不要射杀信使——荷兰简化环境评估的思考

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal Pub Date : 2023-05-02 DOI:10.1080/14615517.2023.2204286
J. Arts, H. de Vries
{"title":"不要射杀信使——荷兰简化环境评估的思考","authors":"J. Arts, H. de Vries","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2204286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Netherlands’ Environmental Assessment (EA) system has continuously been discussed with calls for streamlining and simplifying. This paper aims to provide an overview and to examine these discussions, including their more fundamental background. To this end, we discuss the origins of the Dutch EA-system, its practice, the critique, the regulator’s reaction by changing institutional arrangements, and the consequences. We conclude that politically, EA is blamed for cumbersome planning and decision-making, while professionals are more nuanced. We see a process of persistent cumbersome planning and decision-making about plans and projects in a country in which environment and nature are under pressure. This situation is resulting in impromptu ‘escape routes’ and evermore detailed EA-studies that are costly, time-consuming, lack quality, are contested, and often fail before court. This process is observed for a long time. Although most studies stressed that streamlining and simplifying will not help in accelerating the planning process, nevertheless regulatory changes aimed at this because of political pressure. Overall, as a consequence of the simplification of regulations and the reduction of safeguards, the advanced and comprehensive nature of the original Dutch EIA-system has been called into question. EA as a messenger intrinsically will always be subject to critique.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"238 - 243"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Don’t Shoot the Messenger – Reflections on streamlining and simplification of Environmental Assessment in the Netherlands\",\"authors\":\"J. Arts, H. de Vries\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14615517.2023.2204286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Netherlands’ Environmental Assessment (EA) system has continuously been discussed with calls for streamlining and simplifying. This paper aims to provide an overview and to examine these discussions, including their more fundamental background. To this end, we discuss the origins of the Dutch EA-system, its practice, the critique, the regulator’s reaction by changing institutional arrangements, and the consequences. We conclude that politically, EA is blamed for cumbersome planning and decision-making, while professionals are more nuanced. We see a process of persistent cumbersome planning and decision-making about plans and projects in a country in which environment and nature are under pressure. This situation is resulting in impromptu ‘escape routes’ and evermore detailed EA-studies that are costly, time-consuming, lack quality, are contested, and often fail before court. This process is observed for a long time. Although most studies stressed that streamlining and simplifying will not help in accelerating the planning process, nevertheless regulatory changes aimed at this because of political pressure. Overall, as a consequence of the simplification of regulations and the reduction of safeguards, the advanced and comprehensive nature of the original Dutch EIA-system has been called into question. EA as a messenger intrinsically will always be subject to critique.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"238 - 243\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2204286\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2204286","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要荷兰的环境评估(EA)系统不断被讨论,要求精简和简化。本文旨在提供一个概述并审查这些讨论,包括其更基本的背景。为此,我们讨论了荷兰EA制度的起源、实践、批评、监管机构通过改变制度安排的反应以及后果。我们得出的结论是,在政治上,EA被指责为繁琐的规划和决策,而专业人士则更为微妙。在一个环境和自然面临压力的国家,我们看到了一个关于计划和项目的持续繁琐的规划和决策过程。这种情况导致了即兴的“逃跑路线”和越来越详细的EA研究,这些研究成本高、耗时长、缺乏质量、有争议,并且经常在法庭上失败。这个过程观察了很长一段时间。尽管大多数研究强调,精简和简化无助于加快规划进程,但由于政治压力,针对这一点的监管变化。总的来说,由于法规的简化和保障措施的减少,荷兰最初的环境影响评估系统的先进性和全面性受到了质疑。EA作为一个内在的信使总是会受到批评。
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
Don’t Shoot the Messenger – Reflections on streamlining and simplification of Environmental Assessment in the Netherlands
ABSTRACT The Netherlands’ Environmental Assessment (EA) system has continuously been discussed with calls for streamlining and simplifying. This paper aims to provide an overview and to examine these discussions, including their more fundamental background. To this end, we discuss the origins of the Dutch EA-system, its practice, the critique, the regulator’s reaction by changing institutional arrangements, and the consequences. We conclude that politically, EA is blamed for cumbersome planning and decision-making, while professionals are more nuanced. We see a process of persistent cumbersome planning and decision-making about plans and projects in a country in which environment and nature are under pressure. This situation is resulting in impromptu ‘escape routes’ and evermore detailed EA-studies that are costly, time-consuming, lack quality, are contested, and often fail before court. This process is observed for a long time. Although most studies stressed that streamlining and simplifying will not help in accelerating the planning process, nevertheless regulatory changes aimed at this because of political pressure. Overall, as a consequence of the simplification of regulations and the reduction of safeguards, the advanced and comprehensive nature of the original Dutch EIA-system has been called into question. EA as a messenger intrinsically will always be subject to critique.
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
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
22.70%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: This is the international, peer-reviewed journal of the International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA). It covers environmental, social, health and other impact assessments, cost-benefit analysis, technology assessment, and other approaches to anticipating and managing impacts. It has readers in universities, government and public agencies, consultancies, NGOs and elsewhere in over 100 countries. It has editorials, main articles, book reviews, and a professional practice section.
期刊最新文献
A game theoretic decision-making approach to reduce mine closure risks throughout the mine-life cycle Consideration of risks to people and the environment related to accidents on natural gas transmission pipelines in LUP and SEA processes in Poland Landscape, EIA and decision-making. A case study of the Vistula Spit Canal, Poland SEA and EIA: uncertain boundaries in Spain Influence factors on the quality of regulatory impact analysis in Brazil
×
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