Introdução: A Avaliação de Impactos à Saúde (AIS) é adotada em vários países como estratégia para abordar os potenciais impactos à saúde relacionados a políticas, planos, programas ou projetos, mas não é ainda utilizada no Brasil. Objetivo: Identificar as condições brasileiras que podem corroborar com vantagens e limitações da AIS já descritas na literatura internacional, considerando sua aplicação futura no Brasil, especialmente no caso de projetos. Métodos: Revisão da literatura científica e de outros documentos internacionais sobre AIS, identificados através de bases de dados (Pub Med e Science Direct), e de portais especializados, para entender o contexto e compilar vantagens e limitações da AIS. Revisão da literatura científica nacional e de outros documentos sobre avaliação de impactos e saúde, identificados através das bases de dados LILACS, SCIELO e outros portais brasileiros que tratam desses temas. Pesquisa qualitativa complementar com profissionais e pesquisadores brasileiros. Resultados e discussão: A AIS ainda está se desenvolvendo no mundo, por isso há vantagens e limitações igualmente importantes associadas aos seus indutores; ao objeto da avaliação (políticas, planos, programas ou projetos); à fase em que é conduzida (prospectiva ou retrospectiva); aos patrocinadores e avaliadores; ao tipo de AIS adotada; à sua institucionalização; à integração a outras formas de avaliação de impactos (AIA ou AAE); à abordagem em saúde, ao escopo e aos métodos adotados; à participação das partes afetadas e a sua influência no processo de tomada de decisão. No Brasil, os estudos que abordam os impactos à saúde são frequentemente retrospectivos e a abordagem de saúde na AIA apresenta lacunas. Os poucos estudos prospectivos ainda não utilizam as ferramentas e passos da AIS. O Ministério da Saúde vem articulando o processo de introdução da AIS no país. Conclusões e Recomendações: Há oportunidades para introduzir a AIS de projetos no país. Entretanto, é urgente o engajamento dos profissionais brasileiros da área de saúde e de avaliação de impactos com as redes de profissionais nacionais e internacionais, visando aprimorar a discussão e prepará-los para enfrentar questionamentos à AIS eventualmente levantados por aqueles que veem no processo de avaliação de impactos obstáculos para a eficiência e rapidez da tomada de decisão sobre projetos. É também preciso organizar padrões mínimos para que não sejam reproduzidos no Brasil problemas já vivenciados e solucionados em outras localidades / Introduction: Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is adopted as a strategy to address the potential health impacts associated with policies, plans, programs or projects in various countries, but not yet in Brazil. Objective: To identify the Brazilian conditions that can contribute to HIA advantages and constraints already described in the literature, considering its future adoption in Brazil, particularly in the case of projects. Method: Review of scientific literature and other documents on HIA, identified in Pub Med and Science Direct, as well as in HIA websites, in order to understand the context and compile HIA advantages and constraints already described in the literature. Review of Brazilian scientific literature and other Brazilian documents on impact assessment and health, identified through LILACS and SCIELO databases as well as other Brazilian web sites that address the subject. Additional qualitative research with Brazilian stakeholders. Results and discussion: HIA is still developing worldwide. Due to that, there are equally important advantages and limitations associated to its drivers, its object (policies, plans, programs or projects), when it is conducted (prospective or retrospective), HIA sponsors and assessors, HIA types, if HIA is institutionalized, if it is integrated with other forms of impact assessment (AIA, SEA), its approach to health, its scope and methods, the participation of affected parties and its influence to decision making. In Brazil, health impact assessments are frequently retrospective and do not adopt HIA tools and its steps. The Brazilian Ministry of Health is working to introduce HIA in the country. Conclusions and recommendations: There are opportunities to introduce HIA of projects in the country. However, it is urgent to engage Brazilian health and impact assessment professionals with national and international networks, in order to deepen and improve the discussion and to prepare them to face future questioning to HIA eventually raised by those that view the impact assessment process as an obstacle to efficiency in the context of project decision making. It is also necessary to develop minimum standards so that some issues already faced and solved elsewhere are not repeated in Brazil

A Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida (ACV) apresenta quatro fases em sua estrutura metodológica, que podem ser encontradas em normas como a ISO 14.040 e ISO 14.044. A Avaliação de Impacto do Ciclo de Vida (AICV) é a terceira fase da ACV e utiliza métodos e modelos de caracterização para avaliar a importância de intervenções ambientais contidas no Inventário do Ciclo de Vida (ICV). Os métodos para a AICV mais utilizados são em sua maioria desenvolvidos em países da Europa, embora sejam aplicados em diferentes partes do mundo, incluindo o Brasil. Assim, o objetivo desta pesquisa é analisar as características e a aplicabilidade dos principais métodos de AICV e verificar o escopo dos modelos de caracterização para a categoria de impacto acidificação a fim de fornecer subsídios para aplicação desses métodos e modelos no Brasil. Por meio da revisão bibliográfica as informações referentes a cada método foram classificadas de acordo com as categorias de comparação: categorias de impacto abordadas, nível de avaliação do impacto, abrangência de aplicação e existência ou não de metodologias para normalização e ponderação. Dessa forma a análise realizada identifica que a maioria das categorias de impacto dos métodos CML 2002, EDIP 97, EPS 2000, USEtox e IMPACT World+ apresentam escopo de aplicação classificado como global, sendo recomendados, para estas categorias, para uso no Brasil. Com a finalidade de auxiliar com informações sobre os modelos de caracterização para a categoria de impacto acidificação, por meio da revisão bibliográfica foi possível analisar os procedimentos e parâmetros de cálculos utilizados por cada modelo para esta categoria. A análise comparativa entre os modelos, com base na revisão bibliográfica, foi feita a partir dos seguintes critérios: substâncias abordadas, ano e região de referência dos fatores de caracterização, parâmetros usados nos cálculos, dados necessários, ano e área de coleta dos dados, resolução espacial, relevância ambiental, robustez científica e exatidão, e documentação, transparência e reprodutibilidade. O modelo Accumulated Exceedance apresentou a melhor avaliação frente a esses critérios e, portanto, é recomendado como referência inicial para o desenvolvimento de procedimentos metodológicos que suportem a aplicação desse modelo no Brasil. Para que isso seja possível é necessário que esse modelo de caracterização seja complementado por um modelo de destino atmosférico adequado à realidade brasileira. Isto posto, pretende-se subsidiar, tanto pelo procedimento adotado quanto pelos resultados obtidos, pesquisas direcionadas ao desenvolvimento de modelos de caracterização, para diferentes categorias de impacto, que representem as características específicas regionais do Brasil durante a AICV. / Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has four phases in its methodological framework, which can be found in standards such as ISO 14,040 and ISO 14,044. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) is the third phase of LCA and uses characterization models and methods to assess the importance of environmental interventions contained in the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI). The methods most commonly used for LCIA are mostly developed in European countries, although applied in different parts of the world, including Brazil. This research aims to analyze the characteristics and the applicability of the main methods of LCIA and to check the characterization models scope for acidification impact category in order to provide support for application of these methods and models in Brazil. Through the LCIA methods review their information were classified according to the criteria: impact categories addressed, impact assessment level, scope of application and the existence or not of methodologies for normalization and weighting. Thus, the analysis identifies that most impact categories of CML 2002, EDIP 97, EPS 2000, USEtox and IMPACT World+ methods present scope of application classified as global, being recommended for these categories for the use in Brazil. In order to assist with information about the characterization models for acidification impact category through the literature review it was possible to analyze the procedures and the calculation parameters used by each model for this category. The comparative analysis between the models, based on review, was done based on the following criteria: substances addressed, reference year and region of characterization factors, parameters used in the calculations, necessary data, year and area of data collection, spatial resolution, environmental relevance, scientific robustness and accuracy, and documentation, transparency and reproducibility. The Accumulated Exceedance model presented the best assessment against these criteria and is therefore recommended as initial reference for the development of methodological procedures that support the application of this model in Brazil. To make this possible it is necessary that this characterization model is complemented by an atmospheric fate model appropriate to the Brazilian reality. That said, it is intended to subsidize, through the procedures adopted and the results obtained, research directed to the development of characterization models, for different impact categories, which represent the specific regional characteristics of Brazil during the LCIA.

