环境影响评估的质量审查:斯里兰卡国家资助和国际援助机构资助发展项目的比较研究

V. Ravi, N. Vimaladhas, V. Vimaladhas
{"title":"环境影响评估的质量审查:斯里兰卡国家资助和国际援助机构资助发展项目的比较研究","authors":"V. Ravi, N. Vimaladhas, V. Vimaladhas","doi":"10.4038/cjs.v52i3.8021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a tool for mitigating the effects of developmental projects on the environment and promoting sustainable development. EIA is an expensive, and professionally engaged process that involves the public. Many countries around the world have long-standing laws in place connected to this topic, as well as solid knowledge and experience. One persistent argument against the efficacy of EIA in developing nations is that the procedure and quality differ from country to country. The International Aid Agencies (IAA) have their guidelines for protecting the environment while following local environmental assessment standards for any financing requirements. IAA involvement in the EIA process might significantly affect how well-written EIA reports are. To evaluate the assessment quality, six EIA reports from state-financed development projects (SL-EIAs) and another six development projects EIAs funded by the IAA (IAA-EIAs) in Sri Lanka were randomly chosen. LeeCooley review package (1990) was used to evaluate the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) of each EIA. In this investigation, it was discovered that IAA-EIAs and SL-EIAs had a significant difference in overall quality. IAA-EIAs show values that range from highly satisfactory to satisfactory and each share 50 percent, whereas SL-EIAs indicate 83% satisfactory and 17 % of borderline quality. In comparison to the SL-EIAs, all four review areas of the IAA-EIAs performed notably well. While the SL-EIA shows good to borderline quality (0.66-0.72), all evaluated IAA-EIA reports reveal highly satisfactory to satisfactory (0.81-0.93) quality. The engagement of IAA in the environmental assessment has a considerable impact to improve assessment quality in comparison to the only domestic assessment. Finding the weak area in the SL-EIA process and adhering to the IAA standards would elevate the standard of the report.","PeriodicalId":9894,"journal":{"name":"Ceylon Journal of Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A quality review of EIA: A comparative study of state-funded and International Aid Agency funded development projects in Sri Lanka\",\"authors\":\"V. Ravi, N. Vimaladhas, V. Vimaladhas\",\"doi\":\"10.4038/cjs.v52i3.8021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a tool for mitigating the effects of developmental projects on the environment and promoting sustainable development. EIA is an expensive, and professionally engaged process that involves the public. Many countries around the world have long-standing laws in place connected to this topic, as well as solid knowledge and experience. One persistent argument against the efficacy of EIA in developing nations is that the procedure and quality differ from country to country. The International Aid Agencies (IAA) have their guidelines for protecting the environment while following local environmental assessment standards for any financing requirements. IAA involvement in the EIA process might significantly affect how well-written EIA reports are. To evaluate the assessment quality, six EIA reports from state-financed development projects (SL-EIAs) and another six development projects EIAs funded by the IAA (IAA-EIAs) in Sri Lanka were randomly chosen. LeeCooley review package (1990) was used to evaluate the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) of each EIA. In this investigation, it was discovered that IAA-EIAs and SL-EIAs had a significant difference in overall quality. IAA-EIAs show values that range from highly satisfactory to satisfactory and each share 50 percent, whereas SL-EIAs indicate 83% satisfactory and 17 % of borderline quality. In comparison to the SL-EIAs, all four review areas of the IAA-EIAs performed notably well. While the SL-EIA shows good to borderline quality (0.66-0.72), all evaluated IAA-EIA reports reveal highly satisfactory to satisfactory (0.81-0.93) quality. The engagement of IAA in the environmental assessment has a considerable impact to improve assessment quality in comparison to the only domestic assessment. Finding the weak area in the SL-EIA process and adhering to the IAA standards would elevate the standard of the report.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ceylon Journal of Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ceylon Journal of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4038/cjs.v52i3.8021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ceylon Journal of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4038/cjs.v52i3.8021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

环境影响评估是一种减轻开发项目对环境影响和促进可持续发展的工具。环境影响评估是一个涉及公众的昂贵且专业的过程。世界上许多国家都有与这一主题相关的长期法律,以及扎实的知识和经验。反对发展中国家环境影响评估有效性的一个持续论点是,各国的程序和质量不同。国际援助机构(IAA)制定了保护环境的指导方针,同时遵守当地环境评估标准以满足任何融资要求。IAA参与环评过程可能会严重影响环评报告的编写质量。为了评估评估质量,随机选择了来自斯里兰卡国家资助开发项目(SL EIA)的六份环评报告和由IAA资助的另外六份开发项目(IAA EIA)。LeeColley审查包(1990年)用于评估每个环评的环境影响报告(EIS)。在本次调查中,发现IAA EIA和SL EIA在总体质量上存在显著差异。IAA EIA显示的值从非常令人满意到令人满意,各占50%,而SL EIA显示83%令人满意,17%为临界质量。与SL环境影响评价相比,IAA环境影响评价的所有四个审查领域都表现良好。虽然SL-EIA显示出良好至临界质量(0.66-0.72),但所有评估的IAA-EIA报告显示出高度满意至令人满意(0.81-0.93)的质量。与唯一的国内评估相比,IAA参与环境评估对提高评估质量具有相当大的影响。发现SL-EIA过程中的薄弱环节并遵守IAA标准将提高报告的标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A quality review of EIA: A comparative study of state-funded and International Aid Agency funded development projects in Sri Lanka
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a tool for mitigating the effects of developmental projects on the environment and promoting sustainable development. EIA is an expensive, and professionally engaged process that involves the public. Many countries around the world have long-standing laws in place connected to this topic, as well as solid knowledge and experience. One persistent argument against the efficacy of EIA in developing nations is that the procedure and quality differ from country to country. The International Aid Agencies (IAA) have their guidelines for protecting the environment while following local environmental assessment standards for any financing requirements. IAA involvement in the EIA process might significantly affect how well-written EIA reports are. To evaluate the assessment quality, six EIA reports from state-financed development projects (SL-EIAs) and another six development projects EIAs funded by the IAA (IAA-EIAs) in Sri Lanka were randomly chosen. LeeCooley review package (1990) was used to evaluate the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) of each EIA. In this investigation, it was discovered that IAA-EIAs and SL-EIAs had a significant difference in overall quality. IAA-EIAs show values that range from highly satisfactory to satisfactory and each share 50 percent, whereas SL-EIAs indicate 83% satisfactory and 17 % of borderline quality. In comparison to the SL-EIAs, all four review areas of the IAA-EIAs performed notably well. While the SL-EIA shows good to borderline quality (0.66-0.72), all evaluated IAA-EIA reports reveal highly satisfactory to satisfactory (0.81-0.93) quality. The engagement of IAA in the environmental assessment has a considerable impact to improve assessment quality in comparison to the only domestic assessment. Finding the weak area in the SL-EIA process and adhering to the IAA standards would elevate the standard of the report.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
An in-vitro gastric digestion model with peristalsis function for the analysis of the food gastric digestion Physico-chemical, textural and consumers’ acceptability of biscuits made from composite flour of wheat, fermented soybean-hull and date-pulp Incidence, Characterization and Pathogenicity of Seed-Borne Fungi of Lentil (Lens culinaris L.) in Pakistan Optimization of chemical treatments on the mechanical properties of banana leaves Urea cocrystals: the fertilizer industry’s next big thing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1