It is generally accepted that the environment has three inter-dependent components: economic, socio-political and natural Consequently, integrated environmental management coupled with sustainable development is critical, and in order to achieve this goal, effective guidelines and implementable legislation are necessary. This evaluation aims to determine and compare the effectiveness of the South African and Malawian environmental impact assessment (EIA) legislation, using the comparative criteria set out by Wood (1995, 2003), and accordingly to determine whether any further amendments are necessary to improve the effectiveness of these countries' EIA systems. In the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region, it is particularly important that environmental legislation and policies are aligned across borders, to allow for better integration of these economies. The alignment of EIA systems in the SADC region could enhance regional sustainable development if managed using similar criteria. The primary objective of this study is to compare the EIA legislation of South Africa and Malawi using Wood's (1995, 1999, 2003) 14-point evaluation criteria. The effectiveness and not the implementation and practice of the legislation is being compared. The secondary objective of this study is to determine whether Wood and Roux's recommendations have been incorporated into the South African National Environmental Management Amendment Act 8 of 2004 and the January 2005 draft EIA regulations, and whether South African legislation meets Wood's 14 criteria for a sound EIA system. In the South African evaluation, 11 of Wood's 14 criteria are met, while an additional two criteria are partially met and one criterion is failed, resulting in an overall improvement in the South African EIA system. The Malawian EIA legislation meets 11 of Wood's 14 criteria, with three criteria being partially met, in principle making it more effective than the South African EIA legislation. However, although Malawi theoretically has a slightly more effective EIA legislation than South Africa, in practice this is not the case. Ideally, when South Africa's updated EIA legislation is published it will meet with all 14 of Wood's criteria for an effective EIA system based on international standards. / Thesis (M. Environmental Management)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2006.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process that seeks to reduce the negative environmental consequences of listed development activities, which could have a detrimental effect on the environment, in the advance of their implementation, and a requirement of legislation in South Africa. An important element of the systematic EIA process is the submission of an environmental impact or scoping report or an environmental impact report (EIR) to the relevant governmental department, interested and affected parties and/or specialist for review to determine the report's adequacy before a project can be authorised or if further information is required. The information made available in reports to decision-makers with regard to developments with the potential of affecting explosive projects, plays a significant role in the authorisation of the project after the authority review process, which is dependent on the quality of the report. In order to contribute more effectively to sustainable development, more attention must be placed on assessing the quality of ElA's as part of determining how effectively EIA has been functioning in South Africa; hence this study is aimed at assessing the quality of EIA assessment reports of four projects with the potential of impacting on explosive industry projects. The objectives of the study included the review by independent reviewers of the quality of four-selected impact reports using a checklist, analysis of the review process results and provision of recommendations to improve the quality of environmental impact reports for-explosive projects. Based on the review results it is concluded that the quality of the four reports for-explosive projects. Based on the review results it is concluded that the quality of the four reports were of an acceptable standard, although certain areas were found poorly performed i.e. improvement with regard to identification of key impacts and considerations of alternatives and mitigation as well as the control and treatment of waste. Otherwise the review method is fairly robust and consistent and therefore can be seen as a reliable indication of EIR quality. The following was recommended to improve the quality of the reports for explosive projects: The use of a quality review checklist for explosive projects by EIA practitioners and authorities to be used as an additional tool to the EIA regulations (DEAT 2002) and the Integrated Environmental Management series (DEAT 2002) can further improve the quality of the El reports for explosive projects. • The use by EIA practitioners of an explosive review checklist will assist in ensuring that all key aspects are addressed before submission to relevant authorities, i.e. the report contains all pertinent information and is technically sound, the report is set-up clearly and coherently organized and presented so that it can be understood and that it has addressed all the key issues to make a decision about the proposed development. This will further assist in fast-tracking the approval process often delayed by the request of additional information from the applicant as a result of inadequate reports. • Regular use of the review checklist by EIA practitioners and authorities for ascertaining the quality of the environmental impact reports will contribute to a baseline of EIR quality for evaluating EIA practice for explosive projects under the new regulations promulgated in June 2006. / Thesis (M. Environmental Management)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process that seeks to reduce the negative environmental consequences of listed development activities, which could have a detrimental effect on the environment, in the advance of their implementation, and a requirement of legislation in South Africa. An important element of the systematic EIA process is the submission of an environmental impact or scoping report or an environmental impact report (EIR) to the relevant governmental department, interested and affected parties and/or specialist for review to determine the report's adequacy before a project can be authorised or if further information is required. The information made available in reports to decision-makers with regard to developments with the potential of affecting explosive projects, plays a significant role in the authorisation of the project after the authority review process, which is dependent on the quality of the report. In order to contribute more effectively to sustainable development, more attention must be placed on assessing the quality of ElA's as part of determining how effectively EIA has been functioning in South Africa; hence this study is aimed at assessing the quality of EIA assessment reports of four projects with the potential of impacting on explosive industry projects. The objectives of the study included the review by independent reviewers of the quality of four-selected impact reports using a checklist, analysis of the review process results and provision of recommendations to improve the quality of environmental impact reports for-explosive projects. Based on the review results it is concluded that the quality of the four reports for-explosive projects. Based on the review results it is concluded that the quality of the four reports were of an acceptable standard, although certain areas were found poorly performed i.e. improvement with regard to identification of key impacts and considerations of alternatives and mitigation as well as the control and treatment of waste. Otherwise the review method is fairly robust and consistent and therefore can be seen as a reliable indication of EIR quality. The following was recommended to improve the quality of the reports for explosive projects: The use of a quality review checklist for explosive projects by EIA practitioners and authorities to be used as an additional tool to the EIA regulations (DEAT 2002) and the Integrated Environmental Management series (DEAT 2002) can further improve the quality of the El reports for explosive projects. • The use by EIA practitioners of an explosive review checklist will assist in ensuring that all key aspects are addressed before submission to relevant authorities, i.e. the report contains all pertinent information and is technically sound, the report is set-up clearly and coherently organized and presented so that it can be understood and that it has addressed all the key issues to make a decision about the proposed development. This will further assist in fast-tracking the approval process often delayed by the request of additional information from the applicant as a result of inadequate reports. • Regular use of the review checklist by EIA practitioners and authorities for ascertaining the quality of the environmental impact reports will contribute to a baseline of EIR quality for evaluating EIA practice for explosive projects under the new regulations promulgated in June 2006. / Thesis (M. Environmental Management)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009.