Aufgrund einer größeren finanziellen Unsicherheit im Zusammenhang mit ökologischen Risiken sind nachhaltigkeitsorientierte Innovationen in einem Marktumfeld weniger wahrscheinlich. Übergeordnetes Ziel dieser Studie ist es, Innovationsprozesse in der Landwirtschaft zu analysieren und ihre Fähigkeit zur Integration marktgetriebener und ökosystemorientierter Aktivitäten zu bewerten. Dadurch soll ein Domainansatz in der Landwirtschaft überwunden werden. Entwickelt wurde dafür ein Rahmen für die Analyse und das Management von nachhaltigkeitsorientierten Innovationsprozessen: das Triple Helix System der Innovation für Nachhaltigkeit (THIS). Es soll die Interaktion zwischen landwirtschaftlicher Praxis, Forschung und Politik bei transformativen Veränderungsprozessen unterstützen. Der Rahmen wurde basierend auf einer Fallstudienanalyse in drei Interaktionsebenen eingeteilt, die für die Aushandlung von Nachhaltigkeitszielen über den Markt und das Ökosystem relevant sind: 1) die technologische, 2) die organisatorische und 3) die Governance-Ebene. Grundlage für die Übersetzung von Nachhaltigkeitszielen auf die lokale Ebene sind die übergreifenden Ziele der Vereinten Nationen für nachhaltige Entwicklung (SDGs). Auf jeder Ebene ergeben sich spezifische Forschungsfragen: in der Vorplanung (Front End), in der Einbindung von Managementfunktionen, und in der Berücksichtigung von Indikatoren für Nachhaltigkeit in politischen Gesetzentwicklungsprozessen. Die Analyse, die sich aus der Anwendung von THIS ergibt, trägt zur Debatte über tragfähige Formen des Innovationsmanagements für zielorientierte Innovationen bei. THIS dient somit als Rahmen, um Innovationsprozesse zu beschleunigen und die zusätzlichen Unsicherheiten bei den im Agrarsektor entwickelten Innovationen frühzeitig zu berücksichtigen. Schließlich zeigt diese Studie, wie sich die Anforderungen eines iterativen Managements in Organisationsstrukturen für institutionelle Unterstützung widerspiegeln können. / Due to greater financial uncertainty in connection with ecological risks, sustainability-oriented innovations are less likely to be successfully adopted in a market environment. The overall objective of this study is to analyse innovation processes in agriculture, and to assess their ability to integrate market-driven as well as ecosystem-oriented activities across different levels of relationship interaction. To overcome a domain approach in agriculture, a framework for the analysis and management of sustainability-oriented innovation processes in agriculture was developed: the Triple Helix System of Innovation for Sustainability (THIS). It is set to enhance the diffusion and utilisation of new knowledge generated by interaction between agricultural practice, research and policy. The framework looks at three levels of relationship interaction relevant to the negotiation of market versus ecosystem, including 1) technological, 2) organisational, and 3) governance aspects. The negotiation of sustainability goals is conducted by translating the overarching global United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to the substantive focus of innovation in each case. Each level of relationship interaction reveals specific research questions, addressing for example the consideration of sustainability impacts at the beginning of an innovation process (the front end), management functions required to organise and steer an innovation process, and the potential for integrating indicators for sustainability in policy regulation and governance. The study contributes to the debate on viable forms of innovation management for goal-oriented innovation processes. The application of THIS achieves to address additional uncertainty posed particularly by environmental aspects characteristic to the agricultural sector. Finally, this study shows how the requirements of iterative management can be reflected in organisational structures for institutional support.

