This article provides a comparative overview of environmental impact assessment (EIA) in Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, South Africa, Angola, and the European Union (EU). EIA “systemic measure” and “foundation measure” criteria are used to evaluate and compare the performance of each system. In contrast to the EU, EIA must be carried out by registered experts in the African countries. In Tanzania, Mozambique and South Africa public consultation is mandatory during scoping. In Kenya and Tanzania the EIA study should contain measures to prevent health hazards, to ensure employee safety, and for emergency management. EIA system monitoring is required in Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, and in the EU, but not in South Africa and Angola. Financial issues, insufficient qualified personnel, and an increasing number of EIA applications undermine the capacity of competent authorities to adequately monitor these EIA systems. Consequently, training programmes increase effectiveness of EIA implementation is a common request. The African countries reviewed here have adopted EIA and integrated EIA systems into public policy despite the constraints they face. As they continue to gain experience in EIA and to revise their EIA systems, they are moving towards a more flexible system with greater public involvement and robust arrangements and practices.
The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm, 1972), the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio de Janeiro, 1992), and the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Johannesburg, 2002) laid a solid foundation and high-level commitment for integrating environment protection and economic development to achieve sustainable development [
At the national level, EIA was first formally introduced in the United States with the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act. Subsequently, other industrialized countries rapidly adopted EIA regulations. Today, more than 100 countries and all development banks and most international agencies require EIAs for major activities and projects.
EIA is a key instrument of European Union (EU) environmental policy. The Directive on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the Environment (EU EIA Directive), enacted in 1985 (85/337/EEC) [
In Africa, legal requirements or general procedures for EIA have evolved substantially over the past decade. Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa, and Angola each have adopted an EIA regulatory regime. The current challenge is to upgrade the EIA process and practice to tackle environmental decline that is grounded in poverty, underdevelopment, and lack of basic infrastructures. In an increasingly globalized world, democratization, deregulation, privatization, and decentralization also need to be incorporated into the public policy process. As a result, EIA arrangements need to become more flexible, less reliant on “command and control” measures, and open to greater public and stakeholder involvement [
This paper provides a comparative overview of EIA systems and practices in Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa, Angola, and the EU in order to assess their effectiveness2. The following issues will be addressed: What institutional frameworks exist? Which EIA procedures are followed? What are the details of EIA requirements? Is there a pattern of procedural arrangements for an EIA and its contents? Are the implemented EIA systems effective? What are the main constraints and gaps for genuine effectiveness of EIA systems? What are the next steps to improve the effectiveness of EIA systems and practice in these countries? An overview of the research methodology is provided, as well as a detailed comparative review of different “systemic measures” and “foundation measures” of these EIA systems.
A two-step methodology was used in this research. First, a preliminary assessment of the EIA systems was carried out in the selected countries (Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa and Angola)3 through evaluation of their legal, institutional and procedural frameworks. Second, specific analytic criteria were used to compare the EIA systems in the five African countries and in the EU. The criteria applied in this study are based on those proposed by Ahmad Balsam and Christopher Wood [
This study is primarily based on descriptive criteria, formal EIA requirements and practical application methods. It considers the legal, institutional and procedures contexts of each EIA system and proceeds to a detailed comparison of the following EIA system attributes:
・ legislative and administrative procedures for EIA
・ aspects of EIA such as screening, scoping, EIA report review, mitigation, etc.
・ measures undertaken to improve the effectiveness of EIA systems
The first two of these attributes broadly correspond to “systemic measures” and the third attribute corresponds to “foundation measures”.
All five countries reviewed here have legal provisions concerning EIA. In Kenya, EIA legal requirements first appeared in the Environmental Management and Coordination Act (EMCA) of 1999 [
The first “formal” EIA process in Tanzania was undertaken for the Stiegeler’s Gorge Power and Flood Control project in 1980. Since then, EIA practice has evolved comparatively slowly [
In Mozambique, EIA legal requirements first appeared in Decree 76/98 of 29 December 1998 [
Prior to promulgation of EIA regulations in September 1997 (R1182, R1183, and R1184 of the Environment Conservation Act 73 of 1989), EIA was voluntary in South Africa. No procedures, methods, triggers, or products were codified in law, and no formal administrative systems were in place to process EIAs at any level of government, despite enabling clauses in the Environment Conservation Act [
In post-Apartheid South Africa, environmental provisions were enshrined in the Bill of Rights, and EIA was given new impetus in the Environmental Management Policy published in 1997. EIA regulations were promulgated under the National Environmental Management Act No. 107 of 1998 (Republic of South Africa, 1998) [
Angolan environmental legislation was updated in the early 1990s with the establishment of the State Secretariat for the Environment and subsequent adoption of the Environment Framework Act, Decree no. 5/98 of 19 June 1998 [
EIA was introduced into European Community law by the Directive (85/ 337/EEC) [
The EIA process comprises six main elements: screening, scoping, report preparation, public consultation, review, and decision making. The criteria and requirements for each element will vary between jurisdictions, as will the timeline for each element.
Screening determines whether or not a project proposal requires an EIA and what level of EIA is required. All the systems reviewed here use a fairly comprehensive list of projects to identify whether an EIA is required.
An important step in EIA systems, scoping identifies key issues (and non-iss- ues) and concerns and evaluates, organizes, and presents them to assist in analysis and decision-making. Some form of scoping exists in the EIA systems of Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, and South Africa. However, there is no formal requirement for scoping in the EU Directive or in Angolan law.
All the EIA systems studied here require public participation, an EIA review stage, and mitigation and monitoring of impacts. All five of the African systems include a legal requirement for preparation of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP).
In all the countries examined here, the EIA is initiated by the proponent. In Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, and Angola the proponent is responsible for conducting an EIA. In South Africa, a pre-qualified Environmental Assessment Practitioner appointed by the proponent conducts an EIA.
Figures 1-5 set out the EIA institutional framework in the five African coun-
tries. In the EU, the institutional framework will vary from Member State to Member State. In general, the three levels of institutions participate in the EIA process: national government departments and entities, provincial or local government entities, and other governmental and non-state entities (e.g., local communities, research institutes, or non-governmental organizations). The institutional framework will pre-determine the leverage points for EIA inputs in the planning and decision-making processes, the focus of the EIA, the margin for consultation, facilitate participation by the general public and stakeholders, and provide the road map for procedural arrangements. Thus it is vital that the leading institution has a clear mandate and that the institutional framework is well defined. It is readily apparent from the literature review and field experience which institutions are involved in the EIA procedure, however, the process of interaction between them are not always clear in the African countries.
