Pub Date : 2023-02-06DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2173852
R. Alberts, F. Retief, C. Roos, D. Cilliers
ABSTRACT Due to high development demands, environmental impact assessment (EIA) systems internationally are under increasing pressure to simplify, streamline and demonstrate efficiency. South Africa, as a country, has decades of experience in finding solutions to this challenge. Here we aim to provide a critical reflection on the different streamlining interventions implemented over time. Five key interventions are covered, namely: exemptions, refined screening activities, norms and standards, stricter time frames, and the introduction of strategic instruments. We conclude that although well intentioned, attempts at continually refined and expanded legislation, policy, guidelines and protocols have had the opposite effect, by making the system inefficient, overly complex and confusing. Two pragmatic recommendations are made, namely: (i) to provide for more discretion in decision-making, especially during screening, and (ii) to provide for an exit decision after scoping.
{"title":"Three decades of EIA streamlining: Lessons from South Africa","authors":"R. Alberts, F. Retief, C. Roos, D. Cilliers","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2173852","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2173852","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Due to high development demands, environmental impact assessment (EIA) systems internationally are under increasing pressure to simplify, streamline and demonstrate efficiency. South Africa, as a country, has decades of experience in finding solutions to this challenge. Here we aim to provide a critical reflection on the different streamlining interventions implemented over time. Five key interventions are covered, namely: exemptions, refined screening activities, norms and standards, stricter time frames, and the introduction of strategic instruments. We conclude that although well intentioned, attempts at continually refined and expanded legislation, policy, guidelines and protocols have had the opposite effect, by making the system inefficient, overly complex and confusing. Two pragmatic recommendations are made, namely: (i) to provide for more discretion in decision-making, especially during screening, and (ii) to provide for an exit decision after scoping.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"205 - 211"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41431610","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 : 2023-02-06DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2171829
T. Fischer
Dear readers, Much has been written in the professional literature on what is required in order to realize a sustainable transformation of societies and economies. In this context, more recently, particular attention has been paid to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs; see, e.g. Kørnøv et al. 2020). The 17 SDGs work in different dimensions that, according to Sachs et al. (2019) can be expressed through the following six ‘modules’; ‘(1) education, gender and inequality; (2) health, well-being and demography; (3) energy decarbonization and sustainable industry; (4) sustainable food, land, water and oceans; (5) sustainable cities and communities; and (6) digital revolution for sustainable development’ (Sachs et al. 2019, abstract). Whilst all dimensions/modules are interlinked, some of the linkages are weaker whereas others are stronger. This is particularly true with regard to the operationalization of goals through policies and associated plans, programmes and projects. Whilst e.g. energy programmes may have a narrow focus on particular energy development options (and may thus mainly focus on module (3)), regional spatial strategies are likely going to touch on all of the above six modules (Fischer 2003). Furthermore, whereas SDGs are usually linked with targets and associated actions of implementation, there is a tendency to look at goals in isolation and the necessity to deal with possible trade-offs between different goals is (too) often ignored (Fischer 2020). In this context, integration has been portrayed as ‘the key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals’ (Stafford-Smith et al. 2017, title). Importantly, there is a presumption that given suitable implementation instruments (more recently, the potential role of taxonomies of sustainable investment has been critically discussed in Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal – IAPA; see Dusík and Bond 2022; Fischer 2022), implementation of all goals is possible. However, this is an unrealistic expectation (Bowen et al. 2017), as trade-offs will always need to be dealt with in policy, plan, programme and project making. The pivotal role impact assessments (IAs) play for enabling operationalisation of SDGs and sustainable development, in particular by making trade-offs transparent, is unfortunately frequently ignored. Examples abound, including statements such as ‘we lack clear models for organizing [. . .] discussions and consultation processes’ and ‘Sophisticated tools are needed to design pathways [.] for Transformations’ (Sachs et al. 2019, p812). However, IA approaches are (and have already been for some time) providing for such models and tools (see, e.g. Morrison-Saunders et al. 2015; Geneletti 2016; Fischer and González, 2021; Fonseca 2022). In this context, suggestions that ‘new and improved tools are needed’ (Sachs et al. 2019, p812) without mentioning IA and not considering what is already available is highly problematic, as this will just contribute to further delays in t
