This report discusses public participation in a Megaproject Environmental Assessment and Review Process, specifically, the Alcan aluminum smelter review process. Two methods are employed to assess the Alcan process - the first, a review of related literature on public participation and environmental assessment processes. Secondly, a survey of public attitudes and concerns towards the megaproject assessment and review process. A set of ideal guidelines for government, industry or proponent, and the public to follow in an environmental assessment and review process is developed. These guidelines are discussed in chapter seven of the report, along with a critique of the events that occurred in the Alcan review process. A modified megaproject environmental assessment and review process is developed, based on the results of the review of related literature; attitude survey; and an examination of the Manitoba Environmental Assessment and Review Process and the review process formulated to review the Alacan proposal. This modified Megaproject Environmental Assessment and Review Process is presented and discussed in chapter seven. Four recommendations are advanced in chapter eight specific to the Alcan process. These recommendations apply more generally to the Manitoba Environmental Assessment and Review Process. In summary, I recommend: 1) A legislative basis to the Manitoba Environmental Assessment and Review Process; 2) An expanded definition of environment to include the socio-economic environment; 3) Financing of legitimate interest groups; and 4) A clear definition of the Environmental Assessment and Review Process. This should outline all opportunities for public involvement; information for the public on the review process; opportunity for the public to participate in the development and review of the EIA guidelines and completed environmental impact statement; and requiring both government and industry to involve the public in the review process.

This article contributes to dialog in the field about the nature of the manuscript review process. It develops a psychoanalytic framework for understanding how participants in the review process construct each other as subjects in discourse and why the experience of alienation inevitably marks this process. The framework suggests that participants can draw on different subject positions with regard to this alienation. One is imaginary and entails the failed fantasy that lack and alienation can be overcome. The other is symbolic and entails a mutual engagement with this failure. The article suggests imaginary positions are less constructive, resulting in struggles between participants as others. By contrast, it suggests symbolic positions are more constructive, resulting in struggles with otherness and opportunities for more creative outcomes. The article explores reviewer reflexivity as an important element of symbolic interactions in which participants have responsibility for the production of relationships in the review process.

Sustainability is vital to the success of our cities and settlements. While communities are becoming increasingly conversant with sustainability concepts, uncertainty remains over how to translate these into planning practice. This practicum explores the role of sustainability checklists as one tool for planning and designing more sustainable communities. The inquiry examines the design, implementation and effectiveness of these tools and seeks to understand the motivation and context in which they are developed, the varying approaches and components of checklist tools, and the impact that they are having on planning and development practices. A review of twenty-four sustainability checklists from a selection of BC municipalities, an online survey and key informant interviews were used to inform this study. Nine key findings are identified suggesting that while checklists are helping to communicate sustainability objectives and are encouraging better development, they are not resulting in the large scale shifts to development patterns and urban systems that are required to achieve sustainable outcomes; therefore, checklists need to be integrated with other policies, regulations and tools in order to assist in achieving sustainable settlements.

Sustainability is vital to the success of our cities and settlements. While communities are becoming increasingly conversant with sustainability concepts, uncertainty remains over how to translate these into planning practice. This practicum explores the role of sustainability checklists as one tool for planning and designing more sustainable communities. The inquiry examines the design, implementation and effectiveness of these tools and seeks to understand the motivation and context in which they are developed, the varying approaches and components of checklist tools, and the impact that they are having on planning and development practices. A review of twenty-four sustainability checklists from a selection of BC municipalities, an online survey and key informant interviews were used to inform this study. Nine key findings are identified suggesting that while checklists are helping to communicate sustainability objectives and are encouraging better development, they are not resulting in the large scale shifts to development patterns and urban systems that are required to achieve sustainable outcomes; therefore, checklists need to be integrated with other policies, regulations and tools in order to assist in achieving sustainable settlements.

