A potential role for EIA in finnish forest planning: Learning from experiences in Ontario, Canada

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 99-108

  Hanna, Kevin S ^a   Pölönen, Ismo ^b   Raitio, Kaisa ^b  

^a WILFRID LAURIER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

Author keywords

Canada; Class assessment; EIA law; Eia legislation; Environmental impact assessment; Finland; Forest planning; Integrated resource management; Ontario

Indexed keywords

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; FOREST MANAGEMENT; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK;

CANADA; FINLAND; ONTARIO [CANADA];

EID: 79957814729     PISSN: 14615517     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/146155111X12913679730359     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Bonnell, S 2003. Environmental assessment of forestry in Canada. Forestry Chronicle, 79(6),1067-1070.
2. Bullock, R and K S Hanna 2008. Community forests: mitigating or creating conflict in British Columbia forest management. Society and Natural Resources, 21, 77-85.
3. Cassidy, P 1994. Ontario's timber management Class Environmental Assessment: two perspectives (first perspective). Resources: the Newsletter of the Canadian Institute of Environment and Law, 47, 1-4.
4. Christy, L C, C E Di Leva, J M Lindsay and P T Takoukam 2007. Forest Law and Sustainable Development. Addressing Contemporary Challenges Through Legal Reform. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
5. Duffy, P 2004. Agriculture, forestry and fisheries: the orphans of environmental impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22(3), 175-176.
6. EAB, Environmental Assessment Board (Ontario) 1994. Reasons for Decision and Decision: Class Environmental Assessment by the Ministry of Natural Resources for Timber Management on Crown Lands in Ontario. Toronto: Environmental Assessment Board.
7. Finnish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2006.
8. Gachechiladze, M, B Noble and B Bitter 2009. Following-up in strategic environmental assessment: a case study of 20-year forest management planning in Saskatchewan, Canada. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27(1), 45-56.
9. Graci, S 2009. The Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. In Environmental Impact Assessment, Practice and Participation, ed. K S Hanna. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
10. Hanna K S 2010. Transition and the need for innovation in Canada's forest sector. In Resource and Environmental Management in Canada: Addressing Conflict and Uncertainty, ed. B Mitchell. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
11. Hellström, E 2001. Conflict Cultures - Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Environmental Conflicts in Forestry. The Finnish Society of Forest Science, Helsinki, Silva Fennica, Monographs 2.
12. Hiltunen, V (ed.) 1998. Kainuun luonnonvarasuunnitelma. Metsahallituksen metsatalouden julkaisuja 8. Vantaa.
13. Hiltunen, V and M Väisänen (eds) 2004. Kainuun alueen l uonnonvarasuunnitelma kausi 2002-2011. Metsahallituksen metsatalouden julkaisuja 50. Helsinki.
14. Hoberg, G 2000. How the way we make policy governs the policy we make. In Forging Truces in the War in the Woods: Sustaining the Forests of the Pacific Northwest, ed. D Alper and D Salazar. Vancouver: UBC Press.
15. Howlett, M 2001. Canadian Forest Policy. Adapting to Change. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
16. Käyhkö, U-R, I Pölönen and E Grönlund 2007. YVA-menettelyn soveltaminen yksittäistapauksissa. Soveltamisratkaisujen laatu ja yhtenäisyys 1994-2006. Suomen ympäristö 18/2007.
17. Kellar D and K S Hanna 2009. Harmonization and efficacy: what does the 2010 Winter Olympics tell us about environmental impact assessment in Canada? In Environmental Impact Assessment, Practice and Participation, ed. K S Hanna. Oxford and Toronto: Oxford University Press.
18. Kiviniemi, M 2004. Metsäoikeus. Kolmas painos. Hämeenlinna: Metsälehti kustannus.
19. Kokko, K T 2009. A legal method and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of regulation: safeguarding forest biodiversity in Finland. Nordic Environmental Law Journal, 2009, 57-78.
20. Leskinen, L 2004. Purposes and challenges of public participation in regional and local forestry in Finland. Forest Policy and Economics, 6, 605-618.
21. Lindgren, R 1994. Ontario's timber management Class Environmental Assessment: two perspectives (second perspective). Resources: the Newsletter of the Canadian Institute of Environment and Law, 47, 1-4.
22. MNR, Ministry of Natural Resources 2008. Five-Year Environmental Assessment Report, 2003-2008. Toronto: Ministry of Natural Resources.
