Treatment of biodiversity issues in Finnish environmental impact assessment

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 87-99

  Söderman, Tarja ^a  

^a FINNISH ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Environmental impact assessment; Finland

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING; NATIONAL STRATEGY;

EASTERN HEMISPHERE; EURASIA; EUROPE; FINLAND; NORTHERN EUROPE; SCANDINAVIA; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE; WORLD;

EID: 22444438641     PISSN: 14615517     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/147154605781765634     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Act on Amendment to the Act on Environmental Impact Assessment procedure. 1999. Statutes of Finland 267/1999, Helsinki:Ministry of Justice.
2. Atkinson, S. F., 1985. “Habitat-based methods for biological impact assessment”. The Environmental Professional, 7:265–282.
3. Atkinson, S. F., Bhatia, S., Schoolmaster, F. S., and Waller, W. T., 2000. “Treatment of biodiversity impacts in a sample of US environmental impact statements”. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 18 (4):271–282.
4. Bagri, A., McNeely, J., and Vorshies, F., 1998. Biodiversity and Impact Assessment, Biodiversity Division and Economics Unit, International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), The World Conservation Union. available at http://iucn.org/themes/economics, last accessed 17 May 2005
5. Beanlands, G. E., and Duinker, P., 1983. An Ecological Framework for Environmental Impact Assessment in Canada, Halifax, Nova Scotia:Institute for Research and Environmental Studies.
6. Byron, H., 1999. Biodiversity and Environmental Impact Assessment of UK Road Schemes, Current Practice and Proposed Guidance, London:Imperial College. available at http://iucn.org/themes/economics, last accessed 17 May 2005
7. Canter, L. W., and Kamath, J., 1995. “Questionnaire checklist for cumulative impacts”. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 15:311–339.
8. CEC, Council of the European Communities. 1985. “Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects on certain public and private projects on the environment”. Official Journal, L 175 5 July
9. CEC, Council of the European Communities. 1992. “Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of the natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora”. Official Journal, L 206 22 July
10. CEC, Council of the European Communities. 1997. “Directive 97/11/EC amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment”. Official Journal, L 073 14 March
11. Cooper, T. A., and Canter, L. W., 1997. “Documentation of cumulative impacts in environmental impact statements”. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 17:385–411.
12. Cooper, L. M., and Sheate, W. R., 2002. “Cumulative effects assessment:a review of UK environmental impact statements”. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 22:425–439.
13. Decree on Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure (268/1999). 1999. Statutes of Finland 268/1999, Helsinki:Ministry of Justice.
14. Hirsch, A., 1993. “Improving consideration of biodiversity in NEPA assessments”. The Environmental Professional, 15:103–115.
15. Institute of Environmental Assessment. 1995. Guidelines for Baseline Ecological Assessment, London:E and FN Spon.
16. Joao, E., and Fonseca, A., 1996. Current use of Geographical Information Systems for Environmental Assessment:a discussion document, Department of Geography, London School of Economics. Research Papers in Environmental and Spatial Analysis no 36
17. Kalff, S. A., 1996. A Proposed Framework for Cumulative Effect Assessment in Canadian National Parks, Halifax:Parks Canada. Parks Canada Technical Report in Ecosystem Science no I
18. Nature Conservation Act. 1996. Statues of Finland 1096/1066, Helsinki:Ministry of Justice.
19. RSPB, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. 1995. Wildlife Impact — the Treatment of Nature Conservation in Environmental Assessment, Sandy, UK:The RSPB.
20. Ross, W. A., 1998. “Cumulative effects assessment:learning from Canadian case studies”. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 16 (4):267–276.
21. Southerland, M. T., 1995. “Conserving biodiversity in highway development projects”. The Environmental Professional, 17:226–242.
22. Thompson, S., Treweek, J. R., and Thurling, D. J., 1997. “The ecological component of environmental impact assessment:a critical review of British environmental statements”. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 40 (2):157–171.
23. Treweek, J. R., Thompson, S., Veitch, N., and Japp, J., 1993. “Ecological assessment of proposed road developments:a review of environmental statements”. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 36 (3):295–307.
24. Treweek, J., 1995. “Ecological impact assessment”. Impact Assessment, 13:289–315.
25. Treweek, J., 1999. Ecological Impact Assessment, Oxford:Blackwell Science.
26. United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. 1992. available at http://biodiv.org, last accessed 17 May 2005