Introdução: A Avaliação de Impactos à Saúde (AIS) é adotada em vários países como estratégia para abordar os potenciais impactos à saúde relacionados a políticas, planos, programas ou projetos, mas não é ainda utilizada no Brasil. Objetivo: Identificar as condições brasileiras que podem corroborar com vantagens e limitações da AIS já descritas na literatura internacional, considerando sua aplicação futura no Brasil, especialmente no caso de projetos. Métodos: Revisão da literatura científica e de outros documentos internacionais sobre AIS, identificados através de bases de dados (Pub Med e Science Direct), e de portais especializados, para entender o contexto e compilar vantagens e limitações da AIS. Revisão da literatura científica nacional e de outros documentos sobre avaliação de impactos e saúde, identificados através das bases de dados LILACS, SCIELO e outros portais brasileiros que tratam desses temas. Pesquisa qualitativa complementar com profissionais e pesquisadores brasileiros. Resultados e discussão: A AIS ainda está se desenvolvendo no mundo, por isso há vantagens e limitações igualmente importantes associadas aos seus indutores; ao objeto da avaliação (políticas, planos, programas ou projetos); à fase em que é conduzida (prospectiva ou retrospectiva); aos patrocinadores e avaliadores; ao tipo de AIS adotada; à sua institucionalização; à integração a outras formas de avaliação de impactos (AIA ou AAE); à abordagem em saúde, ao escopo e aos métodos adotados; à participação das partes afetadas e a sua influência no processo de tomada de decisão. No Brasil, os estudos que abordam os impactos à saúde são frequentemente retrospectivos e a abordagem de saúde na AIA apresenta lacunas. Os poucos estudos prospectivos ainda não utilizam as ferramentas e passos da AIS. O Ministério da Saúde vem articulando o processo de introdução da AIS no país. Conclusões e Recomendações: Há oportunidades para introduzir a AIS de projetos no país. Entretanto, é urgente o engajamento dos profissionais brasileiros da área de saúde e de avaliação de impactos com as redes de profissionais nacionais e internacionais, visando aprimorar a discussão e prepará-los para enfrentar questionamentos à AIS eventualmente levantados por aqueles que veem no processo de avaliação de impactos obstáculos para a eficiência e rapidez da tomada de decisão sobre projetos. É também preciso organizar padrões mínimos para que não sejam reproduzidos no Brasil problemas já vivenciados e solucionados em outras localidades / Introduction: Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is adopted as a strategy to address the potential health impacts associated with policies, plans, programs or projects in various countries, but not yet in Brazil. Objective: To identify the Brazilian conditions that can contribute to HIA advantages and constraints already described in the literature, considering its future adoption in Brazil, particularly in the case of projects. Method: Review of scientific literature and other documents on HIA, identified in Pub Med and Science Direct, as well as in HIA websites, in order to understand the context and compile HIA advantages and constraints already described in the literature. Review of Brazilian scientific literature and other Brazilian documents on impact assessment and health, identified through LILACS and SCIELO databases as well as other Brazilian web sites that address the subject. Additional qualitative research with Brazilian stakeholders. Results and discussion: HIA is still developing worldwide. Due to that, there are equally important advantages and limitations associated to its drivers, its object (policies, plans, programs or projects), when it is conducted (prospective or retrospective), HIA sponsors and assessors, HIA types, if HIA is institutionalized, if it is integrated with other forms of impact assessment (AIA, SEA), its approach to health, its scope and methods, the participation of affected parties and its influence to decision making. In Brazil, health impact assessments are frequently retrospective and do not adopt HIA tools and its steps. The Brazilian Ministry of Health is working to introduce HIA in the country. Conclusions and recommendations: There are opportunities to introduce HIA of projects in the country. However, it is urgent to engage Brazilian health and impact assessment professionals with national and international networks, in order to deepen and improve the discussion and to prepare them to face future questioning to HIA eventually raised by those that view the impact assessment process as an obstacle to efficiency in the context of project decision making. It is also necessary to develop minimum standards so that some issues already faced and solved elsewhere are not repeated in Brazil

A presente pesquisa tomou por objeto de estudo central a dimensão social (mais conhecida como \'componente antrópico\' ou \'componentes do meio socioeconômico\') consubstanciada na prática e no discurso de avaliação de impacto ambiental. Buscou-se analisar as ausências, lacunas, insuficiências, distorções e omissões ativas no trato dessa dimensão social, procurando compreendê-las como indícios da configuração momentânea das fronteiras do \'social\' na regulação ambiental de projetos no Brasil, enquanto construção histórica atravessada por interesses conflitantes entre os envolvidos nas disputas por hegemonia do campo ambiental, sem perder de vista seu diálogo com outros campos do espaço social, como o político e o econômico. Através dessa chave interpretativa, foi possível retomar as origens e características históricas que conformaram os sentidos