首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Determination of significance in Ecological Impact Assessment: Past change,current practice and future improvements
Institution:1. Transport Research Unit, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom;2. Centre for Urban Studies, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 166 1018 WV Amsterdam, Netherlands;1. Swift Creek Consulting, PO Box 1513, Garibaldi Highlands, BC, Canada, V0N 1T0;2. Tributary Project Services Ltd., 602 5th Avenue, Prince Rupert, BC, Canada, V8J 1S5;3. BC Environmental Assessment Office, PO Box 9426, STN PROV GOVT, Victoria, BC, Canada, V8W 9V1;4. Metlakatla Stewardship Society, PO Box 224, Prince Rupert, BC, Canada, V8J 3P6;5. Gitga''at Lands and Marine Resources, Gitga''at First Nation, 445 Hayimiisaxaa Way, Hartley Bay, BC, Canada, V0V 1A0;1. Institute of Biological and Health Sciences, Federal University of Alagoas, Maceió, Brazil;2. Instituto de Geografia, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil;3. School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK;4. Instituto de Pesquisas Ecológicas (IPÊ), Nazaré Paulista, Brazil
Abstract:Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) is an important tool for conservation and achieving sustainable development. ‘Significant’ impacts are those which disturb or alter the environment to a measurable degree. Significance is a crucial part of EcIA, our understanding of the concept in practice is vital if it is to be effective as a tool. This study employed three methods to assess how the determination of significance has changed through time, what current practice is, and what would lead to future improvements. Three data streams were collected: interviews with expert stakeholders, a review of 30 Environmental Statements and a broad-scale survey of the United Kingdom Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM) members.The approach taken in the determination of significance has become more standardised and subjectivity has become constrained through a transparent framework. This has largely been driven by a set of guidelines produced by IEEM in 2006. The significance of impacts is now more clearly justified and the accuracy with which it is determined has improved. However, there are limitations to accuracy and effectiveness of the determination of significance. These are the quality of baseline survey data, our scientific understanding of ecological processes and the lack of monitoring and feedback of results. These in turn are restricted by the limited resources available in consultancies. The most notable recommendations for future practice are the implementation of monitoring and the publication of feedback, the creation of a central database for baseline survey data and the streamlining of guidance.
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号