This study contributes to the performance measurement (PM) literature by providing validated measures of PM system use and increased understanding of the impact of PM use on organizational outcomes. The purpose of this study was to articulate and test the relationships between PM system use, organizational learning, and organizational performance by taking into account the effects of PM-related technical factors (namely, PM system maturity and review process (RP) maturity). The concept of PM use was explored through the examination of its underlying processes, as reflected in the literature and two case studies, and a set of practices delineating PM use processes were proposed. Following a scale development approach, a measurement instrument of PM use was developed and validated with empirical data collected through a web-based questionnaire. The results from factor analysis showed the need to revise the initial set of PM use practices into five dimensions: monitoring, problem-finding, problem-solving, validating causal relationships, and validating improvement actions. Additionally, new measures were developed to assess PM and RP maturity factors. The factor analysis results identified four maturity variables: managed RP, optimized RP, PM design and PM implementation. Data from 216 managers participating in RP meetings were used to test the hypothesized relationships via partial least square (PLS). The results provide varying support for the hypotheses defined. First, the results show that monitoring directly impacts organizational performance while problem-finding, problem-solving and validating causal relationships indirectly impact organizational performance through shared vision and team learning. These indirect effects were positive in some cases and negative in others, depending on the direction of the relationship between the use variable and the organizational learning variable. Second, validating improvement actions did not influence organizational outcomes. Finally, the only moderating effect found was managed RP on the relationship between validating causal relationships and financial performance. Because of the weak support for moderating effects, an alternative model was proposed, exploring these maturity variables as antecedents of PM use. The results provided substantial support for this alternate model. Practical implications and areas for future research are also identified and discussed. / Ph. D.

South Africa is one of the world's foremost mining nations and mining and its associated industries continue to form the cornerstone of the country's economy. However, the mining industry has, by its very nature, the potential to endanger human health and safety, as well as the physical environment. Consequently, mining will always contend with major environmental challenges and remain under constant public pressure to demonstrate its commitment to responsible environmental management. The key to effective environmental management is the use of a systematic approach to plan, control and improve environmental efforts. An Environmental Management System (EMS) employs such an approach and allows organisations to address environmental concerns in an orderly and consistent manner. Such a system allows organisations to anticipate and meet their environmental objectives and to ensure ongoing compliance with national and/or international requirements. An organisation with no existing EMS should, initially, establish its current position with regard to the environment by means of an initial review process. The aim should be to consider all environmental aspects of the organisation as a basis for establishing the EMS. Although a few gold mines in South Africa have implemented an EMS, the question of which significant environmental aspects need to be managed in such a system at a deep level gold mine shaft, remains largely unanswered. This study endeavoured to provide answers to this question and develop a generic model for the initial review process of a deep level gold mine shaft. The development of such a model should facilitate the development and implementation of an EMS at such shafts, thereby contributing to reduce the environmental impact of gold mines. The research consisted of a literature review of national and international literature on the topic and a comparative empirical study, which evaluated the mining operations of two deep level gold mine shafts. Data collection and analysis was done according to the IS0 14015 guideline on the environmental assessment of sites and organisations. Other techniques used included business process analysis, the use of modified Leopoldt matrices and risk analysis to determine the significance of the environmental impacts and aspects. This study contributed to a generic model for the initial environmental review process that precedes the development of an EMS at deep level gold mine shafts through: developing a generic sub-model that can be used to determine the scope of any deep level gold mine shaft; identifying some of the significant environmental impacts and aspects of deep level gold mine shafts, as well as identifying some generic business activities that are potentially destructive and carry a high risk of causing significant negative environmental impacts. / Thesis (M. Environmental Management)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