Methods of chemical hazard ranking and toxic impact assessment estimate fate and toxicity assuming the chemical exists in dissolved and particulate phases and, for metals, that all dissolved species are equally bioavailable. This treatment of metals, similar to organic chemicals, introduced a significant error in their estimates of hazard ranking since metal bioavailability and ecotoxicity are related to truly dissolved phase and specifically free metal ion within it. My thesis addressed this concern by developing a new method that introduced Bioavailability Factor (BF) to the calculation of Comparative Toxicity Potentials (CTPs) for hazard ranking of chemicals; also known as Characterization Factors for use in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). First, the metal speciation/complexation was incorporated into fate calculations by loosely coupling commercial geochemical metal speciation model, WHAM, with a multimedia fate model, USEtoxTM, which is originally designed to calculate CTPs for organic chemicals. Second, Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) was used to calculate the bioavailability-corrected adverse toxic effects of metals. This new method was applied to assess the implications of choosing environmental characteristics, notably freshwater chemistry, by calculating BFs and CTPs of several cationic metals (e.g., Cd, Cu, Co, Pb, Ni and Zn) using 12 European, 24 Canadian ecoregions, several distinct freshwater-types selected from large river and lake systems world-wide. The newly estimated metal CTPs (i.e., ecotoxicity potentials) are up to ~1000 times lower than previous values used in LCIA. Notably the model results showed that the absolute values of CTPs, and their relative ranking amongst chemicals, are a product of the characteristics of a receiving environment. Hence it is crucial to select a generic freshwater archetype on which this analysis should be based. Finally, the new model framework was extended to apply within the Unit World Model (UWM) framework to estimate critical loads (CLs) of cationic metals to surface aquatic systems.

Methods of chemical hazard ranking and toxic impact assessment estimate fate and toxicity assuming the chemical exists in dissolved and particulate phases and, for metals, that all dissolved species are equally bioavailable. This treatment of metals, similar to organic chemicals, introduced a significant error in their estimates of hazard ranking since metal bioavailability and ecotoxicity are related to truly dissolved phase and specifically free metal ion within it. My thesis addressed this concern by developing a new method that introduced Bioavailability Factor (BF) to the calculation of Comparative Toxicity Potentials (CTPs) for hazard ranking of chemicals; also known as Characterization Factors for use in Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA). First, the metal speciation/complexation was incorporated into fate calculations by loosely coupling commercial geochemical metal speciation model, WHAM, with a multimedia fate model, USEtoxTM, which is originally designed to calculate CTPs for organic chemicals. Second, Biotic Ligand Model (BLM) was used to calculate the bioavailability-corrected adverse toxic effects of metals. This new method was applied to assess the implications of choosing environmental characteristics, notably freshwater chemistry, by calculating BFs and CTPs of several cationic metals (e.g., Cd, Cu, Co, Pb, Ni and Zn) using 12 European, 24 Canadian ecoregions, several distinct freshwater-types selected from large river and lake systems world-wide. The newly estimated metal CTPs (i.e., ecotoxicity potentials) are up to ~1000 times lower than previous values used in LCIA. Notably the model results showed that the absolute values of CTPs, and their relative ranking amongst chemicals, are a product of the characteristics of a receiving environment. Hence it is crucial to select a generic freshwater archetype on which this analysis should be based. Finally, the new model framework was extended to apply within the Unit World Model (UWM) framework to estimate critical loads (CLs) of cationic metals to surface aquatic systems.

