This dissertation critically reviews the quality of South African environmental authorisations through the application of a methodology adopted from the Lee and Colley (1999) environmental impact assessment (EIA) report review package. The literature review shows that to date limited research has been conducted on the quality of environmental authorisations nationally. Anecdotal evidence suggests that environmental authorisations are of weak quality; hence the development of guidelines on the compilation of environmental authorisations by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA). In this dissertation, the quality of the environmental authorisations is critically reviewed against the requirements of the National Environmental Management Act (Act No. 107 of 1998) and departmental guidelines. The research concludes that only 64% of reviewed authorisations are deemed satisfactory, while 36% were unsatisfactory. When the basic assessment report (BAR) and scoping and environmental impact assessment (S&EIA) process authorisations are compared it is concluded that the there is a minimal difference in quality. The BAR achieved a 69% satisfactory rating while the S&EIA process achieved a 61% satisfactory rating. The dissertation concludes by making recommendations to improve the quality of authorisations. / M (Environmental Management), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015

This dissertation critically reviews the quality of South African environmental authorisations through the application of a methodology adopted from the Lee and Colley (1999) environmental impact assessment (EIA) report review package. The literature review shows that to date limited research has been conducted on the quality of environmental authorisations nationally. Anecdotal evidence suggests that environmental authorisations are of weak quality; hence the development of guidelines on the compilation of environmental authorisations by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA). In this dissertation, the quality of the environmental authorisations is critically reviewed against the requirements of the National Environmental Management Act (Act No. 107 of 1998) and departmental guidelines. The research concludes that only 64% of reviewed authorisations are deemed satisfactory, while 36% were unsatisfactory. When the basic assessment report (BAR) and scoping and environmental impact assessment (S&EIA) process authorisations are compared it is concluded that the there is a minimal difference in quality. The BAR achieved a 69% satisfactory rating while the S&EIA process achieved a 61% satisfactory rating. The dissertation concludes by making recommendations to improve the quality of authorisations. / M (Environmental Management), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015

In order to make decisions to approve filling stations, an environmental impact assessment (EIA) needs to be conducted and evaluated by the competent authority. Although numerous filling stations have been authorised for operation, the quality of the EIA reports that form the basis for decision making has never been evaluated. The evaluation of the quality of EIA reports on filling station developments by means of an adapted Lee–Colley review package formed the basis of this research. The main conclusion was that the quality of the EIA reports for filling station developments, as reviewed by the adapted review package, is generally of a poor standard. This means that a decision to approve a new filling station is generally based on just enough information to the competent authority. The main deficiencies in the EIA reports related to site description, cumulative impacts and mitigation measures, while the environment description, identification of impacts, scoping of impacts, assessment of impact significance and emphasis (impacts) in the reports were of good quality. The results from the reviewed EIA’s correspond mostly with the literature on the review of EIA reports. / Thesis (M. Environmental Management)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012.

In order to make decisions to approve filling stations, an environmental impact assessment (EIA) needs to be conducted and evaluated by the competent authority. Although numerous filling stations have been authorised for operation, the quality of the EIA reports that form the basis for decision making has never been evaluated. The evaluation of the quality of EIA reports on filling station developments by means of an adapted Lee–Colley review package formed the basis of this research. The main conclusion was that the quality of the EIA reports for filling station developments, as reviewed by the adapted review package, is generally of a poor standard. This means that a decision to approve a new filling station is generally based on just enough information to the competent authority. The main deficiencies in the EIA reports related to site description, cumulative impacts and mitigation measures, while the environment description, identification of impacts, scoping of impacts, assessment of impact significance and emphasis (impacts) in the reports were of good quality. The results from the reviewed EIA’s correspond mostly with the literature on the review of EIA reports. / Thesis (M. Environmental Management)--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012.

