Pub Date : 2022-11-30DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2099730
Mark K. Watson, T. Morgan, Cassio Ingles de Sousa, Marc Dunn, Emmanuel B. Raufflet, Cynthia Taylor, Rasmus Kløcker Larsen
ABSTRACT How can Indigenous peoples and practitioners engage Impact Assessment as a collaborative learning process that enables communities to affect and influence the design of development projects and their management systems? How to create conversations between Indigenous peoples in order to craft a message/voice in relation to developers? This article summarizes lessons learned from ‘Aashukan’ an Indigenous exchange organized on James Bay Cree lands, Northern Québec, Canada in conjunction with the IAIA Conference in 2017. It presents the context, objectives, processes, and outcomes of this workshop in relation to the Impact Assessment community and discusses future directions.
{"title":"Indigenous experiences of impact assessment and development projects: lessons from the Aashukan exchange","authors":"Mark K. Watson, T. Morgan, Cassio Ingles de Sousa, Marc Dunn, Emmanuel B. Raufflet, Cynthia Taylor, Rasmus Kløcker Larsen","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2099730","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2099730","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How can Indigenous peoples and practitioners engage Impact Assessment as a collaborative learning process that enables communities to affect and influence the design of development projects and their management systems? How to create conversations between Indigenous peoples in order to craft a message/voice in relation to developers? This article summarizes lessons learned from ‘Aashukan’ an Indigenous exchange organized on James Bay Cree lands, Northern Québec, Canada in conjunction with the IAIA Conference in 2017. It presents the context, objectives, processes, and outcomes of this workshop in relation to the Impact Assessment community and discusses future directions.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"71 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47463762","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 : 2022-11-29DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2151169
Guilherme Prado Alves, M. R. R. E. Almeida, Daniele Ornaghi SantAnna
ABSTRACT Social License to Operate (SLO) is a way to ensure community acceptance for entrepreneurial operations. This study describes and discusses the perspectives from communities, and external agents involved in SLO acquisitions and maintenance for a Small Hydroelectric Power Plant (SHP). Then, we reflect upon SLO applications for fair socio-environmental management. We used a case study for the research design. Data were collected using documents provided by the entrepreneur and semi-structured interviews of 15 stakeholders. We performed content analysis on the information obtained, along with literature discussion. Community representatives and external stakeholders reported not knowing about the SLO term and expected more benefits for the affected region. We observed that the main characteristic SLO results occurred in the phases preceding project operations. After the project was completed, the relationship among the parties weakened. Although it can’t be possible to measure SLO level based on data from this case study, we point that SLO must take participatory systems, collective work, environmental protection, and social guarantees into account at all enterprise life cycle, to promote honest pathways for regional development. This study can contribute to discussions on implementing SLO in new contexts, such as SHP.
{"title":"Social license to operate applied to small hydroelectric power plants: community perspectives and reflections","authors":"Guilherme Prado Alves, M. R. R. E. Almeida, Daniele Ornaghi SantAnna","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2151169","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2151169","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Social License to Operate (SLO) is a way to ensure community acceptance for entrepreneurial operations. This study describes and discusses the perspectives from communities, and external agents involved in SLO acquisitions and maintenance for a Small Hydroelectric Power Plant (SHP). Then, we reflect upon SLO applications for fair socio-environmental management. We used a case study for the research design. Data were collected using documents provided by the entrepreneur and semi-structured interviews of 15 stakeholders. We performed content analysis on the information obtained, along with literature discussion. Community representatives and external stakeholders reported not knowing about the SLO term and expected more benefits for the affected region. We observed that the main characteristic SLO results occurred in the phases preceding project operations. After the project was completed, the relationship among the parties weakened. Although it can’t be possible to measure SLO level based on data from this case study, we point that SLO must take participatory systems, collective work, environmental protection, and social guarantees into account at all enterprise life cycle, to promote honest pathways for regional development. This study can contribute to discussions on implementing SLO in new contexts, such as SHP.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"114 - 125"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49458983","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 : 2022-11-18DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2147140
B. Sadler, R. Verheem
ABSTRACT 2021 marked the 25th anniversary of the publication of our report ‘SEA – status, challenges and future directions‘. This report was part of an international study of the effectiveness of environmental assessment by a consortium of countries and organisations. In recognition of the anniversary, the NCEA has placed a digital version of the report, making it widely available through the internet for the first time (www.eia.nl). The report documents the state of SEA practice at a key stage of process development and provides a benchmark against which subsequent progress can be reviewed. Using the report as a baseline, we take stock of the course of SEA development over the last quarter century and its bearing on the state of practice today.