dominantes de termos como \'meio ambiente\', \'impacto ambiental\' e \'atingido\' na regulação pública e na atividade de avaliação de impacto, subsumindo da equação os impactos e processos sociais relacionados à implantação de grandes projetos. A pesquisa argumenta, nesse sentido, que ao componente social tem sido atribuído um papel marginal, frágil e bastante delimitado espacial e temporalmente, corroborando com críticas históricas a este instrumento de planejamento. Diagnósticos empobrecidos, avaliações que escamoteiam a complexidade de impactos sociais cumulativos, indiretos e de segunda ordem (cujas marcas são o longo prazo, a fluidez das fronteiras espaciais, a imprevisibilidade, a intangibilidade e a dificuldade de valoração monetária) e medidas mitigadoras e compensatórias insuficientes são ilustrados empiricamente pela pesquisa, tomando o estudo de impacto ambiental de um projeto de anel rodoviário recente, situado no Litoral Norte do estado de São Paulo, como matéria-prima principal de análise. Aliado a uma metodologia investigativa, baseada no levantamento de documentos oficiais do processo licenciatório, a pesquisa procurou identificar os meandros, os mecanismos, as operações e os filtros que recolocam o \'social\' como parte subordinada da avaliação de impacto ambiental, dando pouquíssimo relevo a questões fundamentais, como: fluxos migratórios, crescimento demográfico, demanda adicional sobre infraestrutura e serviços urbanos, transformações da paisagem e novas configurações urbanas, mudança de perfil sociocultural e econômico em nível regional, etc. Em paralelo, após extensa revisão bibliográfica nacional e internacional na área de avaliação de impacto social (que serviu de embasamento teórico-conceitual à pesquisa), procurou-se averiguar em que medida as novas formulações discursivas emergentes, tanto no campo ambiental quanto no subcampo profissional da avaliação de impacto, nos últimos trinta anos, têm encontrado ressonância na prática da avaliação de impacto ambiental de projetos, no país - i.e., como têm sido apropriadas por agentes reguladores e consultores técnicos responsáveis pelos EIAs. Por fim, a pesquisa buscou tecer reflexões sobre as potencialidades e limitações inerentes à avaliação de impacto ambiental como instrumento de planejamento regional, integrado, democrático, fundado em princípios de equidade ambiental e no reconhecimento das demandas de grupos sociais atingidos. / The present study has focused on the social dimension (better known as \'anthropic component\' or \'components of the socioeconomic environment\'), based on the practice and discourse of environmental impact assessment. It sought to analyze the absences, gaps, inadequacies, distortions and omissions that are active in the treatment of this social dimension, seeking to understand them as signs of the momentary configuration of the boundaries of the \'social\' in the environmental regulation of projects in Brazil, as a historical construction crossed by interests Conflict between those involved in environmental hegemony disputes, without losing sight of their dialogue with other fields of social space, such as political and economic. Through this interpretive key, it was possible to return to the origins and historical characteristics that conformed the dominant meanings of terms such as \'environment\', \'environmental impact\' and \'reached\' in public regulation and impact assessment activity, subsuming impacts And social processes related to the implementation of large projects. The research argues, in this sense, that the social component has been assigned a marginal, fragile and quite delimited spatial and temporal role, corroborating historical criticism of this planning instrument. Impoverished diagnostics, assessments that eschew the complexity of cumulative, indirect and second-order social impacts (whose long-term marks, fluidity of spatial boundaries, unpredictability, intangibility and difficulty in monetary valuation) and insufficient mitigating and compensatory measures Are empirically illustrated by the survey, taking the environmental impact study of a recent road ring project, located in the North Coast of the state of São Paulo, as the main raw material for analysis. In addition to an investigative methodology, based on the collection of official documents of the licensing process, the research sought to identify the meanders, mechanisms, operations and filters that replace the \'social\' as a subordinate part of the environmental impact assessment, giving very little emphasis to Such as: migration flows, population growth, additional demand on infrastructure and urban services, landscape transformations and new urban configurations, socio-cultural and economic profile change at the regional level, etc. In parallel, after extensive national and international literature review in the area of social impact assessment (which served as a theoretical-conceptual basis for research), it was sought to determine to what extent new emerging discursive formulations, both in the environmental field and in the professional subfield Of the impact assessment over the last thirty years have found resonance in the practice of assessing the environmental impact of projects in the country - ie as they have been appropriated by regulators and technical consultants responsible for EIAs. Finally, the research sought to reflect on the potentialities and limitations inherent to environmental impact assessment as a regional, integrated, democratic planning tool based on principles of environmental equity and the recognition of the demands of affected social groups.

