Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal最新文献

{"title":"Pathways for improving the consideration of ecological connectivity in environmental assessment: lessons from five case studies","authors":"Charla Patterson, Aurora Torres, M. Coroi, Katherine Cumming, M. Hanson, B. Noble, G. Tabor, J. Treweek, C. Iglesias-Merchán, Jochen A. G. Jaeger","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2246727","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2246727","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Case studies can highlight opportunities for mainstreaming connectivity into environmental assessment (EA) and reveal relevant conditions for success or failure. We examined five cases from Canada, Spain, Sweden, and the UK to address three questions: (1) What are major challenges? (2) What are relevant opportunities and lessons learnt? (3) What research directions should be promoted? We identified 15 challenges and 19 lessons that can help improve connectivity consideration. Common challenges include i) late consideration; ii) lack of resources; iii) lack of explicit requirements; iv) lack of guidance; v) limited recognition of the importance of connectivity; and vi) absence of a landscape-scale perspective. Lessons learnt include the need for rooting connectivity assessments in scientific knowledge and for considering multiple scales of analysis. The findings revealed multiple pathways that can lead to inclusion of connectivity, such as the involvement of knowledgeable EA practitioners, and governments providing a supportive framework. The findings can be applied to advance connectivity assessments in EA, emphasizing the need for guidance and the role of cumulative effects assessment and strategic environmental assessment.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"374 - 390"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45949532","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}

{"title":"Ecological connectivity in environmental impact assessments: modelling alternative highway bypass scenarios","authors":"Darrel Tiang Chin Fung, R. van der Ree, Nic McCaffrey, C. Gibbins, A. Lechner","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2237294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2237294","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Road building is one of the greatest threats to biodiversity globally. This study addressed common challenges for spatially explicit ecological assessments of linear infrastructure EIAs, by first providing an overview of existing approaches and then applying a connectivity model with scenario analysis of alternative road alignments for a road bypass in Beaufort, Australia. The application included an expert-based connectivity model using a combination of least-cost paths, circuit theory, and graph theory to model five conservation targets (four species and one group) with different dispersal abilities and habitat requirements. For each of these targets, we modelled four different road alignments, then assessed mitigation options for the least impactful alignment. The results showed that each target species was dissimilarly impacted, with longer dispersers affected the most. The modelling clearly identified a single alignment with the least overall impact on connectivity and showed how wildlife crossing structures can mitigate impacts through improving overall connectivity for all target species. This real-world case-study demonstrated the potential to apply a transparent and quantitative approach to mainstreaming ecological connectivity modelling in EIAs.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"349 - 373"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48533652","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}

{"title":"A review of the quality of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) reports in Botswana","authors":"G. Matome, K. Mulale","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2239587","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2239587","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Botswana recently introduced strategic environmental assessment (SEA) into her national environmental management framework and the SEA approach used in is anchored on the South African approach which is reported defective where it originates. Furthermore, there is a dearth of literature on the performance of SEA in Botswana. In response, this paper studies the quality of SEAs of three of Botswana’s development plans, prepared between 2011 and 2018. The study employs European SEA Directive-based SEA report quality review package. Findings demonstrate that SEA practice in Botswana is generally satisfactory albeit with some critical challenges. Shortcomings relate to the description of the baseline environment; the listing of baseline documents; the identification of problems relating to, and effects of proposed plan on areas of ecological significance; evaluation of secondary, cumulative, and synergistic effects; the elaboration of various properties of effects; consideration given to effects on various sustainability receptors and health implications; the conduct of SEA following applicable national SEA frameworks; the uncertain effects of public participation and SEA on proposed plan; and, the description of how developed monitoring arrangements can be used to reduce duplication of efforts between SEA and EIA.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"403 - 415"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44831877","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}