{"title":"25 years of SEA: personal reflections on recent progress, current status and future prospects","authors":"B. Sadler, R. Verheem","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2147140","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2147140","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT 2021 marked the 25th anniversary of the publication of our report ‘SEA – status, challenges and future directions‘. This report was part of an international study of the effectiveness of environmental assessment by a consortium of countries and organisations. In recognition of the anniversary, the NCEA has placed a digital version of the report, making it widely available through the internet for the first time (www.eia.nl). The report documents the state of SEA practice at a key stage of process development and provides a benchmark against which subsequent progress can be reviewed. Using the report as a baseline, we take stock of the course of SEA development over the last quarter century and its bearing on the state of practice today.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"78 - 82"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46394979","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 : 2022-11-07DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2139469
W. Bernauer, Glen Hostetler, E. Greene, F. Tester, Rowan Harris, Laura Tanguay
ABSTRACT This paper contributes to the literature about environmental impact assessment follow-up, with case studies of stakeholder advisory groups associated with three mining projects in Nunavut, Canada. Based on an analysis of regulatory documents, we conclude that stakeholder advisory groups, as constituted and currently operating in Nunavut, are undermining aspects of the environmental assessment process. For example, potential impacts to wildlife that are invaluable to Inuit communities, as well as proposed measures to mitigate these impacts, have repeatedly been deferred to post-approval discussions in advisory groups. As a result, potential impacts and proposed mitigations are not adequately assessed during decision-making and permitting. Opportunities for public participation are curtailed, as advisory groups have no mechanism for public involvement and suffer from limited transparency. Moreover, these advisory groups have proven to be ineffective forums for guiding post-approval monitoring and addressing project effects. Other jurisdictions can learn from these experiences. A failure to implement best practice principles and stakeholder advice can lead to negative social and ecological outcomes.
{"title":"Undermining Assessment: EIA follow-up, stake-holder advisory groups, and extractive industries in Nunavut, Canada","authors":"W. Bernauer, Glen Hostetler, E. Greene, F. Tester, Rowan Harris, Laura Tanguay","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2139469","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2139469","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper contributes to the literature about environmental impact assessment follow-up, with case studies of stakeholder advisory groups associated with three mining projects in Nunavut, Canada. Based on an analysis of regulatory documents, we conclude that stakeholder advisory groups, as constituted and currently operating in Nunavut, are undermining aspects of the environmental assessment process. For example, potential impacts to wildlife that are invaluable to Inuit communities, as well as proposed measures to mitigate these impacts, have repeatedly been deferred to post-approval discussions in advisory groups. As a result, potential impacts and proposed mitigations are not adequately assessed during decision-making and permitting. Opportunities for public participation are curtailed, as advisory groups have no mechanism for public involvement and suffer from limited transparency. Moreover, these advisory groups have proven to be ineffective forums for guiding post-approval monitoring and addressing project effects. Other jurisdictions can learn from these experiences. A failure to implement best practice principles and stakeholder advice can lead to negative social and ecological outcomes.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"87 - 101"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43471437","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 : 2022-11-02DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2134619
Aurora Torres, Charla Patterson, Jochen A. G. Jaeger
We hope this special issue will help improve the treatment of ecological connectivity in the EA process and will inspire progress by catalyzing findings and emerging areas of research related to the measurement and integration of connectivity in the practice of EA. Specifically, we aimed to (1) highlight the need for studies that link EA and connectivity;(2) learn about current challenges and compile approaches for improving the consideration of connectivity in EA;and (3) foster interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral work that evaluates and advances current practices of connectivity consideration. The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered reflection and debate about an urgent need to re-evaluate how humans relate to the natural world, particularly biodiversity, and how environmental assessment (EA) can be improved to prevent further biodiversity decline (Gannon [15];Figueiredo Gallardo et al. [14]). [Extracted from the article]