As noted above, the five African countries and the EU have each established a legal regime for EIA. EIA legislation in all of these jurisdictions applies to new projects and expansion and renovation of existing projects. Among the five African jurisdictions, only Mozambique prohibits the proponent from appealing a ruling.
These EIA systems also include legal or procedural specifications for deadlines (see
Specific provisions are made for Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs). However, Angola doesn’t include formal provisions for SEAs in their national legislation. In South Africa, SEAs have been implemented on a voluntary basis since the mid-1990s on the basis of specific guidelines for SEAs.
The regulations and procedures of the respective jurisdictions define the administrative arrangements and roles of the competent authorities involved in the EIA process. Each jurisdiction has identified a specific competent authority for overseeing the EIA process. Informal methods of coordination between competent authorities responsible for managing the EIA process and other entities responsible for pollution control or planning exist in Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania, South Africa, and Angola. In the EU, coordination mechanisms vary from country to country.
Screening
Is the EIA System based on specific and clear legal provisions? | Yes. In: | Yes. In: | Yes. In Decree 76/98, of December 29, revoked by Decree 45/2004, of September 29. Decree 42/2008, of 4 November, change the Decree 45/2004. | Yes. In: | Yes. In Decree no. 51/2004, of July 23. | Yes. Directive 97/11/EC that alters Directive 85/337/EEC, on evaluation of the effects of specific public and private projects on the environment.a, b |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
・ Environmental Management and Coordination Act, 1999 | ・ The Environmental Management Act, 2004; | Promulgation of EIA Regulations in September 1997 (R1182, R1183 and R1184 on the Environment Conservation Act 73 of 1989). | ||||
・ Environmental (Impact Assessment and Audit) Regulations, 2003 | ・ The Environmental (Registration of Environmental Experts) regulations, 2005. | These Regulations were revoked by the EIA Regulations of 21 April 2006. | ||||
Are there mechanisms via which the promoter or members of the general public may file appeals against the decision taken? | When a project is not included in the list that specifies the projects which are obligatorily subject to an EIA, and the project may affect the environment, the NEMA (National Environmental Management Authority) will determine whether or not it is necessary to carry out an EIA. | Any person who disagrees with, or whose interests are harmed as a result of the Minister’s decision, approving or rejecting the EIA, may appeal against the decision in the Environmental Appeal Court. | None. | Any person affected by the decision may present a notice of his intention to file an appeal to any of the following bodies: Minister, MEC or delegated body of the State. | An appeal against the decision of the Minister responsible for the Environment may be made under the general terms of administrative litigation and procedures. | Specific legal provisions for each Member State. |
If the promoter does not agree with NEMA's decision concerning the obligation to carry out an EIA it may appeal against the decision in Court within a maximum of 14 days. | If the notice of the appeal is addressed to the Minister, the appeal should be submitted to the DEAT (Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism). If it is addressed to the MEC, the appeal should be submitted to the Provincial Department responsible for environmental affairs. If it is addressed to the delegated body of the State, the appeal should be presented to the respective body. | |||||
Any person who disagrees with, or whose interests are damaged as a result of NEMA’s decision, approving or rejecting the EIA, may present an appeal in Court within 60 days (after the date of the decision). |
Are there legal provisions or specifications on the deadline available to the EIA Authority in order to issue professional opinions over the course of the various stages of the EIA process?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Varies for each Member State.
The EIA Authority after reception of the Project Report shall submit a copy of the report, up to 7 days afterwards, to any Ministry,
department, state company or relevant local authority or to the District
Environment
Committee in order to receive comments.
The NEMC (National Environment
Management Council), after reception of the Project Report shall submit a copy of the report, within a
maximum of 7 days, to the relevant ministries or public institutes, to the Local Government Environmental
Management Officer, and, if more than one district is involved, to the Regional Secretariat in order to receive their comments.
The EIA Authority must observe the following deadlines:
The Competent Authority must observe the
following deadlines:
Within a maximum of 30 days counted from the date of reception of the documentation, the Ministry
responsible for the environment will send the respective opinion to the competent authority in order to licence or authorise the project,
accompanied by the public consultation report that it has organised and
analysis thereof.
The entities to which the copies of the report have been sent must make a
statement within a maximum of 21 days. The EIA Authority.
The NEMC will issue its final opinion (as to whether or not the project is subject to an EIA) within 45 days after reception of the Project Report.
・ Pre-assessment up to 5 working days;
・ Basic Assessment -acknowledge receipt (if application is in order) or reject application (if not in order);
The EIA Authority will issue its final opinion (regarding whether or not the project is subject to an EIA) within a maximum of 45 days after reception of the Project Report.
The NEMC after
reception of the EIA will submit, up to 14 days later, a copy to any ministry or institute in order to receive
comments, and to
notify and invite the general public to take part.
・ EPDA and ToR up to 30
・ working days;
・ Basic Assessment decision of accept or refuse 30 days;
The EIA Authority, after reception of the EIA Report, shall submit a copy of the report, up to 14 days afterwards, to any Ministry,
department, state company or relevant local authority in order to receive comments.
The entities to which the copies of the report have been sent must make a statement within a maximum of 30 days
・ EIA-up to 45 working days.
・ Scoping report review-30 days;
The entities to which the copies of the report have been sent must make a
statement within a maximum of 30 days. The EIA Authority may extend these deadlines.
The Minister will
provide his final
opinion up to 30 days after reception of the
recommendations from the NEMC.
The Provincial
Environmental Coordination
Departments must observe the
following deadlines:
・ Impact Assessment Report review-60 days;
The EIA Authority will issue its final opinion concerning the EIA up to 3 months after
reception of the EIA Report.
・ Pre-assessment -up to 8 working days;
・ decision to grant or refuse Environmental Authorization 45 days;
・ Terms of
・ Reference-up to 15 working days;
・ must in writing grant or refuse authorization in respect of all or part of the activity-10 days.
・ SES-up to 30 working days.