South Africa is one of the world's foremost mining nations and mining and its associated industries continue to form the cornerstone of the country's economy. However, the mining industry has, by its very nature, the potential to endanger human health and safety, as well as the physical environment. Consequently, mining will always contend with major environmental challenges and remain under constant public pressure to demonstrate its commitment to responsible environmental management. The key to effective environmental management is the use of a systematic approach to plan, control and improve environmental efforts. An Environmental Management System (EMS) employs such an approach and allows organisations to address environmental concerns in an orderly and consistent manner. Such a system allows organisations to anticipate and meet their environmental objectives and to ensure ongoing compliance with national and/or international requirements. An organisation with no existing EMS should, initially, establish its current position with regard to the environment by means of an initial review process. The aim should be to consider all environmental aspects of the organisation as a basis for establishing the EMS. Although a few gold mines in South Africa have implemented an EMS, the question of which significant environmental aspects need to be managed in such a system at a deep level gold mine shaft, remains largely unanswered. This study endeavoured to provide answers to this question and develop a generic model for the initial review process of a deep level gold mine shaft. The development of such a model should facilitate the development and implementation of an EMS at such shafts, thereby contributing to reduce the environmental impact of gold mines. The research consisted of a literature review of national and international literature on the topic and a comparative empirical study, which evaluated the mining operations of two deep level gold mine shafts. Data collection and analysis was done according to the IS0 14015 guideline on the environmental assessment of sites and organisations. Other techniques used included business process analysis, the use of modified Leopoldt matrices and risk analysis to determine the significance of the environmental impacts and aspects. This study contributed to a generic model for the initial environmental review process that precedes the development of an EMS at deep level gold mine shafts through: developing a generic sub-model that can be used to determine the scope of any deep level gold mine shaft; identifying some of the significant environmental impacts and aspects of deep level gold mine shafts, as well as identifying some generic business activities that are potentially destructive and carry a high risk of causing significant negative environmental impacts. / Thesis (M. Environmental Management)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

A pesquisa analisou o processo de avaliação pelos pares nas revistas brasileiras de Ciência da Informação como uma prática social na ciência. Além disso, verificou a estrutura editorial das revistas e a filiação institucional dos editores, membros das comissões editoriais e avaliadores. Para a coleta de dados, utilizou questionários distintos para cada sujeito e analisou partes textuais das seis revistas classificadas com conceito A (nacional) pelo Qualis/CAPES, a saber: Ciência da Informação, DataGramaZero, Encontros Bibli, Informação & Sociedade, Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação e Transinformação. Trata-se de um estudo descritivo que identificou como sujeitos os editores, membros das comissões editoriais, avaliadores e autores que contribuíram com as revistas em 2006. Os resultados apontaram que a estrutura editorial mais comum entre as revistas constitui-se de editor, comissão editorial, conselho consultivo e auxiliares. A maioria dos editores, membros das comissões editoriais e avaliadores são vinculados a instituições de ensino superior brasileiras ou estrangeiras. Sobre os procedimentos de avaliação, os resultados mostraram que o número de avaliadores por trabalho é no mínimo dois ou três. As revistas empregam critérios de avaliação que tratam dos aspectos formais e de conteúdo dos originais. A maioria dos membros das comissões editoriais e dos avaliadores considerou os procedimentos e critérios de avaliação satisfatórios. Entre os autores, a maior parte apontou que os procedimentos e critérios foram expressos com clareza pelas revistas. Os conflitos de interesse ocorreram com a minoria dos respondentes. A falta de respostas sobre alguns procedimentos adotados por uma revista dificultou a análise dos dados. Constata-se que as revistas, em sua maioria, seguem procedimentos de avaliação similares e de acordo com os padrões científicos. As diferenças principais estão relacionadas ao tipo de recompensa, ao formato do parecer dos avaliadores e à decisão final sobre a publicação dos artigos. / The study analyzed the peer review process in Brazilian journals of Information Science as a social practice in science. Moreover, it verified the editorial structure of scientific journals and the institutional affiliation of editors, members of editorial committees and reviewers. For the data gathering process, it utilized distinct questionnaires for each person and analyzed textual parts of six scientific journals graded A (national), according to Qualis/CAPES, namely: Ciência da Informação, DataGramaZero, Encontros Bibli, Informação & Sociedade, Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação e Transinformação. Subjects of this descriptive study are editors, members of editorial committees, reviewers and authors who have contributed to such journals in 2006. The results pointed that the most common editorial structure among the scientific journals is composed by editor, editorial committee, editorial board and assessors. Most of the editors, members of editorial committees and reviewers are affiliated to Brazilian or foreign institutions of higher education. Concerning the review procedures, the results revealed that the number of referees by articles is two or three. The scientific journals employ review criteria which deal with formal and content aspects of manuscripts. The majority of members of editorial committees and reviewers considered the procedures and review criteria satisfactory. The most part of the authors indicated that the procedures and review criteria were expressed clearly by scientific journals. Conflicts of interest occurred with the minority of respondents. The lack of answers about some procedures adopted by a scientific journal made the data analysis more difficult. Conclusions indicate that the scientific journals, in their majority, following similar peer review procedures and in accordance with scientific standards. The main differences are related to the type of recompense, the reviews format and the final decision about the publication of the articles.

