Pub Date : 2022-07-14DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2099729
Wei Li, Jingfeng Yuan, Jiyue Guo, H. Liu, Yulun Pan
ABSTRACT To enhance resilience for adapting to recent severe issues such as flooding and water shortage, Sponge City (SPC) is being delivered by using Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) across China. Considering a sustainable implementation, an understanding of and effective management for the environment-related underlying dynamics of the adaptability of SPC PPPs are prerequisite. Therefore, we examined a conceptual model integrated with four external environment dimensions, which is useful for identifying externally environmental effects on the project’s adaptability. By utilizing the structural equation modeling techniques, the hypothesized relationships illustrated in the conceptual model were tested and verified. Empirical evidence indicates that the Political Environment has the highest impact followed by the Social, Economic and Natural Environments. Implications generated from the SEM are then discussed for future improvements. This study provides governments with an insight into assessing external environment effects that are significant for (1) improving the adaptability of their projects and then (2) enabling sustainability for infrastructures.
{"title":"Environment-related underlying dynamics of project adaptability: a case study of sponge-city PPPs in China","authors":"Wei Li, Jingfeng Yuan, Jiyue Guo, H. Liu, Yulun Pan","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2099729","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2099729","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT To enhance resilience for adapting to recent severe issues such as flooding and water shortage, Sponge City (SPC) is being delivered by using Public–Private Partnerships (PPPs) across China. Considering a sustainable implementation, an understanding of and effective management for the environment-related underlying dynamics of the adaptability of SPC PPPs are prerequisite. Therefore, we examined a conceptual model integrated with four external environment dimensions, which is useful for identifying externally environmental effects on the project’s adaptability. By utilizing the structural equation modeling techniques, the hypothesized relationships illustrated in the conceptual model were tested and verified. Empirical evidence indicates that the Political Environment has the highest impact followed by the Social, Economic and Natural Environments. Implications generated from the SEM are then discussed for future improvements. This study provides governments with an insight into assessing external environment effects that are significant for (1) improving the adaptability of their projects and then (2) enabling sustainability for infrastructures.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"2 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48416261","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 : 2022-07-03DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2090086
Josianne Claudia Sales Rosa, P. B. R. Campos, Caroline Bianca Nascimento, Barbara Almeida Souza, Rebeca Valetich, L. E. Sánchez
ABSTRACT Habitat loss and fragmentation are ecological impacts of development projects known to have severe effects on mammals’ populations. Here, we study the role of connectivity assessment in Environmental Impact Assessment, focusing on its contribution to determining appropriate mitigation, in particular, biodiversity offsetting. For that purpose, we analysed the dispersal of large mammals in a region potentially influenced by a mine located in the Atlantic rainforest in Brazil and anticipate the long-term outcomes of restoration offsets by modelling a 30-year post-offset scenario. Results show that: (i) offsets enhance ecological connectivity and are used as an alternative habitat for the animals dispersed due to habitat loss and fragmentation; (ii) the location of restoration areas should be carefully planned to maximize their contribution to increase ecological connectivity and enhance habitat quality. The reviewed case suggests that best practices to incorporate connectivity analysis in environmental impact assessment include: (i) monitoring biodiversity to quantify losses and gains; (ii) modelling offset areas alternatives for both protection and restoration; and (iii) conducting rigorous analysis of project alternatives, aiming at impact avoidance.