Biodiversity considerations form an essential component of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), especially in areas with both a high biodiversity value and development pressure such as the Cape Floristic Region (CFR) in South Africa. Limited research has been conducted within the South African context on the quality of biodiversity inputs to EIA. The aim of this research was to evaluate the quality of biodiversity input to EIA in the CFR. To address this aim, a customised review package was generated to evaluate the quality of 26 Biodiversity Impact Assessment (BIA) reports in the CFR. The results were then compared with international trends of biodiversity input to EIA in order to show how prevalent such trends are within an area with high biodiversity value. This comparison showed that the quality of biodiversity input to EIA in the CFR generally concur with inadequacies identified in international EIA literature. Typically, significant weaknesses identified during the review were the lack of public participation and an insufficient evaluation of alternatives. Specialists also failed to develop adequate monitoring programmes. Furthermore, a very pertinent limitation was that, in general, assessments are conducted during inappropriate seasons and over insufficient time periods. However, some variations to the international trends are also present within the Region. For example, a particular strength was that a precautionary approach was adopted by most of the specialists to avoid negative impacts on biodiversity. In addition, specialists did not merely focus on lower levels (species and habitats) of biodiversity, but incorporated ecological processes in assessment techniques. The inadequacies identified in this dissertation pose particular challenges for biodiversity management and conservation practices. The development and implementation of mechanisms such as Best Practice Guidelines and improved biodiversity related legislation is proposed to improve biodiversity input to EIA. / M Environmental Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014

A Política Nacional do Meio Ambiente visa compatibilizar o desenvolvimento socioeconômico com a qualidade ambiental. A Avaliação de Impacto Ambiental, um de seus instrumentos, utiliza-se do Estudo de Impacto Ambiental (EIA) na sua aplicação em projetos ou empreendimentos. A elaboração do EIA envolve a etapa de diagnóstico para análise da qualidade ambiental da área. A qualidade do EIA e do diagnóstico tem sido objeto de críticas e descrédito junto à sociedade, principalmente à comunidade científica e às associações ambientalistas. Sabe-se que a qualidade do diagnóstico influencia diretamente a efetividade processual do EIA e seu papel como influenciador da tomada de decisão; assim, uma avaliação da qualidade dessa etapa do EIA contribui com a aplicação mais efetiva desse instrumento. A pesquisa visou avaliar a qualidade do diagnóstico biótico dos EIAs do Estado de São Paulo elaborados entre 2005 e 2014. Para isso, proposições ao diagnóstico biótico foram reunidas em uma lista de verificação, utilizada para a avaliação de 55 diagnósticos bióticos e 35 termos de referência de EIAs. Os resultados foram analisados qualitativamente e em comparação com as recomendações dos termos de referência (TRs) analisados. Posteriormente, a qualidade dos diagnósticos foi analisada sob três perspectivas: aprovação dos estudos, tipo de empreendimento e ano de elaboração do EIA. Por fim, foi realizada análise de componentes principais não-linear (NLPCA) para os dados de diagnóstico, no intuito de testar a sugestão de aplicação dessa ferramenta para a identificação dos critérios determinantes para a qualidade dos diagnósticos e possíveis relações entre esses critérios e entre os estudos. A qualidade dos diagnósticos bióticos analisados foi mais satisfatória para aspectos descritivos do que analíticos. Foram determinantes para a qualidade dos estudos critérios relativos à coleta de dados quantitativos e levantamentos para espécies raras, segundo a NLPCA. Tempo de levantamento e sazonalidade foram considerados insatisfatórios, e apresentaram relação estatística com a identificação do grau de vulnerabilidade da área. Os resultados realçaram a importância da sistematização de dados de biodiversidade em fontes confiáveis e atualizadas para elaboração e análise de diagnósticos, e para TRs mais específicos, uma vez que, apesar de estarem sendo cumpridos pelos estudos, os TRs são genéricos e apresentam mais recomendações descritivas do que analíticas. Não houve diferença representativa entre a qualidade dos diagnósticos referentes a estudos aprovados e não aprovados, o setor de Obras Hidráulicas apresentou avaliações mais satisfatórias, o que foi salientado pela NLPCA e pode estar relacionado ao porte do projeto, e a análise temporal evidenciou uma tendência de melhora dos estudos e TRs. Tanto a lista de verificação quanto a NLPCA se mostraram ferramentas adequadas para a investigação da qualidade de diagnósticos biológicos de EIA / The Brazilian National Environmental Policy established Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as one of the 13 tools to reconcile socio-economic development with environmental quality. EIA involves the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) in its application to development projects. EIS drafting involves a baseline step for analysis of environmental quality of the area. The quality of the EIS and the baseline process has been criticized by society, especially by scientific community and environmental groups, and this quality directly influences the effectiveness of the EIA procedure and its role as a decision making tool. Thus, an evaluation of the quality of this EIS step contributes to a more effective application of this instrument. The research aimed to evaluate the quality of biotic baseline studies of EIS drawn up between 2005 and 2014 in the state of São Paulo. We assessed 55 biotic baseline studies and 35 terms of reference (TRs) of EISs by a checklist which consists of a set of recommendations from literature and regulations to biotic baseline studies. The results of baseline and TRs were analyzed qualitatively and compared to one another. Then, we looked at the baseline quality under three approaches: license emission, sector and project type of activity, and year of EIS preparation. Finally, multivariate analysis was performed by Nonlinear Principal Component Analysis (NLPCA) for the baseline quality data in order to test the application of this analysis for the identification of critical and determinant criteria for the quality of baseline and the investigation of how these criteria and the EISs are related to one another. Results point to more satisfactory descriptive than analytical issues. Criteria of quantitative data collecting and surveys of rare species were determinants for baseline quality. Time of survey and seasonality was an unsatisfactory criterion, and statistically related to the vulnerability degree of the area. Results highlighted the importance of systematization of biodiversity data in reliable and updated sources useful for EISs preparation and analysis and for the draft of TRs in a more specific way. TRs were satisfactorily complied by the baseline content, but they are generic and present more descriptive than analytical recommendations. There was no representative difference between the quality of baseline of approved and not approved EISs. Hydraulic project showed more satisfactory evaluations, emphasized by NLPCA, and it may be related to the size of the project. Temporal analysis highlighted an improvement trend of studies and TRs. Thus, both the checklist as NLPCA proved to be suitable tools to the assessment of biological baseline studies of EIS