A pesquisa analisou o processo de avaliação pelos pares nas revistas brasileiras de Ciência da Informação como uma prática social na ciência. Além disso, verificou a estrutura editorial das revistas e a filiação institucional dos editores, membros das comissões editoriais e avaliadores. Para a coleta de dados, utilizou questionários distintos para cada sujeito e analisou partes textuais das seis revistas classificadas com conceito A (nacional) pelo Qualis/CAPES, a saber: Ciência da Informação, DataGramaZero, Encontros Bibli, Informação & Sociedade, Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação e Transinformação. Trata-se de um estudo descritivo que identificou como sujeitos os editores, membros das comissões editoriais, avaliadores e autores que contribuíram com as revistas em 2006. Os resultados apontaram que a estrutura editorial mais comum entre as revistas constitui-se de editor, comissão editorial, conselho consultivo e auxiliares. A maioria dos editores, membros das comissões editoriais e avaliadores são vinculados a instituições de ensino superior brasileiras ou estrangeiras. Sobre os procedimentos de avaliação, os resultados mostraram que o número de avaliadores por trabalho é no mínimo dois ou três. As revistas empregam critérios de avaliação que tratam dos aspectos formais e de conteúdo dos originais. A maioria dos membros das comissões editoriais e dos avaliadores considerou os procedimentos e critérios de avaliação satisfatórios. Entre os autores, a maior parte apontou que os procedimentos e critérios foram expressos com clareza pelas revistas. Os conflitos de interesse ocorreram com a minoria dos respondentes. A falta de respostas sobre alguns procedimentos adotados por uma revista dificultou a análise dos dados. Constata-se que as revistas, em sua maioria, seguem procedimentos de avaliação similares e de acordo com os padrões científicos. As diferenças principais estão relacionadas ao tipo de recompensa, ao formato do parecer dos avaliadores e à decisão final sobre a publicação dos artigos. / The study analyzed the peer review process in Brazilian journals of Information Science as a social practice in science. Moreover, it verified the editorial structure of scientific journals and the institutional affiliation of editors, members of editorial committees and reviewers. For the data gathering process, it utilized distinct questionnaires for each person and analyzed textual parts of six scientific journals graded A (national), according to Qualis/CAPES, namely: Ciência da Informação, DataGramaZero, Encontros Bibli, Informação & Sociedade, Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação e Transinformação. Subjects of this descriptive study are editors, members of editorial committees, reviewers and authors who have contributed to such journals in 2006. The results pointed that the most common editorial structure among the scientific journals is composed by editor, editorial committee, editorial board and assessors. Most of the editors, members of editorial committees and reviewers are affiliated to Brazilian or foreign institutions of higher education. Concerning the review procedures, the results revealed that the number of referees by articles is two or three. The scientific journals employ review criteria which deal with formal and content aspects of manuscripts. The majority of members of editorial committees and reviewers considered the procedures and review criteria satisfactory. The most part of the authors indicated that the procedures and review criteria were expressed clearly by scientific journals. Conflicts of interest occurred with the minority of respondents. The lack of answers about some procedures adopted by a scientific journal made the data analysis more difficult. Conclusions indicate that the scientific journals, in their majority, following similar peer review procedures and in accordance with scientific standards. The main differences are related to the type of recompense, the reviews format and the final decision about the publication of the articles.

