Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements.
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFOP |
Texto Completo: | http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/handle/123456789/10745 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925518301689 |
Resumo: | For decades, authors and institutions have argued that the quality of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) is somehow affected by the volume of information they contain. Both too little and too much information can be a problem. However, very few academic studies have addressed the issue of EIS length in detail. The objective of this article was to systematically analyze the volume of information presented in EISs, using Brazil as the empirical context. More specifically, this study evaluated the volume and proportion of information disclosed in 49 Brazilian EISs. This study also tried to identify sectorial variations and whether variables such as project size and number of pages in Terms of References are likely determinants of information volume.>146 thousand pages of EIS information were scrutinized in two rounds of content analysis. Data were organized in spreadsheets and then coded and analyzed through various descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Overall, findings corroborate the fact that EISs are now significantly longer than the early ones, and still heavily loaded with baseline information. The average number of pages in EISs and in Non-technical Summaries was found to be 2993 and 94, respectively. Kruskal-Wallis and linear regression tests indicated that EIS length is likely affected by a combination of variables, including project size, territorial and sectorial characteristics. Such findings suggest that the historical approach of setting page limits to EISs through regulations and Terms of References is no longer appropriate for EIA practice in connection with large enterprises in Brazil, and arguably elsewhere. The article discusses its practical and academic implications, and highlights the need to further investigate the actual impacts of EIS length on decision-making. |
id |
UFOP_4bc834901aaa9fe875eb41120bd877ef |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:localhost:123456789/10745 |
network_acronym_str |
UFOP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFOP |
repository_id_str |
3233 |
spelling |
Rivera Fernández, Germán MarinoBrito, Ludmila Ladeira Alves deFonseca, Alberto de Freitas Castro2019-02-22T14:12:39Z2019-02-22T14:12:39Z2018FERNÁNDEZ, G. M. R.; BRITO, L. L. A. de.; FONSECA, A. de F. C. Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 73, p. 114-121, 2018. Disponível em: <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925518301689>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2019.01959255http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/handle/123456789/10745https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925518301689For decades, authors and institutions have argued that the quality of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) is somehow affected by the volume of information they contain. Both too little and too much information can be a problem. However, very few academic studies have addressed the issue of EIS length in detail. The objective of this article was to systematically analyze the volume of information presented in EISs, using Brazil as the empirical context. More specifically, this study evaluated the volume and proportion of information disclosed in 49 Brazilian EISs. This study also tried to identify sectorial variations and whether variables such as project size and number of pages in Terms of References are likely determinants of information volume.>146 thousand pages of EIS information were scrutinized in two rounds of content analysis. Data were organized in spreadsheets and then coded and analyzed through various descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Overall, findings corroborate the fact that EISs are now significantly longer than the early ones, and still heavily loaded with baseline information. The average number of pages in EISs and in Non-technical Summaries was found to be 2993 and 94, respectively. Kruskal-Wallis and linear regression tests indicated that EIS length is likely affected by a combination of variables, including project size, territorial and sectorial characteristics. Such findings suggest that the historical approach of setting page limits to EISs through regulations and Terms of References is no longer appropriate for EIA practice in connection with large enterprises in Brazil, and arguably elsewhere. The article discusses its practical and academic implications, and highlights the need to further investigate the actual impacts of EIS length on decision-making.EIS lengthEIS qualityInformation managementEnvironmental impact assessmentDecision-makingDoes size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessporreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFOPinstname:Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP)instacron:UFOPLICENSElicense.txtlicense.txttext/plain; charset=utf-8924http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/bitstream/123456789/10745/2/license.txt62604f8d955274beb56c80ce1ee5dcaeMD52ORIGINALARTIGO_DoesSizeMatter.pdfARTIGO_DoesSizeMatter.pdfapplication/pdf1080315http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/bitstream/123456789/10745/1/ARTIGO_DoesSizeMatter.pdf21cd7d1cf546da98eb19b9d7ea366215MD51123456789/107452019-02-22 09:12:39.435oai:localhost: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ório InstitucionalPUBhttp://www.repositorio.ufop.br/oai/requestrepositorio@ufop.edu.bropendoar:32332019-02-22T14:12:39Repositório Institucional da UFOP - Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. |
title |
Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. |
spellingShingle |
Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. Rivera Fernández, Germán Marino EIS length EIS quality Information management Environmental impact assessment Decision-making |
title_short |
Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. |
title_full |
Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. |
title_fullStr |
Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. |
title_sort |
Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. |
author |
Rivera Fernández, Germán Marino |
author_facet |
Rivera Fernández, Germán Marino Brito, Ludmila Ladeira Alves de Fonseca, Alberto de Freitas Castro |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Brito, Ludmila Ladeira Alves de Fonseca, Alberto de Freitas Castro |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Rivera Fernández, Germán Marino Brito, Ludmila Ladeira Alves de Fonseca, Alberto de Freitas Castro |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
EIS length EIS quality Information management Environmental impact assessment Decision-making |
topic |
EIS length EIS quality Information management Environmental impact assessment Decision-making |
description |
For decades, authors and institutions have argued that the quality of Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) is somehow affected by the volume of information they contain. Both too little and too much information can be a problem. However, very few academic studies have addressed the issue of EIS length in detail. The objective of this article was to systematically analyze the volume of information presented in EISs, using Brazil as the empirical context. More specifically, this study evaluated the volume and proportion of information disclosed in 49 Brazilian EISs. This study also tried to identify sectorial variations and whether variables such as project size and number of pages in Terms of References are likely determinants of information volume.>146 thousand pages of EIS information were scrutinized in two rounds of content analysis. Data were organized in spreadsheets and then coded and analyzed through various descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Overall, findings corroborate the fact that EISs are now significantly longer than the early ones, and still heavily loaded with baseline information. The average number of pages in EISs and in Non-technical Summaries was found to be 2993 and 94, respectively. Kruskal-Wallis and linear regression tests indicated that EIS length is likely affected by a combination of variables, including project size, territorial and sectorial characteristics. Such findings suggest that the historical approach of setting page limits to EISs through regulations and Terms of References is no longer appropriate for EIA practice in connection with large enterprises in Brazil, and arguably elsewhere. The article discusses its practical and academic implications, and highlights the need to further investigate the actual impacts of EIS length on decision-making. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2018 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2019-02-22T14:12:39Z |
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2019-02-22T14:12:39Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv |
FERNÁNDEZ, G. M. R.; BRITO, L. L. A. de.; FONSECA, A. de F. C. Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 73, p. 114-121, 2018. Disponível em: <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925518301689>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2019. |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/handle/123456789/10745 |
dc.identifier.issn.none.fl_str_mv |
01959255 |
dc.identifier.uri2.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925518301689 |
identifier_str_mv |
FERNÁNDEZ, G. M. R.; BRITO, L. L. A. de.; FONSECA, A. de F. C. Does size matter? An evaluation of length and proportion of information in environmental impact statements. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 73, p. 114-121, 2018. Disponível em: <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925518301689>. Acesso em: 11 fev. 2019. 01959255 |
url |
http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/handle/123456789/10745 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925518301689 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFOP instname:Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP) instacron:UFOP |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP) |
instacron_str |
UFOP |
institution |
UFOP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFOP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFOP |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/bitstream/123456789/10745/2/license.txt http://www.repositorio.ufop.br/bitstream/123456789/10745/1/ARTIGO_DoesSizeMatter.pdf |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
62604f8d955274beb56c80ce1ee5dcae 21cd7d1cf546da98eb19b9d7ea366215 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFOP - Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositorio@ufop.edu.br |
_version_ |
1801685734221938688 |