Valuation of environmental impacts in monetary terms is a both difficult and controversial undertaking. However, the need to highlight the value of ecosystem services in policy decisions has become more and more evident in the face of climate change and diminishing biodiversity in the sea and other ecosystems. Valuing non-market goods and services, like ecosystem services, is a lively research field within environmental economics, and valuation methods have been considerably elaborated in the last ten years. In practical policy analyses, there is often a need for readily available valuations of different impacts. This thesis explores and develops several ways to include valuation of environmental impacts in different policy tools, such as cost-benefit analysis, environmental accounting and life-cycle analysis. The first paper in this thesis is a part of the Swedish attempts to construct and calculate an environmentally adjusted NDP (net national product). This work involved putting a price on non-marketed environmental goods and assets. The valuation methods used in paper I include many of the available methods to value non-marketed goods and services. Valuation of environmental impacts and/or environmental pressures is used in a number of environmental systems analysis tools besides environmental accounting. Examples are Cost-Benefit Analysis, Life Cycle Assessment, Life Cycle Cost analysis, Strategic Environmental Assessment and Environmental Management Systems. These tools have been developed in different contexts and for different purposes; the way valuation is used also differs. In paper II, the current use of values/weights in the tools is explored, as well as the usefulness of a common valuation/weighting scheme and necessary qualities of such a scheme. In the third paper, a set of generic weights meeting these criteria is developed. Some of the generic values in the weighting set are taken from directly from other studies, while some are calculated by applying a benefit transfer method called structural benefit transfer on results from selected valuation studies. The method is tested on a number of valuation studies in the fourth paper. Climate change will have a significant impact on Sweden during this century, both positive and negative. In the fifth paper, a rough estimate of the impacts on man-made capital and human health is presented. The study is an example of an impact assessment including only marketed assets valued with market prices. In the last paper, the economics of sustainable energy use is discussed; what is a sustainable energy price, and how might growth be affected if energy use is limited to a sustainable level? The discussion is based on two different models of thought: a back-casting study, describing how a sustainable future society might look like, and economic scenarios projected with general equilibrium models. / QC 20100330

No description available.

No description available.

In much of Australia and the United States, the almost universal right to have a house on rural allotments has resulted in rural living settlement in areas intended, by land use planning policy, to be used for agriculture. Such ‘unplanned’ rural living has a range of potential adverse impacts, including, among other things, loss of agricultural production, land use conflicts with agriculture, land value constraints on farm restructuring, and changes to the rural landscape character. Given the strongly held community perception of a house as a development right, this research was motivated by the need to understand the effects of that right, in order to assess the potential value of any change in policy. An integral consideration was the influence of the size of allotments with any such right. The research was also driven by an interest in explaining the pattern of unplanned rural living settlement, i.e. why are particular allotments converted and others not? Largely in the absence of previous studies of unplanned rural living as a distinct phenomenon, there was scope for this thesis to make a contribution to knowledge in these respects. The research involved three stages of empirical analysis. Firstly, a Queensland-wide survey of land use conversion from sugarcane production supported the choice of the Bundaberg region as the study area. Contingency table analyses were then conducted into the current land use and other attributes of land in the study area that, in 1980, was used for sugarcane. Those analyses identified distinguishing attributes of the different land use sub-sets of allotments, and informed the selection of observation units for the third stage. The third stage provided the principal basis for fulfilling the research objectives. It focused on logit models of the choice, at the time of sale, between using a particular allotment for unplanned rural living or sugarcane production. Those analyses provided an indication of the role of individual land attributes while controlling for the effects of other attributes. It was found there had been limited conversion of suitable, productive sugarcane land to unplanned rural living. Compared to those allotments that remained in sugarcane production, allotments converted to rural living were, on average, much smaller, of less value, had lower agricultural production potential, and were situated in more undulating and forested landscapes further from Bundaberg. These clear distinctions between rural living and sugarcane allotments contributed to logit models with high explanatory power. The expected productive income of allotments had overwhelming weight and was highly statistically significant in explaining the land use choice between unplanned rural living and sugarcane. This is a notable finding, because some other studies have not shown such a strong relationship between land use and measures such as soil productivity. There was a degree of natural coincidence between more undulating and forested landscapes and lower productive potential. Notably, landscape attributes appeared to be of secondary importance in determining land use. The presence of a house at the time of sale was not a statistically significant explanatory factor for land use. This finding, together with that of limited conversion of suitable, productive land to unplanned rural living, meant there was a lack of evidence to support a change to the right to have a house on rural allotments. The findings did indicate that the allotment area required to avoid conversion to unplanned rural living was different to the area required for agricultural viability. In the circumstances of this study area and period, 20 ha would have been an acceptable minimum to retain suitable cropping land in productive use. This is compared to the 60 ha suggested as necessary for farm viability. However, the potential for changed economic conditions to reduce the productive value of agricultural land, and increase demand for rural living, makes it appropriate to be cautious about permitted allotment sizes. A detailed conceptual framework informed the selection of observation units and variables for the third stage of analyses. The framework helped to confirm allotment sales as the observation units, and provided the rationale for excluding the difficult to measure influences of a landowner’s attachment to the land, and inertia, as explanatory variables. The high explanatory power of the logit models provides support for the approach, which may be useful in future studies.