{"title":"Advancing the consideration of ecological connectivity in environmental assessment – Part 2 of the special issue","authors":"Aurora Torres, Charla Patterson, Jochen A. G. Jaeger","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2239586","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2239586","url":null,"abstract":"Despite a rapidly growing body of research about ecological connectivity, studies explicitly examining and advancing its inclusion and consideration in environmental assessment (EA) have remained surprisingly sparse. The primary purpose of this special issue is to compile and catalyse research that explicitly links connectivity and EA practice, showcasing the work of researchers and practitioners that recognizes the significance of connectivity and addresses knowledge gaps. We are pleased to introduce the second part of this special issue, featuring three additional papers that delve deeper into the topics and insights presented in the first 7 articles and first editorial. The first part of this special issue, published in November 2022 (IAPA vol. 40, no. 6), emphasized the need for studies that combine EA and ecological connectivity and aimed to promote interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral collaboration and to improve current EA practices. It started with an overview of current practices and common issues regarding the treatment of connectivity in EA, drawing on a global survey of EA actors (Patterson et al. 2022b), followed by national overviews about urban planning in Sweden (Karlsson and Bodin 2022) and road planning in Brazil (Oliveira Gonçalves et al. 2022), as well as the EA process in Canada (Patterson et al. 2022a) and in the United Kingdom (Kor et al. 2022). Subsequent papers zoomed into specific cases that (1) explicitly incorporated connectivity assessments in the EA process across scales and EA tiers ranging from project-level environmental impact assessments to strategic environmental assessments (Cumming and Tavares 2022), (2) developed and applied strong quantitative approaches to model habitat connectivity for certain target species in EAs (Kor et al. 2022), and (3) explored the contribution of mitigation measures to the connectivity of ecological networks for amphibians (Clevenot et al. 2022). The first editorial summarized the findings of these studies in terms of challenges, uncertainties, and opportunities associated with quantifying, assessing, and mitigating impacts on connectivity as part of the EA process (Torres et al. 2022). It laid out the need for systemic changes and further research efforts for better integration of connectivity into EA practice. Some of the challenges identified refer to the accurate quantification of the effects of development projects on connectivity and the use of the results. For instance, they point to the need to avoid the Fallacy of Stressed Systems and the Shifting Baseline Syndrome to prevent an underestimation of impacts on connectivity, to the danger of mis-use of connectivity assessments to mask or ‘compensate’ for habitat loss, and to the need to set up and follow through with monitoring for sufficiently long time periods. In the planning and regulatory perspective, the editorial highlighted that it is crucial to raise awareness and explicitly consider connectivity in national planning","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"330 - 332"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60044702","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}

{"title":"Moving to next generation community-based environmental assessment","authors":"Rajib Biswal, A. Sinclair, H. Spaling","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2243019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2243019","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Undertaking environmental assessments for small, rural development projects has proven to be both vexing and essential. Our research considers one approach to assessing such projects, community-based environmental assessment (CBEA). The purpose of our work was to gauge current CBEA practice and consider next generation approaches in the face of challenges such as lack of adequate capacity, resource and power imbalances, achieving meaningful participation, narrow conceptions of sustainability, and weak follow-up and monitoring. Through a literature review and semi-structured interviews with various EA experts from around the globe, we consider these issues and propose a framework for next-generation community-based environmental assessment (NG-CBEA) that builds on four key next generation themes; sustainability, meaningful public participation, follow-up and monitoring, and learning.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"416 - 427"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43295190","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}

{"title":"Influential Indigenous voices? Evaluating cultural impact assessment effectiveness in Aotearoa New Zealand","authors":"D. Jolly, M. Thompson‐Fawcett","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2229657","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2229657","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In Aotearoa New Zealand, Māori have prepared their own impact assessments for three decades. Yet, there has been no evaluation of effectiveness. Asking practitioners and experts to reflect on their experiences with Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA), we addressed the question ‘how far do CIA go to deliver outcomes Māori define as positive’? Interweaving Indigenous lived experiences with Indigenous theory, we undertook a critical analysis of CIA effectiveness. We found that CIA are delivering positive outcomes, but these are highly variable, and fall short of substantial outcomes consistent with the partnership and the dual planning framework envisioned by the Treaty of Waitangi. 1 To be effective, CIA functions best when it is Indigenous-led and – in the wider Aotearoa New Zealand planning and impact assessment framework – also Treaty-led. The Māori experience contributes to the developing international field of Indigenous IA.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"391 - 402"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45861676","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}

