challenges such as lack of adequate capacity, resource and power imbalances, achieving meaningful participation, narrow conceptions of sustainability, and weak follow-up and monitoring. Through a literature review and semi-structured interviews with various EA experts from around the globe, we consider these issues and propose a framework for next-generation community-based environmental assessment (NG-CBEA) that builds on four key next generation themes; sustainability, meaningful public participation, follow-up and monitoring, and learning.
{"title":"Moving to next generation community-based environmental assessment","authors":"Rajib Biswal, A. Sinclair, H. Spaling","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2243019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2243019","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Undertaking environmental assessments for small, rural development projects has proven to be both vexing and essential. Our research considers one approach to assessing such projects, community-based environmental assessment (CBEA). The purpose of our work was to gauge current CBEA practice and consider next generation approaches in the face of challenges such as lack of adequate capacity, resource and power imbalances, achieving meaningful participation, narrow conceptions of sustainability, and weak follow-up and monitoring. Through a literature review and semi-structured interviews with various EA experts from around the globe, we consider these issues and propose a framework for next-generation community-based environmental assessment (NG-CBEA) that builds on four key next generation themes; sustainability, meaningful public participation, follow-up and monitoring, and learning.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"416 - 427"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43295190","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-02DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2229657
D. Jolly, M. Thompson‐Fawcett
ABSTRACT In Aotearoa New Zealand, Māori have prepared their own impact assessments for three decades. Yet, there has been no evaluation of effectiveness. Asking practitioners and experts to reflect on their experiences with Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA), we addressed the question ‘how far do CIA go to deliver outcomes Māori define as positive’? Interweaving Indigenous lived experiences with Indigenous theory, we undertook a critical analysis of CIA effectiveness. We found that CIA are delivering positive outcomes, but these are highly variable, and fall short of substantial outcomes consistent with the partnership and the dual planning framework envisioned by the Treaty of Waitangi. 1 To be effective, CIA functions best when it is Indigenous-led and – in the wider Aotearoa New Zealand planning and impact assessment framework – also Treaty-led. The Māori experience contributes to the developing international field of Indigenous IA.
{"title":"Influential Indigenous voices? Evaluating cultural impact assessment effectiveness in Aotearoa New Zealand","authors":"D. Jolly, M. Thompson‐Fawcett","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2229657","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2229657","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In Aotearoa New Zealand, Māori have prepared their own impact assessments for three decades. Yet, there has been no evaluation of effectiveness. Asking practitioners and experts to reflect on their experiences with Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA), we addressed the question ‘how far do CIA go to deliver outcomes Māori define as positive’? Interweaving Indigenous lived experiences with Indigenous theory, we undertook a critical analysis of CIA effectiveness. We found that CIA are delivering positive outcomes, but these are highly variable, and fall short of substantial outcomes consistent with the partnership and the dual planning framework envisioned by the Treaty of Waitangi. 1 To be effective, CIA functions best when it is Indigenous-led and – in the wider Aotearoa New Zealand planning and impact assessment framework – also Treaty-led. The Māori experience contributes to the developing international field of Indigenous IA.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"391 - 402"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45861676","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-09DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2220152
Juwo Juwish Lwesya Sibale, T. Fischer
ABSTRACT In this paper, the authors reflect on public participation (PP) in environmental impact assessment (EIA) processes in Malawi, where EIA is implemented as Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA). Who is invited and who is actively contributing to PP meetings is explored. In this context, 12 ESIAs are examined, six from rural and six from urban areas. While PP principles ask for a balanced approach towards the inclusion of both interested and affected individuals and bodies, in the 12 projects, participants were mostly development and planning experts in urban projects and traditional leaders (chiefs) in rural projects. People without societal positions that were directly affected by developments only represented 15% of those being present in PP meetings. Based on these findings, the authors suggest that PP policy needs to be improved and enforced in order to allow ordinary people potentially directly affected by development to be better represented.
{"title":"Who is involved in environmental and social impact assessment public participation? Observations on urban and rural practices in Malawi","authors":"Juwo Juwish Lwesya Sibale, T. Fischer","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2220152","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2220152","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper, the authors reflect on public participation (PP) in environmental impact assessment (EIA) processes in Malawi, where EIA is implemented as Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA). Who is invited and who is actively contributing to PP meetings is explored. In this context, 12 ESIAs are examined, six from rural and six from urban areas. While PP principles ask for a balanced approach towards the inclusion of both interested and affected individuals and bodies, in the 12 projects, participants were mostly development and planning experts in urban projects and traditional leaders (chiefs) in rural projects. People without societal positions that were directly affected by developments only represented 15% of those being present in PP meetings. Based on these findings, the authors suggest that PP policy needs to be improved and enforced in order to allow ordinary people potentially directly affected by development to be better represented.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"301 - 313"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41557862","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-02DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2214446
Dietlinde N Nakwaya-Jacobus, M. Hipondoka, S. Angombe, L. Stringer, A. Dougill
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.
{"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":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2214446","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":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49667803","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-20DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2206702
M. Birley
ABSTRACT Projects and their Environmental Impact Assessments should take account of global cumulative impacts such as those associated with Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The emissions induce the climate emergency which is a major determinant of public health and much else. This opinion paper identifies some challenges and improvements that could be made in current policy, procedure, and methods for mitigating the climate emergency in airport expansion. It does so by analysing the Environmental Statement for the Leeds and Bradford Airport expansion plan, together with existing international, national, and local climate change policies.
{"title":"Including climate change in airport EIAs","authors":"M. Birley","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2206702","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2206702","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Projects and their Environmental Impact Assessments should take account of global cumulative impacts such as those associated with Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The emissions induce the climate emergency which is a major determinant of public health and much else. This opinion paper identifies some challenges and improvements that could be made in current policy, procedure, and methods for mitigating the climate emergency in airport expansion. It does so by analysing the Environmental Statement for the Leeds and Bradford Airport expansion plan, together with existing international, national, and local climate change policies.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"323 - 327"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44678541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2208397
Urmila Jha-Thakur
ABSTRACT This letter provides an overview of the EIA system in India for the last three decades. The strengths and weaknesses of the system are summarised here based on the key reviews, which have been undertaken during this time. The main purpose of this contribution is however to reflect on the recent attempts to introduce changes within the EIA system in India via the Draft EIA Notification of 2020 and the subsequent regulatory instruments. The proposed changes are compared and contrasted against the identified strengths and weaknesses. Though the Draft Notification was rejected, it showcases the intention of the Government towards dilution of the EIA system and its failure portrays the extent to which public opinion and understanding of EIA has evolved in the country.
{"title":"Three decades of EIA reforms in India: reflections on the complexities of simplifications","authors":"Urmila Jha-Thakur","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2208397","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2208397","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This letter provides an overview of the EIA system in India for the last three decades. The strengths and weaknesses of the system are summarised here based on the key reviews, which have been undertaken during this time. The main purpose of this contribution is however to reflect on the recent attempts to introduce changes within the EIA system in India via the Draft EIA Notification of 2020 and the subsequent regulatory instruments. The proposed changes are compared and contrasted against the identified strengths and weaknesses. Though the Draft Notification was rejected, it showcases the intention of the Government towards dilution of the EIA system and its failure portrays the extent to which public opinion and understanding of EIA has evolved in the country.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"244 - 248"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42108061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：