A pesquisa analisou o processo de avaliação pelos pares nas revistas brasileiras de Ciência da Informação como uma prática social na ciência. Além disso, verificou a estrutura editorial das revistas e a filiação institucional dos editores, membros das comissões editoriais e avaliadores. Para a coleta de dados, utilizou questionários distintos para cada sujeito e analisou partes textuais das seis revistas classificadas com conceito A (nacional) pelo Qualis/CAPES, a saber: Ciência da Informação, DataGramaZero, Encontros Bibli, Informação & Sociedade, Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação e Transinformação. Trata-se de um estudo descritivo que identificou como sujeitos os editores, membros das comissões editoriais, avaliadores e autores que contribuíram com as revistas em 2006. Os resultados apontaram que a estrutura editorial mais comum entre as revistas constitui-se de editor, comissão editorial, conselho consultivo e auxiliares. A maioria dos editores, membros das comissões editoriais e avaliadores são vinculados a instituições de ensino superior brasileiras ou estrangeiras. Sobre os procedimentos de avaliação, os resultados mostraram que o número de avaliadores por trabalho é no mínimo dois ou três. As revistas empregam critérios de avaliação que tratam dos aspectos formais e de conteúdo dos originais. A maioria dos membros das comissões editoriais e dos avaliadores considerou os procedimentos e critérios de avaliação satisfatórios. Entre os autores, a maior parte apontou que os procedimentos e critérios foram expressos com clareza pelas revistas. Os conflitos de interesse ocorreram com a minoria dos respondentes. A falta de respostas sobre alguns procedimentos adotados por uma revista dificultou a análise dos dados. Constata-se que as revistas, em sua maioria, seguem procedimentos de avaliação similares e de acordo com os padrões científicos. As diferenças principais estão relacionadas ao tipo de recompensa, ao formato do parecer dos avaliadores e à decisão final sobre a publicação dos artigos. / The study analyzed the peer review process in Brazilian journals of Information Science as a social practice in science. Moreover, it verified the editorial structure of scientific journals and the institutional affiliation of editors, members of editorial committees and reviewers. For the data gathering process, it utilized distinct questionnaires for each person and analyzed textual parts of six scientific journals graded A (national), according to Qualis/CAPES, namely: Ciência da Informação, DataGramaZero, Encontros Bibli, Informação & Sociedade, Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação e Transinformação. Subjects of this descriptive study are editors, members of editorial committees, reviewers and authors who have contributed to such journals in 2006. The results pointed that the most common editorial structure among the scientific journals is composed by editor, editorial committee, editorial board and assessors. Most of the editors, members of editorial committees and reviewers are affiliated to Brazilian or foreign institutions of higher education. Concerning the review procedures, the results revealed that the number of referees by articles is two or three. The scientific journals employ review criteria which deal with formal and content aspects of manuscripts. The majority of members of editorial committees and reviewers considered the procedures and review criteria satisfactory. The most part of the authors indicated that the procedures and review criteria were expressed clearly by scientific journals. Conflicts of interest occurred with the minority of respondents. The lack of answers about some procedures adopted by a scientific journal made the data analysis more difficult. Conclusions indicate that the scientific journals, in their majority, following similar peer review procedures and in accordance with scientific standards. The main differences are related to the type of recompense, the reviews format and the final decision about the publication of the articles.