{"title":"Enhancing ecological connectivity through biodiversity offsets to mitigate impacts on habitats of large mammals in tropical forest environments","authors":"Josianne Claudia Sales Rosa, P. B. R. Campos, Caroline Bianca Nascimento, Barbara Almeida Souza, Rebeca Valetich, L. E. Sánchez","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2090086","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2090086","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Habitat loss and fragmentation are ecological impacts of development projects known to have severe effects on mammals’ populations. Here, we study the role of connectivity assessment in Environmental Impact Assessment, focusing on its contribution to determining appropriate mitigation, in particular, biodiversity offsetting. For that purpose, we analysed the dispersal of large mammals in a region potentially influenced by a mine located in the Atlantic rainforest in Brazil and anticipate the long-term outcomes of restoration offsets by modelling a 30-year post-offset scenario. Results show that: (i) offsets enhance ecological connectivity and are used as an alternative habitat for the animals dispersed due to habitat loss and fragmentation; (ii) the location of restoration areas should be carefully planned to maximize their contribution to increase ecological connectivity and enhance habitat quality. The reviewed case suggests that best practices to incorporate connectivity analysis in environmental impact assessment include: (i) monitoring biodiversity to quantify losses and gains; (ii) modelling offset areas alternatives for both protection and restoration; and (iii) conducting rigorous analysis of project alternatives, aiming at impact avoidance.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"333 - 348"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48841253","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 : 2022-06-28DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2091055
Keletso V. Malepe, Ainhoa González, F. Retief
ABSTRACT There has been little empirical investigation of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) performance towards safeguarding conservation and promoting responsible tourism within protected areas. This paper examines the quality of EIA Reports (EIARs) prepared for tourism developments in the world-renowned Kruger to Canyons (K2C) Biosphere Reserve, one of the largest in Africa. An adapted version of the internationally recognised Lee and Colley report review package was used. The review results indicate that the EIARs are, overall, of satisfactory quality and that the reports provide adequate information to support the incorporation of sustainable and responsible tourism principles in decision-making. However, inadequacies are observed in certain review areas, namely public participation, provision for mitigation and monitoring, and content of non-technical summaries. Notably, the analytical review areas (e.g. impact assessment) perform better than the descriptive ones (e.g. presentation of assessment results), which contrasts with review findings reported in the international literature. This research provides important insights and contributes to advancing review frameworks and to ongoing debates around the potential of EIA to foster environmental protection and sustainability within protected areas.
关于环境影响评价(EIA)在保护环境和促进负责任旅游方面的作用的实证研究很少。本文考察了非洲最大的生物圈保护区之一、世界著名的克鲁格峡谷(K2C)生物圈保护区旅游开发的环境影响评估报告(eiar)的质量。采用了国际公认的Lee and Colley报告审查包的改编版本。审查结果表明，总体而言，环境评估报告的质量令人满意，报告提供了充分的资料，支持将可持续和负责任的旅游原则纳入决策。然而，在某些审查领域，即公众参与、提供缓解和监测措施以及非技术摘要的内容，发现存在不足之处。值得注意的是，分析性审查领域(如影响评估)比描述性审查领域(如提出评估结果)表现更好，这与国际文献中报告的审查结果形成对比。这项研究提供了重要的见解，有助于推进审查框架，并有助于围绕环境影响评估在保护区内促进环境保护和可持续发展的潜力展开辩论。
{"title":"Evaluating the quality of Environmental Impact Assessment Reports (EIARs) for tourism developments in protected areas: The Kruger to Canyons Biosphere case study","authors":"Keletso V. Malepe, Ainhoa González, F. Retief","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2091055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2091055","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There has been little empirical investigation of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) performance towards safeguarding conservation and promoting responsible tourism within protected areas. This paper examines the quality of EIA Reports (EIARs) prepared for tourism developments in the world-renowned Kruger to Canyons (K2C) Biosphere Reserve, one of the largest in Africa. An adapted version of the internationally recognised Lee and Colley report review package was used. The review results indicate that the EIARs are, overall, of satisfactory quality and that the reports provide adequate information to support the incorporation of sustainable and responsible tourism principles in decision-making. However, inadequacies are observed in certain review areas, namely public participation, provision for mitigation and monitoring, and content of non-technical summaries. Notably, the analytical review areas (e.g. impact assessment) perform better than the descriptive ones (e.g. presentation of assessment results), which contrasts with review findings reported in the international literature. This research provides important insights and contributes to advancing review frameworks and to ongoing debates around the potential of EIA to foster environmental protection and sustainability within protected areas.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"384 - 398"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48828839","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 : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2089375
T. Fischer
