环境评价中生态连通性的处理:当前实践和共同问题的全球调查

IF 1.8 4区 社会学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal Pub Date : 2022-08-10 DOI:10.1080/14615517.2022.2099728
Charla Patterson, Aurora Torres, M. Coroi, Katherine Cumming, M. Hanson, B. Noble, G. Tabor, J. Treweek, Jochen A. G. Jaeger
{"title":"环境评价中生态连通性的处理:当前实践和共同问题的全球调查","authors":"Charla Patterson, Aurora Torres, M. Coroi, Katherine Cumming, M. Hanson, B. Noble, G. Tabor, J. Treweek, Jochen A. G. Jaeger","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2022.2099728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Ecological connectivity should be an important consideration in environmental assessment (EA). How often and how thoroughly the analysis of ecological connectivity is integrated in the EA process is, however, unknown. We surveyed EA actors and stakeholders regarding their perceptions of, and experiences with, connectivity analysis in the context of EA. 134 practitioners, regulators, consultants, researchers, and interest groups from all inhabited continents participated. Over 72% of respondents stated that ecological connectivity should always be considered; however, it is often considered too late in the EA process, at a scale of analysis often unsuitable for capturing landscape-scale effects, and relying on overly simplistic metrics or qualitative approaches. This disparity between the availability of a range of quantitative tools and the poor consideration of connectivity in EA raises major concerns about current practice and the feasibility of connectivity analysis in project-based EA. Connectivity consideration will need to be required explicitly and supported by best-practice guidance to address the conditions that should trigger a connectivity analysis, the required types of approaches, and the kind of information required to inform decision-making.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"40 1","pages":"460 - 474"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treatment of ecological connectivity in environmental assessment: A global survey of current practices and common issues\",\"authors\":\"Charla Patterson, Aurora Torres, M. Coroi, Katherine Cumming, M. Hanson, B. Noble, G. Tabor, J. Treweek, Jochen A. G. Jaeger\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14615517.2022.2099728\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Ecological connectivity should be an important consideration in environmental assessment (EA). How often and how thoroughly the analysis of ecological connectivity is integrated in the EA process is, however, unknown. We surveyed EA actors and stakeholders regarding their perceptions of, and experiences with, connectivity analysis in the context of EA. 134 practitioners, regulators, consultants, researchers, and interest groups from all inhabited continents participated. Over 72% of respondents stated that ecological connectivity should always be considered; however, it is often considered too late in the EA process, at a scale of analysis often unsuitable for capturing landscape-scale effects, and relying on overly simplistic metrics or qualitative approaches. This disparity between the availability of a range of quantitative tools and the poor consideration of connectivity in EA raises major concerns about current practice and the feasibility of connectivity analysis in project-based EA. Connectivity consideration will need to be required explicitly and supported by best-practice guidance to address the conditions that should trigger a connectivity analysis, the required types of approaches, and the kind of information required to inform decision-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"460 - 474\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2022.2099728\",\"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/10.1080/14615517.2022.2099728","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: 9

摘要

生态连通性应成为环境评价的重要考虑因素。然而,生态连通性的分析在EA过程中被整合的频率和彻底程度是未知的。我们调查了EA参与者和涉众,关于他们在EA背景下对连通性分析的看法和经验。来自所有有人居住的大陆的134名从业者、监管者、顾问、研究人员和利益团体参与了调查。超过72%的受访者表示应始终考虑生态连通性;然而,在EA过程中,它通常被认为太晚了,在分析的规模上通常不适合捕获景观规模的影响,并且依赖于过于简单的度量或定性方法。一系列定量工具的可用性和EA中连通性考虑不足之间的差异,引起了对当前实践和基于项目的EA中连通性分析可行性的主要关注。连接性考虑需要明确要求,并得到最佳实践指导的支持,以解决触发连通性分析的条件、所需的方法类型、以及为决策提供信息所需的信息。
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
Treatment of ecological connectivity in environmental assessment: A global survey of current practices and common issues
ABSTRACT Ecological connectivity should be an important consideration in environmental assessment (EA). How often and how thoroughly the analysis of ecological connectivity is integrated in the EA process is, however, unknown. We surveyed EA actors and stakeholders regarding their perceptions of, and experiences with, connectivity analysis in the context of EA. 134 practitioners, regulators, consultants, researchers, and interest groups from all inhabited continents participated. Over 72% of respondents stated that ecological connectivity should always be considered; however, it is often considered too late in the EA process, at a scale of analysis often unsuitable for capturing landscape-scale effects, and relying on overly simplistic metrics or qualitative approaches. This disparity between the availability of a range of quantitative tools and the poor consideration of connectivity in EA raises major concerns about current practice and the feasibility of connectivity analysis in project-based EA. Connectivity consideration will need to be required explicitly and supported by best-practice guidance to address the conditions that should trigger a connectivity analysis, the required types of approaches, and the kind of information required to inform decision-making.
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