scholarly journals Verwissenschaftlichung des Rechts und Ihre Grenzen -Entwicklung des Umweltvertralichkeitspruungsrechts in Korea

2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-124
Author(s):  
Joonhyung Hong
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Learning Ability ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Successful Outcome ◽  
Ultimate Truth ◽  
New Model

This article tackles the issue of "science and law" in the "risk society." by analyzing recent development of the ENvironmental Impact Assessment System in Korea. The conditions of uncertainty, ignorance and indeterminacy constitute a serious challenge to traditional conceptions of science as an arbiter of ultimate truth and authority. Current status of academic discussions of the issue shows that enhanced use of science in law, especially adoption of precautionary measures for better protection of environment and ecological diversity does not necessarily bring about successful outcome, either due to the political nature of scientific inquiry and knowledge or due to the scientific indeterminacy itself. More important than demystifying this imperfection of scientific knowledge, however, is often recognizing the way how the science is being handled at bar, at agency office or in parliament. Understanding dialectic of science, law and policy, so real truth about science in law is an indispensable prerequisite for our search for a new model of environmental law. Politics of law in dealing with "science and law" issues and other aspects of separation of power need to be therefore more realistically addressed before we proceed to reform the existing regime of environmental impact assessment. in this vein, the article emphasizes the crucial role of the court as a truth-finding forum embedded in a vitalized litigation culture, while it proposes a series of ideas as fundamentals for a new model of environmental law: optimization of science and law relationship, need for co-options in environmental lawmaking, devising and developing "environmental law with learning ability" through enhanced utilization of science, redistributing roles among various actors in polycentric context of environmental law and applying conflict resolution approach to environmental policy making.

scholarly journals Beyond Public Particpation: The disjuncture between South Africa's Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law and Sustainable Development

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
T Murombo
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Development Planning ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Provisions

One of the key strategies for achieving sustainable development is the use of the process of evaluating the potential environmental impacts of development activities. The procedure of environmental impact assessment (EIA) implements the principle of integration which lies at the core of the concept of sustainable development by providing a process through which potential social, economic and environmental impacts of activities are scrutinised and planned for. Sustainable development may not be achieved without sustained and legally mandated efforts to ensure that development planning is participatory. The processes of public participation play a crucial role in ensuring the integration of the socio-economic impacts of a project into the environmental decision-making processes. Public participation is not the only process, nor does the process always ensure the achievement of sustainable development. Nevertheless, decisions that engage the public have the propensity to lead to sustainable development. The public participation provisions in South Africa’s EIA regulations promulgated under the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 show a disjuncture between the idea of public participation and the notion of sustainable development. The provisions do not create a framework for informed participation and leave a wide discretion to environmental assessment practitioners (EAPs) regarding the form which participation should assume. In order for environmental law, specifically EIA laws, to be effective as tools to promote sustainable development the laws must, among other things, provide for effective public participation. The judiciary must also aid in the process by giving content to the legal provisions on public participation in the EIA process.

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.

Sustaining the unsustainable? Environmental impact assessment and overdevelopment in Bali

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Warren ◽  
Agung Wardana
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Agricultural Land ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Water Shortage ◽  
New Order ◽  
Reform Era ◽  
Vested Interests ◽  
Resort Development

Bali faces serious environmental crises arising from overdevelopment of the tourism and real estate industry, including water shortage, rapid conversion of agricultural land, pollution, and economic and cultural displacement. This article traces continuities and discontinuities in the role of Indonesian environmental impact assessment (EIA) during and since the authoritarian ‘New Order’ period. Following the fall of the Suharto regime in 1998, the ‘Reform Era’ brought dramatic changes, democratizing and decentralizing Indonesia's governing institutions. Focusing on case studies of resort development projects in Bali from the 1990s to the present, this study examines the ongoing capture of legal processes by vested interests at the expense of prospects for sustainable development. Two particularly controversial projects in Benoa Bay, proposed in the different historical and structural settings of the two eras—the Bali Turtle Island Development (BTID) at Serangan Island in the Suharto era and the Tirta Wahana Bali Internasional (TWBI) proposal for the other side of Benoa in the ‘Reform Era’—enable instructive comparison. The study finds that despite significant changes in the environmental law regime, the EIA process still finds itself a tool of powerful interests in the efforts of political and economic elites to maintain control of decision-making and to displace popular opposition forces to the margins.

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.

A SNAPSHOT OF GERMANY'S EIA APPROACH IN LIGHT OF THE UNITED STATES ARCHETYPE

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (04) ◽  
pp. 1250022 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHANN KÖPPEL ◽  
GESA GEIßLER ◽  
JENNIFER HELFRICH ◽  
JESSICA REISERT
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Role Model ◽  
The United States ◽  
Current Status ◽  
National Environmental Policy Act ◽  
25Th Anniversary ◽  
20Th Anniversary ◽  
National Environmental

November 2010 marked the 25th anniversary of the EU Environmental Impact Assessment Directive and the 20th anniversary of its implementation in Germany via the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (EIAA) in 1990. Reflecting back to the original role model for these pieces of legisiation, the 1969 US National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) can bring some interesting differences to light. Four decades of experience from the more mature US EIA system may hold some important lessons for Germany's younger EIAA. While an outright comparison is impossible at this present time, this article aims to contribute a comparative perspective to show the current status of the original US model, NEPA, and the differences in development and practice to Germany's younger EIAA.

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