The deadlines are counted from the date of registration of the entry of
documentation to the competent authority, and are interrupted
whenever
complementary
information is
requested and resumed after such information has been duly resented by the proponent.
In exceptional
circumstances, the Minister for
Coordination of
Environmental Affairs, on the basis of a duly well-grounded
proposal presented by DNEIA or DPCA, may extend the established deadlines in
accordance with the specific characteristics of each case.
Are there
provisions on public
consultation deadlines?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
Yes.
Varies for each Member State.
The EIA Authority, up to 14 days after reception of the EIA Report, shall invite the general public to make oral or written comments in relation to the report.
The Council shall within thirty days of receipt of an
Environmental
Impact Statement decide whether or not to convene a public hearing for purposes of
collecting submission a comments on the proposed project or undertaking.
The convocation for a public audience or consultation shall be made public at least 15 days prior to the meeting, using the appropriate means for the respective publication.
The public consultation shall be carried out during a period of at least five days and no more than 10 days. At the end of the period set for the public
consultation, a succinct report will be drawn up, within the following 8 days, specifying the
diligent proceedings
taken, the participation recorded and the
conclusions to be drawn.
Publication of a notice concerning the project, during two consecutive weeks in a national circulation
newspaper.
The date and venue of the public hearing shall be publicitized at least one week prior to the meeting.
All oral or written presentations or manifestations
produced within the framework of the public participation process, presented to local bodies and/or to the proponent, up to 10 days before the revision period of the Simplified
Environmental Study (SES) or of the EIA will be
registered and will be considered in the decision of the Technical
Evaluation
Committee,
provided that they are related to the environmental
impacts of the
activities.
Produce an
advertisement in the official and local language in a
national coverage radio station at least once per week during two consecutive weeks.
On the conclusion of the public hearing, the presiding officer shall comply a report of the views presented at the public hearing and submit the report to the Director General within fourteen days from the date of completion of the public hearing.
At least three public meetings shall be held. The notices shall be sent out with at least one week prior notice before the meetings.
Are there
provisions on the deadlines for presenting
appeals against a decision?
Yes. The deadlines are as follows:
No.
No.
Yes. The appeal must be presented within a maximum of 30 days counted from the date of presentation of the notice of the
intention to file an appeal.
No.
Varies for each Member State.
・ 14 days-For the promoter to appeal against NEMA’s decision concerning the obligation to carry out an EIA;
The Minister, MEC or delegated body of the State, as
appropriate, may, in writing, extend the deadline for filing an appeal.
・ 60 days (After the date of the decision)-for any person who disagrees or whose interests are affected by the decision of NEMA, as to whether or not approve an EIA, may appeal in the Court.
Are there
provisions on Strategic
Environmental Assessments (SEA)?
In accordance with Article 42, paragraph 1, of the Environmental (Impact Assessment and Audit) Regulations of 2003, the agencies, in
conjunction with NEMA, shall submit all proposals for policies, programmes and plans for a SEA, in order to determine which are the most ecologically and economically efficient when applied individually or in combination with others.
In accordance with Article 104, paragraph 1, of the 2004
Environmental
Management Act, the SEA of Regulations, Policies, Strategies, Programmes and Plans shall be drawn up.
Yes.
No. In South Africa, SEAs have been widely implemented on a voluntary basis since the mid-1990s (over 50 SEAs were identified). There are specific guidelines for the SEA.
No.
Yes, Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and Council, of June 27, 2001, on
evaluation of the effects of specific plans and
programmes on the
environment.
Administration
Which is the competent EIA authority?
NEMA (National Environment
Management
Authority)
NEMC (National Environment Management Council)
Ministry for
Coordination of Environmental Affairs (MCEA), through the
National
Environmental Impact
Assessment
Department (DNEIA) and the Provincial
Environmental Action
Coordination
Department (DPCA).
DEAT is responsible for evaluating projects of national importance (i.e. projects that cross provincial or
national
boundaries). The environmental
departments of the various provincial governments are responsible for
evaluating
applications that have been submitted in terms of the EIA regulations.
In accordance with Decree no. 51/04,of July 23, the competency for the AIA procedure pertains to the Minister responsible for the Environment, who will designate the entity
responsible for drawing up the procedure. Since
publication of Decree-Law no. 4/09, of May 18, the National Directorate for Prevention and Assessment of Environmental Impacts is the service within the Ministry of the
Environment responsible for AIA procedures. Since then, it has no longer be necessary for the Minister responsible for the
Environment to designate the entity responsible for
drawing up this procedure. This competency is
exercised jointly with the Minister responsible for the project under appraisal and the Minister responsible for Territorial Planning, in the case of projects located within urban perimeters or which cut across
settlements.
Each Member State has at least one competent authority for EIAs.
Minister Responsible for the Environment Issues-has the final decision as to whether an EIA will be
approved, conditionally approved or rejected.
Who is
responsible for Revision of the Environmental Impact Study (EIA)?
NEMA
The NEMC (National Environment
Management Council) in collaboration with inter-sectorial
consultative
committees
Technical
Evaluation
Committee (TEC)
DEAT or an expert in the area
The Ministries
responsible for the Environment or the expert in the area.
Each Member State has a
Structure/
commission
responsible for revision of the EIA.
What are the sectorial
responsibilities of the authorities in the EIA process?
NEMA can submit a copy of the EIA report to any
Ministry,
department, state company or relevant local authority for comment.
Environmental Experts Advisor Community
Relevant sectorial authorities will be represented in the TEC.
Relevant sectorial authorities are
consulted.
Any relevant
Ministry, department, state company or local authority is consulted.
A different
situation in each Member State.
What is the level of coordination with any other pollution control and planning organisation?
Any Ministry,
department, state company or relevant local authority.
Environmental Experts Advisor Community
TEC
Any relevant
sectorial
authorities
Any relevant
Ministry, department, state company or local authority.
A different
situation in each Member State.
EIA Process
What is the process for
identifying which projects are subject to EIAs?
Through the list identifying the projects that are obligatorily subject to an EIA.
Through the list
identifying the projects that are obligatorily subject to an EIA.
Category A.
Activities contained in Annex I to Decree 45/2004, will be subject to carrying out an EIA.
Through the list identifying the projects that are obligatorily
subject to an EIA.
