Dealing with continuous reform: Towards adaptive EA policy systems in countries in transition

Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 455-476

  Cherp, Aleg ^a   Antypas, Alexios ^a  

^a CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Actor networks; Eastern Europe; Effectiveness; EIA; Environmental policy; Policy analysis; SEA

Indexed keywords

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; TRANSITIONAL ECONOMY;

ASIA; CENTRAL ASIA; CENTRAL EUROPE; EASTERN EUROPE; EURASIA; EUROPE;

EID: 0842334065     PISSN: 14643332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1142/S1464333203001516     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Ailte (2002). EIA practice in Latvia with a special emphasis on the quality of environmental statements. MSc thesis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy. Budapest: Central European University.
2. Alton, CC and PB Underwood (2003). Let us make impact assessment more accessible. EIA Review, 23, 141-153.
3. Bektashi, L (2001). Environmental assessment in Azerbaijan. MSc thesis. Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy. Budapest: Central European University.
4. Bektashi, L and A Cherp (2002). Evolution and current state of environmental assessment in Azerbaijan. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 20(4), 253-263.
5. Bellinger, E, N Lee, C George and A Paduret (eds.) (2000). Environmental Assessment in Countries in Transition. Budapest: Central European University Press.
6. Bennis, WG and PE Slater (1968). The Temporary Society. New York: Harper and Row.
7. Branis, M and I Mádlová (2000). Analysis of Czech environmental impact statement submitted for approval between July 1992 and March 1996. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Environmentalica, 14, 127-138.
8. Brickman, R (1984). "Science and the politics of toxic chemical regulation: US and European contrasts. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 9(1), 107-111.
9. Brinkerhoff, D (1996). Coordination issues in policy implementation networks: An illustration from Madagascar's NEAP. World Development, 24(9), 1497-1511.
10. Bruijn, H de and E ten Heuvelhof (2002). Policy analysis and decision making in a network: How to improve the quality of analysis and the impact on decision-making. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 20(4), 232-242.
11. Caldwell, LK (1982). Science and the National Environmental Policy Act: Redirecting Policy through Procedural Reform. Tusca Loosa: University of Alabama Press.
12. Callon, M (1986). Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen. Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
13. CEU, Central European University (2003). Network for Environmental Assessment in Countries in Transition. http://www.ceu.hu/envsci/eianetwork/. [27 October 2003].
14. Cherp, A (1999). Environmental Assessment in Countries in Transition. PhD thesis, Department of Planning and Landscape. Manchester: University of Manchester.
15. Cherp, A (2001a). Environmental assessment in countries in transition: Evolution in a changing context. Journal of Environmental Management, 62(4), 357-374.
16. Cherp, A (2001b). Environmental assessment legislation and practice in Eastern Europe and the former USSR. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 21, 335-361.
17. Cherp, A and N Lee (1997). Evolution of SER and OVOS in the Soviet Union and Russia (1985-1996). EIA Review, 17, 177-204.
18. Cojocaru, M (2001). Environmental Assessment and Environmental Audit in Moldova: The Formal Procedure and the Practice. MSc thesis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy. Budapest: Central European University.
19. Collingridge, D and C Reeve (1986). Science Speaks to Power: The Role of Experts in Policy Making. New York: St. Martin's Press.
20. EBRD, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (1994). Environmental Impact Assessment Legislation: Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovak Republic, Slovenia. London: Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff.
21. Emmelin, L (1998). Evaluating environmental impact assessment systems - Part 1: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research, 15, 129-148.
22. European Commission (2001). Guidance on EIA: EIS Review. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
23. Fischer, TB (2003). Strategic environmental assessment in post-modern times. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 23, 155-170.
24. Fülöp S (2003). E-mail to the author (A Cherp).
25. Galstyan, S (2002). Incorporation of Health Considerations into Environmental Impact Assessment: The Case of Armenia. MSc thesis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy. Budapest: Central European University.
26. Gillespie, B, D Eva et al. (1979). Carcinogenic risk assessment in the US and UK: The case of Aldrin/Dieldrin. Social Studies of Science, 9, 265-301.
27. Holm-Hansen, J (ed.) (1995). Environmental Impact Assessment in the Baltic Countries - The Case of Three Oil Terminals. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.
28. Hood, C (1976). The Limits of Administration. London: Wiley.
29. Jasper, J (1990). Nuclear Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
30. Jasper, JM (1992). Three Nuclear Energy Controversies. Newbury Park: Controversy.
31. Khusnutdinova, G (2003). Environmental Impact Assessment in Uzbekistan: Evolution, Current State, and Future Trends. MSc thesis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy. Budapest: Central European University.
