Use of Animal Species Data in Environmental Impact Assessments |
| |
Authors: | Edo Knegtering J Marijke Drees Paul Geertsema Hans J Huitema Anton J M Schoot Uiterkamp |
| |
Institution: | (1) Department of Nature, Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, P.O. Box 20401, The Hague, EK, 2500, The Netherlands;(2) Society for the Study and Conservation of Mammals, Oude Kraan 8, Arnhem, LJ, 6811, The Netherlands;(3) MEE Ijsseloevers, P.O. Box 10217, Almere, AE, 1301, The Netherlands;(4) Society for the Study and Conservation of Mammals, Oude Kraan 8, Arnhem, LJ, 6811, The Netherlands;(5) Center for Energy and Environmental Studies IVEM, University of Groningen, Nijenborgh 4, Groningen, AG, 9747, The Netherlands |
| |
Abstract: | Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) should ideally help minimize adverse effects on biological diversity by considering
impacts of projects on wide ranges of species. This paper investigates how recent Dutch EIAs included the species comprising
animal diversity. We present results of two studies on fauna data used in the EIAs. Objectives were to determine for different
taxa (a) the relative representation of species in Environmental Impact Statements (EISs); (b) the extent to which EISs referred
to specific species and the accuracy of survey data referred to; and (c) apparent roles of different EIA actors in species
inclusion. EIAs were found to use data on various taxa but on limited numbers of species. The frequency with which taxa were
included varied significantly. Birds were most frequently included, followed by mammals, amphibians, and other species groups.
The quality of data on birds exceeded that regarding other vertebrates. Our results indicate that (a) EIA working groups of
independent experts were the most influential in determining the data to be used; (b) on average, proponents included data
more often than required by guidelines; and (c) in 30 to 40% of the EIAs, the participation of nongovernmental organizations
prompted use of data. Despite the key role of experts in data inclusion, the taxon rankings found in the EIAs showed little
deviation from those observed in studies on people’s preferences for species. Given the limited ranges of species considered,
it is doubtful that the EIAs examined effectively contributed to conserving animal species diversity.
Edo Knegtering produced this work in his personal capacity |
| |
Keywords: | The Netherlands Environmental Impact Assessments Biodiversity Species Animals Experts |
本文献已被 PubMed SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|