{"title":"Who is involved in environmental and social impact assessment public participation? Observations on urban and rural practices in Malawi","authors":"Juwo Juwish Lwesya Sibale, T. Fischer","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2220152","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2220152","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper, the authors reflect on public participation (PP) in environmental impact assessment (EIA) processes in Malawi, where EIA is implemented as Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA). Who is invited and who is actively contributing to PP meetings is explored. In this context, 12 ESIAs are examined, six from rural and six from urban areas. While PP principles ask for a balanced approach towards the inclusion of both interested and affected individuals and bodies, in the 12 projects, participants were mostly development and planning experts in urban projects and traditional leaders (chiefs) in rural projects. People without societal positions that were directly affected by developments only represented 15% of those being present in PP meetings. Based on these findings, the authors suggest that PP policy needs to be improved and enforced in order to allow ordinary people potentially directly affected by development to be better represented.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"301 - 313"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41557862","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}

{"title":"Substantive, normative and transactive effectiveness of EIA: perception of key actors in Namibia","authors":"Dietlinde N Nakwaya-Jacobus, M. Hipondoka, S. Angombe, L. Stringer, A. Dougill","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2214446","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2214446","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT EIA has become an important environmental management tool because it is supported by enforceable legal backing. However, its effectiveness has been debated, especially in developing countries where systems are often mimicked from the Western world. EIA in Namibia has been in place since the enactment of the legislation in 2007 and 2012 respectively. This paper investigates EIA's substantive, normative, and transactive effectiveness in Namibia as perceived by key actors. Data were collected through survey questionnaires and triangulated with semi-structured interviews. A total of 110 actors responded to the survey and 25 experts were interviewed. Interviewees perceive EIA in Namibia as moderately and marginally effective in supporting substantive, normative, and transactive effectiveness. They further perceive that various contextual and administrative challenges affect EIA effectiveness in Namibia. Challenges include poor administration, restrained consideration of assessment findings in decisions, limited learning and environmental awareness opportunities, inadequate public participation, funding, and poor monitoring, and reporting. Interviewees also highlighted political will as necessary to improve funding and appropriate institutional arrangement. Actors perceive that projects meant to improve the livelihood of impoverished communities can be accepted while foregoing environmental objectives. With targeted improvements, EIA can effectively facilitate good environmental decisions, resource mobilisation, and sustainability in Namibia.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"280 - 300"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49667803","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}

{"title":"Including climate change in airport EIAs","authors":"M. Birley","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2206702","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2206702","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Projects and their Environmental Impact Assessments should take account of global cumulative impacts such as those associated with Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The emissions induce the climate emergency which is a major determinant of public health and much else. This opinion paper identifies some challenges and improvements that could be made in current policy, procedure, and methods for mitigating the climate emergency in airport expansion. It does so by analysing the Environmental Statement for the Leeds and Bradford Airport expansion plan, together with existing international, national, and local climate change policies.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"323 - 327"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44678541","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}

{"title":"Three decades of EIA reforms in India: reflections on the complexities of simplifications","authors":"Urmila Jha-Thakur","doi":"10.1080/14615517.2023.2208397","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2023.2208397","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This letter provides an overview of the EIA system in India for the last three decades. The strengths and weaknesses of the system are summarised here based on the key reviews, which have been undertaken during this time. The main purpose of this contribution is however to reflect on the recent attempts to introduce changes within the EIA system in India via the Draft EIA Notification of 2020 and the subsequent regulatory instruments. The proposed changes are compared and contrasted against the identified strengths and weaknesses. Though the Draft Notification was rejected, it showcases the intention of the Government towards dilution of the EIA system and its failure portrays the extent to which public opinion and understanding of EIA has evolved in the country.","PeriodicalId":47528,"journal":{"name":"Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal","volume":"41 1","pages":"244 - 248"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42108061","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}