IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v49y2016icp204-212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The qualification process of mining projects in environmental impact assessment: Criteria and thresholds

Author

Listed:
  • Gałaś, Slávka
  • Gałaś, Andrzej

Abstract

The aim of the article is to compare the qualification process of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) applied for mining projects in the Visegrad Group countries (V4). Poland is a major producer of copper and silver, the Czech Republic produces kaolin and uranium, Slovakia – magnesite and Hungary – bauxite. Despite significant differences in mineral reserves in the mentioned countries, mineral deposits are treated as important natural resources that are the basis for development of power industry, construction industry and other various industrial branches. The paper determines importance of the qualification in the EIA procedure. In the next part, criteria and thresholds of the qualification of the EIA procedure resulting from division of projects depending on the possibility of significant environmental impact have been described. It has been shown that there are large differences in thresholds which qualify mining projects in the discussed countries to the EIA procedure. In comparison with the European Union EIA Directive, the V4 countries have more detailed (expanded) division of qualification criteria. Slovakia is the best example when concerning division of projects into particular types, while Polish solutions present the most detailed set of qualification criteria. In the Czech Republic, any new mining project is the subject to the mandatory EIA procedure, and in Hungary they are always the subject to the screening stage. Exploration works are the subject to the qualification process only in Poland and Hungary. They are based on such parameters as the depth of a given borehole and occurrence of other protected resources (groundwater, animated nature, etc.). The criteria and thresholds for the selection of projects that may potentially have significant impact on the environment also considerably differ in the degree of details and even units. The authors raise the question whether it is intentional or accidental, emphasising that the lack of precision in this area makes exploitation of mineral resources more complicated. It should be also emphasised that the EIA procedure is one of the most important instruments of environmental management allowing to achieve sustainable economic development.

Suggested Citation

  • Gałaś, Slávka & Gałaś, Andrzej, 2016. "The qualification process of mining projects in environmental impact assessment: Criteria and thresholds," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 204-212.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:49:y:2016:i:c:p:204-212
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2016.06.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420716300320
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2016.06.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joe Weston, 2000. "EIA, Decision-making Theory and Screening and Scoping in UK Practice," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 185-203.
    2. Nieć, Marek & Galos, Krzysztof & Szamałek, Krzysztof, 2014. "Main challenges of mineral resources policy of Poland," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 93-103.
    3. Jikun Huang & Fangbin Qiao & Linxiu Zhang & Scott Rozelle, 2000. "Farm Pesticide, Rice Production, and Human Health," EEPSEA Research Report rr2000051, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised May 2000.
    4. ., 2016. "The (re)production of corporate paths," Chapters, in: Rethinking Corporate Governance, chapter 3, pages 37-60, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Oecd, 2016. "Online Product Safety: Trends and Challenges," OECD Digital Economy Papers 261, OECD Publishing.
    6. -, 2016. "Productividad y brechas estructurales en México," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL en México (Estudios e Investigaciones) 40165, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    7. Divine Odame Appiah & Balikisu Osman, 2014. "Environmental Impact Assessment: Insights From Mining Communities In Ghana," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(04), pages 1-20.
    8. Aslan, Hadiye & Kumar, Praveen, 2016. "The product market effects of hedge fund activism," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 226-248.
    9. C. A. K. Lovell, 2016. "Recent Developments in Productivity Analysis," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 417-444, October.
    10. Joe Weston, 2004. "Eia Screening For Changes And Extensions To Existing Projects: Applying An Eu Perspective," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(02), pages 177-188.
    11. Amir Ikram & Qin Su & Muhammad Yasir Rafiq & Ramiz-Ur-Rehman, 2016. "Time series modelling for steel production," Journal of Developing Areas, Tennessee State University, College of Business, vol. 50(3), pages 191-207, July-Sept.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brijs, Tom & De Jonghe, Cedric & Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Belmans, Ronnie, 2017. "Interactions between the design of short-term electricity markets in the CWE region and power system flexibility," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 36-51.
    2. Lizana, Jesús & Chacartegui, Ricardo & Barrios-Padura, Angela & Ortiz, Carlos, 2018. "Advanced low-carbon energy measures based on thermal energy storage in buildings: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3705-3749.
    3. Xiao, Shuang & Sethi, Suresh P. & Liu, Mengqi & Ma, Shihua, 2017. "Coordinating contracts for a financially constrained supply chain," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 71-86.
    4. Lopez, Rigoberto A. & He, Xi & De Falcis, Eleonora, 2017. "What Drives China’s New Agricultural Subsidies?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 279-292.
    5. Buchholz, Thomas & Gunn, John S. & Saah, David S., 2017. "Greenhouse gas emissions of local wood pellet heat from northeastern US forests," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 483-491.
    6. Jikun Huang & Fangbin Qiao & Linxiu Zhang & Scott Rozelle, 2000. "Farm Pesticide, Rice Production, and Human Health," EEPSEA Research Report rr2000051, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised May 2000.
    7. Loureiro, Gilberto & Mendonça, Cesar, 2024. "Do large registered investment funds undermine shareholder activism? Evidence from hedge fund proposals," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    8. Marzena Smol & Paulina Marcinek & Joanna Duda & Dominika Szołdrowska, 2020. "Importance of Sustainable Mineral Resource Management in Implementing the Circular Economy (CE) Model and the European Green Deal Strategy," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-21, May.
    9. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    10. Bessler, Wolfgang & Vendrasco, Marco, 2022. "Corporate control and shareholder activism in Germany: An empirical analysis of hedge fund strategies," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    11. Nickolay Gantchev & Oleg R Gredil & Chotibhak Jotikasthira, 2019. "Governance under the Gun: Spillover Effects of Hedge Fund Activism," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 23(6), pages 1031-1068.
    12. Yamina Chouaibi & Matteo Rossi & Ghazi Zouari, 2021. "The Effect of Corporate Social Responsibility and the Executive Compensation on Implicit Cost of Equity: Evidence from French ESG Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    13. Ben Arfa, Nouha & Karmani, Majdi & Labaronne, Daniel, 2017. "Antecedents of hedge fund activism in French listed target firms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1315-1326.
    14. Azar, José & Schmalz, Martin & Tecu, Isabel, 2017. "Anti-Competitive Effects of Common Ownership," IESE Research Papers D/1169, IESE Business School.
    15. Durnev, Art & Mangen, Claudine, 2020. "The spillover effects of MD&A disclosures for real investment: The role of industry competition," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1).
    16. Zbigniew Kasztelewicz & Mateusz Sikora & Maciej Zajączkowski, 2020. "Method of Selecting Opening Cut Location Using Multi-Criteria Analysis of Decision Variant Mapping," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-14, September.
    17. Xiao, Fenglong & Shen, Yinjie, 2024. "Wolves at the door to the unknown: Innovation search and hedge fund activism," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    18. Hu, Ruifa & Cai, Yaqing & Chen, Kevin Z. & Huang, Jikun, 2012. "Effects of inclusive public agricultural extension service: Results from a policy reform experiment in western China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 962-974.
    19. Inder K. Khurana & Yinghua Li & Wei Wang, 2018. "The Effects of Hedge Fund Interventions on Strategic Firm Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(9), pages 4094-4117, September.
    20. Nilashi, Mehrbakhsh & Ali Abumalloh, Rabab & Keng-Boon, Ooi & Wei-Han Tan, Garry & Cham, Tat-Huei & Cheng-Xi Aw, Eugene, 2024. "Unlocking sustainable resource management: A comprehensive SWOT and thematic analysis of FinTech with a focus on mineral management," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:49:y:2016:i:c:p:204-212. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.