A Avaliação do Ciclo de Vida (ACV) apresenta quatro fases em sua estrutura metodológica, que podem ser encontradas em normas como a ISO 14.040 e ISO 14.044. A Avaliação de Impacto do Ciclo de Vida (AICV) é a terceira fase da ACV e utiliza métodos e modelos de caracterização para avaliar a importância de intervenções ambientais contidas no Inventário do Ciclo de Vida (ICV). Os métodos para a AICV mais utilizados são em sua maioria desenvolvidos em países da Europa, embora sejam aplicados em diferentes partes do mundo, incluindo o Brasil. Assim, o objetivo desta pesquisa é analisar as características e a aplicabilidade dos principais métodos de AICV e verificar o escopo dos modelos de caracterização para a categoria de impacto acidificação a fim de fornecer subsídios para aplicação desses métodos e modelos no Brasil. Por meio da revisão bibliográfica as informações referentes a cada método foram classificadas de acordo com as categorias de comparação: categorias de impacto abordadas, nível de avaliação do impacto, abrangência de aplicação e existência ou não de metodologias para normalização e ponderação. Dessa forma a análise realizada identifica que a maioria das categorias de impacto dos métodos CML 2002, EDIP 97, EPS 2000, USEtox e IMPACT World+ apresentam escopo de aplicação classificado como global, sendo recomendados, para estas categorias, para uso no Brasil. Com a finalidade de auxiliar com informações sobre os modelos de caracterização para a categoria de impacto acidificação, por meio da revisão bibliográfica foi possível analisar os procedimentos e parâmetros de cálculos utilizados por cada modelo para esta categoria. A análise comparativa entre os modelos, com base na revisão bibliográfica, foi feita a partir dos seguintes critérios: substâncias abordadas, ano e região de referência dos fatores de caracterização, parâmetros usados nos cálculos, dados necessários, ano e área de coleta dos dados, resolução espacial, relevância ambiental, robustez científica e exatidão, e documentação, transparência e reprodutibilidade. O modelo Accumulated Exceedance apresentou a melhor avaliação frente a esses critérios e, portanto, é recomendado como referência inicial para o desenvolvimento de procedimentos metodológicos que suportem a aplicação desse modelo no Brasil. Para que isso seja possível é necessário que esse modelo de caracterização seja complementado por um modelo de destino atmosférico adequado à realidade brasileira. Isto posto, pretende-se subsidiar, tanto pelo procedimento adotado quanto pelos resultados obtidos, pesquisas direcionadas ao desenvolvimento de modelos de caracterização, para diferentes categorias de impacto, que representem as características específicas regionais do Brasil durante a AICV. / Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has four phases in its methodological framework, which can be found in standards such as ISO 14,040 and ISO 14,044. Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) is the third phase of LCA and uses characterization models and methods to assess the importance of environmental interventions contained in the Life Cycle Inventory (LCI). The methods most commonly used for LCIA are mostly developed in European countries, although applied in different parts of the world, including Brazil. This research aims to analyze the characteristics and the applicability of the main methods of LCIA and to check the characterization models scope for acidification impact category in order to provide support for application of these methods and models in Brazil. Through the LCIA methods review their information were classified according to the criteria: impact categories addressed, impact assessment level, scope of application and the existence or not of methodologies for normalization and weighting. Thus, the analysis identifies that most impact categories of CML 2002, EDIP 97, EPS 2000, USEtox and IMPACT World+ methods present scope of application classified as global, being recommended for these categories for the use in Brazil. In order to assist with information about the characterization models for acidification impact category through the literature review it was possible to analyze the procedures and the calculation parameters used by each model for this category. The comparative analysis between the models, based on review, was done based on the following criteria: substances addressed, reference year and region of characterization factors, parameters used in the calculations, necessary data, year and area of data collection, spatial resolution, environmental relevance, scientific robustness and accuracy, and documentation, transparency and reproducibility. The Accumulated Exceedance model presented the best assessment against these criteria and is therefore recommended as initial reference for the development of methodological procedures that support the application of this model in Brazil. To make this possible it is necessary that this characterization model is complemented by an atmospheric fate model appropriate to the Brazilian reality. That said, it is intended to subsidize, through the procedures adopted and the results obtained, research directed to the development of characterization models, for different impact categories, which represent the specific regional characteristics of Brazil during the LCIA.