{"title":"Advancing the consideration of ecological connectivity in environmental assessment: Synthesis and next steps forward","authors":"Aurora Torres, Charla Patterson, Jochen A. G. Jaeger","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2134619","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2134619","url":null,"abstract":"We hope this special issue will help improve the treatment of ecological connectivity in the EA process and will inspire progress by catalyzing findings and emerging areas of research related to the measurement and integration of connectivity in the practice of EA. Specifically, we aimed to (1) highlight the need for studies that link EA and connectivity;(2) learn about current challenges and compile approaches for improving the consideration of connectivity in EA;and (3) foster interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral work that evaluates and advances current practices of connectivity consideration. The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered reflection and debate about an urgent need to re-evaluate how humans relate to the natural world, particularly biodiversity, and how environmental assessment (EA) can be improved to prevent further biodiversity decline (Gannon [15];Figueiredo Gallardo et al. [14]). [Extracted from the article]","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"451 - 459"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48660210","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 : 2022-11-02DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2135232
Charla Patterson, Felipe Casasanta Mostaço, Jochen A. G. Jaeger
ABSTRACT This study seeks to understand the extent to which ecological connectivity has been considered in EIA in Canada. Several factors that may influence the consideration of connectivity were analyzed in an evaluation of 14 environmental impact statements (EIS) obtained from the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry. Connectivity is largely absent from the EIA process, and even projects that attempted to consider connectivity lacked the rigor required to effectively assess impacts on connectivity. Projects that included connectivity as a valued component performed somewhat better, whereas the assessment of connectivity was not affected by different federal environmental acts (CEAA 1992 vs. CEAA 2012), development sectors, or proponent types. Between sections of the EIS, a significantly greater number of evaluation criteria were met in the scoping section compared to all other sections. Without adequate guidance, connectivity analysis in EIA has been conducted ad hoc, with considerable variation in quality. Including connectivity consideration in EIA legislation would provide a legal framework to address the lack of policies, standards, and assessment guidelines. We provide recommendations for integrating connectivity in EIA in Canada and elsewhere.
{"title":"Lack of consideration of ecological connectivity in Canadian environmental impact assessment: Current practice and need for improvement","authors":"Charla Patterson, Felipe Casasanta Mostaço, Jochen A. G. Jaeger","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2135232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2135232","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study seeks to understand the extent to which ecological connectivity has been considered in EIA in Canada. Several factors that may influence the consideration of connectivity were analyzed in an evaluation of 14 environmental impact statements (EIS) obtained from the Canadian Impact Assessment Registry. Connectivity is largely absent from the EIA process, and even projects that attempted to consider connectivity lacked the rigor required to effectively assess impacts on connectivity. Projects that included connectivity as a valued component performed somewhat better, whereas the assessment of connectivity was not affected by different federal environmental acts (CEAA 1992 vs. CEAA 2012), development sectors, or proponent types. Between sections of the EIS, a significantly greater number of evaluation criteria were met in the scoping section compared to all other sections. Without adequate guidance, connectivity analysis in EIA has been conducted ad hoc, with considerable variation in quality. Including connectivity consideration in EIA legislation would provide a legal framework to address the lack of policies, standards, and assessment guidelines. We provide recommendations for integrating connectivity in EIA in Canada and elsewhere.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"481 - 494"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49036525","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 : 2022-10-31DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2139863
Michael Lambrecht, M. Sowman, Kirsten Day
ABSTRACT Recognising the value of GIS in screening environmental impacts, the South African government has introduced a web-based Screening Tool as a mandatory part of the EIA application process. The Tool draws on numerous databases to depict sensitive attributes of proposed development sites. Enforcement of the Tool has implications for how EIAs are conducted, in terms of both scope and cost. In this paper we present the results of preliminary research into user perceptions of the accuracy and utility of the Tool. Findings from a national survey and several semi-structured interviews show that most users are not confident that the Tool accurately assigns sensitivity ratings according to various environmental themes. Notwithstanding this finding, overall opinion is that the Tool has potential to improve the scientific robustness of the EIA process. It is recommended that practitioners and specialists are involved in further development of the Tool to increase accuracy of the sensitivity ratings. We conclude more generally that integration of GIS can compensate for knowledge gaps and enhance the scientific veracity of EIA.