Through the list
identifying the projects that are
obligatorily subject to an EIA.
Through the list identifying the projects that are obligatorily subject to an EIA. (Annex I of the Directive). c, d
The activities included in Annex II and
evaluated as pertaining to category B, are
subject to carrying out an SES.
Category C.
Activities contained in Annex III, must observe the norms specified within the specific directives of correct
environmental
management
Is the
methodology used in order to identify projects
systematic?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
When a project is not included in the list that specifies the projects which are obligatorily subject to an EIA, and the project may affect the environment, NEMA will
determine whether or not it is necessary to carry out an EIA.
The EIA is not
obligatory for those activities whose
probability of causing serious effects to the environment is reduced or which are not
located in
environmentally
sensitive areas
All activities that may cause an impact on the environment, that are not included in
Annexes I, II and III, will be subject to pre-assessment by the MCEA.
All activities that may cause an impact on the environment, that are not included in the list
identifying the projects that are obligatorily
subject to an EIA, will be subject to pre-assessment by the EIA
Authority.
Decree no. 51/2004 states that the EIA is obligatory for projects identified in the
Annex to the Decree. Real estate
developments that are considered by the government to be of interest for defence and National Security may be exempted from carrying out an EIA.
Annex II of the Directive covers the projects for which each
Member State shall determine whether or not it is subject to an EIA, via analysis on a case-by-case basis, or application of selection criteria.
For the list of activities identified in Annex II of the Screening and Scoping Guidelines, the NEMC will evaluate whether or not an EIA is necessary.
Annex III specifies these criteria, indicating the probability of negative effects on the environment.
Are there legal requirements for carrying out scoping (Scoping Definition Proposals)? If so, what are the respective details?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
There are no requirements in the legal Directives for drawing up a Scoping Definition Proposal. e
Drawing up the scoping and Terms of Reference (ToR) for all projects
subject to an EIA (by the proponent).
Preparation of the scoping and Terms of Reference (ToR) for projects included in the obligatory list (by the proponent).
Study of
Environmental Pre-viability and definition of Scope (EPDA) is obligatory for all activities
classified as pertaining to category A.
A Scoping shall be drawn up for all activities subject to an EIA.
Are there public consultations during the scoping process?
No.
Yes.
No.
Yes.
Not applicable
No.f, g
The proponent/
certified and registered experts or a registered company shall draw up a list of interested or affected parties and will consult them. Minutes should be drawn up following these
consultations referring to the topics addressed and which questions/ constraints were raised. These minutes should be duly signed by all intervening parties.
The pre-qualified expert shall carry out a public
consultation.
Does the scoping need to be
revised? If so, who is
responsible for the revision.
No.
No.
Yes.
Yes.
Not applicable
Specific legal
provisions for each Member State.
The Technical
Evaluation
Committee
(inter-sectorial committee
responsible for
analysing the
technical documents drawn up within the framework of the EIA) shall carry out the revision.
The scoping needs to be revised.
Revision may be carried out by the Competent
Authority.
Are there
requirements which oblige the promoter to demonstrate that alternatives to the project were taken into
consideration?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Analysis of the
alternatives must include
identification of alternative
locations, design and technology.
Analysis of the
alternatives must
include identification of alternative locations, design and
technology.
Viable alternatives shall be identified for the planning,
construction and operation stages and, in the case of
temporary activities, for their respective deactivation.
Analysis of the
alternatives must include identification of alternative
locations, type of activity to be
developed, design, technology and
operational aspects of the activity
Analysis of the
alternatives must
include identification of all the technological
alternatives and
alternative locations, confronting them with the possibility that the project will not be executed.
The alternatives studied by the
proponent must be described,
indicating the reasons for the final choice (taking into consideration the effects on the environment).h, i
Choice of the
location, design and technology proposed in the project should be duly well-grounded.
Due grounds should be provided, justifying the choice of the location proposed in the project together with the
proposed process and technology .
Due grounds shall be presented for the choices made.
Are the details of the EIA Report defined in the legislation?
The contents of the EIA Report are described in detail in the EIA legislation.
The contents of the EIA Report are described in detail in the EIA
legislation and in the Guide
The contents of the EIA Report are described in detail in the EIA legislation and in the Guide
The contents of the EIA Report are described in detail in the EIA legislation and in the Guide
The contents of the EIA Report are
described in detail in the EIA legislation.
The contents of the EIA Report are described in detail in the Directive. j, k
Are there
requirements for drawing up environmental management plans? If so what are the
respective details
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Specific legal
provisions for each Member State.
The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will propose measures in order to eliminate, minimise and mitigate adverse impacts on the
environment,
including the
associated cost, scheduling and the entity responsible for implementation, including monitoring and implementation of environmental audits during the operation and
deactivation stages.
The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will propose measures in order to eliminate, minimise and mitigate adverse impacts on the
environment, including the associated cost, scheduling and the entity responsible for implementation.
The Environmental Management Plan of the activity will include monitoring impacts, an
environmental
educational
programme and
accident
contingency plans.
The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will contain information on:
According to Decree no. 51/2004, a supervision and
monitoring
programme of the
positive and negative impacts must be drawn up, indicating the factors and
parameters to be taken into
consideration.
・ the person responsible for drawing up the plan and evidence of his technical capacities for this task;
・ measures designed to manage or mitigate the environmental impacts foreseen in the planning and design, pre-construction, construction, operation stages, rehabilitation of the environment and de-activation (when suitable);
・ aspects of the activity covered by the EMP ( detailed description);
・ The person who will be responsible for implementing the measures;
・ Scheduling of implementation of the measures specified within the EMP, when appropriate;
・ Proposal of a mechanism to monitor compliance with the terms established in the EMP and the respective reports.
Are there
requirements for proposing measures to minimise
environmental impacts? If so, are such
measures
presented for each of the project stages?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
The mitigation measures shall
include the means and forms of
management, use all the best available technologies and good practices
existing in
engineering
structures in order to minimise the
negative aspects deriving from the project
(environmental, socioeconomic and cultural), and also foster the positive aspects.
Recommendations or a plan aimed at
mitigating the likely impacts should be presented.
A set of measures shall be proposed aimed at minimising or avoiding negative effects and fostering positive effects of the activity on the biophysical and socioeconomic
environment.
