The contribution of capacities and context to EIA system performance and effectiveness in developing countries: Towards a better understanding

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 271-282

  Kolhoff, Arend J ^a   Runhaar, Hens A C ^b   Driessen, Peter P J ^b  

^a Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Analytical framework; Capacities; Context; Eia system; Performance

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DECISION MAKING; DEVELOPING WORLD; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; MODELING; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; STAKEHOLDER; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

EID: 74849120057     PISSN: 14615517     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/146155109X479459     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Ahmad, B and C Wood 2002. A comparative evaluation of the EIA systems in Egypt, Turkey and Tunisia. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 22, 213-234.
2. Ahammed, R and N Harvey 2004. Evaluation of environmental impact assessment procedures and practice in Bangladesh. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22, 63-78.
3. Alemagi, D, VA Sondo and J Ertel 2007. Constraints to environmental impact assessment practice: A case study of Cameroun. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 9, 357-380.
4. Ali, OMM 2007. Policy and institutional reforms for an effective EIA system in Sudan. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 9, 67-82.
5. Androulakis, I and I Karakassis 2006. Evaluation of the EIA system performance in Greece, using quality indicators. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 26, 242-256.
6. Annendale, D 2001. Developing and evaluating environmental impact assessment systems for small developing countries. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 19(3), 187-193.
7. Appiah-Opuko, S 2001.EIA in developing countries: the case of Ghana. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 21, 59-71.
8. Barker, A and C Wood 1999. An evaluation of EIA system performance in eight EU countries. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 19, 387-404.
9. Baser, H and P Morgan 2008. Capacity, Change and Performance Study Report (Discussion Paper, 59B). Maastricht: European Centre for Development Policy Management.
10. Botetzagias, I 2008. The environmental impact assessment and auditing process in Greece: evidence from the prefectural level. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 26, 115-125.
11. Caldwell, LK 1989. Understanding impact analysis: technical process, administration reform, policy principle. In: Policy through impact assessment, ed. R V Bartlett. New York: Greenwood Press.
12. CENN 2004a. Assessment of Effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) System in the South Caucasus States: Georgia.
13. CENN 2004b. Assessment of Effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) System in the South Caucasus States: Armenia.
14. CENN 2004c. Assessment of Effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) System in the South Caucasus States: Azerbaijan.
15. Cherp, A 2001. EA legislation and practice in Central and Eastern Europe and the former USSR: a comparative analysis. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 21, 335-362.
16. Cherp, A and A Antypas 2003. Dealing with continuous reform: towards adaptive EA policy systems in countries in transition. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 5, 455-476.
17. Cherp, A and S Golubeva 2004. Environmental assessment in the Russian Federation: evolution through capacity building. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22, 121-130.
18. Christensen, P, L Kornov and E H Nielsen 2003. The outcome of EIA, European Commission, DGXI.
19. Doelle, M and AJ Sinclair 2006. Time for a new approach to public participation in EA: Promoting cooperation and consensus for sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 26, 185-205.
20. El-Fadel, M, M Zeinati and D Jamali 2000. Framework for environmental impact assessment in Lebanon. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20, 579-604.
21. El-Fadl, K and M El-Fadel 2004. Comparative assessment of EIA systems in MENA countries: challenges and prospects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, 553-593.
22. Erickson, PA 1994. A practical guide to environmental impact assessment. San Diego. Academic Press.
23. Emmelin, L 1998a. Evaluating environmental impact assessment systems part 1: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research, 15, 129-148.
24. Emmelin, L 1998b. Evaluating Nordic environmental impact assessment part 2: Professional culture as an aid in understanding implementation. Scandinavian Housing and planning research, 15, 187-209.
25. Espinoza, G and V Alzina (eds) 2001. Review of Environmental Impact Assessment in Selected Countries of Latin America and the Caribbean; Methodology, Results and Trends. InterAmerican Development bank; Centre for development studies.