Dear readers, In May 2022, the UK’s Johnson government published a ‘Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill’ (‘A Bill to make provision for the setting of levelling-up missions and reporting on progress in delivering them’), subsequently referred to as ‘the Bill’. Amongst other things, this aims at ‘reforming’ town planning in England (it is unclear whether it will also apply to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland). A key aim is to shorten planning consent procedures. If the Bill obtains Royal Assent in 2023 and becomes law, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) are foreseen to be replaced by socalled ‘Environmental Outcome Reports’ (EORs). Whilst to date, there have neither been any pilot studies of EORs nor indeed any discussion on them and their description in the Bill is rudimentary, the main rationale for their introduction is connected with a desire to simplify requirements for considering environmental impacts of plans, programmes and projects (PPPs), and to substantially reduce the effort and time currently going into the assessment of environmental impacts of PPPs. The idea behind EORs is to test whether a PPP is in line with defined environmental targets (to be prescribed by central government). Apart from a few PPPs to which the UNECE Convention on EIA in a Transboundary Context/the associated SEA Protocol may apply, it appears that EORs will not be the outcome of a comprehensive EIA/SEA type participative procedure. Rather, it seems that they are meant to be based on the completion of an assessment checklist or matrix, possibly similar to what e.g. a rapid health impact assessment (HIA; see Fischer et al. 2021) or a BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method; Ewuosho 2014) assessment looks like, with an emphasis on the achievement of specific environmental targets. Public engagement can occur if the Secretary of State deems this necessary. There are undoubtedly a number of weaknesses of current EIA and SEA practices in the UK (with regards to England, see, e.g. Arts et al. 2012; Fischer 2010; Jha-Thakur and Fischer 2016) and there is clearly scope for improvement, in particular with regards to achieving greater substantive effectiveness (Fischer and Retief 2021). So whilst a greater focus on outcomes is not necessarily a bad thing, the implied anticipated approach of EORs raises some serious concerns. In this context, it is important that environmental assessments (EAs; encompassing both, EIA and SEA), introduced first in the US through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1970 and subsequently throughout the world, were deliberately designed as participatory ex-ante (i.e. prepared before the final design) assessment procedures (Fischer and González 2021a), mainly due to the failings of technical checklist/matrixbased impact analyses, in particular, cost-benefit analyses – CBA. In this context, a key challenge for many EAs is how to deal with trade-offs b
{"title":"Replacing EIA and SEA with Environmental Outcome Reports (EORs) - the 2022 levelling up and regeneration bill in the UK","authors":"T. Fischer","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2089375","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2089375","url":null,"abstract":"Dear readers, In May 2022, the UK’s Johnson government published a ‘Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill’ (‘A Bill to make provision for the setting of levelling-up missions and reporting on progress in delivering them’), subsequently referred to as ‘the Bill’. Amongst other things, this aims at ‘reforming’ town planning in England (it is unclear whether it will also apply to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland). A key aim is to shorten planning consent procedures. If the Bill obtains Royal Assent in 2023 and becomes law, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) are foreseen to be replaced by socalled ‘Environmental Outcome Reports’ (EORs). Whilst to date, there have neither been any pilot studies of EORs nor indeed any discussion on them and their description in the Bill is rudimentary, the main rationale for their introduction is connected with a desire to simplify requirements for considering environmental impacts of plans, programmes and projects (PPPs), and to substantially reduce the effort and time currently going into the assessment of environmental impacts of PPPs. The idea behind EORs is to test whether a PPP is in line with defined environmental targets (to be prescribed by central government). Apart from a few PPPs to which the UNECE Convention on EIA in a Transboundary Context/the associated SEA Protocol may apply, it appears that EORs will not be the outcome of a comprehensive EIA/SEA type participative procedure. Rather, it seems that they are meant to be based on the completion of an assessment checklist or matrix, possibly similar to what e.g. a rapid health impact assessment (HIA; see Fischer et al. 2021) or a BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method; Ewuosho 2014) assessment looks like, with an emphasis on the achievement of specific environmental targets. Public engagement can occur if the Secretary of State deems this necessary. There are undoubtedly a number of weaknesses of current EIA and SEA practices in the UK (with regards to England, see, e.g. Arts et al. 2012; Fischer 2010; Jha-Thakur and Fischer 2016) and there is clearly scope for improvement, in particular with regards to achieving greater substantive effectiveness (Fischer and Retief 2021). So whilst a greater focus on outcomes is not necessarily a bad thing, the implied anticipated approach of EORs raises some serious concerns. In this context, it is important that environmental assessments (EAs; encompassing both, EIA and SEA), introduced first in the US through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1970 and subsequently throughout the world, were deliberately designed as participatory ex-ante (i.e. prepared before the final design) assessment procedures (Fischer and González 2021a), mainly due to the failings of technical checklist/matrixbased impact analyses, in particular, cost-benefit analyses – CBA. In this context, a key challenge for many EAs is how to deal with trade-offs b","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"267 - 268"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48975604","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 : 2022-06-21DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2082240
Kathia Lavoie, P. Hébert
ABSTRACT Hydro-Québec broke ground on a 1,550-MW hydroelectric complex on the Romaine River in Québec in 2009. The complex is built on the traditional territory of the Innu and mostly affects two communities, Ekuanitshit and Nutashkuan. To assess and limit the impacts of its large-scale projects on Indigenous populations, Hydro-Québec favors a rigorous methodological approach derived from the social sciences that allows scientific knowledge of social phenomena to be developed. This paper looks at the environmental follow-up of Innu land use and occupation conducted for the Romaine hydroelectric complex. It is also an approach that encourages local community involvement in the process and makes rapid response to the unexpected possible, both of which are significant in limiting a project’s impacts.Overall, the follow-up has demonstrated that the mitigation measures encouraged use of the land and made it possible for a larger number of people and more diversified groups to get there. Despite its rigor, the follow-up demonstrated the difficulty to evaluate the emotional toll on a people faced with loss of a part of their land.