On 18 June 2010 new NEMA 2010 EIA Regulations were promulgated and came into effect on 2 August 2010 in order to improve the effectiveness of EIA. The question of effectiveness, therefore still remains. The quality of EIRs under the 1997 regulations in South Africa has been researched, although not as extensively as in other parts of the world. It was concluded that the quality of EIRs in South Africa are generally satisfactory, although a number of problems were identified, e.g. timing of the EIA, the identification of activities which require authorization or not, the consideration of alternatives, the absence of any time limits, the absence of requirements for monitoring and enforcing compliance, and objectivity. The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), (Act no 107, 1998) was amended and new regulations promulgated in 2006. No research has been published regarding the quality of EIRs produced in South Africa under the 2006 regulations. Since it was the intent of the new regulations to improve EIA effectiveness, it is necessary that the quality of EIRs produced under the new EIA system be investigated. As in the other studies in South Africa, the Lee and Colley review model was used as basis for the comparative analysis of the EIRs before and after 2006. A sample of 26 EIRs, 11 under the 1997 EIA system and 15 under the 2006 EIA system, obtained from the then Impact Assessment Directorate of the National Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) archives in Pretoria were reviewed. The main conclusions were that the majority of the EIRs under the 1997 system were of an acceptable standard and that the overall quality of the EIRs did not improve after the promulgation of the 2006 regulations. The descriptive and presentational parts of the EIRs were more satisfactorily addressed, while the analytical parts such as impact significance were addressed less satisfactorily. EIR quality appears to be on par with international standards, but there are areas of distinct weaknesses. As the 2006 EIRs included some of the first EIRs conducted under the new regulations, there is potential for the quality to improve over time. However, the areas that still need attention are the identification and evaluation of impacts, impact magnitude and monitoring programmes. / Thesis (M.Sc. (Geography and Environmental Management))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

On 18 June 2010 new NEMA 2010 EIA Regulations were promulgated and came into effect on 2 August 2010 in order to improve the effectiveness of EIA. The question of effectiveness, therefore still remains. The quality of EIRs under the 1997 regulations in South Africa has been researched, although not as extensively as in other parts of the world. It was concluded that the quality of EIRs in South Africa are generally satisfactory, although a number of problems were identified, e.g. timing of the EIA, the identification of activities which require authorization or not, the consideration of alternatives, the absence of any time limits, the absence of requirements for monitoring and enforcing compliance, and objectivity. The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), (Act no 107, 1998) was amended and new regulations promulgated in 2006. No research has been published regarding the quality of EIRs produced in South Africa under the 2006 regulations. Since it was the intent of the new regulations to improve EIA effectiveness, it is necessary that the quality of EIRs produced under the new EIA system be investigated. As in the other studies in South Africa, the Lee and Colley review model was used as basis for the comparative analysis of the EIRs before and after 2006. A sample of 26 EIRs, 11 under the 1997 EIA system and 15 under the 2006 EIA system, obtained from the then Impact Assessment Directorate of the National Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) archives in Pretoria were reviewed. The main conclusions were that the majority of the EIRs under the 1997 system were of an acceptable standard and that the overall quality of the EIRs did not improve after the promulgation of the 2006 regulations. The descriptive and presentational parts of the EIRs were more satisfactorily addressed, while the analytical parts such as impact significance were addressed less satisfactorily. EIR quality appears to be on par with international standards, but there are areas of distinct weaknesses. As the 2006 EIRs included some of the first EIRs conducted under the new regulations, there is potential for the quality to improve over time. However, the areas that still need attention are the identification and evaluation of impacts, impact magnitude and monitoring programmes. / Thesis (M.Sc. (Geography and Environmental Management))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

