کد مقاله کد نشریه سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی نسخه تمام متن
5116315 1485217 2017 11 صفحه PDF دانلود رایگان
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
The inclusion of biodiversity in environmental impact assessment: Policy-related progress limited by gaps and semantic confusion
ترجمه فارسی عنوان
شامل تنوع زیستی در ارزیابی تاثیرات محیط زیست: پیشرفت مربوط به سیاست محدود شده توسط شکاف و سردرگمی معنایی
کلمات کلیدی
ارزیابی اثرات زیست محیطی، سلسله مراتب کاهش دهنده، علم حفاظت، برنامه ریزی استفاده از زمین، از دست دادن خالص،
موضوعات مرتبط
مهندسی و علوم پایه مهندسی انرژی انرژی های تجدید پذیر، توسعه پایدار و محیط زیست
چکیده انگلیسی
Natural habitat loss and fragmentation, as a result of development projects, are major causes of biodiversity erosion. Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is the most commonly used site-specific planning tool that takes into account the effects of development projects on biodiversity by integrating potential impacts into the mitigation hierarchy of avoidance, reduction, and offset measures. However, the extent to which EIA fully address the identification of impacts and conservation stakes associated with biodiversity loss has been criticized in recent work. In this paper we examine the extent to which biodiversity criteria have been integrated into 42 EIA from 2006 to 2016 for small development projects in the Montpellier Metropolitan territory in southern France. This study system allowed us to question how EIA integrates biodiversity impacts on a scale relevant to land-use planning. We examine how biodiversity inclusion has changed over time in relation to new policy for EIA and how the mitigation hierarchy is implemented in practice and in comparison with national guidelines. We demonstrate that the inclusion of biodiversity features into EIA has increased significantly in relation to policy change. Several weaknesses nevertheless persist, including the continued absence of substitution solution assessment, a correct analysis of cumulative impacts, the evaluation of impacts on common species, the inclusion of an ecological network scale, and the lack of monitoring and evaluation measures. We also show that measures for mitigation hierarchy are primarily associated with the reduction of impacts rather than their avoidance, and avoidance and offset measures are often misleadingly proposed in EIA. There is in fact marked semantic confusion between avoidance, reduction and offset measures that may impair stakeholders' understanding. All in all, reconsideration of stakeholders routine practices associated with a more strategic approach towards impact anticipation and avoidance at a land-use planning scale is now necessary for the mitigation hierarchy to become a clear and practical hierarchy for “no net loss” objectives based on conservation priorities.
ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Journal of Environmental Management - Volume 200, 15 September 2017, Pages 35-45
نویسندگان
, , ,