A Política Nacional do Meio Ambiente visa compatibilizar o desenvolvimento socioeconômico com a qualidade ambiental. A Avaliação de Impacto Ambiental, um de seus instrumentos, utiliza-se do Estudo de Impacto Ambiental (EIA) na sua aplicação em projetos ou empreendimentos. A elaboração do EIA envolve a etapa de diagnóstico para análise da qualidade ambiental da área. A qualidade do EIA e do diagnóstico tem sido objeto de críticas e descrédito junto à sociedade, principalmente à comunidade científica e às associações ambientalistas. Sabe-se que a qualidade do diagnóstico influencia diretamente a efetividade processual do EIA e seu papel como influenciador da tomada de decisão; assim, uma avaliação da qualidade dessa etapa do EIA contribui com a aplicação mais efetiva desse instrumento. A pesquisa visou avaliar a qualidade do diagnóstico biótico dos EIAs do Estado de São Paulo elaborados entre 2005 e 2014. Para isso, proposições ao diagnóstico biótico foram reunidas em uma lista de verificação, utilizada para a avaliação de 55 diagnósticos bióticos e 35 termos de referência de EIAs. Os resultados foram analisados qualitativamente e em comparação com as recomendações dos termos de referência (TRs) analisados. Posteriormente, a qualidade dos diagnósticos foi analisada sob três perspectivas: aprovação dos estudos, tipo de empreendimento e ano de elaboração do EIA. Por fim, foi realizada análise de componentes principais não-linear (NLPCA) para os dados de diagnóstico, no intuito de testar a sugestão de aplicação dessa ferramenta para a identificação dos critérios determinantes para a qualidade dos diagnósticos e possíveis relações entre esses critérios e entre os estudos. A qualidade dos diagnósticos bióticos analisados foi mais satisfatória para aspectos descritivos do que analíticos. Foram determinantes para a qualidade dos estudos critérios relativos à coleta de dados quantitativos e levantamentos para espécies raras, segundo a NLPCA. Tempo de levantamento e sazonalidade foram considerados insatisfatórios, e apresentaram relação estatística com a identificação do grau de vulnerabilidade da área. Os resultados realçaram a importância da sistematização de dados de biodiversidade em fontes confiáveis e atualizadas para elaboração e análise de diagnósticos, e para TRs mais específicos, uma vez que, apesar de estarem sendo cumpridos pelos estudos, os TRs são genéricos e apresentam mais recomendações descritivas do que analíticas. Não houve diferença representativa entre a qualidade dos diagnósticos referentes a estudos aprovados e não aprovados, o setor de Obras Hidráulicas apresentou avaliações mais satisfatórias, o que foi salientado pela NLPCA e pode estar relacionado ao porte do projeto, e a análise temporal evidenciou uma tendência de melhora dos estudos e TRs. Tanto a lista de verificação quanto a NLPCA se mostraram ferramentas adequadas para a investigação da qualidade de diagnósticos biológicos de EIA / The Brazilian National Environmental Policy established Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as one of the 13 tools to reconcile socio-economic development with environmental quality. EIA involves the Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) in its application to development projects. EIS drafting involves a baseline step for analysis of environmental quality of the area. The quality of the EIS and the baseline process has been criticized by society, especially by scientific community and environmental groups, and this quality directly influences the effectiveness of the EIA procedure and its role as a decision making tool. Thus, an evaluation of the quality of this EIS step contributes to a more effective application of this instrument. The research aimed to evaluate the quality of biotic baseline studies of EIS drawn up between 2005 and 2014 in the state of São Paulo. We assessed 55 biotic baseline studies and 35 terms of reference (TRs) of EISs by a checklist which consists of a set of recommendations from literature and regulations to biotic baseline studies. The results of baseline and TRs were analyzed qualitatively and compared to one another. Then, we looked at the baseline quality under three approaches: license emission, sector and project type of activity, and year of EIS preparation. Finally, multivariate analysis was performed by Nonlinear Principal Component Analysis (NLPCA) for the baseline quality data in order to test the application of this analysis for the identification of critical and determinant criteria for the quality of baseline and the investigation of how these criteria and the EISs are related to one another. Results point to more satisfactory descriptive than analytical issues. Criteria of quantitative data collecting and surveys of rare species were determinants for baseline quality. Time of survey and seasonality was an unsatisfactory criterion, and statistically related to the vulnerability degree of the area. Results highlighted the importance of systematization of biodiversity data in reliable and updated sources useful for EISs preparation and analysis and for the draft of TRs in a more specific way. TRs were satisfactorily complied by the baseline content, but they are generic and present more descriptive than analytical recommendations. There was no representative difference between the quality of baseline of approved and not approved EISs. Hydraulic project showed more satisfactory evaluations, emphasized by NLPCA, and it may be related to the size of the project. Temporal analysis highlighted an improvement trend of studies and TRs. Thus, both the checklist as NLPCA proved to be suitable tools to the assessment of biological baseline studies of EIS

