Determinación de la eficacia en el tratamiento de la diversidad biológica en estudios de impacto ambiental
Loading...
Código QR
Authors
Almeida Leandro, Eduardo Arturo
Abstract
El Estudio de Impacto Ambiental (EIA) es un instrumento importante para la gestión ambiental, ya que busca asegurar la compatibilidad de las actividades humanas con la preservación del medio ambiente. Sin embargo, algunos estudios internacionales critican que su aplicación actual es solo descriptiva, poco predictiva y preventiva, lo que genera una brecha entre sus objetivos y su aplicación práctica. En este contexto, el presente trabajo pretende determinar la eficacia de los estudios de impacto ambiental del Perú en el tratamiento de la diversidad biológica. El estudio siguió un enfoque secuencial en tres fases. En la primera fase, se seleccionaron 100 EIA de un total de 777 aprobados entre 2004 y 2018, evaluando su cumplimiento con la normativa nacional vigente. Luego, en las siguientes fases, se evaluaron los mejores estudios de cada fase previa considerando directrices internacionales y guías de manejo adaptativo. La eficacia en el tratamiento de la diversidad biológica fue evaluada en la dimensión del procedimiento. Los resultados de la Fase I indicaron que la mayoría de los EIA obtuvieron la calificación “Deficiente” y una minoría con la calificación “Óptimo”; no obstante, los resultados también muestran una mejora gradual en la calidad de los estudios a lo largo del tiempo. En la Fase II, de los 22 EIA analizados, la mayoría de los estudios presentaron la calificación "Aceptable". En esta fase se identificaron deficiencias en el análisis de alternativas, en la caracterización de los impactos ambientales y en la estrategia de manejo. Finalmente, en la Fase III los resultados evidenciaron que la mayoría de los estudios no incorporan el manejo adaptativo de manera adecuada. Si bien los EIA abordan aspectos como la participación de las partes interesadas y los objetivos de manejo, presentan deficiencias en la descripción de las acciones potenciales de manejo, los modelos de predicción y los planes de monitoreo
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is an essential tool for managing the environment by ensuring that human activities are compatible with environmental preservation. However, some international studies criticize its current application, stating that it is merely descriptive and lacks predictability and preventive measures, thus creating a gap between its objectives and practical implementation. In this context, this study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of EIS in Peru in treating biodiversity. The study followed a sequential approach in three phases. In the first phase, 100 EIS were selected from 777 approved between 2004 and 2018, evaluating their compliance with current national regulations. In the subsequent phases, the best studies from each previous phase were evaluated considering international guidelines and adaptive management frameworks. The effectiveness of treating biodiversity was assessed in the procedural dimensions. The results of Phase I indicated that most of EIS received a "Deficient" rating, with a minority receiving an "Optimal" rating. However, there was also a gradual improvement in the quality of studies over time. In Phase II, out of the 22 EIS analyzed, the majority received an "Acceptable" rating. Deficiencies were identified in the analysis of alternatives, characterization of environmental impacts, and management strategy. Finally, in Phase III, the results showed that most studies do not adequately incorporate adaptive management. While EIS address aspects such as stakeholder participation and management objectives, they exhibit deficiencies in describing potential management actions, prediction models, and monitoring plans.
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is an essential tool for managing the environment by ensuring that human activities are compatible with environmental preservation. However, some international studies criticize its current application, stating that it is merely descriptive and lacks predictability and preventive measures, thus creating a gap between its objectives and practical implementation. In this context, this study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of EIS in Peru in treating biodiversity. The study followed a sequential approach in three phases. In the first phase, 100 EIS were selected from 777 approved between 2004 and 2018, evaluating their compliance with current national regulations. In the subsequent phases, the best studies from each previous phase were evaluated considering international guidelines and adaptive management frameworks. The effectiveness of treating biodiversity was assessed in the procedural dimensions. The results of Phase I indicated that most of EIS received a "Deficient" rating, with a minority receiving an "Optimal" rating. However, there was also a gradual improvement in the quality of studies over time. In Phase II, out of the 22 EIS analyzed, the majority received an "Acceptable" rating. Deficiencies were identified in the analysis of alternatives, characterization of environmental impacts, and management strategy. Finally, in Phase III, the results showed that most studies do not adequately incorporate adaptive management. While EIS address aspects such as stakeholder participation and management objectives, they exhibit deficiencies in describing potential management actions, prediction models, and monitoring plans.
Description
Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina. Facultad de Ciencias. Departamento
Académico de Biología
Keywords
Estudio de Impacto ambiental
Citation
Date
2024
Collections
Seleccionar año de consulta:
Licencia de uso
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess