Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
FIGURE 8.2
Illustrating the Signifi cance of Alarm
and Diagnostic Indicators, and
Threshold Level in Environmental
Management
t C
ALARM INDICATOR
INPUT INDICATOR
THRESHOLD LEVEL
of the numbers of non-compliances, a leading indicator would be the number of inter-
nal environmental compliance audits conducted per year. The major advantage of lead-
ing indicators is that corrective actions can often be taken before dei ciencies show up.
Unfortunately, leading indicators can be difi cult to quantify (some may be qualitative
rather than quantitative), and the results may not address the concerns of some stakehold-
ers (such as the public), who may still want to know the quantities of waste released into
the environment, or the number of health and safety violations.
Which Indicator to Choose
Much research has been done in developing environmental indicators (Bakkes et al . 1994,
Segnestam 1999, Saunders et al . 1998). At the environmental scoping stage, since all indi-
cators are derived from data, the environmental assessment can only rely on indicators
based on data that can be easily acquired. In the scoping process, the focus is on indica-
tors describing the current state of the environment. As the mine moves into the feasibility
stage, detailed surveys are carried out which increase the quantity of environmental data
providing an expanded set of indicators for future monitoring and evaluation of impacts
associated with mine operation. During mine operation, environmental indicators will
eventually evolve into environmental performance indicators (EPI). As such, indicators
are very much dynamic tools. Clearly, an understanding of mining in general and of the
proposed mining project in particular, is benei cial and in fact necessary in the design of
i eld surveys, and the selection of meaningful environmental indicators.
Priority environmental issues identii ed on the basis of community concerns also inl u-
ence the selection of environmental indicators. They are driven by the current environ-
mental debate and may not always imply an obvious cause of pressure on the environment.
In practice, however, categories of stresses or pressures on the environment (e.g. vegetation
clearing, illegal logging, disease patterns, community unrest) are often themselves prior-
ity issues. Because priority issues and stress response approaches overlap, stress-response
indicators can be considered as a subset of indicators within priority issues. This avoids the
problem with a pure priority issues approach that, while immediate community concerns
will be addressed, underlying causal processes may be ignored.
Standard selection criteria for environmental indicators centre around scientii c validity,
practical, and programmatic considerations. Above all, an indicator must be practical and
An understanding of mining in
general and of the proposed
mining project in particular, is
benefi cial and in fact necessary
in the design of fi eld surveys,
and the selection of meaningful
environmental indicators.
 
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search