{"title":"South Africa’s EIA Screening Tool: A preliminary study of how users perceive its accuracy and utility","authors":"Michael Lambrecht, M. Sowman, Kirsten Day","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2139863","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2139863","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recognising the value of GIS in screening environmental impacts, the South African government has introduced a web-based Screening Tool as a mandatory part of the EIA application process. The Tool draws on numerous databases to depict sensitive attributes of proposed development sites. Enforcement of the Tool has implications for how EIAs are conducted, in terms of both scope and cost. In this paper we present the results of preliminary research into user perceptions of the accuracy and utility of the Tool. Findings from a national survey and several semi-structured interviews show that most users are not confident that the Tool accurately assigns sensitivity ratings according to various environmental themes. Notwithstanding this finding, overall opinion is that the Tool has potential to improve the scientific robustness of the EIA process. It is recommended that practitioners and specialists are involved in further development of the Tool to increase accuracy of the sensitivity ratings. We conclude more generally that integration of GIS can compensate for knowledge gaps and enhance the scientific veracity of EIA.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"102 - 113"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48140686","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 : 2022-10-27DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2139468
Camila Martins Godinho, B. Noble, G. Poelzer, K. Hanna
ABSTRACT Impact assessment can play an important role in global energy transition, delivering knowledge to identify and manage the impacts of renewable energy projects. Yet, there are enduring concerns about IA’s efficacy for renewable energy development. Based on content analysis of IA applications for wind energy development in Canada, this paper examines the environmental and social impacts typically assessed across wind energy projects and the mitigation solutions proposed. Results indicate considerable imbalance between biophysical versus social impacts, including mitigation solutions. IAs include far more solutions for managing biophysical impacts than social ones, with impact-to-mitigation ratios of 1:4.3 and 1:1.3 respectively. Most mitigations focus on impact minimisation, followed by avoidance, and are often vague and imprecise regarding the timing, methods of implementation, and responsibility. Notwithstanding common impacts, mitigation actions that were common across projects were too vague or imprecise to support transferable practice to find efficiencies in assessment. Improved understanding the impacts of renewable energy projects and mitigation solutions, and learning from one project to the next, are foundational to advancing the role of IA the transition to renewable energy.
{"title":"Impact assessment for renewable energy development: analysis of impacts and mitigation practices for wind energy in western Canada","authors":"Camila Martins Godinho, B. Noble, G. Poelzer, K. Hanna","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2139468","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2139468","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Impact assessment can play an important role in global energy transition, delivering knowledge to identify and manage the impacts of renewable energy projects. Yet, there are enduring concerns about IA’s efficacy for renewable energy development. Based on content analysis of IA applications for wind energy development in Canada, this paper examines the environmental and social impacts typically assessed across wind energy projects and the mitigation solutions proposed. Results indicate considerable imbalance between biophysical versus social impacts, including mitigation solutions. IAs include far more solutions for managing biophysical impacts than social ones, with impact-to-mitigation ratios of 1:4.3 and 1:1.3 respectively. Most mitigations focus on impact minimisation, followed by avoidance, and are often vague and imprecise regarding the timing, methods of implementation, and responsibility. Notwithstanding common impacts, mitigation actions that were common across projects were too vague or imprecise to support transferable practice to find efficiencies in assessment. Improved understanding the impacts of renewable energy projects and mitigation solutions, and learning from one project to the next, are foundational to advancing the role of IA the transition to renewable energy.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"59 - 70"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45228243","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 : 2022-09-30DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2128557
Laura Kor, Ben O’Hickey, M. Hanson, M. Coroi
ABSTRACT Ecological connectivity across landscapes is vital for the maintenance of biodiversity and the processes that enable life on earth. Despite this, environmental planning decisions are usually made at the scale of individual projects, failing to account for landscape-scale impacts. Incorporating habitat connectivity analysis in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) could provide an opportunity to address this gap. We present a novel approach to model habitat connectivity in an EIA undertaken for the Heathrow Third Runway Expansion Project, a proposed development in south-east England. Drawing on field data, remote sensing, and species-specific literature reviews, a circuit theory approach was used to assess functional connectivity across the project landscape for grass snakes Natrix helvetica and soprano pipistrelles Pipistrellus pygmaeus. Results indicated key areas for species movement and potential ‘pinch-points’ vulnerable to development impacts. We discuss lessons learnt, potential applications to inform impact assessment, mitigation design, and biodiversity net gain approaches, and further work required to mainstream connectivity analyses in EIA and decision-making.