{"title":"Transformation towards a sustainable world – the pivotal role of impact assessments","authors":"T. Fischer","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2171829","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2171829","url":null,"abstract":"Dear readers, Much has been written in the professional literature on what is required in order to realize a sustainable transformation of societies and economies. In this context, more recently, particular attention has been paid to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs; see, e.g. Kørnøv et al. 2020). The 17 SDGs work in different dimensions that, according to Sachs et al. (2019) can be expressed through the following six ‘modules’; ‘(1) education, gender and inequality; (2) health, well-being and demography; (3) energy decarbonization and sustainable industry; (4) sustainable food, land, water and oceans; (5) sustainable cities and communities; and (6) digital revolution for sustainable development’ (Sachs et al. 2019, abstract). Whilst all dimensions/modules are interlinked, some of the linkages are weaker whereas others are stronger. This is particularly true with regard to the operationalization of goals through policies and associated plans, programmes and projects. Whilst e.g. energy programmes may have a narrow focus on particular energy development options (and may thus mainly focus on module (3)), regional spatial strategies are likely going to touch on all of the above six modules (Fischer 2003). Furthermore, whereas SDGs are usually linked with targets and associated actions of implementation, there is a tendency to look at goals in isolation and the necessity to deal with possible trade-offs between different goals is (too) often ignored (Fischer 2020). In this context, integration has been portrayed as ‘the key to implementing the Sustainable Development Goals’ (Stafford-Smith et al. 2017, title). Importantly, there is a presumption that given suitable implementation instruments (more recently, the potential role of taxonomies of sustainable investment has been critically discussed in Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal – IAPA; see Dusík and Bond 2022; Fischer 2022), implementation of all goals is possible. However, this is an unrealistic expectation (Bowen et al. 2017), as trade-offs will always need to be dealt with in policy, plan, programme and project making. The pivotal role impact assessments (IAs) play for enabling operationalisation of SDGs and sustainable development, in particular by making trade-offs transparent, is unfortunately frequently ignored. Examples abound, including statements such as ‘we lack clear models for organizing [. . .] discussions and consultation processes’ and ‘Sophisticated tools are needed to design pathways [.] for Transformations’ (Sachs et al. 2019, p812). However, IA approaches are (and have already been for some time) providing for such models and tools (see, e.g. Morrison-Saunders et al. 2015; Geneletti 2016; Fischer and González, 2021; Fonseca 2022). In this context, suggestions that ‘new and improved tools are needed’ (Sachs et al. 2019, p812) without mentioning IA and not considering what is already available is highly problematic, as this will just contribute to further delays in t","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"85 - 86"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47090277","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 : 2023-02-02DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2170093
Chris Joseph, T. Gunton, James Hoffele, Martha Baldwin
ABSTRACT Cumulative effects assessment has been a longstanding challenge and is perhaps the most crucial component of project-level impact assessment. Alternative approaches to advance project-level cumulative effects assessment are developed based upon the findings of a literature review and key informant interviews. Alternative approaches are organized around key themes and cover: baselines; hybridization of sequential and integrated assessment; regional environmental assessment; the omnipresence of cumulative effects in project-level assessment; professional culture; and value-centrism.
{"title":"Improving cumulative effects assessment: alternative approaches based upon an expert survey and literature review","authors":"Chris Joseph, T. Gunton, James Hoffele, Martha Baldwin","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2170093","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2170093","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Cumulative effects assessment has been a longstanding challenge and is perhaps the most crucial component of project-level impact assessment. Alternative approaches to advance project-level cumulative effects assessment are developed based upon the findings of a literature review and key informant interviews. Alternative approaches are organized around key themes and cover: baselines; hybridization of sequential and integrated assessment; regional environmental assessment; the omnipresence of cumulative effects in project-level assessment; professional culture; and value-centrism.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"162 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48833913","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 : 2023-02-01DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2172644
A. Fonseca
ABSTRACT Developers’ concerns over the costs and delays of environmental impact assessment (EIA) have increasingly been driving ‘simplification’ solutions and reforms. This letter critically reviews the evolution of EIA simplification in Brazil. More specifically, it (1) sets out to describe the main stages of EIA simplification in Brazil, and (2) calls for conceptually clear and evidence-based simplification reforms. I argue that the first simplification efforts in Brazil mirrored an attempt to bring procedural proportionality to EIA. But simplification gradually became a more nuanced phenomenon reflecting a variety of streamlining, digitalization, and decentralization strategies. However, the many simplification efforts do not seem to be affecting developers’ predominant perception about EIA ineffectiveness. Brazil may be witnessing a more radical stage of EIA simplification, in which ‘simplicity’ is pursued through weak public participation and the exemption of specific economic sectors of the Brazilian economy from EIA. Without conceptually clear and evidence-based simplification reforms, debates over EIA effectiveness are likely to be influenced by simplistic win-win narratives, and Brazil’s increasingly fragile environment is likely to get worse.