26. Gibson, RB 2002. From Wreck Cove to Voisey's Bay: the evolution of federal environmental assessment in Canada. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 20, 151-159.
27. Glasson, J, R Therivel, J Weston, E Wilson and R Frost 1996. Changes in the Quality of Environmental Statements for Planning Projects. London. HSMO.
28. Glasson, J and NNB Salvador 2000. EIA in Brazil: a procedure practice gap. A comparative study with reference to the European Union and especially the UK. Environmental Assessment Review, 20, 191-225.
29. Kakonge, J O 1996. Problems with public participation in EIA process: Examples from sub-Saharan Africa. Impact Assessment, 14, 309-320.
30. Khusnutdinova, G 2004. Environmental impact assessment in Uzbekistan. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22, 167-172.
31. Lusthaus, C et al 2002. Organisational Assessment. A Framework for Improving Performance. Inter-American Development Bank, Washington and International Research Centre, Ottawa.
32. Mao, W and P Hills 2002. Impacts of the economic-political reform on environmental impact assessment implementation in China. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 20, 101-111.
33. Meredith, T 1991. Environmental impact assessment and monitoring. In Resource Management and Development, ed. B Mitchell Toronto: Oxford University Press, 224-245.
34. Mokhehle, L and R Diab 2001. Evolution of environmental impact assessment in a small developing country: a review of Lesotho case studies from 1980 to 1999. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 19, 9-18.
35. Mostert, E 1995. Commissions for Environmental Impact Assessment, their contribution to the effectiveness of environmental impact assessment. Delft.
36. Nooteboom, S 2007. Impact assessment procedures for sustainable development: A complexity theory perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27, 645-665.
37. Ogunba, O A 2004. EIA systems in Nigeria: evolution, current practise and shortcomings. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, 643-660.
38. Purnama, D 2003. Reform of the EIA process in Indonesia: improving the role of public involvement. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 23, 415-439.
39. Ramjeawon, T and R Beedassy 2004. Evaluation of the EIA system on the Island of Mauritius and development of an environmental monitoring plan framework. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, 537-549.
40. Sadler, B 1996. International Study on Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment: Final Report Environmental Assessment in a Changing World: Evaluating Practice to Improve Performance. International Association for Impact Assessment, Ottawa.
41. Smith, LG 1993. Impact Assessment and Sustainable Resource Management. Harlow: Longman Scientific.
42. Taylor, S 1984. Making Bureaucracies Think: The Environmental Impact Assessment Strategy of Administrative Reform. Stanford University Press, Stanford.
43. Ten Heuvelhof, E and C Nauta 1997. Environmental impact: the effects of environmental impact assessment in the Netherlands. Project Appraisal, 12, 25-30.
44. Therivel, R, E Wilson, S Thompson, D Healey and D Pritchard 1992. Strategic Environmental Assessment. London: Earthscape.
45. UNDP 2007. Capacity Assessment Practice Note. New York, United Nations.
46. UNEP 2004. Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment: Towards an Integrated Approach. Geneva, United Nations.
47. Van Loon, L 2008. Capacity Development for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in Yemen. Master's Thesis, University of Utrecht.
48. Van de Riet, O 2003. Policy Analysis in Multi-actor Policy Settings. Delft, Eburon.
49. Vecchio, RP 1995. Organisational Behaviour. Orlando: Harcourt Brace.
50. 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, 93-99.
51. Wiesner, D 1995. EIA. The Environmental Impact Assessment Process. What it is. Dorset, UK: Prism Press.
52. Wood, C 1995. Environmental Impact Assessment. A Comparative Review. Harlow: Prentice Hall,
53. Wood, C 2003. Environmental Impact Assessment. A Comparative Review, 2nd edn. Harlow: Prentice Hall.
54. World Bank 2006. Environmental Impact Assessment, Regulations and Strategic Environmental Assessment Requirements. Practices and lessons learned in east and southeast asia. Environmental and social development. Safeguard dissemination note no. 2. Washington DC, World Bank.
55. World Bank 2006. Safeguards diagnostic review for piloting the use of Ghanaian systems to address environmental safeguard issues in the proposed world bank-assisted Ghana energy development and access project. Equivalence and acceptability report, December, 2006.
56. World Bank 2007. Ghana Country Environmental Analysis. World Bank 2008. Using Training to Build Capacity for Development.
57. World Commission on Environment and Development 1987. Our Common Future. New York: Oxford University Press.
58. www.cbd.int Convention on biological diversity.
59. www.unece.org/env/eia/ Convention on EIA in a trans-boundary context (Espoo convention).
60. www.unece.org/env/pp Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters.