کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
5115633 | 1484979 | 2017 | 13 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
- Sensitivity mapping can enhance baseline information for environmental assessments.
- A novel online geoprocessing tool supports systematic sensitivity assessment.
- It enables combining context-specific environmental criteria and value judgments.
- Pilot testing it through stakeholder engagement has validated its applicability.
- The tool promotes assessment consistency and transparency but data issues remain.
Environmental sensitivity analysis provides a framework for systematically and objectively determining the potential for significant environmental impacts. The higher the natural or acquired sensitivity of the receiving environment, the less capable it is to cope with human-induced change. Given that sensitivity is context- and spatially-specific, Geographic Information Systems have been applied to develop an operational Webtool to analyse it. The Webtool enables a rapid and replicable spatial examination of environmental sensitivities and potential for land-use conflicts that supports Strategic Environmental Assessment and, ultimately, informed planning and decision-making. The novelty is on the provision of an online geoprocessing Widget that enables creation of context-specific maps. Pilot testing the Webtool in land-use and renewable energy planning through stakeholder engagement has validated its applicability. Stakeholders confirmed that it enables replicating and, in some cases, improving in-house SEA mapping processes while saving time and effort. However, its full reliance on publicly available spatial datasets renders completeness and resolution issues. The Webtool provides a critical starting-point for sectoral planning discussions and for developing plan/programme alternatives that avoid or minimise potentially incompatible or unsustainable zonings, while promoting consistency and transparency in impact assessment.
Journal: Environmental Impact Assessment Review - Volume 66, September 2017, Pages 86-98