A set of measures shall be proposed and aimed at
minimising or avoiding the
negative effects and fostering the positive effects of an
activity.
Measures designed to mitigate the negative impacts will be
defined.
Varies for each Member State. l, m
Although legislation does not specify that these measures must be presented for each of the project’s
development stages, this practice exists.
Although legislation does not specify that these measures must be presented for each of the project’s
development stages, this practice exists.
Although legislation does not specify that these measures must be presented for each of the project’s development stages, this practice exists.
The legislation states that these measures must be presented for each of the project’s
development stages.
Although legislation does not specify that these measures must be presented for each of the project’s
development
stages, some of the Environmental
Impact Studies to which we had access revealed that this practice exists.
Are there requirements for drawing up a monitoring plan? If so, what should be
included within this plan.
Monitoring during the operation and deactivation stages are included in the EMP.
Monitoring is foreseen.
The Environmental Management Plan of the activity includes monitoring of the impacts.
Contemplated within the scope of the EMP.
According to Decree no. 51/2004, a
supervision and
monitoring
programme of the positive and negative impacts must be drawn up, indicating the factors and
parameters to be taken into
consideration.
Varies for each Member State.
The elements that should be
contemplated are not established.
There is no
specification of the terms that should be
contemplated.
There is no specification of the terms that should be contemplated.
There is no
specification of the terms that should be contemplated.
Are there requirements for revision of the EIA Report? If so, how does this take place?
The Ministry, departments, state companies or local authorities with management and control functions of the environment and natural resources may revise the EIA report in order to guarantee that it complies with the developed reference terms.
The revision process should be based on the following criteria:
The MCEA will designate the
Technical
Evaluation
Committee (TEC) and revise the EPDA and the EIA report.
Yes. Revision is carried out by the EIA Authority (DEAT) or by an expert in the
respective area.
According to
prevailing legislation, EIA reviews are
carried out by
technicians from the Ministry of the
Environment/
National Directorate for Prevention and Assessment of
Environmental
Impacts. Nonetheless, no EIA review criteria have been established.
Specific legal
provisions for each Member State. n
・ Balance between the short and long-term socioeconomic benefits as contrasted to the damages caused to the physical and human environment;
The TEC will draw up the technical report of the
revision and
respective well-grounded
technical opinion, and will issue a final assessment
statement. This statement will be sent to the EIA
Authority for the final decision.
・ The nature of the project and whether or not it complies with environmental quality standards;
・ possible mitigation measures or other corrective measures;
・ Comments retrieved during the public consultations and other consultation processes;
・ amongst others.
The NEMC may, during the revision process, make a visit in order to inspect or verify any location associated to the project under
analysis. The respective travel expenses will be borne by the proponent.
Which body or bodies are responsible for revision of the EIA Report?
The Ministry, departments, state companies or local authority with management and control functions of the environment or natural resources, in collaboration with NEMA.
The NEMC may create inter-sectorial consultative committees, at the national level and, when suitable, at the level of the Local Government Authority in order to provide advice during revision of the EIA report.
MCEA and TEC.
DEAT or an
expert in the area.
In practice, EIA reviews have been carried out by technicians from the Ministry of the Environment/ National Directorate for Prevention and Assessment of
Environmental
Impacts and/or
experts in the field.
Varies for each Member State. n
The committees must be constituted by at least 12 specialists, in order to guarantee multidisciplinarity.
The TEC is
constituted by (always an uneven number of
members):
The inter-sectorial consultative
committees may,
subject to approval from NEMC’s
Director-General,
incorporate other
persons necessary for their correct
functioning.
・ a representative of the DNEIA, who will chair the Committee;
The minimum quorum necessary for holding a meeting of the
committee is 2/3.
・ a representative of the Ministry responsible for the area of the proposed activity;
On the basis of the NEMC’s
recommendations, the Minister will issue his decision.
・ a representative of FUNAB;
・ a representative of the local authority for the area where the activity is located, if the proposed location for implementation of the activity has been authorised in this territory;
・ Other representatives of environmental government bodies, teaching institutions or research centres;
・ A specialised technician in the area of the respective activity requested or contracted by the EIA Authority, whenever this proves to be necessary.
May the
proponent take part in the
revision process or respond to questions raised during revision of the EIA
Report?
The proponent may respond to questions raised during
revision of the EIA Report.
The proponent may respond to questions raised during revision of the EIA Report.
Additional information and amendments may be requested.
The proponent may respond to questions raised during
revision of the EIA Report.
Not applicable.
Varies for each Member State. n
The practice exists, in several projects, of the proponent and certified and registered expert(s) (or registered
company) to attend the inter-sectorial
consultative
committees .
Is the EIA Report made available for a Public
Consultation? If so, how does this take place.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
Yes.
The Presiding Officer in collaboration with NEMA will
determine the
procedural rules of the Public
Consultation.
Any constraints raised during the consultation of interested parties during the scoping stage, shall be duly addressed when
drawing up the EIA.
The Terms of
Reference (ToR) governing the process of drawing up the EIA or SES must describe the Public Consultation procedure to be followed.
Chapter 6 of the EIA
Regulations of April 21, 2006 presents details of the Public Consultation process.
The public consolidation process begins with prior
disclosure of a non-technical summary of the Environmental Impact Study, specifying the key effects that the project may generate in the environment, in particular use of natural resources, emission of polluting agents, creation of disturbances (ranging from intensity of lighting/heat to noise and smells) or elimination of
residues, identifying the
preventive methods used in
order to evaluate and diminish the effects on the environment, together with the project’s
impact on the socioeconomic environment. Disclosure of these elements must respect industrial confidentiality and observe legal norms protecting non-patented technical knowledge. In the framework of the public consultation,
statements and complaints that have been presented, related to the project, will be considered and appraised.
The
methodology used in order to carry out Public
Consultations varies in each Member State.
The Public
Consultation must be held in a convenient and accessible site for persons who may be affected by the project.
Whenever part of the general public expresses a strong concern in relation to the project and its impact is likely to be extensive and significant, the NEMC will organise a Public Consultation.
The proponent is responsible for
public participation, during the
conception stage of the activity, up to submission of the EIA and SES
reports.
The proponent should be given the opportunity to make a presentation and respond to the
questions raised during the Public Consultation.
