Environmental impact assessment (EIA) effectiveness in protected areas

Alberts, Reece; Retief, François; Cilliers, Dirk; Roos, Claudine; Hauptfleisch, Morgan

doi:10.1080/14615517.2021.1904377

Cited by 18 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Only some of the cases reviewed provided clear statements on the cumulative impacts associated with the particular project. The above aligns with previous research in the international and South African context, that found dealing with significance remains a key challenge (Arts et al 2012;Ehrlich and Ross 2015;Retief, et al 2016;Sandham et al 2020;Alberts et al 2021a)…”

Section: Significancesupporting

confidence: 88%

“…A distinction can however be made between 'administratively correct' EIA decisions and 'good' EIA decisions (Alberts et al 2021b) KPIs were chosen that are empirically measurable and for which data could be obtained from EIA case files. The KPIs addressed South African minimum legal requirements and international best practice for EIA report substance, based on an adapted and contextualised Lee and Colley method (Adapted from Alberts et al, 2020;Alberts et al 2021a;Sandham et al 2008aSandham et al , 2020 -see Table 2.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The quality or substance of EIA reports has been a particular focus of international and South African EIA research (Sandham et al 2008a;Jalava et al 2010;Bond et al 2018). Literature suggests that substantive weakness is an ongoing challenge for EIA practice both internationally and within the South African context (Wood 2003;Sandham et al 2010Sandham et al , 2013aSandham et al , 2020Alberts et al 2021a;Fischer and Retief 2021) with much being written on how to improve substance, including factors such as:…”

Section: Is Eia Just Admin?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

EIA decision-making and administrative justice: the substance of just decisions

Alberts

Retief

Arts

et al. 2022

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we aim at determining the link between EIA report substance and administratively just EIA decisions. In so doing, previous research based on 42 case studies from South Africa, which analysed whether they comprised administratively just decisions (i.e. that were lawful, procedurally fair and reasonable) were reviewed for the substance of the EIA reports on which the decisions were based. The research found that administratively just decisions can be achieved even with weak EIA report substance in areas such as: need and desirability, identifying alternatives, dealing with significance, and addressing mitigation measures. We thereby conclude that administrative justice may be a false safety net in ensuring more environmentally sustainable EIA outcomes if not supported and informed by good EIA report substance. We conclude by making recommendations to improve substance and thereby strengthening administrative justice in EIA.

show abstract

Section: Significancesupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Is Eia Just Admin?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

EIA decision-making and administrative justice: the substance of just decisions

Alberts

Retief

Arts

et al. 2022

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous researches have covered topics such as application (Wei, 2020), BIM-based (Albert van Eldik et al, 2020), effects and drawbacks (Zhu, 2018), sustainability (Keftin, 2015;Weaver et al, 2008), system, evolution, practice, shortcomings (Ogunba, 2004), compliance (Keftin et al, 2009), challenges (Kavishe et al, 2022;Lotfy and Ismaeel, 2022) and effectiveness (Alberts et al, 2021). The study of barriers to EIA implementation for construction projects has not been studied in sufficient detail in developing countries.…”

Section: Eia In Nigeria 719mentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers to environmental impact assessment implementation for construction projects in Nigeria

Osuizugbo

Nnodu

2023

BEPAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeEnvironmental impact assessment (EIA) is one of the best approaches to identifying, preventing, minimising, compensating for any unfavourable impacts on the environment and also encouraging sustainability. This paper aims to investigate the barriers to EIA implementation for construction projects in Nigeria.Design/methodology/approachThe study adopted a survey research technique. The snowball sampling approach was adopted to identify key stakeholders in EIA practice for the administration of questionnaire. A total of 187 questionnaires were administered and a response rate of 60% (113 questionnaires were adequately filled and returned) was achieved. Descriptive and inferential statistics were utilised in analysing elicited data.FindingsThe results from data analysis showed that, “failure to influence the decision-making process/multiple conflicting decision-making”, “unstable regulatory regime”, “lack of available, accessible and fit-for purpose data”, “inadequate public knowledge of legal issues” and “poor provision of information” were the top most five barriers to EIA implementation for construction projects in Nigeria. Also, the results from the research show a statistically significant degree of agreement on the rankings by the groups of key stakeholders in EIA concerning the barriers to EIA implementation for construction projects.Originality/valueThis paper contributed to more effective EIA studies by drawing attentions to barriers to EIA implementation for construction projects. An understanding of these barriers can help key stakeholders in the construction industry of developing countries such as Nigeria to facilitate development of methods required in reducing barriers to EIA implementation in the construction sector.

show abstract

“…The requirement for public consultation stems from the fact that within the South African context, protected areas, apart from private nature reserves, are mainly a function of public administration, and they are thus required to consult with the public on matters relating to the management of these areas. This usually happens with regard to developments in the protected areas through EIA processes (Alberts et al 2021), as well as annual communication of protected area activities in the form of annual reports. Failure to effectively communicate and consult with the public could result in public buy-in being lost for protected areas, resulting in a shift in societal values related to Risk 1 as discussed above.…”

Section: Exploring the Risks For The South African Protected Area Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying key risks to the achievement of protected area system objectives

Alberts¹,

Retief²,

Roos³

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protected area systems are designed in law and policy towards achieving certain policy objectives. These systems rely on legal frameworks that determine how countries designate, declare and manage their protected areas. To date, little research has been conducted on the risks faced by protected area systems. To this end, this paper aims to identify the key risks for protected area systems achieving their objectives. This is achieved through the application of Theory of Change (ToC), which is internationally recognised as the preferred method to identify underlying assumptions and risks within policy and legal frameworks. We achieve this aim through a case study analysis of the South African protected area system as embedded in law and policy. The application of the ToC method identified 25 underlying assumptions and risks which are central to the protected area system achieving its objectives. Understanding these risks allows for a better understanding of the potential failure of the system and how to avoid it. The paper then explores and discusses the identified risks in terms of existing literature and concludes by making recommendations related to further research for the identified risks.

show abstract

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) effectiveness in protected areas

Cited by 18 publications

References 37 publications

EIA decision-making and administrative justice: the substance of just decisions

EIA decision-making and administrative justice: the substance of just decisions

Barriers to environmental impact assessment implementation for construction projects in Nigeria

Identifying key risks to the achievement of protected area system objectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) effectiveness in protected areas

Cited by 18 publications

References 37 publications

EIA decision-making and administrative justice: the substance of just decisions

EIA decision-making and administrative justice: the substance of just decisions

Barriers to environmental impact assessment implementation for construction projects in Nigeria

﻿Identifying key risks to the achievement of protected area system objectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Identifying key risks to the achievement of protected area system objectives