{"title":"Weak Participation and Ideological Exemption: The Latest Stage of EIA Simplification in Brazil?","authors":"A. Fonseca","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2172644","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2172644","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Developers’ concerns over the costs and delays of environmental impact assessment (EIA) have increasingly been driving ‘simplification’ solutions and reforms. This letter critically reviews the evolution of EIA simplification in Brazil. More specifically, it (1) sets out to describe the main stages of EIA simplification in Brazil, and (2) calls for conceptually clear and evidence-based simplification reforms. I argue that the first simplification efforts in Brazil mirrored an attempt to bring procedural proportionality to EIA. But simplification gradually became a more nuanced phenomenon reflecting a variety of streamlining, digitalization, and decentralization strategies. However, the many simplification efforts do not seem to be affecting developers’ predominant perception about EIA ineffectiveness. Brazil may be witnessing a more radical stage of EIA simplification, in which ‘simplicity’ is pursued through weak public participation and the exemption of specific economic sectors of the Brazilian economy from EIA. Without conceptually clear and evidence-based simplification reforms, debates over EIA effectiveness are likely to be influenced by simplistic win-win narratives, and Brazil’s increasingly fragile environment is likely to get worse.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"199 - 204"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48732536","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 : 2023-02-01DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2169460
Mehrnoosh Mohammadi, Yan Chen, H. T. Rahman, K. Sherren
ABSTRACT Shifts from fossil fuels toward renewable energy (RE) introduce profound changes to landscapes, including visual impacts that are often investigated during environmental and social impact assessment. Moreover, RE transitions are among many visual changes happening in rural areas that are increasingly serving amenity functions and becoming destinations for wide ranges of users. This diversity introduces complexities during infrastructure siting discussions. Emerging grape and wine production landscapes in Canada serve amenity and production purposes, and this study was designed to understand the impacts of RE development using case studies of solar panels and wind turbines in two vineyard landscapes in Ontario (ON) and British Columbia (BC). We applied novel mixed methods, including content analysis and saliency-based visual impact analysis, to textual and image-based representations posted on Instagram of those vineyards. In this case, the addition of low-density RE infrastructures did not seem to disturb the vineyard experience. The technique presented can be applied in a wide range of infrastructure siting contexts, both before and after construction, but requires additional research and calibration.
{"title":"A saliency mapping approach to understanding the visual impact of wind and solar infrastructure in amenity landscapes","authors":"Mehrnoosh Mohammadi, Yan Chen, H. T. Rahman, K. Sherren","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2169460","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2169460","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Shifts from fossil fuels toward renewable energy (RE) introduce profound changes to landscapes, including visual impacts that are often investigated during environmental and social impact assessment. Moreover, RE transitions are among many visual changes happening in rural areas that are increasingly serving amenity functions and becoming destinations for wide ranges of users. This diversity introduces complexities during infrastructure siting discussions. Emerging grape and wine production landscapes in Canada serve amenity and production purposes, and this study was designed to understand the impacts of RE development using case studies of solar panels and wind turbines in two vineyard landscapes in Ontario (ON) and British Columbia (BC). We applied novel mixed methods, including content analysis and saliency-based visual impact analysis, to textual and image-based representations posted on Instagram of those vineyards. In this case, the addition of low-density RE infrastructures did not seem to disturb the vineyard experience. The technique presented can be applied in a wide range of infrastructure siting contexts, both before and after construction, but requires additional research and calibration.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"154 - 161"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46626963","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 : 2023-01-27DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2171592
C. Faith-Ell
ABSTRACT This letter gives an overview of the discourse regarding simplification and streamlining of Environmental Assessment (EA) in Sweden. The topic of simplification has been discussed since the introduction of EIA in 1988 in Sweden. Three main themes can be identified in the discourse: i) to reduce the number of EAs; ii) clarification of key elements and aspects; and iii) shortening of the administrative time of the planning and permitting processes. Also, the Swedish discourse has moved from focusing on minimising the requirements on EA to finding ways to strengthen the competent authority. Finally, the Swedish case shows that the issue of simplification and streamlining of EA processes is something that oscillates over time depending on political will and changes in the EU legislation. However, these processes take time and are often characterised by an inertia that usually balances out the most radical suggestions on simplification and streamlining.
