Quality of an environmental impact statement, through the application of the Lee & Colley analysis method
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22567/rep.v12i1.857Keywords:
environmental impact, environmental impact assessment, quality review, environmental impact statementAbstract
Projects, activities or undertakings, causing a significant environmental impact, must be licensed through the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), which is linked to the presentation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). One criticism of the EIA has been its low quality. The objective of the work is to evaluate the quality of an Environmental Impact Statement, through the application of the Lee & Colley evaluation method. From the application of this method, grade E was obtained for this EIA, characterizing it as unsatisfactory, with omissions and significant inadequate points. Lee & Colley's analysis presents a total of 73 analysis criteria, including 4 areas, 17 categories and 52 subcategories. Of this total, 73 analytical items (criteria), 24 (about 33%) received grade D, 22 (30%) obtained grade E, 6 (8%) had grade F. With this, 71% of the items of the assessed EIA were considered inadequate. From this work, it was possible to show that the evaluated EIA does not present satisfactory quality, making the process of environmental licensing and decision-making about the socio-environmental viability of the enterprise in question difficult.
References
Agra Filho, S. S. (2014). Planejamento e Gestão Ambiental no Brasil: os instrumentos da política nacional de meio ambiente. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier.
Almeida, M. R. R., Alvarenga, M. I. N. & Cespedes, J. G. (2014). Avaliação da qualidade de estudos ambientais em processos de licenciamento. Revista Geociências, 33(1), 106-118.
Almeida, M. R. R., Malfará, D. T., Mendes, N. C., Moraes, M. C. P., Souza, M. P. & Montaño, M. (2012). Aplicação e métodos para a revisão da qualidade de impacto ambiental. Revista de Gestão Ambiental e Sustentabilidade, 1(1),1-28.
Anifowose, B., Lawler, D. M., Van der Horst, D.& Chapman, L. (2016). A systematic quality assessment of Environmental Impact Statements in the oil and gas industry. Science of the Total Environment, 572, 570-585.
Attanasio Junior, M. R. (2015). Direito Ambiental Interdisciplinar: para estudantes e profissionais da área de ciência e tecnologia. Campinas: Millenium Editora.
Aung, T. S., Shengji, L. & Condon, S. (2018). Evaluation of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) of Chinese EIA in Myanmar: Myitsone Dam, the Lappadaung Copper Mine and the Sino-Myanmar oil and gas pipelines. Impact Assessment And Project Appraisal, 37(1), 71-85.
Badr, E. A., Zahran, A. A. & Cashmore, M. (2011). Benchmarking performance: Environmental impact statements in Egypt. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31(3), 279-285.
Bertuola, H. T. & Candiani, G. (2018). Métodos para avaliação retrospectiva da qualidade de um estudo de impacto ambiental. Revista Ibero-Americana de Ciências Ambientais, 9(8), 282-298.
Bond, A., Retief, F., Cave, B., Fundingsland, M., Duinker, P. N., Verheem, R. & Brown, A. L. (2018). A contribution to the conceptualisation of quality in impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 68(1), 49-58.
Brasil. Resolução Conama nº 1 (1986). Estabelece definições, responsabilidades, critérios básicos e as diretrizes gerais para uso e implementação da avaliação de impacto ambiental.
Bronz, D. (2016). Nos bastidores do licenciamento ambiental: uma etnografia das práticas empresariais em grandes empreendimentos. Rio de Janeiro: Contracapa.
Campagnaro, V. H., Farias, L. A. & Candiani, G. (2021). Socio-environmental conflicts: a study on the Logistic Center in Paranapiacaba and involved social representations. Ambiente & Sociedade. São Paulo, 24(1),1-21.
Caro-Gonzalez, A. L, Toro, J. & Zamorano, M. (2021). Effectiveness of environmental impact statement methods: A Colombian case study. Journal of Environmental Management, 300(1).
Cetesb - Companhia Ambiental do Estado de São Paulo (2014). Manual para Elaboração de Estudos para o Licenciamento com Avaliação de Impacto Ambiental. Decisão de Diretoria nº 217.
