评价保护区旅游开发环境影响评估报告的质量:克鲁格到峡谷生物圈的案例研究

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal Pub Date : 2022-06-28 DOI:10.1080/14615517.2022.2091055
Keletso V. Malepe, Ainhoa González, F. Retief
{"title":"评价保护区旅游开发环境影响评估报告的质量:克鲁格到峡谷生物圈的案例研究","authors":"Keletso V. Malepe, Ainhoa González, F. Retief","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2091055","DOIUrl":null,"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":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"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\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2091055\",\"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/10.1080/14615517.2022.2091055","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: 1

摘要

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。
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
Evaluating the quality of Environmental Impact Assessment Reports (EIARs) for tourism developments in protected areas: The Kruger to Canyons Biosphere case study
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.
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