1 / 8

A Comparative Analysis of EIA Systems in Latin America

This analysis examines the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) systems of twenty Latin American countries compared to the United States. It highlights differences in the nature, conception, and roles of EIA, as well as procedures such as scoping, public participation, and monitoring. The findings reveal varying approaches to EIA preparation, screening, scoping, alternatives analysis, and evaluation, emphasizing the differences in stakeholder engagement and decision-making influence. The study underscores the significance of EIA as a pivotal environmental management tool across Latin America.

rosborn
Download Presentation

A Comparative Analysis of EIA Systems in Latin America

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Comparative Analysis of EIA Systems in Latin America Ernesto Sánchez Triana and Santiago Enríquez 27th Annual Conference of IAIA Seoul, Korea 3-9 June, 2007

  2. Overview • The analysis aims to compare the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Systems adopted by twenty Latin American countries, focusing both on differences among countries in the region and with the United States. • Argentina - Belize - Bolivia - Brazil - Chile - • Colombia - Costa Rica - Dominican Republic - Ecuador - • El Salvador - Guatemala - Guyana - Honduras - Mexico - • Nicaragua - Panama - Paraguay - Peru - Uruguay - Venezuela - • Sources for the analysis consist mainly of federal EIA laws and regulations currently in place.

  3. Findings • EIA has a different nature in Latin America (LA) and in the US: • In the US, EIA is used open up decision-making to public scrutiny. • In Latin America, EIA is used as the main environmental management tool, in environmental management plans. • Differences in the conception of EIA translate into differences in the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders, as well as on the influence of EIA on the decision-making process.

  4. Findings (2) • Selection of EIA Preparers • Developers are responsible for hiring the consultant. The consultant is not hired most of the time to overcome potential objections to the project. • Screening • Based on restrictive lists, positive and negative lists.

  5. Findings (3) • Scoping • Ecuador, Guyana, and Honduras have a formal open scoping process. In most countries, scope of the EIS is decided by authority or developer, based on laws or regulations. • Public Participation • Consultations are mostly informative and rarely engage stakeholders in meaningful discussions.

  6. Findings (4) • Alternatives • Analysis of Alternatives is used to justify why the developer’s choice was selected over other viable alternatives. • Evaluation of EIA • Developer is responsible for compliance with EIA legislation. The authority evaluates whether EIA is adequate, usually based on discretionary criteria.

  7. Findings (5) • Monitoring and Follow-up • Authorities rarely monitor the action’s impacts and compliance with operating conditions after the authorization has been issued.

  8. Conclusions • Most LA countries conceive EIA as an environmental management tool to address the environmental impacts of all types of projects and activities. • The difference in the nature of EIA has implications in terms of how the different stages of the process are conceptualized, and in the roles and responsibilities of authorities, developers, communities, and other stakeholders.

More Related