In much of Australia and the United States, the almost universal right to have a house on rural allotments has resulted in rural living settlement in areas intended, by land use planning policy, to be used for agriculture. Such ‘unplanned’ rural living has a range of potential adverse impacts, including, among other things, loss of agricultural production, land use conflicts with agriculture, land value constraints on farm restructuring, and changes to the rural landscape character. Given the strongly held community perception of a house as a development right, this research was motivated by the need to understand the effects of that right, in order to assess the potential value of any change in policy. An integral consideration was the influence of the size of allotments with any such right. The research was also driven by an interest in explaining the pattern of unplanned rural living settlement, i.e. why are particular allotments converted and others not? Largely in the absence of previous studies of unplanned rural living as a distinct phenomenon, there was scope for this thesis to make a contribution to knowledge in these respects. The research involved three stages of empirical analysis. Firstly, a Queensland-wide survey of land use conversion from sugarcane production supported the choice of the Bundaberg region as the study area. Contingency table analyses were then conducted into the current land use and other attributes of land in the study area that, in 1980, was used for sugarcane. Those analyses identified distinguishing attributes of the different land use sub-sets of allotments, and informed the selection of observation units for the third stage. The third stage provided the principal basis for fulfilling the research objectives. It focused on logit models of the choice, at the time of sale, between using a particular allotment for unplanned rural living or sugarcane production. Those analyses provided an indication of the role of individual land attributes while controlling for the effects of other attributes. It was found there had been limited conversion of suitable, productive sugarcane land to unplanned rural living. Compared to those allotments that remained in sugarcane production, allotments converted to rural living were, on average, much smaller, of less value, had lower agricultural production potential, and were situated in more undulating and forested landscapes further from Bundaberg. These clear distinctions between rural living and sugarcane allotments contributed to logit models with high explanatory power. The expected productive income of allotments had overwhelming weight and was highly statistically significant in explaining the land use choice between unplanned rural living and sugarcane. This is a notable finding, because some other studies have not shown such a strong relationship between land use and measures such as soil productivity. There was a degree of natural coincidence between more undulating and forested landscapes and lower productive potential. Notably, landscape attributes appeared to be of secondary importance in determining land use. The presence of a house at the time of sale was not a statistically significant explanatory factor for land use. This finding, together with that of limited conversion of suitable, productive land to unplanned rural living, meant there was a lack of evidence to support a change to the right to have a house on rural allotments. The findings did indicate that the allotment area required to avoid conversion to unplanned rural living was different to the area required for agricultural viability. In the circumstances of this study area and period, 20 ha would have been an acceptable minimum to retain suitable cropping land in productive use. This is compared to the 60 ha suggested as necessary for farm viability. However, the potential for changed economic conditions to reduce the productive value of agricultural land, and increase demand for rural living, makes it appropriate to be cautious about permitted allotment sizes. A detailed conceptual framework informed the selection of observation units and variables for the third stage of analyses. The framework helped to confirm allotment sales as the observation units, and provided the rationale for excluding the difficult to measure influences of a landowner’s attachment to the land, and inertia, as explanatory variables. The high explanatory power of the logit models provides support for the approach, which may be useful in future studies.