During the 21st century, climatic change and non-climatic stressors are likely to impact forests leading to large-scale forest and biodiversity loss, and diminished ecological benefits. Assessing the vulnerability of forests and addressing the sources of vulnerability is an important risk management strategy. The overall goal of this research work is to develop methodological approaches at different scales and apply them to assess the vulnerability of forests in India for developing strategies for forest adaptation. Indicator-based methodological approaches have been developed for vulnerability assessment at local, landscape and national scales under current climate scenario, and at national scale under future climate scenario. Under current climate scenario, the concept of inherent vulnerability of forests has emerged by treating vulnerability as a characteristic internal property of a forest ecosystem independent of exposure. This approach to assess vulnerability is consistent with the framework presented in the latest report of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR5 2014). Assessment of vulnerability under future climate scenario is presented only at national scale due to challenges associated with model-based climate projections and impact assessment at finer scales. The framework to assess inherent vulnerability of forests at local scale involves selection of vulnerability indicators and pair wise comparison method (PCM) to assign the indicator weights. The methodology is applied in the field to a 300-ha moist deciduous case study forest (Aduvalli Protected Forest, Chikmagalur district) in the Western Ghats area, where a vulnerability index value of 0.248 is estimated. Results of the study indicate that two indicators - ‘preponderance of invasive species’ and ‘forest dependence of community’ - are the major drivers of inherent vulnerability at present. The methodology developed to assess the inherent vulnerability at landscape scale involves use of vulnerability indicators, the pair wise comparison method, and geographic information system (GIS) tools. Using the methodology, assessment of inherent vulnerability of Western Ghats Karnataka (WGK) landscape forests is carried out. Four vulnerability indicators namely, biological richness, disturbance index, canopy cover and slope having weights 0.552, 0.266, 0.123 and 0.059, respectively are used. The study shows that forests at one-third of the grid points in the landscape have high and very high inherent vulnerability, and natural forests are inherently less vulnerable than plantation forests. The methodology used for assessment of forest inherent vulnerability at the national scale was same as used at landscape scale. 40% of forest grid points in India are assessed with high and very high inherent vulnerability. Except in pockets, the forests in the three biodiversity hotspots in India i.e., the Western Ghats in peninsular India, northeastern India, and the northern Himalayan region are assessed to have low to medium inherent vulnerability. Vulnerability of forests under future climate scenario at national scale is estimated by combining the results of assessment of climate change impact and inherent vulnerability. In the present study, ensemble climatology from five CMIP5 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5) climate models for RCP (Representative Concentration Pathways) 4.5 and 8.5 in short (2030s) and long term (2080s) is used as input to IBIS (Integrated Biosphere Simulator) dynamic vegetation model. Forest grid points projected to experience vegetation-shift to a new plant functional type (PFT) under future climate are categorized under ‘extremely high’ vulnerability category. Such forest grid points in India are 22 and 23% in the short term under RCP4.5 and 8.5 respectively, and these percentages increase to 31 and 37% in the long term. IBIS simulated vegetation projections are also compared with LPJ (Lund-Potsdam-Jena) simulated projections. Both the vegetation models agree that forests at about one-third of the grid points could be impacted by future climate but the spatial distribution of impacted grid points differs between the models. Vulnerability assessment is a powerful tool for building long-term resilience in the forest sector in the context of projected climate change. From this study, three forest scenarios emerge in India for developing adaptation strategies namely: (a) less disturbed primary forests; (b) degraded and fragmented primary forests; and (c) secondary (plantation) forests. Minimizing anthropogenic disturbance and conserving biodiversity are critical to reduce forest vulnerability of less disturbed primary forests. For disturbed forests and plantations, adaptive management aimed at forest restoration is necessary to build resilience. Mainstreaming forest adaptation in India through Forest Working Plans and realignment of the forestry programs is necessary to manage the risk to forests under climate change.

The paper identifies three topics in order to evaluate the improvements in the regulation of the National System of EnvironmentalImpact Assessment, looking to benefit the people’s trust in the environmental certification. The first one consists in the gradual transition from the prevention paradigm to the integration one, as the purpose of the different instruments that compose the system; the second involves the enrichment in the evaluation of the Environmental Impact Study (EIS), by incorporating the scoping phase; and the third involves adopting additional measures that reinforce the independence of the teams in charge of the elaboration and evaluation of the EIS. / El artículo identifica tres áreas para evaluar mejoras a la regulacióndel Sistema Nacional de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental, con miras a favorecer la aparición de confianza ciudadana respecto de la certificación ambiental. La primera tiene que ver con transitar gradualmente del paradigma preventivo al integrativo como finalidad de los instrumentos que componen el sistema; la segunda, con enriquecer la evaluación del estudio de impacto ambiental (EIA) incorporándole una etapa de scoping a cargo del Estado; y la tercera, con adoptar medidas adicionales que refuercen la independencia de los equipos de elaboración y evaluación del EIA.