{"title":"Environmental follow-up of land use and occupation: an impact management tool for the Romaine hydroelectric complex","authors":"Kathia Lavoie, P. Hébert","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2082240","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2082240","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Hydro-Québec broke ground on a 1,550-MW hydroelectric complex on the Romaine River in Québec in 2009. The complex is built on the traditional territory of the Innu and mostly affects two communities, Ekuanitshit and Nutashkuan. To assess and limit the impacts of its large-scale projects on Indigenous populations, Hydro-Québec favors a rigorous methodological approach derived from the social sciences that allows scientific knowledge of social phenomena to be developed. This paper looks at the environmental follow-up of Innu land use and occupation conducted for the Romaine hydroelectric complex. It is also an approach that encourages local community involvement in the process and makes rapid response to the unexpected possible, both of which are significant in limiting a project’s impacts.Overall, the follow-up has demonstrated that the mitigation measures encouraged use of the land and made it possible for a larger number of people and more diversified groups to get there. Despite its rigor, the follow-up demonstrated the difficulty to evaluate the emotional toll on a people faced with loss of a part of their land.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"372 - 383"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48466776","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 : 2022-06-18DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2084231
Amarilis Lucia Casteli Figueiredo Gallardo, Cintia Aparecida da Conceição Dos Santos, A. Bond, Evandro Mateus Moretto, M. Montaño, Simone Athayde
ABSTRACT Biodiversity is a core issue in the quest to achieve sustainable development. Although Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) includes biodiversity as an environmental component to consider in decision-making, its inclusion remains a challenge. Since the beginning of SEA practice, several guides have been proposed to address this challenge, but evaluating their success remains problematic. This paper, therefore, aims to develop an easily applied, criteria-based approach for evaluating the biodiversity assessment that takes place within SEA. A test application of the evaluation framework, based on the International Best Practice Principles on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in SEA, demonstrates its success in identifying whether the main elements of biodiversity were considered in a SEA report. However, the criteria focus on inclusion or exclusion of specific details, rather than the substance of the biodiversity consideration, and so further studies need to develop evaluative approaches for the substantive inclusion of biodiversity in SEA practice.
{"title":"Translating Best Practice Principles into criteria for evaluating the consideration of biodiversity in SEA practice","authors":"Amarilis Lucia Casteli Figueiredo Gallardo, Cintia Aparecida da Conceição Dos Santos, A. Bond, Evandro Mateus Moretto, M. Montaño, Simone Athayde","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2084231","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2084231","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Biodiversity is a core issue in the quest to achieve sustainable development. Although Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) includes biodiversity as an environmental component to consider in decision-making, its inclusion remains a challenge. Since the beginning of SEA practice, several guides have been proposed to address this challenge, but evaluating their success remains problematic. This paper, therefore, aims to develop an easily applied, criteria-based approach for evaluating the biodiversity assessment that takes place within SEA. A test application of the evaluation framework, based on the International Best Practice Principles on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in SEA, demonstrates its success in identifying whether the main elements of biodiversity were considered in a SEA report. However, the criteria focus on inclusion or exclusion of specific details, rather than the substance of the biodiversity consideration, and so further studies need to develop evaluative approaches for the substantive inclusion of biodiversity in SEA practice.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"437 - 449"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45102979","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 : 2022-06-18DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2080492
Bryan Robert Jenkins
ABSTRACT Resilience describes the ability of complex systems to withstand disturbance or recover from disturbance while maintaining structure and function. Resilience assessment identifies potential failure pathways due to disturbances, critical variables, and their thresholds in relation to system failure. It provides the basis for identifying management interventions to reduce system vulnerability to disturbance and enhance recovery of system structure and function. Case studies successfully applying resilience assessment are provided. For impact assessment of Ord River Irrigation Scheme, resilience assessment provided the basis for a conservation strategy for flora and fauna threatened by project clearance. Resilience analysis of policies for managing public health risks for water quality identified strengths and weaknesses of these policies for sustainable management of health risks. In assessing environmental programmes for lakes in Greater Wellington, resilience assessment identified critical variables for managing lake values. In multi-objective planning for Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere, resilience analysis identified rehabilitation priorities without adversely affecting other lake values. A resilience approach to protecting Christchurch from flooding led to a scheme to accommodate flood flows greater than design criteria. KEY POLICY HIGHLIGHTS An approach to resilience assessment is provided comprising adaptive cycles, failure pathways, multiple spatial scales, and management interventions. Examples are discussed of applications of resilience assessment to project assessment, environmental policy, environmental programmes, rehabilitation priorities, and project design. The value added by resilience assessment to impact assessment and environmental management is discussed.
