DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

한국 환경영향평가 제도에 대한 이해관계자의 인식 조사

Survey on the Perception of Stakeholders on the EIA System in Korea

  • Kim, Minkyung (Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Lee, Sangdon (Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Ewha Womans University)
  • 투고 : 2020.12.04
  • 심사 : 2021.01.26
  • 발행 : 2021.02.28

초록

환경영향평가 실무자들은 환경영향평가 정책을 수립하는데 매우 중추적인 역할을 하며, 환경영향평가 시행 시에는 이해관계자와의 정보공유, 의견조율 등을 통하여 환경 갈등을 예방하고 해소할 수 있다. 따라서 환경영향평가 정책 및 시행 등 시스템 전반에 대하여 실무자를 포함한 이해관계자의 인식을 파악하는 것은 환경영향평가의 개선 방향 및 정책 방향 설정에 도움이 될 수 있다. 그러나 현재 한국에서 시행되고 있는 환경영향평가 제도 및 운영에 대한 이해관계자의 인식 및 이해에 대한 정보는 부족한 상황이다. 그러므로 본 연구는 의사결정 수단이며, 환경 정보 분석기법을 통해 악영향을 최소화할 수 있는 사전예방적 기법인 환경영향평가 제도에 대해서 운영 및 절차상의 문제점들을 진단하고, 향후 환경영향평가 제도의 개선점과 시스템의 보완점을 모색하고자 하였다. 37개의 질문의 온라인 설문조사를 통해 환경영향평가 이해관계자 95명의 응답을 정리하였다. 이해관계자들은 현행 제도의 운영과 평가서 작성의 문제점 등에 대해 인식하고 있었으며, 이를 반영하여 나타났다. 부정 응답률(불만족 및 매우 불만족)이 높게 나타난 평가서 작성 기간 및 비용(49%), 새로운 방법의 도입(46%), 주민의견수렴 및 갈등관리의 항목(41%)은 추후 우리가 더 보완해야 할 부분이라 판단된다. 사회가 빠르게 발전하면서 제도도 그에 맞추어 보완이 필요하며, 조사결과 부정 응답이 높은 항목들에 대해 정책적인 개선 노력이 필요하다.

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) practitioners play a very pivotal role in establishing EIA policies, and when implementing EIA environmental conflicts can be prevented and resolved by sharing information with stakeholders and coordinating opinions. For this reason, grasping the perceptions of stakeholders including practitioners about the overall system, such as EIA policies and implementation, can be helpful in setting improvement directions and policy directions for EIA. However, there is an insufficient information on the perception and understanding of stakeholders about the EIA system and operation currently in effect in Korea. Therefore, this study diagnoses operational and procedural problems for the EIA system, which is a decision-making tool and a precautionary technique that can minimize adverse effects through the environmental information analysis method, and improvement points and systems of the EIA system in the future. We tried to find a complement of an online survey of 37 questions,responses from 95 responses from stakeholders of EIA were summarized. Stakeholders were aware of the problems of the operation of the current system and the preparation of the evaluation form, and this was reflected. Period and cost of preparation of EIS (49%), the introduction of a new method (26%) and the items of collecting opinions and conflict management (41%), which showed high negative response rates (dissatisfied and very dissatisfied), are considered to be areas that we need to supplement further in the future. As society develops rapidly, the system needs to be supplemented accordingly, and policy improvement efforts are needed for items with high negative responses as a result of the survey.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Arts J, Runhaar HAC, Fischer TB, Jha-Thakur U, Van Laerhoven F, Driessen PPJ, Onyango V. 2012. The effectiveness of EIA as an instrument for environmental governance: reflecting on 25 years of EIA practice in the Netherlands and the UK. J Environ Assess Policy Manage. 14(4) special issue on 25 years of EIA in the EU. DOI: 10.1142/S1464333212500251
  2. Chang H, Jeon HJ. 2013. The improvement for geo-spatial information utilization of environment impact assessment supporting system. Journal of the Korean Society for Geospatial Information System. 21(1): 45-52. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.7319/KOGSIS.2013.21.1.045
  3. Cho KJ, Choi JK, Park YM, Song YI, Sa GH, Lee SB, Jeong JC, Lim YS. 2008. Achievement and development of EIA over the last 30 years. Korea Environment Institute. Sejong. [Korean Literature]
  4. Choi JG, Park JH, Lee BK. 2019. The future of Korea's environmental impact assessment system. Environment Forum. No. 234. Korea Environment Institute. Sejong. [Korean Literature]
  5. Duarte, Carla Grigoletto, Ana Paula Alves Dibo, Juliana Siqueira-Gay, Luis Enrique Sanchez. 2017. Practitioners' perceptions of the Brazilian environmental impact assessment system: results from a survey. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 35(4): 293-309. DOI: 10.1080/14615517.2017.1322813
  6. Kim JO, Min BW. 2020. International case study on the public participation procedure in environmental impact assessment. J Environ Impact Assess. 29(5): 363-376. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2020.29.5.363
  7. Lee BK, Moon NK, Kim YM, Kim TY, Sun HS, Lee SY, Lee YJ, Ha JS, Gwon SY, Park JY, Ahn JY, Yang K, Lee HS. 2020. Convergence data usage plan for environmental assessment to enhance future environmental responsiveness. Korea Environment Institute. Sejong. [Korean Literature]
  8. Lee JH, Koo JG, Kim MJ, Kim IS, Nam YS, Ryu JG, Park YM, Sung HC, Lee DG, Lee MW, Lee MC, Lee SD, Lee SH, Jang YG, Jeong JG, Choi JK, Ha SR, Han SW, Hong KH, Hong SP, Hwang SI. 2014. Environmental impact assessment. Dong-Hwa Technology. Gwangju of Gyeonggido. [Korean Literature]
  9. Lee YG. 2008. A study on environmental impact assessment report and deliberation period reduction. Master dissertation, Chonnam National University. Gwangju. [Korean Literature]
  10. Ministry of Environment. 2009. Final report on research on the development of qualification items for environmental impact assessors. Government of Korea. [Korean Literature]
  11. Ministry of Environment. 2011. Final report on research to prepare criteria for judgment of poor preparation of assessments reports, and measures to improve natural ecosystem surveys. Government of Korea. [Korean Literature]
  12. Morrison-Saunders A, Annandale D, Cappelluti J. 2001. Practitioner perspectives on what influences EIA quality. Impact Assess Project Apprais. 19: 321-325, DOI: 10.3152/147154601781766934
  13. National Assembly Budget Office. 2012. Meta evaluation of the environmental impact assessment system. Seoul. [Korean Literature]
  14. Ryu BR, Cho HK. 2013. A study on the role of environmental impact assessment in resolving environmental conflicts : with a focus on information dynamics. Korean Public Administration Quarterly. 25(3): 847-878. [Korean Literature]
  15. Song DH, Ryu JW, Jung EH. 2015. A study on application of open platform of spatial information for improvement of environment impact assessment supporting system. Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic Information Studies. 18(1): 105-119. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.11108/kagis.2015.18.1.105
  16. Sun HS, Choi JG, Lee BK. 2018. Digital EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) - implementation strategy in preparation for the 4th industrial revolution. KEI Focus. 6(1): 1-18. Sejong. [Korean Literature]
  17. Weston J. 1997. Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment in Practice. Essex: Longman.
  18. Yun SJ. 2004. Suggestions for the improvement of environmental impact assessment to prevent, mitigate and resolve environmental conflicts: focused on the institutionalization of citizen-involved social impact assessment. Korean Society and Public Administration. 15(1): 283-311. [Korean Literature]