{"title":"Simplification of environmental assessment – the case of Sweden","authors":"C. Faith-Ell","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2171592","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2171592","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This letter gives an overview of the discourse regarding simplification and streamlining of Environmental Assessment (EA) in Sweden. The topic of simplification has been discussed since the introduction of EIA in 1988 in Sweden. Three main themes can be identified in the discourse: i) to reduce the number of EAs; ii) clarification of key elements and aspects; and iii) shortening of the administrative time of the planning and permitting processes. Also, the Swedish discourse has moved from focusing on minimising the requirements on EA to finding ways to strengthen the competent authority. Finally, the Swedish case shows that the issue of simplification and streamlining of EA processes is something that oscillates over time depending on political will and changes in the EU legislation. However, these processes take time and are often characterised by an inertia that usually balances out the most radical suggestions on simplification and streamlining.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"194 - 198"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48633883","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 : 2023-01-24DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2170094
Ainhoa González, Iñigo Sobrini
ABSTRACT The Spanish government has made concerted efforts to simplify environmental assessment processes. In the case of the ‘simplified’ Strategic Environmental Assessment approach, this has been done with the objective of streamlining processes and resources, so that plans and programmes, or their modifications, that are considered to potentially have insignificant or negligible environmental effects are not subject to a full assessment. In contrast, the recently introduced ‘environmental effects determination procedure’ for renewable projects has the purpose of speeding up project approval processes in response to energy security challenges with a resulting potential risk of weakening assessment procedures and debilitating environmental protection. Simplification attempts should not only comply with legal mandates but proactively foster environmentally-sound, participatory and transparent decisions.
{"title":"Environmental assessment simplification in Spain: streamlining or weakening procedures?","authors":"Ainhoa González, Iñigo Sobrini","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2170094","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2170094","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Spanish government has made concerted efforts to simplify environmental assessment processes. In the case of the ‘simplified’ Strategic Environmental Assessment approach, this has been done with the objective of streamlining processes and resources, so that plans and programmes, or their modifications, that are considered to potentially have insignificant or negligible environmental effects are not subject to a full assessment. In contrast, the recently introduced ‘environmental effects determination procedure’ for renewable projects has the purpose of speeding up project approval processes in response to energy security challenges with a resulting potential risk of weakening assessment procedures and debilitating environmental protection. Simplification attempts should not only comply with legal mandates but proactively foster environmentally-sound, participatory and transparent decisions.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"190 - 193"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49489723","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 : 2023-01-10DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2023.2166257
T. Fischer
ABSTRACT This contribution is part of a compilation of letters on ‘Environmental Assessment (EA)/Impact Assessment (IA) simplification’ in the journal ‘Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal’. In it, the author discusses current efforts of the UK government to simplify and potentially replace EA. First, an overview of the development of EA over time is provided since it became mandatory (Environmental Impact Assessment – EIA – in 1988 and Strategic Environmental Assessment – SEA – in 2004). This is followed by a review of identified weaknesses of the UK EA system. The current initiative to potentially replace EA with so-called environmental outcomes reports (EORs) is described and critically reflected on. The letter concludes with a deliberation on whether current efforts appear to be fit for purpose and recommendations are provided on how we should proceed.
