Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:34:01.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NEWS & INFORMATION: Protecting Biodiversity by Increasing the Role of Environmental Impact Analysis in Local Decision Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2007

Harold M. Draper
Harold M. Draper
Affiliation:
Burns & McDonnell, 9400 Ward Pkwy., Kansas City, MO 64114
Get access

Extract

The need to conserve biodiversity is recognized as an international problem. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (http://www.biodiv.org) and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (http://ramsar.org) are two examples of international treaties that recognize this issue. The CBD contains explicit impact assessment provisions. Because the US has failed to ratify the CBD, joining Andorra, the Holy See, Iraq, Somalia, and Timor-Leste as the only nations that have not done so, the federal government has not had a consistent approach in its decision making. Nevertheless, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) does provide a mandate and a framework for federal agencies to consider biodiversity impacts, along with other reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of their actions. NEPA Section 101 discusses the need to preserve important historic cultural and natural aspects of our natural heritage. NEPA Section 102 requires a systematic interdisciplinary approach to environmental impact review and that agencies utilize ecological information in planning and development. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR 1508) further explain that effects that must be analyzed in a NEPA review include “ecological, such as the effects on natural resources and on the components, structures, and functioning of affected ecosystems … whether direct, indirect or cumulative.” The International Association for Impact Assessment (2005) has recognized impact assessment as an important decision-support tool to help plan and implement development with biodiversity in mind.

Type
NEWS & INFORMATION
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 2007 , pp. 78 - 79
Copyright
© 2007 National Association of Environmental Professionals

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brownlie, S., C. de Villiers, A. Driver, N. Job, A. von Hase, and K. Maze. 2005. Systematic Conservation Planning in the Cape Floristic Region and Succulent Karoo, South Africa: Enabling Sound Spatial Planning and Improved Environmental Assessment. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 7:201–228.Google Scholar
Council on Environmental Quality, 1993. Incorporating Biodiversity Considerations into Environmental Impact Analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act. Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC.
Grossman, D. H., D. Faber-Langendoen, A. S. Weakley, M. Anderson, P. Bourgeron, R. Crawford, K. Goodin, S. Landaal, K. Metzler, K. D. Patterson, M. Pyne, M. Reid, and L. Sneddon. 1998. International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States. The National Vegetation Classification System: Development, Status, and Applications, volume 1. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA.
International Association for Impact Assessment. 2005. Biodiversity in Impact Assessment. Special Publication Series No. 3. Fargo, ND.
Kolhoff, A., and R. Slootweg. 2005. Biodiversity in SEA for Spatial Plans: Experiences from the Netherlands. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 7:267–286.Google Scholar
McKinstry, Jr., R. B., J. McElfish, M. Jacobson, and D. J. Hay. 2006. Legal Tools that Provide Direct Protection for Elements of Biodiversity. In Biodiversity Conservation Handbook: State, Local, and Private Protection of Biological Diversity, R. B. McKinstry, Jr., C. Ripp and E. Lisy, eds. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, DC, 227–255.
McKinstry, Jr., R. B., C. Ripp, and E. Lisy, eds. 2006. Biodiversity Conservation Handbook: State, Local, and Private Protection of Biological Diversity. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, DC, 651 pp.
Pritchard, D. 2005. International Biodiversity-Related Treaties and Impact Assessment—How Can They Help Each Other? Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 23:7–16.Google Scholar
Treweek, J., R. Therivel, S. Thompson, and M. Slater. 2005. Principles for the Use of Strategic Environmental Assessment as a Tool for Promoting the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 7:173–199.Google Scholar