423908
Beschreibung
Karteikarten von Chantelle Lin, aktualisiert more than 1 year ago
|
Erstellt von Chantelle Lin
vor fast 11 Jahre
|
|
| Frage | Antworten |
| EA definition | systematic process of determining and managing the potential and real impacts of proposed and existing human activities on the environment |
| how has EA evolved | from being voluntary and discretionary to being more mandatory |
| stages in evolution of EA | Stage 1: reactive pollution control for locally id'd problems, technical solutions, closed negotiations. Stage 2: proactive impact id and mitigation through relatively formal impact assessment and project licensing but focussed on biophysical concerns with no serious public role 3) integration of broader envmtl considerations in project selection and planning but in context of indv activities. consideration of a full range of factors incl cultural, historical etc, examination of alternatives, public reviews. 4) integrated planning and decision-making for sustainability, addressing policies and programs and projects and cumulative local, regional, and global effects with decision processes that empower public, recognize uncertainty, favour precaution |
| key elements of best practice ea | 1) legislative foundation to establish ea as mandatory and enforceable that provides clarity, certainty, fairness and consistency 2) broad definition of envmt and process that sets out reqs to ensure ea is applied to all envmtlly sig undertakings 3) process aimed at iding best option rather than just acceptable proposals, reqing critical examination of purposes, comparative evaluation of alts to proposal, alt means of undertaking proposal 4) limits ministerial discretion 5)open and fair process provides sig role for public and contains provisions related to public notice, comment, access to info, participant funding, 6) enforceable terms and conditions for approval of proposal 7)addresses monitoring and post-approval follow-up 8)provisions for linking assessment work into lger context incl overall biophys and socio-econ impacts |
| ea as opening up political decision-making process | public participation, process decision, scoping, alts analysis, baseline analysis/proposal characteristics/mitigation opts; impact analysis/impact sigificance/mitigation analysis; report prep and submission; review and final decision; follow-up and monitoring |
| Cdn EA Act | 95- fed ea. assessment can involve screening lvl assessment, comprehensive study, panel review, or mediation |
| is an ea req'd | based on definition of project (phys works), def of fed authorities (incl minister, agency, other body responsible to minister, dept, any other body prescribed- become Responsible Authorities), list of fed decisions in section 5 of ea (1) decisions in which fed authority is proponent of project, 2) decisions to financially support project 3)decisions to grant interest in fed land to project 4) fed 'regulatory decisions) |
| mandatory steps in screening process | public notice of commencement of assessment, determination of scope, prep of screening report, final project decision |
| comprehensive study | 5-10/yr. form of self-assessment. hybrid btwn screening and panel review. incl public engagement at scoping stage, during prep of report, and before project decision |
| Victor Diamond Mine Comprehensive Envmtl Assessment, ON | scoping- some FN groups scoped out, inadequate social assessment |
| panel reviews | 1-5/yr ex Mackenzie Valley pipeline, LNG, resource extraction. important process decisions made by minister. implementation of process through independent panel |
| key responsibilities of panel | ensure req'd info is obtained and made available to public; hold hearings in a manner that offers the public an opportunity to participate in the assessment; prepare a report (conclusions, recommendations, summary of public's comments); submit report |
| mediation | decision to use mediation lies with minister of envmt. rarely used. interested parties must be id'd and willing to participate |
| Exclusion List Regulation Ammendments, Infrastructur Projects Envmtl Assessment Adaptation Regulation | 2009- excludes many projects from govt's infrastructure plan from EA. adaptation regulation removes possibility of bumping up assessments , eliminates some public consultation, authorizes fed EA in lieu of prov EA |
| Manitoba EA | list of projects that trigger EA, flexibility in terms of process options, discretion. sustainable dvlpmnt. triggered when any person wishes to construct, alter, operate or set into operation a class 1 2 or 3 dvlpmnt |
| class 1,2 or 3 dvlpmnt (Manitoba EA) | 1- discharge pollutants. 2- effects unrelated to pollution or in addition, 3- effects of such a magnitude or which generate such a number of envmtl issues that it is an exceptional project |
| Nunavut Impact Review Board | territorial ea. aboriginals play stronger role |
| ea process challenges | discretion, effective vs efficient (ex baseline data, consideration of alternatives), relationship btwn ea and regulatory processes (regulatory approvals vs planning implications), public participation (lack of shared decision making, lack of participation at normative and strategic levels) |
| 6 major problems with cumulative effects assessment | application of ce at project lvl; focus on project approval vs sustainability assessment; lack of understanding of ecological impact thresholds; separation of ce from project-specific impacts; weak interpretation of ce; inappropriate handling of potential future dvlpmnt |
| sustainability assessment | integrating sustainability concepts into decisionmaking. |
| diff btwn sa and ea | sa has greater breadth of coverage and integration of concerns than ea's tradition emphasis on biophysical envmt. incl social, econ, biophys, interconnections and interdependencies. integrative |
| strategic env assessmnt (sea) | formalized, systemic, comprehensive process of evaluating envmtl impacts of a policy, plan, or program and alts. ea that goes beyond project to consider industry sector, region or policy, plan or program. |
| barriers to sea | lack of political will, lock of understanding of role in decision-making, challenges in engaging public, lack of approaches and methodologies, financial constraints,lack of agreement about need and benefits, problems finding govt authority to coordinate and take responsibility |
| when is sea expected | whenever proposal that may result in important evmntl effects is submitted to minister or cabinet for approval |
| community-based ea | smaller, community-based projects that utilize natl resources for livelihood |
| reasons for cbea | cost effective, efficient, ensures projects are assessed, local capacity for participation |
| multi-jurisdictional assessment | interjurisdictional coordination of assessment |
| multi-jurisdictional assessment goals | standardization (devising one common ea practice)(v difficult), harmonization (reqs of all applicable legislation met through one process- bilateral agreements, project-specific agreements), substitution |
Möchten Sie mit GoConqr kostenlos Ihre eigenen Karteikarten erstellen? Mehr erfahren.