Year: 2012
Type: dissertation
Abstract: Ecological impact assessment focuses both on spatially bound biophysical environment and biodiversity as composition, structure, and key processes and on benefits of biodiversity gained through ecosystem services. It deals with allocation of space in complex situations characterised by uncertainty and conflicting values of actors. In the process of ecological impact assessment that forms part of environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA), the whole proposal of a project, plan, or programme; its targets; alternative options and their acceptability from a biodiversity standpoint; and knowledge of the biodiversity and ecosystem services it provides are shaped. The analyses in this thesis examine the current practices of Finnish ecological impact assessment with respect to its substantive and procedural features and the roles of actors. The analyses utilise qualitative and semi-quantitative data from EIA and Natura 2000 appropriate assessment reports, statements of environmental authorities, other data produced via assessment processes, and actors views related to ecological impact assessment. After analysis of the present shortcomings, constraints, and development needs, a tool taking into account fully current understanding and ecosystem services is developed to improve prevailing impact assessment practices. The results of the analyses demonstrate that the knowledge base for the comprehensive ecological impact assessment in EIA, Natura 2000 appropriate assessment, and municipal land-use planning SEA is far from adequate. Impact assessments fail to identify the biodiversity at stake, what is affected, and how, and, as a consequence, the selection of biodiversity elements for assessment is unsystematic, superficial, or focused on the most obvious strictly protected species. The connection between baseline studies and impact prediction is loose; consequently, the predictive value of baseline studies is low, preventing effective mitigation and monitoring. There is also a tendency toward unnecessary detail at the expense of a broader treatment of biodiversity that would address ecosystem processes, interactions, and trends. Substantive treatment of biodiversity is often restricted to compositional diversity and at the species and habitat type level. Finnish ecological impact assessment does not take into account the value-laden nature of impact assessment. It is baseline-oriented and often seen as external and parallel to the actual planning and decision-making. Scoping practices reflect this separateness by outsourcing important value-bound significance determinations to individual ecology consultants instead of considering them an integral part of the planning process. Cumulative effects are hardly ever considered in Finnish ecological impact assessment practices. The use of more sophisticated methods and tools than expert judgements and matrices is almost non-existent in Finnish ecological impact assessment practices, because of the planning environment lacking the time, resources, and skills for it. In addition, often a highly detailed treatment of biodiversity elements with complex tools is not necessary for achieving a holistic picture of the targets and impacts of an initiative. Therefore, an objective set for improvement in the knowledge grounding of ecological impact assessment has been the development of a relatively simple tool utilising already available data. Ecosystem services criteria and indicators were developed for target-setting, impact prediction, and monitoring, and these were tested in three processes of local master planning and regional planning. Timing constraints of data delivery; obstacles in data availability, quality, and consistency; and relative closeness of planning processes hampered the use of indicators, but the tool nonetheless was experienced as beneficial by the testing teams overall. The future challenges facing use of the tool involve its independent utilisation by planners without support from researchers on different planning scales, collaboration and commitment of actors in setting targets for ecosystem services, and versatile use of data. The other challenges in improvement of today s ecological impact assessment practices comprise finding a balance between broad-brush and detailed information individually for each planning situation; utilising, sharing, and mediating both knowledge within ecosystem-service-generating units and users and beneficiaries views of valued and prioritised ecosystem services; shifting from parallel linkage of impact assessment and planning towards planning- and decision-making-centred environmental assessment; supplying the necessary substantive and procedural requirements for ecological impact assessment in the EIA, nature conservation, and land-use and building legislation; placing stronger emphasis on scoping by strengthening the guiding role of authorities and reserving more time and resources for scoping by proponents and planners; generating specific cumulative impact assessment in EIA and SEA and improving that employed in Natura 2000 appropriate assessment by creating an iterative link; and fostering work-sharing between project- and plan/programme-level actors in identification of cumulative impacts.
Source: Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja
Author: Tarja Söderman
Language: English
Subfield: Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
Field: Environmental Science
Domain: Physical Sciences
SDG: Life on land
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W1490488543