IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF SLM PRACTICES ON ECOSYSTEM SERVICES OF SOILS

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lenka Korbelova
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Impact Assessment

scholarly journals ‘Environmental Impact Assessment’ in Drylands: Late Knowledge Penetration or a Deliberate Ignorance for Megaprojects?

World ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 374-378
Author(s):  
Farshad Amiraslani
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Environmental Impact Assessment ◽  
Ecological Resilience ◽  
Delayed Action ◽  
The Way

Despite the paramount role of drylands in supporting people’s livelihoods and rendering ecosystem services, legislation on Environmental Impact Assessment has been introduced belatedly after several decades. By exemplifying Iran, the author proposes two main reasons for such a delayed action. First, drylands are misleadingly considered as barren lands where biodiversity is relatively low. In one classification, deserts are even categorized along with rocks. Second, the author emphasizes that drylands have been subjected to unprecedented changes due to the expansion of infrastructure and urbanization that started in the 1970s. These growing pressures have been beyond the ecological resilience of drylands and have not been monitored, assessed, and modified correctly. Further scrutiny regarding EIA undertakings in drylands and the way they can be improved is now needed.

scholarly journals Should the ecosystem services concept be used in European Commission impact assessment?

2016 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. 6-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Diehl ◽  
Benjamin Burkhard ◽  
Klaus Jacob
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
European Commission

scholarly journals Avoiding impacts on biodiversity through strengthening the first stage of the mitigation hierarchy

Oryx ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 316-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Phalan ◽  
Genevieve Hayes ◽  
Sharon Brooks ◽  
David Marsh ◽  
Pippa Howard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Technical Knowledge ◽  
Political Will ◽  
Building Capacity ◽  
Mitigation Hierarchy ◽  
Conservation Organizations

AbstractThe mitigation hierarchy is a decision-making framework designed to address impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services through first seeking to avoid impacts wherever possible, then minimizing or restoring impacts, and finally by offsetting any unavoidable impacts. Avoiding impacts is seen by many as the most certain and effective way of managing harm to biodiversity, and its position as the first stage of the mitigation hierarchy indicates that it should be prioritized ahead of other stages. However, despite an abundance of legislative and voluntary requirements, there is often a failure to avoid impacts. We discuss reasons for this failure and outline some possible solutions. We highlight the key roles that can be played by conservation organizations in cultivating political will, holding decision makers accountable to the law, improving the processes of impact assessment and avoidance, building capacity, and providing technical knowledge. A renewed focus on impact avoidance as the foundation of the mitigation hierarchy could help to limit the impacts on biodiversity of large-scale developments in energy, infrastructure, agriculture and other sectors.

What is value? Impact assessment of cultural heritage

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-436
Author(s):  
Guillermo S. Reher
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Cultural Values ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
To Come ◽  
The Impact

PurposeThere are currently various methodologies used for carrying out impact assessments of cultural heritage. This paper aims to critically explore the reasons for this diversity and ascertain their varying consistency.Design/methodology/approachThe paper does a comparative analysis of the methodologies used, exploring how they measure up to the theoretical underpinnings of the ecosystem services approach and the cultural values model, considered to be the most comprehensive strategies for assessing the impact of cultural heritage.FindingsThe study reveals that there are few methodologies, and they only inconsistently work upon the theoretical perspectives mentioned earlier. In addition, from the public policy perspective, surprisingly few areas endowed with cultural heritage have been, in one way or another, assessed for impact, perhaps in part due to the lack of adequate methodologies.Research limitations/implicationsThe methods analysed are those that have been made public, which can be found in English. Also, they may be exploratory themselves, so some of the conclusions reached here may have also been found by the analysts themselves. This research serves to provide some scientific groundings for developing a more comprehensive impact assessment method.Practical implicationsThe results of this paper highlight certain glaring absences from current methodologies which invite the development of more definitive cultural impact assessment models. This is possible given the current state of the art, and further research and practice are necessary to develop a more comprehensive cultural values model–based research assessment.Social implicationsBy focussing on the absence of certain indicators on behalf of impact assessment methodologies, this paper sheds light on the overlooked (or under-measured) benefits derived from cultural heritage. Many of the benefits derived from this type of resource find an opportunity to come out in the open, greatly affecting researchers, cultural heritage planners and local communities.Originality/valueThis paper also serves to substantiate a glaring absence within the ecosystem services framework, which is the lack of practical methodologies for measuring some of these service values.

Integrated earth system dynamic modeling for life cycle impact assessment of ecosystem services

2014 ◽  
Vol 472 ◽  
pp. 262-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Damien Arbault ◽  
Mylène Rivière ◽  
Benedetto Rugani ◽  
Enrico Benetto ◽  
Ligia Tiruta-Barna
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle ◽  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Dynamic Modeling ◽  
Life Cycle Impact Assessment ◽  
System Dynamic ◽  
Earth System ◽  
Life Cycle Impact
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document