Biodiversity considerations form an essential component of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), especially in areas with both a high biodiversity value and development pressure such as the Cape Floristic Region (CFR) in South Africa. Limited research has been conducted within the South African context on the quality of biodiversity inputs to EIA. The aim of this research was to evaluate the quality of biodiversity input to EIA in the CFR. To address this aim, a customised review package was generated to evaluate the quality of 26 Biodiversity Impact Assessment (BIA) reports in the CFR. The results were then compared with international trends of biodiversity input to EIA in order to show how prevalent such trends are within an area with high biodiversity value. This comparison showed that the quality of biodiversity input to EIA in the CFR generally concur with inadequacies identified in international EIA literature. Typically, significant weaknesses identified during the review were the lack of public participation and an insufficient evaluation of alternatives. Specialists also failed to develop adequate monitoring programmes. Furthermore, a very pertinent limitation was that, in general, assessments are conducted during inappropriate seasons and over insufficient time periods. However, some variations to the international trends are also present within the Region. For example, a particular strength was that a precautionary approach was adopted by most of the specialists to avoid negative impacts on biodiversity. In addition, specialists did not merely focus on lower levels (species and habitats) of biodiversity, but incorporated ecological processes in assessment techniques. The inadequacies identified in this dissertation pose particular challenges for biodiversity management and conservation practices. The development and implementation of mechanisms such as Best Practice Guidelines and improved biodiversity related legislation is proposed to improve biodiversity input to EIA. / M Environmental Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2014