Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

Korean Society of Environmental Impact Assessment (한국환경영향평가학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluating Implementation Rate of Wildlife Mitigation Measures in the Environmental Impact Assessment

환경영향평가에서 동물상 영향 저감방안 이행현황 평가 - 도시 및 도로 개발사업을 중심으로 -

  • Ji-Hoon, Lee (Department of Landscape Architecture, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Eun-Sub, Kim (Interdisciplinary program in Landscape Architecture, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yong-Won, Mo (Department of Landscape Architecture, Yeungnam University) ;
  • Dong-Kun, Lee (Department of Landscape Architecture and Rural System Engineering, Seoul National University)
  • 이지훈 (영남대학교 생명응용과학대학 조경학과) ;
  • 김은섭 (서울대학교 협동과정 조경학) ;
  • 모용원 (영남대학교 생명응용과학대학 조경학과) ;
  • 이동근 (서울대학교 농업생명과학대학 조경.지역시스템공학부)
  • Received : 2022.05.30
  • Accepted : 2022.11.28
  • Published : 2022.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

It is essential to increase the implementation rate in order to increase the effectiveness of mitigation measures that can mitigate the negative impact of development projects. In the case of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA),research on the implementation evaluation of development projects is insufficient, even though the effectiveness of mitigation measures has been steadily raised. Therefore, this study evaluated the implementation rate of the mitigation measures and identified the cause of the difference in the implementation rate for each mitigation measures in order to understand the current status of the ecological mitigation measures. The implementation rate of urban and road development projects mitigation measures was 56.0% and 64.4%, respectively. the implementation rate of 'Monitoring' mitigation measures was the highest in all development project. But, 'Habitat creation' and 'Accident prevention measures' were low. In addition, it was found that the implementation rate of the mitigation measures were high when the contents of the mitigation measure described in the report were specific. Through this study, it was found that in order to increase the implementation rate of the EIA ecological environment animal mitigation measures, it is necessary to reflect the environmental and geographical characteristics of the target site in detail. Furthermore, it is judged that this study can be used as a basic basis for enhancing the effectiveness of the EIA system introduced to mitigate the negative impact on the environment.

개발사업의 부정적인 영향을 감소시킬 수 있는 저감방안의 실효성을 높이기 위해서는 이행률을 높이는 것이 필수적이다. 환경영향평가에서 자연생태환경 동물상 분야의 경우 저감방안에 대한 실효성 문제가 꾸준히 제기되고 있음에도 불구하고 현재 진행되고 있는 개발사업의 이행평가 연구는 미흡한 실정이다. 따라서 본 연구는 환경영향평가사업의 대표적인 유형인 도시 및 도로의 개발사업을 대상으로 자연생태환경 동물상 분야의 저감방안 이행률을 평가하고, 각 저감방안별 이행률 차이가 발생하는 원인에 대해 파악하고자 하였다. 도시 및 도로개발사업 저감방안 이행률은 각 56.0%와 64.4%로 낮게 나타났다. 사후 모니터링은 모든 사업유형에서 이행률이 가장 높게 나타났으나, 서식지 조성과 사고예방 저감방안은 낮게 나타났다. 또한, 저감방안 이행률은 보고서 내 기재된 저감방안 내용이 구체적일 때 높음을 알 수 있었다. 본 연구를 통해 환경영향평가 자연생태환경 동물상 분야 저감방안의 이행률을 높이기 위해서는 평가서 작성 시 대상지의 환경적, 지리적 특성을 구체적으로 반영할 필요가 있으며, 실제로 이행할 수 있도록 상세하게 서술할 필요가 있음을 알 수 있었다. 더 나아가 자연환경에 부정적인 영향을 감소시키기 위해 도입된 환경영향평가 제도의 실효성을 증진하기 위한 기초 근거로서 본 연구가 활용될 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 결과물은 환경부의재원으로한국환경산업기술원의 ICT기반 환경영향평가 의사결정 지원 기술개발사업의 지원을 받아 연구되었습니다(2021003360002).

References

  1. Briggs S, Malcolm DH. 2013. Determination of significance in Ecological Impact Assessment: Past change. current practice and future improvements 38: 16-25.
  2. Caro-Gonzalez AL, Toro J, Zamorano M. 2021. Effectiveness of environmental impact statement methods: A Colombian case study. Journal of Environmental Management. 300.
  3. Comprehensive Plan for Conservation of Endangered Wildlife. 2018. Ministry of Environment. [Korean Literature]
  4. Cho KJ, Choi JK, Park YM, Song YI, Sa KH, Lee SB, Jeong JC, Lim YS. 2008. Achievement and Development of EIA over the last 30 years. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  5. EIASS. https://www.eiass.go.kr
  6. Drayson K, Thompson S. 2013. Ecological mitigation measures in English Environmental Impact Assessment, Journal of Environmental Management. 119: 103-110.
  7. Drayson K, Wood G, Thompson S. 2015. Assessing the quality of the ecological component of English Environmental Statements. Journal of Environmental Management: 241-253.
  8. Kim JO, Min BW. 2020. Problems and Improvement Strategies of Environmental Impact Assessment by Local Government in South Korea - Case Studies of 8 Local Governments including Seoul, Jeju, Busan and Daejeon -, Journal of Envinronmental Impact Assessment 29(2): 132-143 [Korean Literature]
  9. Kim MK, Lee SD. 2021. Survey on the perception of stakeholders on the EIA System in Korea. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 30(1): 49-60 [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2021.30.1.49
  10. Korea Environment Institute. 2017. EIA Guideline Series A Ver 2.0. [Korean Literature]
  11. Korea Environment Institute. 2004. Environmental Impact Assessment of Road Construction Projects: Analysis of Prediction and Monitoring. [Korean Literatue]
  12. Lhyne I, Laerhoven F, Cashmore M, Runaar H. 2017. Theorising EIA effectiveness: A contribution based on the Danish system. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 62: 240-249 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2015.12.002
  13. Ministry of Environment. 2009. Guidelines for the preparation of EIA reports for the preparation of EIA reports by project type. Government of Korea. [Korean Literature]
  14. Ministry of Environment. 2020. environment impact asseessment follow-up management guidebook. Government of Korea. [Korean Literature]
  15. Ministry of Environment. 2021. Management Manager's Guide to Environmental Impact Assessment Consultation. [Korean Literature]
  16. Park JH, Choi JG. 2016. A Study on Future Direction and Practical Strategy for the Development of Environmental Impact Assessment Follow-Up. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment 25(3): 165-174. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2016.25.3.165
  17. Sanchez LE, Gallardo ALCF. 2012. On the successful implementation of mitigation measures. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 23(3): 182-190. https://doi.org/10.3152/147154605781765472
  18. Treweek JR, Thompson S, Veitch N, Japp C. 1993. Ecological assessment of proposed road developments: a review of envrionmental statement, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 36(3): 295-307. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640569308711948
  19. Yi PI, Yi YK. 1997. Content Analysis of Mitigation Measures in Environmental Impact Statement, Korean Society of ENvironmental Impact Assessment 6(2): 165-180. [Korean Literature]
  20. Zhang J, Kornov L, Christensen P. 2013. Critical factors for EIA implementation: Literature review and research options. Journal of Environmental Management, 114: 148-157.