IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i19p12659-d932742.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Evaluation of the Quality of Environmental Impact Assessment Reports in the Mobile Telecommunications Infrastructure Sector: The Case of Plateau State in Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • Vincent D. Choji

    (Department of Geography, Environmental Management & Energy Studies, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa)

  • Isaac T. Rampedi

    (Department of Geography, Environmental Management & Energy Studies, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa)

  • Lee-Ann S. Modley

    (Department of Geography, Environmental Management & Energy Studies, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa)

  • Ayodeji P. Ifegbesan

    (Department of Arts and Social Sciences Education, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye 120107, Nigeria)

Abstract

Environmental impact assessment reports meant for proposed development actions can be evaluated to reveal their quality and fitness for the purpose of environmental decision-making. Therefore, this study evaluated the quality and identified strengths and weaknesses in environmental impact assessment reports of telecommunications infrastructure proposed for Plateau State in Nigeria. To this end, 80 reports were evaluated using the modified version of the Lee and Colley review package. The results revealed the following points. In Review Area 1.0 (Description of the proposed telecommunications facilities) and Review Area 5.0 (Communication of results), the quality of environmental impact assessment reports was found to be generally satisfactory. However, the quality of all reports was considered ‘very unsatisfactory’ (‘F’) regarding their overall legal compliance with the requirements stipulated in the remaining three Review Areas, namely, Review Area 2.0 (Terrain susceptibility in the proposed project areas), Review Area 3.0 (Associated and potential environmental impacts), and Review Area 4.0 (Mitigation measures/alternatives). This ‘F’ rating was assigned to 65% (52/80) of reports regarding Review Area 3.0 because the information provided was ‘very unsatisfactory’; important tasks were poorly carried out or not attempted at all. Moreover, in review areas such as Review Area 2.0 and Review Area 4.0, all reports in the evaluation were assigned an ‘F’ quality. Such an unsatisfactory quality rating is ascribable to the very unsatisfactory manner in which the reports were populated, especially as important task(s) were poorly performed or not attempted at all. Historically, only Review Area 1.0 and Review Area 5.0 indicated improvements in quality over time, whereas the remaining three review areas (Review Area 2.0, Review Area 3.0 and Review Area 4.0) did not improve. Based on the results obtained from the study, we recommend that there should be periodic reviews of environmental impact assessment reports by independent reviewers and environmental consultants should adhere to the sectoral guidelines for telecommunication infrastructure during the production of these reports. Moreover, in order to build technical capacity, more studies on report quality must be conducted in all sectors in Nigeria.

Suggested Citation

  • Vincent D. Choji & Isaac T. Rampedi & Lee-Ann S. Modley & Ayodeji P. Ifegbesan, 2022. "An Evaluation of the Quality of Environmental Impact Assessment Reports in the Mobile Telecommunications Infrastructure Sector: The Case of Plateau State in Nigeria," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-23, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12659-:d:932742
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12659/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12659/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luke Alan Sandham & Felicity Van Der Vyver & Francois Pieter Retief, 2013. "The Performance Of Environmental Impact Assessment In The Explosives Manufacturing Industry In South Africa," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 1-18.
    2. John Phylip-Jones & Thomas B. Fischer, 2013. "Eia For Wind Farms In The United Kingdom And Germany," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 1-30.
    3. Kamijo, Tetsuya & Huang, Guangwei, 2017. "Focusing on the Quality of EIS to Solve the Constraints on EIA Systems in Developing Countries: A Literature Review," Working Papers 144, JICA Research Institute.
    4. Tetsuya Kamijo & Guangwei Huang, 2019. "Determinants of the EIA Report Quality for Development Cooperation Projects: Effects of Alternatives and Public Involvement," Working Papers 183, JICA Research Institute.
    5. Daniel S. Boshoff, 2019. "Of Smoke and Mirrors: (Mis)Communicating EIA Results of Solar Energy Projects in South Africa," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03), pages 1-19, September.
    6. Samia Saif & Asim Mehmood & Muhammad Nawaz Chaudhry & Sana Akhtar, 2015. "Evaluating the Adequacy and Quality of Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Reports in Punjab, Pakistan," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(03), pages 1-23.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pattajaree Krasaesen & Vilas Nitivattananon & Malay Pramanik & Joyee Shairee Chatterjee, 2024. "The Performance of Environmental and Health Impact Assessment Implementation: A Case Study in Eastern Thailand," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(5), pages 1-15, May.

    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. Huang, Shi-Zheng, 2022. "Do green financing and industrial structure matter for green economic recovery? Fresh empirical insights from Vietnam," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 61-73.
    2. Xu, Nuo & Kasimov, Ikboljon & Wang, Yanan, 2022. "Unlocking private investment as a new determinant of green finance for renewable development in China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 1121-1130.
    3. Muthoora, Tara & Fischer, Thomas B., 2019. "Power and perception – From paradigms of specialist disciplines and opinions of expert groups to an acceptance for the planning of onshore windfarms in England – Making a case for Social Impact Assess," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    4. Nchia Peter Ghong, 2021. "The Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment as a Sustainable Development Tool in Developing Countries: Case of Cameroon," Environmental Management and Sustainable Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 10(1), pages 45-59, February.
    5. Ulrike Pröbstl-Haider, 2022. "EIA Effectiveness in Sensitive Alpine Areas: A Comparison of Winter Tourism Infrastructure Development in Germany and Austria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    6. Robert Jones & Thomas B. Fischer, 2016. "EIA Follow-Up in the UK — A 2015 Update," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 1-22, March.
    7. G. S. Fraser & J. Russell, 2016. "Following-Up on Uncertain Environmental Assessment Predictions: The Case of Offshore Oil Projects and Seabirds Off Newfoundland and Labrador," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 1-33, March.
    8. Alexandra Jiricka-Pürrer & Martin Bösch & Ulrike Pröbstl-Haider, 2018. "Desired but Neglected: Investigating the Consideration of Alternatives in Austrian EIA and SEA Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-21, October.
    9. Zhang, Dongyang & Mohsin, Muhammad & Taghizadeh-Hesary, Farhad, 2022. "Does green finance counteract the climate change mitigation: Asymmetric effect of renewable energy investment and R&D," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12659-:d:932742. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.