The Public Consultation will be chaired by a qualified person,
indicated by the NEMC.
MCEA is
responsible for
public participation, during the revision stage of the ToR up to Environmental Licensing.
The Presiding Officer will draw up a report including the
viewpoints presented during the Public Consultation and present it to the Director General.
The Public
Consultation must be held in a convenient and accessible site for persons who may be affected by the project.
Public participation is obligatory for category A activities, and is optional for category B. However it should always take place whenever the activities imply: permanent or
temporary
displacement of populations or communities;
displacement of goods or restriction on the use of natural resources.
An opportunity must be given to the
proponent to make a presentation and
respond to questions raised during the Public Consultation.
The public
participation process should result in a Final Report.
The person chairing the Public Consultation, in collaboration with the NEMC, will determine the procedural rules of the Public
Consultation.
This person will also be responsible for drawing up a report including the viewpoints
presented during the Public Consultation and then present it to the Director General.
Is the EIA
Report altered in function of the comments
received during the Public
Consultation?
No legal provisions exist for this
purpose.
Feedback from the consultations made shall be incorporated in the EIA.
No legal provisions exist for this
purpose.
No legal provisions exist for this purpose.
Varies from Member State to Member State.
Is there a
systematic
decision-making process?
NEMA will decide upon the project’s environmental
acceptability on the basis of the
considerations taken from the revision process.
The NEMC may create inter-sectorial
consultative
committees, at the national level and, when suitable at the level of the Local
Government Authority, in order to provide advice during revision of the EIA report.
The Technical
Evaluation
Committee (TEC) will revise the EPDA and the EIA report, or revise the SES.
DEAT decides on the environmental acceptability of the project on the basis of conclusions withdrawn during the revision process.
On the basis of
existing practice, the Minister responsible for the Environment will decide upon the project’s
environmental
acceptability on the basis of conclusions reached during the revision process.
Varies for each Member State. o, p
The Minister will issue his decision on the basis of the NEMC’s recommendations
The TEC will draw up the duly well-grounded
technical revision report and the
respective technical opinion and will issue a final
assessment
statement.
In the case of an EIA, this declaration will be sent to the EIA Authority for the final decision.
In the case of an SES, the PDCA will take a decision on the environmental viability of the proposed activity.
Is there
experience in Strategic
Environmental Assessment?
Yes. Limited.
Yes. Limited.
No.
In South Africa, SEAs have been widely implemented on a voluntary basis since the mid-1990s (over 50 SEAs were identified).
No.
Various SEAs implemented in each Member State.
All systems reviewed here use fairly comprehensive lists of projects in order to identify whether an EIA is required.
As specified in the First Schedule of the Tanzanian EIA regulations, screening procedures are based on two lists of projects: those requiring a mandatory EIA, and small-scale activities and enterprises that required registration (but may or may not require EIA). The Second Schedule lists the screening criteria to be used.
The screening procedures in Mozambique relate to three lists of activities (Categories A, B and C). All Category A activities identified in Appendix I must draw up an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The activities included in Appendix II, and those classified as category B, are subject to a Simplified Environmental Impact Report (SER). Activities that might have an environmental impact and are not listed in Appendices I and III are subject to pre-assessment by the Ministry for Environmental Coordination (MCEA).
In South Africa, the Environmental Assessment Practitioner (EAP) manages the Application for an Environmental Authorisation on behalf of the proponent and determines which process to follow: Basic Assessment, Scoping and EIA, or request an Exemption. In general, activities identified in Listing Note 1 no. R386 are subject to a Basic Assessment and those in Listing Note 2 no. R387 are subject to Scoping and an EIA. If the competent authority cannot reach a decision based on a Basic Assessment, it can order the proponent to subject the activity to
Scoping and EIA. A proponent can also obtain written authorisation from the competent authority to subject an activity listed in Listing Note 1 n.˚ R386 to Scoping and EIA.
In Angola, the EIA is obligatory for projects identified in the Annex to Decree no. 51/04. Real estate developments considered by the government to be of interest for defence and national security may be exempted from an EIA.
The screening procedure in the EU EIA Directive is based on two lists of activities: Annex 1 projects requiring a mandatory EIA, and Annex 2 projects for which Member States must determine whether or not an EIA is required on a case-by-case basis or by applying criteria thresholds. Annex 3 stipulates environmental effects criteria to be applied to projects for Annex 2 screening decisions.
Scoping
Some form of scoping exists in the EIA systems of Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique and South Africa. In Angola there is no formal requirement for scoping. There is also no formal requirement for scoping in the EU Directive. However, a number of Member States (e.g., Germany) have made provisions for scoping in their national legislation. Other Member States (e.g., Ireland) either have certain non-mandatory arrangements for scoping or have encouraged developers to use this practice.
In Kenya, for those projects on the mandatory EIA list, the proponent is required to perform a scoping procedure and draw up terms of reference (ToR) that provide specific guidelines for undertaking the EIA study. The scoping results will include, but will not be limited to, the following aspects: the purpose of the ToR, description of the project and identification of the project’s proponent, specific background objectives for the project, existing environmental conditions, proposed project activities, social analysis of the project’s alternatives, identification of environmental impacts, proposed mitigation measures, social analysis, possible information gaps, and conclusions and recommendations. The scoping review should also clearly identify how the affected community will be involved in the project formulation, e.g., via public meetings (“barazas”), questionnaires and direct interviews.
In Tanzania, if screening shows that the proposed project will have significant adverse environmental impacts, the proponent will be required to perform a scoping procedure, draw up ToR, and prepare a written report on the results of the scoping exercise. This report will serve as a record for interested and affected parties and as guidelines for the EIA. At a minimum the report should indicate how scoping was undertaken; how the public was involved; how the authorities, and interested and affected parties were consulted, including dates and summaries of issues raised; alternatives to be examined in the impact assessment; the main issues of concern; and the specific guidelines for undertaking and preparing the EIA.
