Investigating the implementation of the mitigation hierarchy approach in environmental impact assessment in relation to biodiversity impacts

被引:3
作者
Cares, Rocio A. [1 ,3 ]
Franco, Aldina M. A. [1 ]
Bond, Alan [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ East Anglia UEA, Sch Environm Sci, Norwich, England
[2] North West Univ, Res Unit Environm Sci & Management, Potchefstroom, South Africa
[3] Univ East Anglia UEA, Sch Environm Sci, Norwich Res Pk, Norwich NR4 7TJ, England
关键词
Mitigation hierarchy; Environmental impact assessment; Monitoring; Biodiversity outcome; No net loss biodiversity; Chile; CONSERVATION; THREATS; OFFSET;
D O I
10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107214
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Global loss of biodiversity has directly and indirectly been caused by human activities. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) attempts to address the loss of biodiversity caused by development projects, by avoiding, reducing or compensating the loss (in that order following the mitigation hierarchy approach). Evidence suggests that in practice the mitigation hierarchy is not always applied correctly, and that monitoring is frequently absent, or flawed, meaning that the success of the mitigation measures, and their associated biodiversity outcomes, remain unknown. However, there is no literature that has systematically examined the application of the miti-gation hierarchy and assessed the effectiveness of associated monitoring in an EIA system. This study fills that gap using Chile as an example because of its high biodiversity setting, and ease of access to EIA-related data. The results indicate that the use of compensation measures exceeded what would be expected from correct imple-mentation of the mitigation hierarchy, and that there was also some misclassification of the measures. Moni-toring studies focused on inspecting implementation of mitigation measures rather than measuring biodiversity outcomes (meaning that mitigation effectiveness cannot be fully evaluated). Further, there was a focus on specific elements of ecosystems and lack of consideration for broader biodiversity implications. Thus, the find-ings raise some concerns over the ability of EIA to achieve its goals of zero net loss of biodiversity. We make suggestions to improve the mitigation and monitoring aspects of the EIA process in Chile and would suggest that the recommendations are likely to have wider relevance to other jurisdictions.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 64 条
  • [1] Alonso V., 2020, Serie Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo., V167
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2019, Sexto Informe Nacional de Biodiversidad de Chile ante el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biologica (CDB), P220
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2012, Standard on Biodiversity Offsets
  • [4] Armesto J.J., 1991, Creces (Chile)., V11, P54
  • [5] Arts J., 2001, IMPACT ASSESS PROJ A, V19, P175, DOI DOI 10.3152/147154601781767014
  • [6] Trends in the state of nature and their implications for human well-being
    Balmford, A
    Bond, W
    [J]. ECOLOGY LETTERS, 2005, 8 (11) : 1218 - 1234
  • [7] The effectiveness of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) follow-up with regard to biodiversity conservation in Azerbaijan
    Bataineh, Ramzi H.
    [J]. MANAGEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, 2007, 18 (05) : 591 - 596
  • [8] BBOP, 2009, Biodiversity Offset Implementation Handbook
  • [9] The inclusion of biodiversity in environmental impact assessment: Policy-related progress limited by gaps and semantic confusion
    Bigard, Charlotte
    Pioch, Sylvain
    Thompson, John D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2017, 200 : 35 - 45
  • [10] Ecological equivalence assessment: The potential of genetic tools, remote sensing and metapopulation models to better apply the mitigation hierarchy
    Boileau, Jules
    Calvet, Coralie
    Pioch, Sylvain
    Moulherat, Sylvain
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2022, 305