{"title":"The contribution of resilience assessment to impact assessment","authors":"Bryan Robert Jenkins","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2080492","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2080492","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Resilience describes the ability of complex systems to withstand disturbance or recover from disturbance while maintaining structure and function. Resilience assessment identifies potential failure pathways due to disturbances, critical variables, and their thresholds in relation to system failure. It provides the basis for identifying management interventions to reduce system vulnerability to disturbance and enhance recovery of system structure and function. Case studies successfully applying resilience assessment are provided. For impact assessment of Ord River Irrigation Scheme, resilience assessment provided the basis for a conservation strategy for flora and fauna threatened by project clearance. Resilience analysis of policies for managing public health risks for water quality identified strengths and weaknesses of these policies for sustainable management of health risks. In assessing environmental programmes for lakes in Greater Wellington, resilience assessment identified critical variables for managing lake values. In multi-objective planning for Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere, resilience analysis identified rehabilitation priorities without adversely affecting other lake values. A resilience approach to protecting Christchurch from flooding led to a scheme to accommodate flood flows greater than design criteria. KEY POLICY HIGHLIGHTS An approach to resilience assessment is provided comprising adaptive cycles, failure pathways, multiple spatial scales, and management interventions. Examples are discussed of applications of resilience assessment to project assessment, environmental policy, environmental programmes, rehabilitation priorities, and project design. The value added by resilience assessment to impact assessment and environmental management is discussed.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"331 - 341"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46950294","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 : 2022-06-05DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2080490
Shere Ali, Du Yuefang, H. Bilal, T. Ramsey
ABSTRACT Involuntary displacement caused by the construction of large hydropower projects has disastrous consequences due to poor planning, government institutional capacity limitations, and a lack of involvement of local communities in the development planning process. As a result, significant synergy among major stakeholders is critical for implementing long-term livelihood projects in affected areas. In this context, the study will critically investigate the relationships of significant players who have been involved in mitigating the risks of poverty linked with the Ghazi Barotha Hydropower Project’s affected people. The Water and Power Development Authority of Pakistan (WAPDA) collaborates with major stakeholders such as project NGOs and international financial institutions like the World Bank and Asian Development Bank to develop sustainable livelihoods restoration initiatives such as Employment Opportunities, Improved Resettlement and Social Inclusion, Social Mobilization, Integrated Regional Development Plans, Advocacy, and Land Compensation. The study found that the outcomes of these implemented strategies provided support in preventing poverty and considerably imparted sustainable livelihood options to affected communities.
{"title":"From displacement to resettlement: the stakeholders strategies to mitigate impoverishment risks of the Ghazi Barotha Hydropower Project Pakistan","authors":"Shere Ali, Du Yuefang, H. Bilal, T. Ramsey","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2080490","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2080490","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Involuntary displacement caused by the construction of large hydropower projects has disastrous consequences due to poor planning, government institutional capacity limitations, and a lack of involvement of local communities in the development planning process. As a result, significant synergy among major stakeholders is critical for implementing long-term livelihood projects in affected areas. In this context, the study will critically investigate the relationships of significant players who have been involved in mitigating the risks of poverty linked with the Ghazi Barotha Hydropower Project’s affected people. The Water and Power Development Authority of Pakistan (WAPDA) collaborates with major stakeholders such as project NGOs and international financial institutions like the World Bank and Asian Development Bank to develop sustainable livelihoods restoration initiatives such as Employment Opportunities, Improved Resettlement and Social Inclusion, Social Mobilization, Integrated Regional Development Plans, Advocacy, and Land Compensation. The study found that the outcomes of these implemented strategies provided support in preventing poverty and considerably imparted sustainable livelihood options to affected communities.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"305 - 319"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45485689","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 : 2022-06-01DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2084232
Francini van Staden, F. Retief
ABSTRACT The economic growth-environment nexus explores the relationship between economic growth, as understood in the neoclassical free market or neoliberalism economic theory context, and its implications for the environment. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is considered one of the most successful environmental policy instruments to deal with the consideration of environmental implications of development decisions. Because the economic growth-environment nexus is central to discourses in EIA it is helpful to gain an improved understanding of different perspectives manifesting and influencing EIA practice. This paper aims to identify pluralism in perspectives on the economic growth-environment nexus in EIA practice. This is achieved by applying the Q-method to EIA practice in South Africa and involve the sorting of 36 statements by 16 respondents. The results show pluralism and distinct patterning with four key perspectives emerging namely: the deontological perspective, neoliberal progression, EIA polarisation and new conservationist perspective. We hope this research contributes towards a growing understanding of how different perspectives on the economic growth-environment nexus might influence EIA practice and decision making.
