Does enhanced regulation improve EIA report quality? Lessons from South Africa

被引:55
作者
Sandham, L. A. [1 ]
van Heerden, A. J. [1 ]
Jones, C. E. [2 ]
Retief, F. P. [1 ]
Morrison-Saunders, A. N. [1 ]
机构
[1] North West Univ, Environm Assessment Res Grp, Sch Geo & Spatial Sci, ZA-2520 Potchefstroom, South Africa
[2] Univ Manchester, Sch Environm & Dev, Manchester M13 9PL, Lancs, England
关键词
Environmental Impact Assessment; National Environmental Management Act; South Africa; Environmental Impact Assessment Report; EIA report quality; EIA regulations; ENVIRONMENTAL-IMPACT ASSESSMENT; STATEMENTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.eiar.2012.08.001
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Recently, various EIA systems have been subjected to system review processes with a view to improve performance. Many of these reviews resulted in some form of legislative reform. The South African Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regulations were modified in 2006 with the express intent to improve EIA effectiveness. In order to evaluate to what extent the desired outcome was achieved, the quality of EIA reports produced under the 2006 regulations was investigated for comparative analysis with the preceding regime. A sample of EIA reports from the two legislative regimes was reviewed using an adapted version of a well established method known colloquially as the "Lee and Colley" review package. Despite some improvements in certain aspects, overall report quality has decreased slightly from the 1997 EIA regime. It therefore appears that the modifications to the regulations, often heralded as the solution to improvements in performance have not resulted in improved quality of EIA reports. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:155 / 162
页数:8
相关论文
共 48 条
  • [1] Evaluation of the EIA system performance in Greece, using quality indicators
    Androulidakis, I
    Karakassis, I
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 2006, 26 (03) : 242 - 256
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1997, GOVT GAZETTE 0905, V18261
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2010, Government Gazette
  • [4] Badr El-Sayed A., 2004, Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, V6, P19, DOI 10.1142/S1464333204001572
  • [5] An evaluation of EIA system performance in eight EU countries
    Barker, A
    Wood, C
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 1999, 19 (04) : 387 - 404
  • [6] Quality of environmental impact statements in Portugal and Spain
    Canelas, L
    Almansa, P
    Merchan, M
    Cifuentes, P
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW, 2005, 25 (03) : 217 - 225
  • [7] Cashmore M., 2004, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, V22, P295, DOI [DOI 10.3152/147154604781765860, 10.3152/147154604781765860]
  • [8] Christensen P., 2005, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, V48, P393, DOI 10.1080/09640560500067491
  • [9] DEA Environmental Impact Assessment and Management Strategy - Theme: Governance and Administration, 2011, ENV IMP ASS MAN STRA
  • [10] DEAT, 2008, REV EFF EFF ENV IMP