32. Kichert, WJM, E-H Klein and JFM Koppenjan (eds.) (1997). Managing Complex Networks. London: Sage Publications.
33. Klijn, E-H (1997). Policy networks: An ovierview. In Managing Complex Networks, Walter Kickert et al. London: Sage Publications.
34. Kozova, M and C George (2000). Environmental impact assessment in the Slovak republic. In Environmental Assessment in Countries in Transition, E Bellinger, N Lee, C George and A Paduret. Budapest: CEU Press.
35. Latour, B (1987). Science in Action. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
36. Lee, N, R Colley, J Bonde and J Simpson (1999). Reviewing the Quality of Environmental Statements and Environmental Appraisals. Occasional Paper No. 55. Manchester: Department of Planning and Landscape, University of Manchester.
37. Lee, N and C George (2000). Case Studies of Environmental Assessment in Countries in Transition. Occasional Paper No. 58. Manchester: School of Planning, University of Manchester.
38. Leknes, E (2002). Theoretical perspectives on the evaluation of EIA. Nordic Seminar on Environmental Impact Assessment. Stockholm: Nordregio.
39. Mao, W-F and P Hills (2002). Impacts of the economic-political reform on environmental impact assessment implementation in China. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 2002(2), 101-111.
40. Mikulic, N, J Dusik, B Sadler and S Casey-Lefkowitz (eds.) (1998). Strategic Environmental Assessment in Transitional Countries: Emerging Practices. Budapest: Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe.
41. Mintrom, M and S Vergari (1996). Advocacy coalitions, policy entrepreneurs, and policy change. Policy Studies Journal, 24(3), 420-434.
42. Mondok, Z, E Magyar, Á Havas, E Tombácz and W Pfefferkorn (1998). Development of EIA Review and Control Methodologies. Budapest: Ministry for Environment and Regional Policy of Hungary.
43. NATO, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (2003). NATO Committee on the Challenges of the Modern Society. Pilot Projects. http://www.nato.int/ccms/pilot.htm. [27 October 2003].
44. Nelkin, D (1981). The Atom Besieged: Anti-Nuclear Movements in France and Germany. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
45. Nelkin, D (1987) Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
46. Nowotny, H (1987). A new branch of Science, Inc. In Science for Public Policy, pp 61-76. New York: Pergamon Press.
47. Pasoyan, M (1999). SEA in Armenia. MSc thesis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy. Budapest: Central European University.
48. Pavlickova, K, G Bianchi and V Rosova (1995). Public participation in the EIA process in the Slovak republic. Bratislava, Univerzita Komenskeho v Bratislave. 4-5.
49. Prokopets, M (2001). Environmental Assessment in Mining Industry in Russia. MSc thesis, Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy. Budapest: Central European University.
50. REC, Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (1998). Doors to Democracy: Current Trends and Practices in Public Participation in Environmental Decisionmaking in Central and Eastern Europe. Szentendre (Hungary): Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe.
51. REC, Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (2003). REC - Environmental Assessment. http://www.rec.org/REC/ Programs/EnvironmentalAssessment/Default.html. [27 October 2003].
52. Rein, M and D Schon (1996). Frame-critical policy analysis and frame-reflective policy practice. Knowledge and Policy, 9(1).
53. Richardson, J (ed.) (1982). Policy Styles in Western Europe. London: Allen and Unwin.
54. Richardson, JJ and AG Jordan (1979). Governing Under Pressure: The Policy Process in a Post-Parliamentary Democracy. Oxford: Martin Robertson.
55. Sabatier, P and HC Jenkins-Smith (1993). Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach. Boulder: Westview Press.
56. Taylor, S (1984). Making Bureaucracies Think: The Environmental Impact Statement Strategy of Administrative Reform. Stanford, California: Standford University Press.
57. Thérivel, R (1997). Strategic environmental assessment in Central Europe. Project Appraisal, 12(3), 151-160.
58. Vasilyev, S (1998). Ecological expertise: Ten years of practice. Ecological Messenger of Moscow, 9, 34-43.
59. Vignisdottir, E and K Benediktsson (2002). Heterogenous Networks in Environmental Assessment: Example from a Large-Scale Project in Iceland. Impact of Impact Assessment. The Hague, Netherlands: Annual Conference of the International Association for Impact Assessment
60. von Ritter, K and V Tsirkunov (2002). How Well is Environmental Assessment Working in Moscow Russia. Washington DC: World Bank.
61. Weiss, C (1991). Policy research as advocacy: Pro and con. Knowledge and Policy, 4(1-2), 37-55.
62. Wende, W (2002). Evaluation of the effectiveness and quality of environmental impact assessment in the Federal Republic of Germany. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 20(2), 93-99.
63. Wood, C (1995). Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review. Essex: Longman.
64. Wood, C, A Barker, C Jones and J Hughes (1996). Evaluation of the Performance of the EIA Process. Final Report, 1. Manchester: University of Manchester.
65. World Bank (2002). Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Systems in Europe and Central Asia Countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.