{"title":"Pluralism in EIA practice: A Q-method analysis of the economic growth-environment nexus","authors":"Francini van Staden, F. Retief","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2084232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2084232","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The economic growth-environment nexus explores the relationship between economic growth, as understood in the neoclassical free market or neoliberalism economic theory context, and its implications for the environment. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is considered one of the most successful environmental policy instruments to deal with the consideration of environmental implications of development decisions. Because the economic growth-environment nexus is central to discourses in EIA it is helpful to gain an improved understanding of different perspectives manifesting and influencing EIA practice. This paper aims to identify pluralism in perspectives on the economic growth-environment nexus in EIA practice. This is achieved by applying the Q-method to EIA practice in South Africa and involve the sorting of 36 statements by 16 respondents. The results show pluralism and distinct patterning with four key perspectives emerging namely: the deontological perspective, neoliberal progression, EIA polarisation and new conservationist perspective. We hope this research contributes towards a growing understanding of how different perspectives on the economic growth-environment nexus might influence EIA practice and decision making.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"342 - 352"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44809133","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 : 2022-05-26DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2022.2080491
C.E. Claassens, D. Cilliers, F. Retief, C. Roos, R. Alberts
ABSTRACT Waste management is an important consideration for developments within protected areas (PAs). With the growing demand for mainly tourism-related infrastructure in PAs, more urgent and innovate ways of dealing with waste management are required. Internationally environmental impact assessment (EIA) is considered a key policy instrument to inform waste management-related decision-making for new developments. The EIA process makes provision for the identification of waste-related impacts and mitigation measures during the construction-, operation- and decommissioning phases of a development. However, there has been scant reflection on the role of EIA in dealing with waste management decision-making in PAs. Therefore, this research aims to review the extent to which waste management measures are considered in EIAs for developments in PAs. The results show that waste management measures are, for the most part, poorly considered. For example, EIAs failed to provide estimates of expected waste types and quantities and mostly failed to consider the waste management hierarchy. Recommendations are made towards improving the consideration of waste management measures in EIAs for developments within PAs. These include the drafting of guidelines for waste management in protected areas; training relevant roleplayers on waste management measures; and promoting specialist input on waste-related matters for EIAs in PAs.
{"title":"The consideration of waste management in environmental impact assessment (EIA) for developments in protected areas","authors":"C.E. Claassens, D. Cilliers, F. Retief, C. Roos, R. Alberts","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2080491","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2080491","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Waste management is an important consideration for developments within protected areas (PAs). With the growing demand for mainly tourism-related infrastructure in PAs, more urgent and innovate ways of dealing with waste management are required. Internationally environmental impact assessment (EIA) is considered a key policy instrument to inform waste management-related decision-making for new developments. The EIA process makes provision for the identification of waste-related impacts and mitigation measures during the construction-, operation- and decommissioning phases of a development. However, there has been scant reflection on the role of EIA in dealing with waste management decision-making in PAs. Therefore, this research aims to review the extent to which waste management measures are considered in EIAs for developments in PAs. The results show that waste management measures are, for the most part, poorly considered. For example, EIAs failed to provide estimates of expected waste types and quantities and mostly failed to consider the waste management hierarchy. Recommendations are made towards improving the consideration of waste management measures in EIAs for developments within PAs. These include the drafting of guidelines for waste management in protected areas; training relevant roleplayers on waste management measures; and promoting specialist input on waste-related matters for EIAs in PAs.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"320 - 330"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2022-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41932648","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：