| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.86 KB | Unknown |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
A pós-avaliação tem um papel extremamente importante no contexto da Avaliação de Impacte Ambiental, sendo esta fase decisiva para garantir o cumprimento das condições impostas da Declaração de Impacte Ambiental (DIA)/Decisão sobre a Conformidade Ambiental do Projeto de Execução (DCAPE). É nesta fase que se assegura o cumprimento das medidas de minimização, de forma a minimizar os impactes identificados durante a AIA.
Analisados os 31 relatórios de monitorização sobre o fator recursos hídricos, na Região Hidrográfica do Vouga, Mondego e Lis, verificou-se que, muitos deles não apresentaram qualquer resposta e que, muitas das respostas apresentadas carecem de fundamentação, a falta de informação dificultou o alcance de resultados concretos.
Foi possível verificar também que, as metodologias utilizadas na Pós-avaliação, entre os países do Norte e os países do Sul são distintas, o que leva a crer que, a cultura de um país também pode influenciar na eficácia de resultados.
Assim, após 25 anos desde que a Pós-avaliação foi instituída, como procedimento obrigatório, ainda continua muito por fazer. Apesar de existir legislação a cumprir ainda existem muitas lacunas que devem ser melhoradas, como a formação e recrutamento de recursos humanos especializados, acompanhamento ativo nas diferentes fases do projeto, a participação pública, e, como acontece atualmente, inserir a inteligência artificial na análise de tratamento dos dados inseridos nos relatórios de monitorização.
Post-evaluation plays an extremely important role in the context of the Environmental Impact Assessment, as this phase is decisive in ensuring compliance with the conditions imposed in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Decision on the Environmental Compliance of the Detailed Design (DCAPE). It is at this stage that compliance with the minimisation measures is ensured, in order to minimise the impacts identified during the EIA. After analysing the 31 monitoring reports on the water resources factor in the Vouga, Mondego and Lis Hydrographic Region, it was found that many of them did not provide any answers and that many of the answers provided lacked justification, and that the lack of information made it difficult to achieve concrete results. It was also possible to verify that the methodologies used in the post-evaluation between the countries of the North and the countries of the South are different, which leads us to believe that a country's culture can also influence the effectiveness of results. So, after 25 years since post-evaluation was introduced as a compulsory procedure, much remains to be done. Although there is legislation to comply with, there are still many gaps that need to be improved, such as the training and recruitment of specialised human resources, active monitoring at the different stages of the project, public participation and, as is currently the case, the use of artificial intelligence in the analysis and processing of the data included in the monitoring reports.
Post-evaluation plays an extremely important role in the context of the Environmental Impact Assessment, as this phase is decisive in ensuring compliance with the conditions imposed in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Decision on the Environmental Compliance of the Detailed Design (DCAPE). It is at this stage that compliance with the minimisation measures is ensured, in order to minimise the impacts identified during the EIA. After analysing the 31 monitoring reports on the water resources factor in the Vouga, Mondego and Lis Hydrographic Region, it was found that many of them did not provide any answers and that many of the answers provided lacked justification, and that the lack of information made it difficult to achieve concrete results. It was also possible to verify that the methodologies used in the post-evaluation between the countries of the North and the countries of the South are different, which leads us to believe that a country's culture can also influence the effectiveness of results. So, after 25 years since post-evaluation was introduced as a compulsory procedure, much remains to be done. Although there is legislation to comply with, there are still many gaps that need to be improved, such as the training and recruitment of specialised human resources, active monitoring at the different stages of the project, public participation and, as is currently the case, the use of artificial intelligence in the analysis and processing of the data included in the monitoring reports.
Description
Keywords
Pós-avaliação Eficácia Recursos hídricos Avaliação de impacte ambiental