Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
considerations, there are other reasons why EIA
fails to fulfil its promise.
The principal problem is one of data inputs
regarding the ecology of Brazil. Frequently it is
not available, and where it does exist it is often
out of date. Moreover, what information of value
there is tends to be scattered across so many
institutions that its acquisition within the
timescales available for the completion of an EIA
is impossible.
Where public participation is concerned, the
territory is familiar enough in so far as it is a
problem that pervades systems around the world.
Here, while its existence is not in doubt, it fails to
Box 17.2
EIA—Differences in attitude and practice: Norway and Estonia compared
ESTONIA
As early as 1978, the USSR Council of Ministers decided
that all large projects must undergo expert review in
terms of their impact on the environment. After the
dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Estonia was able
to choose its own environmental strategies and decided
to introduce instruments developed in the West, including
EIA. Compared with most other post-Soviet states,
Estonia made careful preparations before the formal
introduction of EIA. The enabling laws were established
in 1992, but it was in 1994 that the key player in the EIA
adoption process, the Ministry of the Environment,
produced an order that dealt with the procedural matters
of EIA and gave practical advice on EIA report
preparation. Since it is an aspiration of Estonia to join the
EU, it is its intention to bring Estonian EIA practice into
line with the EU Directives on the subject.
NORWAY
The basis for EIA in Norway when formally introduced in
1990 was the Planning and Building Act. This has long
served as a means of land-use planning and the granting
of building permits. Preparation for EIA, however, began
in the late 1970s, but the process became protracted as
a result of debates over the distribution of competencies
to supervise the needs of EIA among the ministries. In
order to achieve a level of integration between EIA and
project planning, the responsibilities for EIA were
ultimately located in the development ministries rather
than in the Ministry of the Environment, whose role
remains a strategic one. Because of the entry of Norway
into the European Economic Area in 1994, Norway
harmonised its EIA system with the EU in 1995.
The chief differences between the two countries in
their approach to EIA are summarised below. They may
be said to broadly reflect the situation in other Nordic
states as against those of the ex-Communist Baltic
states, which also include Latvia and Lithuania.