Following identification of key environmental issues of concern and how various stakeholders will be involved, the proponent will draw up the ToR for the EIA. The ToR must indicate that the Environmental Impact Statement will include: a description of the proposed undertaking and analysis of the need/ reason for the undertaking; objective of the undertaking; other options for carrying out the undertaking; alternatives to the undertaking; description of the existing environment that will be directly or indirectly affected; description of the future environment, predicting its probable status were the undertaking not to take place; environmental impacts that the undertaking may cause; proposed measures to prevent or mitigate all adverse environmental impacts; evaluation of opportunities and constraints to the environment as a result of the undertaking; a proposal for an environmental management programme to cover the construction, operation and decommissioning stages of the undertaking; a proposal for environmental monitoring; a proposal for a public information programme. At the end of the scoping procedure, the ToR and the scoping report must be submitted to NEMC for approval. When necessary, an inspection visit to the site(s) will be made.
In Mozambique, a Study of Environmental Pre-viability and Definition of Scope (EPDA) is obligatory for all Category A activities. The EPDA report should contain the following information:
1) Non-technical summary identifying the main issues, conclusions and proposals;
2) Identification and address of the proponent, as well as the details of the multi-subject team responsible for drawing up the EIR;
3) Limits of the area of indirect influence of the activity and patterns of land use in the area of direct and indirect influence;
4) Description of the activity and different actions foreseen therein, as well as the options to mitigate environmental impacts during the planning, construction, and operation stages and, for a temporary activity, decommissioning;
5) Bio-physical and socio-economic description of the site;
6) Identification and assessment of critical issues of the activity;
7) Indication of the potential environmental impacts of the activity;
8) Identification and description of aspects to be investigated in detail during the EIR.
In South Africa, a scoping will be drawn up for all activities identified under Listing Note 2 n.˚ R387. The Scoping Report (including the Plan of Study for the EIA) must include a description of the proposed activity and feasible and reasonable alternatives; a description of the property and the environment that may be affected and the manner in which the biological, social, economic and cultural aspects of the environment may be impacted by the proposed activity; and a description of environmental issues and potential impacts, including cumulative impacts that have been identified, and details of the public participation process undertaken. In addition, the Scoping Report must contain a roadmap for the EIA, referred to as the Plan of Study for the EIA, specifying the methodology to be used to assess the potential impacts, and the specialists or specialist reports that are required.
Review
The most important quality control feature within an EIA is the review stage as it helps to ensure that information concerning the environmental impacts of an action or project is adequate prior to its use in decision-making. Therefore, it is particularly important that this stage is carried out as effectively and efficiently as possible. Various methods to ensure objectivity of the review phase can be used. These include “use of review criteria, accreditation of EIA report review consultants, setting up of an independent review body, publication of the results of the review and involvement of consultees and the public” [
In Kenya, the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) reviews EIAs. The ToR includes a checklist for lead agencies for review of an EIA Study report.
In Tanzania, a multi-disciplinary Technical Review Committee assists NEMC in the review process. The EIA regulations include review criteria (Article 24). NEMC has also issued Review and Monitoring Guidelines. The Council reviews an EIS in accordance with the following broad criteria areas: 1) description of the development and local economic baseline conditions; 2) identification and evaluation of key impacts (including residual and cumulative impacts) and their magnitude and significance; 3) alternatives, mitigating factors, environmental management plans, and commitment; and 4) stakeholders’ participation and communication of results (including the non-technical summary).
In Mozambique, the Technical Assessment Commission uses the EPDA and ToR to review the EPDA report, EIR, and SER, respectively. The MCEA designates the Technical Assessment Commission. The same Commission that assesses the EPDA will review the EIR. The Provincial Directorate for the Environmental Coordination Affairs will nominate the Commission to review the SER. The EIA legislation includes provisions on the constitution of the Commission, which always comprises an uneven number of members.
In South Africa, several steps in the EIA procedure require reviews (Plan of Study for Scoping, Scoping Report, Plan of Study for EIA, EIR). The competent authority is responsible for review of the Plan of Study for Scoping and also the Plan of Study for EIA. In other cases, reviews may be carried out by the competent authority and specialists.
In Angola, there is no EIA review criteria established under legislation. However, technicians from the Ministry of the Environment/National Directorate for Prevention and Assessment of Environmental Impacts and/or external experts have carried out EIA reviews.
Public participation
Public consultation must be a two-way process, whereby information about the proposal is disseminated, and useful local information and opinions received. The consultation process should record the community’s fears, interests and aspirations in order for these to be addressed in the EIA study. All the EIA systems reviewed here require public participation before or during the review stage. However, only in Tanzania, South Africa and Mozambique is public consultation mandatory during the scoping process. The proponent, in Tanzania and in Mozambique or the EAP in South Africa, must establish a list of interested and affected parties and develop methods for notifying them about the proposal.
EMPs, mitigation and monitoring of impacts
In addition to predictions about the environmental impacts of a project, an EIA report generally includes proposals and recommendations for their mitigation and management. An EMP, which is generally prepared as part of the EIR, includes mitigation and monitoring measures to be undertaken by the proponent. All five African jurisdictions require that an EMP to be drawn up.
In Kenya and Tanzania, the EIA study report and Environmental Impact Statement, respectively, must incorporate an EMP proposing measures to eliminate, minimize, or mitigate adverse environmental impacts, including the respective cost, time frame, and responsibility for implementing the recommended measures. In Mozambique, the EIR and SER must incorporate an EMP, including monitoring of impacts, an environmental education programme, and contingency plans for accidents. In Angola, Decree no. 51/2004 [
In South Africa, the EMP must include:
1) details, including relevant qualifications, of the person who drew up the EMP;
2) proposed environmental management or mitigation measures identified in the EIA report, including those in respect of planning and design, pre-construc- tion and construction activities, operation or undertaking of the activity and rehabilitation;
3) a detailed description of the aspects of the activity covered by the draft EMP;
4) identification of whom will be responsible for implementation of the measures;
5) where appropriate, deadlines for implementation of the measures; and
6) proposed mechanisms for monitoring compliance with the Environmental Management System and reporting thereof.
All the EIA systems reviewed here include a general requirement for mitigating impacts and for impact monitoring. Additionally, under the EU EIA Directive, monitoring should determine the accuracy of the original predictions, possible reasons for any deviations, the degree of deviation from predictions, and the extent to which mitigation measures have achieved their objectives.
