환경영향평가 (Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment)

한국환경영향평가학회 (Korean Society of Environmental Impact Assessment)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

환경영향평가 정보공개 제도의 평가와 개선 방향 - 오르후스 협약을 중심으로 -

Evaluation and Improvement of EIA Information Disclosure System - Focused on the Aarhus Convention -

  • 투고 : 2019.05.01
  • 심사 : 2019.07.31
  • 발행 : 2019.08.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

환경 가치 및 환경 영향의 평가과정은 주관적이고 예측에 의존하기 때문에 과학적 합리성의 확보가 제한된다. 그러므로 정보공개를 통한 절차적 합리성의 확보가 필요하다. 본 연구는 환경영향평가의 절차적 합리성 확보를 위한 방안으로, 평가 과정의 정보공개 강화 방안을 모색하고자 한다. 오르후스 협약은 대중의 환경 정보에 대한 접근과 의사결정에 참여할 수 있는 권리를 규정하는 국제 협약이다. 본 연구는 오르후스 협약에서 제시하는 정보공개에 관한 조항을 토대로 10개 지표를 도출하여 우리나라의 환경영향평가 정보공개 제도를 평가하였다. 평가 결과, 정보공개 방향성 및 제공 기반 마련 측면에서 5개 지표를 만족하여 긍정적 결과를 나타냈다. 그리고 정보 활용 근거 및 제공 과정에 대한 4개 지표에서 세부적인 규정 보완이 필요함을 확인하였다. 마지막으로 대중의 이해 가능성 지표를 통해 전문성 비대칭 문제 및 환경영향평가 제도의 정책 수용성 연구의 필요성을 도출하였다.

