Research on post environmental impact assessment system for highway construction

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yujie Huang ◽  
Yi Shen
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Highway Construction ◽  
Assessment System

Does the Current State of Environmental Impact Assessment in Armenia Pose a Challenge for the Future?

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (02) ◽  
pp. 1950004
Author(s):  
Sophya Geghamyan ◽  
Katarina Pavlickova
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Current State

Many post-Soviet countries are still improving their Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) systems, and Armenia is no exception. In recent years, approximation to and harmonisation with the laws of the European Union has seen Armenia increasingly adopt and apply EU regulations and directives, and this process was supported by adoption of the new law on EIA and Expertise in 2014. The main objectives of this study are to review and analyse the current state of the Armenian EIA system and to assess its legal framework. We applied a method divided into two parts: review and analysis of the legislative aspects of the EIA system in Armenia and the circulation of a survey-questionnaire to EIA experts to establish current practices. The findings of this research provided positive and negative factors which can both be used to improve the assessment system in Armenia. While the most significant EIA strength combines the existence of a systematic law and public involvement in this process, the law has weaknesses in its monitoring, informative and quality control provisions. Moreover, public participation has many weaknesses in practice, including the definition of stakeholders and the lack of guidelines and manuals which challenges expert action. Finally, this paper has explored the major positives and negatives of the Armenian EIA system in practice, and we consider that this should help other Former Soviet Union (FSU) countries define and combat the challenges of their EIA systems.

INVOLVED PARTIES' CONTENTMENT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT SYSTEM IN ESTONIA

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (03) ◽  
pp. 331-347
Author(s):  
TÕNIS PÕDER ◽  
TIIT LUKKI
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
System Development ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Decision Makers

Besides other approaches, interviewing main actors (decision-makers, consultants, developers) can provide valuable information about their subjective attitude as well as indicate probable weak areas and help in formulation of strategy for further research and EIA system development. This paper considers results of the survey conducted in Estonia in early 2008 as a part of national EIA system analysis. The survey covered main actors' contentment with different aspects such as EIA legislation, public participation, EIA outcomes, experts' qualification and impartiality, etc. As evidenced by what they have pointed out, the EIA system leaves much to be desired. All actors seemed to be worried about the low effectiveness of EIA. Deficiencies in public participation were also brought forward. Decision-makers trusted consultants' qualifications, but many of them felt that consultants were biased. However, the obtained results did not indicate any correlation between expert bias and contentment with EIA outcomes, perceived by decision-makers.

Introduction to the Environmental Impact Assessment System and Public Participation in the Russian Federation

2003 ◽  
Vol 05 (03) ◽  
pp. 321-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Kovalev ◽  
Johann Koeppel
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The State ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
The Public ◽  
Independent Expert ◽  
The Russian Federation

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system in the Russian Federation has an extensive set of rules, the main ones are the Assessment of the Environmental Impact (OVOS) of a project and the State Environmental Review (SER). The SER is designed as an investigation of both a project and of its OVOS by an independent expert commission, which is appointed by the federal and regional environmental bodies. The decision of the commission is binding. In addition, a Public Environmental Review (PER) can be conducted by NGOs and recognised by the state. A mandatory component of the EIA in Russia is public participation. The process of public participation is regulated by Russian legislation (for example the Land Code, the OVOS guidelines and autonomous regional laws) and can take various forms. All these opportunities are established on paper; in reality, they are not always taken into account. There are a number of case studies used to observe the extent to which the public has an impact on environmental decision-making. Selected cases include examples in which the public was passive, in which it undertook limited activities, and in which participation was strong and projects were improved or stopped.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document