Comparative analysis of enabling legislation for EIA follow-up in Lebanon, Palestine and Jordan (and Aqaba)

Abstract

The Middle East region has taken large strides in issuing legislations that protect the environment by using well-established tools such as environmental impact assessment and auditing. Ensuring compliance throughout the life cycles of development projects, however, remains a challenging task. This paper aims to show that despite the successes attained thus far, there are several drawbacks in the existing systems, most strikingly the weak linkages between the legal instruments such as EIA and auditing, the lack of provisions for public involvement and inadequate mechanisms and resource allocation for implementing follow-up. These weaknesses are likely contributing to less efficient and effective enforcement, lack of a holistic approach to environmental protection and insufficient financing for environmental mitigation and monitoring measures during the various stages of a development. As a comparative case study, the legislative framework for environmental impact assessment and auditing of Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Aqaba Special Economic Zone have been reviewed and analyzed. The paper presents a set of recommendations that aim to fill the gaps presented.

Reflecting on, and revising, international best practice principles for EIA follow-up

“…Some studies have used the IAIA follow-up principles as the basis for analysis of EIA case studies or jurisdictional arrangements (e.g. Jha-Thakur et al, 2009;Nadeem and Hameed, 2010;Bashour, 2016). One paper specifically used the principles, together with other publications on EIA follow-up, as the basis for deriving a specific set of 'criteria for best practice follow-up' (Pinto et al, 2019, p1) and then using these criteria to test a case study development project.…”