{"title":"Assessing habitat connectivity in environmental impact assessment: a case-study in the UK context","authors":"Laura Kor, Ben O’Hickey, M. Hanson, M. Coroi","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2128557","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2128557","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Ecological connectivity across landscapes is vital for the maintenance of biodiversity and the processes that enable life on earth. Despite this, environmental planning decisions are usually made at the scale of individual projects, failing to account for landscape-scale impacts. Incorporating habitat connectivity analysis in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) could provide an opportunity to address this gap. We present a novel approach to model habitat connectivity in an EIA undertaken for the Heathrow Third Runway Expansion Project, a proposed development in south-east England. Drawing on field data, remote sensing, and species-specific literature reviews, a circuit theory approach was used to assess functional connectivity across the project landscape for grass snakes Natrix helvetica and soprano pipistrelles Pipistrellus pygmaeus. Results indicated key areas for species movement and potential ‘pinch-points’ vulnerable to development impacts. We discuss lessons learnt, potential applications to inform impact assessment, mitigation design, and biodiversity net gain approaches, and further work required to mainstream connectivity analyses in EIA and decision-making.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"495 - 506"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42821948","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 : 2022-09-11DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2119527
A. Morrison‐Saunders, J. Arts, Jenny Pope, A. Bond, F. Retief
ABSTRACT Building upon principles for public engagement and for impact assessment (IA) follow-up, this paper distils best practice principles specific to public participation in IA follow-up. Literature review, followed by a simple survey distributed to IA follow-up and/or public engagement practitioners, helped identify key principles and related published sources. Twelve principles for public participation in IA follow-up are presented, which relate to (1) mandatory public reporting, (2) ease of access to published material, (3) full transparency, (4) clarity about the IA follow-up process, (5) input to decision-making, (6) continuous access to IA follow-up activities and feedback, (7) independent verification, (8) two-way communication, (9) partnerships, (10) Indigenous inclusion, (11) participatory monitoring, and (12) involvement in adaptive management. They form a ladder of public engagement; the initial principles pertain mainly to information provision, with increasing levels of participation and legitimacy inherent in the latter principles. The principles are intended to provide a foundation for practitioners and community members involved in IA follow-up to enhance practice at all stages of the development life cycle, helping to achieve sustainable development.
{"title":"Distilling best practice principles for public participation in impact assessment follow-up","authors":"A. Morrison‐Saunders, J. Arts, Jenny Pope, A. Bond, F. Retief","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2119527","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2119527","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Building upon principles for public engagement and for impact assessment (IA) follow-up, this paper distils best practice principles specific to public participation in IA follow-up. Literature review, followed by a simple survey distributed to IA follow-up and/or public engagement practitioners, helped identify key principles and related published sources. Twelve principles for public participation in IA follow-up are presented, which relate to (1) mandatory public reporting, (2) ease of access to published material, (3) full transparency, (4) clarity about the IA follow-up process, (5) input to decision-making, (6) continuous access to IA follow-up activities and feedback, (7) independent verification, (8) two-way communication, (9) partnerships, (10) Indigenous inclusion, (11) participatory monitoring, and (12) involvement in adaptive management. They form a ladder of public engagement; the initial principles pertain mainly to information provision, with increasing levels of participation and legitimacy inherent in the latter principles. The principles are intended to provide a foundation for practitioners and community members involved in IA follow-up to enhance practice at all stages of the development life cycle, helping to achieve sustainable development.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"48 - 58"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44425641","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：