The use of EIA guidelines is widely advocated and many international examples exist. Of the five African systems reviewed here, only the Angolan lacks developed guidelines. In Kenya, the general and specific EIA guidelines are set out in the Third Schedule of the Environmental (Impact Assessment and Audit) Regulations of 2003. In Mozambique, the MCEA has issued general guidelines for drawing up environmental impact studies and public participation. Tanzanian EIA legislation includes several guidelines. In addition to a General Checklist of Environmental Characteristics, NEMC has issued guidelines on general environmental impact assessment and procedure; screening and scoping; report writing and requirements; and review and monitoring.
In South Africa, six national guidelines (Overview of Integrated Environmental Management, Criteria for Determining Alternatives in EIA, Cumulative Effects Assessment, Environmental Impact Reporting, Environmental Management Plan, Review in EIA), as well as provincial guidelines and manuals, establish parameters for EIA. In the EU, there are guidelines on EIS review, scoping and screening, as well as checklists for the scoping and screening processes.
Only in Angola and South Africa the monitoring of EIA system is not required in legislation. Nonetheless, such monitoring exist in the South Africa case, feedback from previous experience (around nine years) was taken into consideration when drawing up the new EIA regulation.
In Tanzania, Kenya and Mozambique although monitoring of EIA is a legal provision, there is no effectiveness of that procedure.
Expertise in universities, research institutes and private consultancy firms in EIA is widespread in the countries reviewed here. The training of EIA project managers, technical specialists and others involved in the EIA process is critical for improving the effectiveness of EIA and enhancing standard practices, even in mature EIA systems. NEMC, NEMA, MCEA, and the National Directorate for Prevention and Assessment of Environmental Impacts (Angola) have indicated that only a small number of training programmes are provided. There is a general consensus on the need for more training programmes to improve capacity in EIA practice and standards in these African countries.
The evaluation of the performance of the EIA systems discussed above and presented in
Several general conclusions can be drawn from this review, although the study suffered from some constrains and limitations: 1) difficulties assessing original EIA studies and their formal evaluation; 2) difficulties assessing some higher levels of the EIA administration; 3) constant changes in the institutional framework, particularly at the government level and the ministry responsible for the environment4.
These five African countries and the EU share a common EIA framework: screening, EIA study preparation, EIS preparation/review, public consultation, and monitoring. They all have formal provisions for EIA and specific legislation concerning its practice. These EIA laws and regulations define the administrative arrangements and roles of competent authorities in the EIA process. Each jurisdiction has identified a competent authority for overseeing the EIA process. In all countries, the EIA is initiated by the proponent. The EIA is carried out by registered experts in Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, and Angola (however, registration requirements are different in each country). In South Africa, the EIA study is conducted by a pre-qualified Environmental Assessment Practitioner, registered in accordance with specific procedures. The EU EIA Directive does not require that an EIA study be carried out by registered experts.
Informal methods of coordination between competent authorities responsible for managing the EIA process and other entities responsible for pollution control or planning exist in Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania, South Africa, and Angola. In the case of the EU, this varies from country to country. However, in some cases, mandates and the relationships between several institutions are unclear. To improve the effectiveness of EIA, it is necessary to clarify the institutional framework and their roles and responsibilities in the EIA process.
Despite the robustness of these EIA regimes, there are measures that would enhance the effectiveness of the EIA framework and practice. For example, in Kenya, legal provisions for submitting the scoping report for public consultation would enhance integration of community concerns and interests in the EIA final study. This is also an issue in Angola where new EIA legislation is being prepared. According to information received by the authors, public consultation during the scoping phase will be a formal requirement. In general, enhanced public consultation in these EIA systems faces several challenges, including, financial issues; education; cultural, gender, and political differences; and the decision-making culture. Similarly, public access to EIA reports and documentation is critical to ensuring objectivity during the review process. This information is not generally accessible to the public in these countries. South Africa and Tanzania are, however, taking the first steps to making this information available to the public. A further component that requires these governments’ attention is EIA system monitoring. Financial issues, insufficient qualified personnel, and an increasing number of EIA applications undermine the capacity of competent authorities to adequately monitor these EIA systems.
It is clear that the procedures in the five African countries are complex and may, in fact, be more difficult to implement than those in the EU. For example, the EIA study report in Kenya and Tanzania must include measures to prevent health hazards, ensure employee safety in the work environment, and for emergency management. Training of EIA project managers, technical specialists and others involved in the EIA process is thus an essential element of these African countries EIA systems. Enhancing capacity in EIA will ensure these EIA systems to operate effectively and improve standard practices by incorporating experience and lessons learned.
Considering these findings, main recommendations to improve the EIA systems would be mainly to: 1) clarify and simplify the mandates of the several institutions involved in EIA process and system; 2) reinforce the capacity building action regarding the qualification of personnel involved in EIA systems; 3) improve and enlarge public access to EIA reports, including electronic means, also as a facilitator of the process of public consultation―this would constitute a balance facing the tendency to “political approval.
EIA is both a planning and a decision-making tool and helps ensure that development projects do not have costly impacts on the environment and communities. However, EIAs can have little impact on decision making if the process is primarily focused on outputs. In general, an EIA acts as a mitigation exercise because the option of halting projects is rarely considered. This is especially the case when projects are considered to have national, political, or strategic importance. In these African countries, economic development and its accompanying activities and projects make this a particularly urgent issue to consider. As Katima (2003) [
The African countries reviewed here have adopted EIA and integrated EIA systems into public policy despite the constraints they face. They have put in place significant EIA legal frameworks and procedures. As they continue to gain experience in EIA and to revise their EIA systems, they are moving towards a more flexible system with greater public involvement and robust arrangements and practices. It can be expected that ultimately EIA will help these countries meet their development priorities and socio-economic needs.
The authors do not have any disclosure statement to proceed. All the authors have approved the final article.
This study was carried out under the EU Project “PUMPSEA: Periurban mangrove forests as filters and potential phytoremediators of domestic sewages in East Africa”, EU Contract no. 510863, funded by the Sixth Framework Progra- mme of the European Commission. European Commission was not involved in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication.
The publication was supported by the Portuguese Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) through the UID/MAR/04292/2013.
Rebelo, C. and Guerreiro, J. (2017) Comparative Evaluation of the EIA Systems in Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa, Angola, and the European Union. Journal of Environmental Protection, 8, 603-636. https://doi.org/10.4236/jep.2017.85040