{"title":"Simplification and potential replacement of EA in the UK – is it fit for purpose?","authors":"T. Fischer","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2166257","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2166257","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This contribution is part of a compilation of letters on ‘Environmental Assessment (EA)/Impact Assessment (IA) simplification’ in the journal ‘Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal’. In it, the author discusses current efforts of the UK government to simplify and potentially replace EA. First, an overview of the development of EA over time is provided since it became mandatory (Environmental Impact Assessment – EIA – in 1988 and Strategic Environmental Assessment – SEA – in 2004). This is followed by a review of identified weaknesses of the UK EA system. The current initiative to potentially replace EA with so-called environmental outcomes reports (EORs) is described and critically reflected on. The letter concludes with a deliberation on whether current efforts appear to be fit for purpose and recommendations are provided on how we should proceed.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"233 - 237"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42922561","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 : 2022-12-28DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2154434
L. Green, K. Ashton, S. Azam, T. Clemens, M. Bellis
ABSTRACT Brexit, COVID-19 and climate change pose challenges of national and global importance. They continue to have impacts across the economy, society, health, and the environment, all of which are determinants of health and well-being. Between 2018 and 2021, Public Health Wales undertook three Health Impact Assessments (HIA) in relation to the impact of the challenges in Wales. Based on these, work has been carried out to map the synergies across the ‘Triple Challenge’. This paper highlights the commonalities in the impact of the three challenges for Wales, discusses the process carried out, learns from it and proposes actions that can be taken to mitigate harm. Results indicate the three components of the Triple Challenge must not be viewed as separate silos as they have cumulative multi-faceted impacts. This affects some population groups more negatively than others and present a ‘Triple Challenge’ to nation states in the UK and Europe. A HIA approach can enable a range of stakeholders to critically view similar challenges not just as single issues but as a holistic whole to mobilise action.
{"title":"Brexit, COVID-19 and climate change: mapping the impact of the ‘triple challenge’ on health and well-being in wales","authors":"L. Green, K. Ashton, S. Azam, T. Clemens, M. Bellis","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2154434","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2154434","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Brexit, COVID-19 and climate change pose challenges of national and global importance. They continue to have impacts across the economy, society, health, and the environment, all of which are determinants of health and well-being. Between 2018 and 2021, Public Health Wales undertook three Health Impact Assessments (HIA) in relation to the impact of the challenges in Wales. Based on these, work has been carried out to map the synergies across the ‘Triple Challenge’. This paper highlights the commonalities in the impact of the three challenges for Wales, discusses the process carried out, learns from it and proposes actions that can be taken to mitigate harm. Results indicate the three components of the Triple Challenge must not be viewed as separate silos as they have cumulative multi-faceted impacts. This affects some population groups more negatively than others and present a ‘Triple Challenge’ to nation states in the UK and Europe. A HIA approach can enable a range of stakeholders to critically view similar challenges not just as single issues but as a holistic whole to mobilise action.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"126 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48193719","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 : 2022-12-17DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2157111
Marco Gutierrez, C. Hernandez-Santin, S. Bekessy, A. Gordon
ABSTRACT An increasing number of countries are implementing strategic environmental assessment (SEA) to support the development of environmentally sustainable policies, plans and programs. However, some Global South countries are yet to legislate for SEA and research is needed to understand the contextual challenges to implementing SEA effectively in these jurisdictions. Here, we examine Mexico’s first attempt at applying SEA to assess the potential impacts of urban development plans on a city-wide scale, including those on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Using stakeholder interviews and reflexive thematic analysis, we identify and discuss key factors to consider when formally implementing SEA in Mexico for it to achieve its intended objectives. We relate our findings to existing studies on SEA in Global South countries and discuss contextual challenges that may be shared by these jurisdictions, namely: limited knowledge and experience with SEA, low trust in public institutions, and limited institutional capacity of environmental agencies. We then provide recommendations for addressing these shared challenges, which may also prove useful for countries experiencing difficulties with the application of SEA.
{"title":"Contextual challenges for implementing strategic environmental assessment in the Global South: insights from a case study in Mexico","authors":"Marco Gutierrez, C. Hernandez-Santin, S. Bekessy, A. Gordon","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2157111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2157111","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT An increasing number of countries are implementing strategic environmental assessment (SEA) to support the development of environmentally sustainable policies, plans and programs. However, some Global South countries are yet to legislate for SEA and research is needed to understand the contextual challenges to implementing SEA effectively in these jurisdictions. Here, we examine Mexico’s first attempt at applying SEA to assess the potential impacts of urban development plans on a city-wide scale, including those on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Using stakeholder interviews and reflexive thematic analysis, we identify and discuss key factors to consider when formally implementing SEA in Mexico for it to achieve its intended objectives. We relate our findings to existing studies on SEA in Global South countries and discuss contextual challenges that may be shared by these jurisdictions, namely: limited knowledge and experience with SEA, low trust in public institutions, and limited institutional capacity of environmental agencies. We then provide recommendations for addressing these shared challenges, which may also prove useful for countries experiencing difficulties with the application of SEA.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"139 - 153"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42599746","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：