scholarly journals Public Agreement and Public Involvement. Environmental Impact Assessment and Consensus Building.

2002 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 151-160
Author(s):  
Sachihiko Harashina
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Consensus Building

Does the Current State of Environmental Impact Assessment in Armenia Pose a Challenge for the Future?

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (02) ◽  
pp. 1950004
Author(s):  
Sophya Geghamyan ◽  
Katarina Pavlickova
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Current State

Many post-Soviet countries are still improving their Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) systems, and Armenia is no exception. In recent years, approximation to and harmonisation with the laws of the European Union has seen Armenia increasingly adopt and apply EU regulations and directives, and this process was supported by adoption of the new law on EIA and Expertise in 2014. The main objectives of this study are to review and analyse the current state of the Armenian EIA system and to assess its legal framework. We applied a method divided into two parts: review and analysis of the legislative aspects of the EIA system in Armenia and the circulation of a survey-questionnaire to EIA experts to establish current practices. The findings of this research provided positive and negative factors which can both be used to improve the assessment system in Armenia. While the most significant EIA strength combines the existence of a systematic law and public involvement in this process, the law has weaknesses in its monitoring, informative and quality control provisions. Moreover, public participation has many weaknesses in practice, including the definition of stakeholders and the lack of guidelines and manuals which challenges expert action. Finally, this paper has explored the major positives and negatives of the Armenian EIA system in practice, and we consider that this should help other Former Soviet Union (FSU) countries define and combat the challenges of their EIA systems.

EIA Processes in the Radioactive Waste Management in Slovakia: Eight Years of Experience

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Salzer ◽  
Eva Sencˇa´kova´
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Slovak Republic ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Nuclear Facilities ◽  
Legal Provisions

Environmental Impact Assessment Act has been in force in the Slovak Republic since 1994. Evaluation of potential environmental impact of nuclear facilities/activities was enforced in the cases of newly sited constructions containing nuclear facilities much earlier: the civil construction legislation required the preparation of initial safety report with the same purposes. The cardinal change constituted by the EIA Act was the legal requirement of the public involvement in the assessment process, such as participation of municipalities, civil initiatives or public hearings. Another aspect was the most complex evaluation of impact, i.e. not only inside the nuclear safety framework but including, for instance, also non-nuclear, social, and economical aspects. All nuclear activities judged by the environmental impact assessment processes in the last eight years have been related to radioactive waste and spent fuel management facilities or activities and to the decommissioning of nuclear power plants. The particular cases are briefly described and the positive and negative implications from particular environmental impact assessment processes are discussed and generalized. Special attention is given to the use of EIA approaches in the strategy decision-making processes on various levels. There are the main difficulties and drawbacks in application of the EIA legal provisions in Slovakia at the present time.

Recent Trends in Environmental Impact Assessment

1981 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 591-624 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Rosenberg ◽  
Vincent H. Resh ◽  
Steven S. Balling ◽  
Mark A. Barnby ◽  
Joshua N. Collins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Scientific Basis ◽  
Water Diversion ◽  
Average Quality

The objectives of this paper are to characterize an "ideal" environmental impact assessment (e.i.a.); to review the contemporary status of e.i.a. for several major activities and areas of development; and to identify successes, failures, and future needs in e.i.a.The institutional procedures to be followed for e.i.a. have been formalized in a number of countries, but the scientific basis and methods are still developing. We propose that the following elements comprise an ideal e.i.a.: (1) definition of scientific objectives, (2) background preparation, (3) identification of main impacts, (4) prediction of effects, (5) formulation of usable recommendations, (6) monitoring and assessment, (7) sufficient lead time, (8) public participation, (9) adequate funding, and (10) evidence that recommendations were used.The "best available" predictive, preoperational e.i.a.'s involving aquatic resources (power plants, fossil fuels, recreation, reservoirs, wastewater treatment, forestry, and dredging and water diversion in estuaries) were reviewed and scored on a 0–5 scale for each of the elements identified above. Mean scores for the criteria which could be assessed (nos. 1–8) indicated that the quality of the best available e.i.a.'s does not exceed our defined average but improves when legally required documents are excluded from the calculations. The lowest means, for criteria within the scientist's control (nos. 1–5), were obtained for "Prediction of effects" and ' "Formulation of usable recommendations." Overall mean scores for each development area (criteria 1–5) indicated three broad groups which included studies of above average quality (wastewater treatment, recreation); studies of approximately average quality (estuarine impacts, power plants, reservoirs, and fossil fuels); and studies of below average quality (forestry practices).Environmental impact assessment has had the following successes: increased environmental awareness due to public involvement in e.i.a., some environmental protection, and elucidation of intriguing research problems. The list of failures of e.i.a. is, however, longer: "tokenism," unrealistic time constraints, uncertainty of program or development schedules, difficult access to e.i.a. literature, questionable ethics, lack of coordination among studies, and poor research design.Future organizational/administrative needs of e.i.a. include improved access to e.i.a. literature, increased accountability for e.i.a.'s and their authors, improved public input into project decisions and designs, and improved organization and presentation of e.i.a. reports. Future scientific/research needs include development of methods to define and quantify relationships between biological, esthetic, and economic impacts; support for independent biological inventory programs; adequate time frames; improved design of research; inclusion of monitoring and assessment in every e.i.a.; study of cumulative impacts on a regional or national scale; and improved communication between scientists and planners.Key words: environmental impact assessment, aquatic ecology, power plants, fossil fuels, recreation, reservoirs, wastewater treatment, forestry, dredging and water diversion (estuaries)

Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessments Between Spain and Portugal

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (02) ◽  
pp. 1550022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando Vicente ◽  
Teresa Fidélis ◽  
Gonzalo Méndez
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Considerable Increase ◽  
Significant Development ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessments ◽  
The Impact

Since 2000, the Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment (TEIA) process in the Iberian context has undergone significant development due to new circumstances that came into play at the bilateral and European levels: (i) the adoption of a collaborative TEIA Protocol between Spain and Portugal in 2008; and (ii) the increasing number of cross-border projects supported by European Union funds. Despite these developments, the impact of this bilateral regulation on public participation, the cornerstone of any Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), has not yet been fully examined. Drawing from specific literature focusing on the involvement of the public as the basis of effective improvement of the TEIA, this paper critically analyses if the lates transboundary provision has encouraged public participation in this context. Although the analysis of the TEIA enforcement revealed a considerable increase in the number of consultations between the neighbouring states compared to the previous situation, public involvement has not increased. Based on these findings, this paper presents a set of recommendations to more effectively involve the public in transboundary consultations.

Public Participation in Environmental Governance in India and Indonesia

2018 ◽  
pp. 448-476
Author(s):  
Nupur Chowdhury ◽  
Arie Afriansyah
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Judicial Intervention

This chapter examines public participation in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in India and Indonesia. It argues that despite the top-down approach of adoption of EIA, it has undergone a process of intense indigenization in most jurisdictions, influenced significantly by public mobilization and judicial intervention in those jurisdictions. Again, India and Indonesia being densely populated developing countries remarkable similarities are found in them with respect to the manner in which the EIA process has emerged in these legal regimes. It puts forth the claim that the contestation and mediation in regard to fundamental ideas about the nature and process of economic development and public involvement in environmental governance in the two jurisdictions have stark resemblance.

Experiences of Dealing With Environmental Statements for Nuclear Reactor Decommissioning Projects Under the EIA Directive

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. McCready-Shea ◽  
F. E. Taylor ◽  
J. Batt
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Nuclear Reactor ◽  
Competent Authority ◽  
Consultation Process ◽  
Power Stations ◽  
Council Directive

European Council Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC, sets out a framework for the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. It is known as the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive. The Directive is implemented in Great Britain (GB) for the dismantling or decommissioning of nuclear power stations and other nuclear reactor by the Nuclear Reactors (Environmental Impact Assessment for Decommissioning) Regulations 1999 (EIADR99). The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is the competent authority for EIADR99 in GB, and has carried out public consultations on environmental statements that accompanied applications for consent to carry out decommissioning projects at two nuclear power stations in GB. HSE understands that these applications for consent are some of the first under the revised EIA Directive. HSE has developed a strategy for managing applications for consents under EIADR99. This strategy covers two main areas. The first area is public involvement, including identifying a large number of organisations in addition to the consultation bodies identified in the Regulations, providing information through the internet, and making responses to the consultation process publicly available. The second area is interfaces with legislation and Government policy, including town and country planning legislation, related health, safety and environment legislation, and decommissioning timetables. Experiences of implementing the strategy to deal with the environmental statements are described.

scholarly journals SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT IN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: EXPERIENCE AND CHALLENGES IN LITHUANIA

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata DAGILIŪTĖ ◽  
Gintarė JUOZAPAITIENĖ
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Economic Assessment ◽  
Integrative Approach ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
Environmental Impact Statements ◽  
Personal Attitudes

In 2011, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law amendment was approved and a socio-economic assessment formally became an integrated part of EIA in Lithuania. Therefore, this study examines a socio-economic assessment in the environmental impact statements (EIS) and the perceptions of the EIA experts towards a socio economic assessment. Although formally a socio-economic assessment has been validated only recently, 30% of specialists claimed having conducted a socio-economic assessment in detail prior to the amendments to the law. Thus, the EIS analysis has shown a rather poor consideration of these issues as mainly creation of work places was addressed. The survey has shown that preparation of the EIA documents after the formalisation of a socio-economic assessment would change mainly nominally. The EIA experts working in the private sector were more optimistic than those from state institutions. Reluctance of changes and personal attitudes have to be addressed, especially those particular to the experts of state institutions. In addition, methodological guidance, integrative approach and public involvement into the decision-making process could change the current situation and increase the effectiveness of the EIA process and the social impact assessment in general.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document