Colantuono, A. C. S & Cestaro, N. G. (2017). Paranapiacaba: dinâmica econômica em função de seus eventos. Revista Grifos, 42(1), 130-163.
CPEA – Consultoria, Planejamento e Estudos Ambientais Ltda. (2017a). Estudo de Impacto Ambiental – EIA, Centro Logístico Campo Grande.
CPEA – Consultoria, Planejamento e Estudos Ambientais Ltda. (2017b). Relatório de Impacto Ambiental – RIMA, Centro Logístico Campo Grande.
Cremonez, F. E, Cremonez, P. A, Feroldi, M., Camargo, M. P, Klajn, F. F & Feiden, A. (2014). Avaliação de impacto ambiental: metodologias aplicadas no Brasil. Revista Monografias Ambientais – REMOA, 13(5), 3821-3830.
Fernández, G. M. R., Brito, L. L. A. & Fonseca, A. (2018). Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of Information in environmental impact statements. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 73, 114-121.
Figueiredo, V. G. B. (2011). Paranapiacaba: um caso de preservação sustentável da paisagem cultural. Revista Labor & Engenho, 5(3), 61-84.
Glasson, J., Therivel, R. & Chadwick, A. (1999). Introduction to environmental impact assessment. London: UCL Press.
Hickie, D. & Wade, M. (1998). Development of guidelines for improving the effectiveness of environmental assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 18(1), 267-287.
Hourdequin, M., Landres, P., Hanson, M. J. & Craig, D. R. (2012). Ethical implications of democratic theory for U.S. public participation in environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 35(1), 37-44.
Lee, N., Colley, R., Bonde, J. & Simpson, J. (1999). Reviewing the quality of environmental statements. Department of Planning and Landscape, University of Manchester, Occasional Paper, 55, 1-72.
Montaño, M., Carvalho, A. F., Gomes, C. S., Polaz, C. N. M., Jordão, C. O. & Souza, M. P. (2014). Revisão da qualidade de estudos de impacto ambiental de pequenas centrais hidrelétricas. Holos Environment, 14(1), 1-14.
MPF - Ministério Público Federal (2004). Deficiências em Estudos de Impacto Ambiental: síntese de uma experiência. Brasília: 4ª Câmara de Coordenação e Revisão, Escola Superior do Ministério Público da União.
Nakwaya-Jacobus, D. N., Hipondoka, M., Angombe, S., Stringer, L. C. & Dougill, A. J. (2021). Evaluating the performance and procedural effectiveness of Namibia’s Environmental Impact Assessment system. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 91(1).
Nita, A., Fineran, S. & Rozylowicz, L. (2022). Researchers perspective on the main strengths and weaknesses of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedures. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 92(1).
Pinho, P., Maia, R. & Monterroso, A. (2007). The quality of Portuguese environmental impact studies: the case of small hydropower projects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27(1), 189-205.
Põder, T. & Lukki, T. (2012). A critical review of checklist-based evaluation of environmental impact statements. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 29(1), 27-36.
Ribeiro, A. L. G. & Almeida, M. R. R. (2019). Proposta de um Roteiro Geral para Elaboração e Verificação da Qualidade do Estudo de Impacto Ambiental (EIA). Revista Brasileira de Geografia Física, 11(6), 2173-2185.
Sánchez, L. E. (2013). Avaliação de Impacto Ambiental: conceitos e métodos. São Paulo: Oficina de Textos.
Sandham, L. A., Van Heerden, A. J., Jones, C. E., Retief, F. P. & Morrison-Saunders, A. N. (2013). Does enhanced regulation improve EIA report quality? Lessons from South Africa. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 38, 155-162.
Sarmah, P., Nema, A. K. & Sarmah, R. (2020). An approach to determine the quality of EIA reports of hydropower plants using analytic network process and fuzzy logic toolbox. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 85, 1-10.
Tang, Z., Bright, E. & Brody, S. (2009). Evaluating California local land use plan's environmental impact reports. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29(1), 96-106.
Veronez, F. & Montaño, M. (2017). Análise da qualidade dos estudos de impacto no estado do Espírito Santo (2007-2013). Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, 43(1), 6-21.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Revista Eniac Pesquisa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