23. Morrow, K 2005. Public participation in the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment - Directive 2001/42/EC, the UN/ECE Espoo Convention, and the Kiev Protocol. The Yearbook of Environmental Law, 23(3), 49-84.
24. Noble, B F 2004. Integrating strategic environmental assessment with industry planning: a case study of the Pasquai-Porcupine forest management plan, Saskatchewan, Canada. Environmental Management, 33(3), 401-411.
25. Ontario (Ministry of Natural Resources) 2010b. Ontario's Forests, Forest Facts. Toronto: Ministry of Natural Resources.
26. Ontario (Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry) 2010a. Ontario's Forest Industry, Fact Sheet. Toronto: Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry.
27. Pappila, M 2008. Metsäsertifiointi - itsesääntelyä vai markkinointia? Ympäristöpolitiikan ja -oikeuden vuosikirja II. Saarijärvi, pp. 205-161.
28. Pölönen, I 2007. Ympäristövaikutusten arviointimenettely. Tutkimus YVA-menettelyn oikeudellisesta asemasta ja kehittämistarpeista ympäristöllisen vaikuttavuuden näkökulmasta. Suomalaisen Lakimiesyhdistyksen julkaisuja. A-sarja N:o 280. Jyväskylä.
29. Pölönen, I, P Hokkanen and K Jalava 2011. The effectiveness of the Finnish EIA system - What works, what doesńt, and what could be improved? Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31, 120-128.
30. Primmer, E and S Kyllönen 2006. Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme. Forest Policy & Economics, 8, 838-853.
31. Pykälä, J 2007. Implementation of Forest Act in Finland: does it protect the right habitats for threatened species? Forest Ecology and Management, 242, 281-287.
32. Raitio, K 2008. 'You Can't Please Everyone' - Conflict Management Practices, Frames, and Institutions in Finnish State Forests. University of Joensuu, Publications in Social Sciences 86.
33. Rusk, J R, S C R Granchinho and R W Barry 2009. Impact assessment in Nunavut. In Environmental Impact Assessment, Practice and Participation, ed. K S Hanna. Oxford and Toronto: Oxford University Press.
34. Sadler, B 1996. Environmental Assessment in a Changing World: Evaluating Practice to Improve Performance. Final Report. International Study of the Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. Ottawa: International Association for Impact Assessment.
35. Salazar, D J, K Alper and K Donald K (eds) 2000. Sustaining the Forests of the Pacific Coast. Forging the Truces in the War in the Woods. Vancouver: UBC Press.
36. Salila, J 2005. Metsäalueen oikeudellisesta asemasta. Suomalaisen lakimiesyhdistyksen julkaisuja. A-sarja N:o 266. Vammala.
37. Sandström, O, I Vaara, P Heikkuri, M Jokinen, T Kokkoniemi, J Liimatainen, T Loikkanen, M Mela, O Osmonen, J Salmi, M Seppänen, A Siekkinen, J Sihvo, J Tolonen, O Tuohisaari, T Tynys, M Vaara and P Veijola 2000. Ylä-Lapin luonnonvarasuunnitelma. Metsähallituksen metsätalouden julkaisuja 38. Vantaa.
38. Scarr, T A and A A Hopkin 2001. Recent policy initiatives in Ontario and their implications for forest health. In Proceedings of the North American Forest Insect Work Conference. Boreal Odyssey Inf. Rep. NOR-X-381, ed. J R Spence and E M Lefebvre. Edmonton, Alberta: Canadian Forest Service, Northern Forest Centre.
39. Sihvo, J, K Gröndahl, E Stolt, T Tuovinen and J Salmi 2006. Ylä-Lapin luonnonvarasuunnitelma. Kausi 2006-2010. Metsähallitus, Vantaa.
40. Similä, J and K Kokko 2009. Oikeudellinen sääntely ja metsäluonnon monimuotoisuus. Ympäristöpolitiikan ja -oikeuden vuosikirja 2009, pp. 69-129.
41. Slocombe, S D and K Hanna 2007 Integration in resource and environmental management. In Integrated Resource and Environmental Management: Concepts and Practice, ed. K S Hanna and D S Slocombe. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
42. Sinclair, A J and M Doelle 2003. Using law as a tool to ensure meaningful public participation in environmental assessment. Journal of Environmental Law and Practice, 12, 27-53.
43. Tapion taskukirja 2002. 24. uudistettu painos. Jyväskylä.
44. Tikkanen, J 2006. Osapuolten välinen yhteistyö yksityismetsien suunnittelussa. Metsäsuunnittelu ja ekonomia, Metsätieteellinen tiedekunta. Dissertationes Forestales 26.
45. Tikkanen, J and M Kurttila 2007. Participatory and Regional Approach in Forest Planning. Present State and an Ideal Model for Private Land in Finland. Reports of Finnish Environmental Institute 26/2007, pp. 112-122.
46. Valkeapää, A, R Paloniemi, A Vainio, K Vehkalahti, K Helkama, H Karppinen, J Kuuluvainen, A Ojala, T Rantala and M Rekola 2009. Suomen metsät ja metsäpolitiikka - kansalaisten näkemyksiä. University of Helsinki. Department of Forest Economics. Reports 55.
47. Wiklund, H 2005. In search of arenas for democratic deliberation: a Habermasian review of environmental assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 23(4), 281-292.
48. Wood, C 2003. Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review, second edition. Harlow: Pearson.