The process of assessing environmental values and impacts is subjective and depends on predictions, limiting the securing of scientific rationality. Therefore, it is necessary to make a supplement by securing procedural rationality. This study has been tried to secure procedural rationality of EIA based on information disclosure system. The Aarhus Convention is an international treaty that defines the right of the public to access to environmental information and to participate in decision-making. This study evaluates Korean EIA information disclosure system by deriving 10 indicators based on the provisions on information disclosure presented in the Aarhus Convention. As a result, the five indicators were satisfied in terms of direction of information disclosure and provision. And the four indicators for the basis of utilization and process are required to be supplemented by detailed regulations. Finally, we derive the need for research on the asymmetry of expertise and acceptability of EIA system through public understanding indicators.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Ahn SE. 2009. Construction of Environmental Valuation On-line Database and Analysis of Empirical Valuation Studies in Korea I. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  2. Ahn SW, Lee HS. 2012. Reducing Plan of Environmental and Social Conflicts for Tidal Power Plant through the Analysis of Environmental Impact. J Environ Impact Assess. 21(5): 789-799. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2012.21.5.789
  3. Baker DC, McLelland JN. 2003. Evaluating the effectiveness of British Columbia's environmental assessment process for first Nations' participation in mining development. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 23(5): 581-603. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(03)00093-3
  4. Ben D. 1998. Monitoring and Post-auditing in Environmental Impact Assessment: A Review, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 41(6): 731-747. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640569811399
  5. Cashmore M. 2004. The Role of Science in Environmental Impact Assessment: Process and Procedure Versus Purpose in the Development of Theory. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 24(4): 403-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2003.12.002
  6. Cashmore M, Bond A, Cobb D. 2008. The Role and Functioning of Environmental Assessment: Theoretical Reflections Upon an Empirical Investigation of Causation. Journal of Environmental Management. 88(4): 1233-1248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.06.005
  7. Cho KJ, Ju YJ. 2015. Operational Status of the Public Participation Process in Environmental Impact Assessment in Korea. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  8. Cho NW, Maeng JH, Lee MJ. 2017. Use of Environmental Geospatial Information to Support Environmental Impact Assessment Follow-Up Management. Korean Journal of Remote Sensing. 33(5): 799-807. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.7780/kjrs.2017.33.5.3.4
  9. Chun DJ, Lee BK, Lee SY, Lee YJ, Lee EJ, Lee JH, Kang EJ, Shin JH. 2018. The Improvement Measures of Environmental Impact Assessment System to Strengthen the Participation of Local Residents. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  10. Han SH, Bae HH. 2018. Risk Management of Chemical Substances through Information Disclosure. Korean Journal of Public Administration. 56(1): 275-298. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.24145/KJPA.56.1.10
  11. Harper C, Harper C, Snowden M. 2017. Environment and Society: Human Perspectives on Environmental Issues. New York: Routledge.
  12. Hong SP. 2017. Feasibility Study of Environmental Impact Assessment as Instrument for Alternative Dispute Resolutions. J Environ Impact Assess. 26(6): 495-507. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2017.26.6.495
  13. Information Committee. 2017. Trend and Issues of the Open Databases of the Environmental Data, Japan Society for Impact Assessment. 15(1): 11-14. [Japanese Literature]
  14. Jin SH. 2008. The Limits of Procedural Rationality in the Way of Resolving Environmental Conflicts in the Participatory Government. ECO. 12(1): 251-281. [Korean Literature]
  15. Kang HH. 2016. A Legal Investigation on Disclosure and Dissemination of Environmental Information. Environmental Law Review. 38(3): 215-263. [Korean Literature]
  16. Kang JH, Kim JS. 2013. Victims' perspectives on Sex Offender Registration and Notification Regulations. Korean Associatin of Public Safety and Criminal Justice Review. 53: 10-35. [Korean Literature]
  17. Kim BM. 2016. A Study on the Operation Mechanism of Environmental Impact Assessment System. Ph.D. dissertation. Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  18. Kim DH. 2013. A Study on Environmental Information Sharing in International Environmental Law. Ph.D. dissertation. Ajou University, Suwon, Korea. [Korean Literature]
  19. Kim HJ. 2007. Access to Environmental Information - The First Pillar of the Aarhus Convention. Public land law review. 37(2): 335-358. [Korean Literature]
  20. Ku DW. 2002. Environmental Impact Assessment and Social Impact Assessment in Korea - Suggestions for Policy Reform. ECO. 3(1): 133-156. [Korean Literature]
  21. Laville F. 2000. Foundation of Procedural Rationality : Cognitive Limits and Decision Processes. Economics and Philosophy. 16(1): 117-138 https://doi.org/10.1017/S026626710000016X
  22. Lee CB. 2005. Search for Procedural Rationality under Uncertainty, Ambiguity, and Dilemma. Korean Journal of Public Administration. 43(4): 1-27. [Korean Literature]
  23. Lee YS, Choi JK, Cho KJ, Han SW, Lee YS. 2012. Improvement of Environmental Impact Assessment Regime to Reduce Environmental Conflict - Approach through Lawsuit Case Analysis -. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  24. Lee MJ, Maeng JH, Lee YJ, Yoon JH, Lee JH, Lee SM, Cho NW. 2018. Establishment of spatial information application system for advanced environmental impact assessment. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  25. Lee SY, Ju YJ. 2016. Survey of Public Participation Methods Appliable to the Environmental Impact Assessment Process. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  26. Maeng JH, Lee MJ, Kim TH, Seong MG, Cho NW. 2017. Operation of Environmental impact assessment support system 2017. Ministry of Environment. [Korean Literature]
  27. Niles MT, Lubell M. Integrative Frontiers in Environmental Policy Theory and Research. Policy Studies Journal. 40(1): 41-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2012.00445.x
  28. Park JH. 2017a. Environmental Information Disclosure System in Japan, its Evaluation and Suggest. Public Law Journal. 18(4): 461-502. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.31779/plj.18.4.201711.016
  29. Park JH. 2017b. Comparative Study on the Nuclear Power Plant Environmental Impact Assessment-Focus on the Public Participation-. The Law Reasearch institutute of Hongik Univ. 18(4): 273-298. [Korean Literature]
  30. Park JH, Choi JG, 2016. A Study on Future Direction and Practical Strategy for the Development of Environmental Impact Assessment Follow-Up. J Environ Impact Assess. 25(3): 165-174. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2016.25.3.165
  31. 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): 847-877. [Korean Literature]
  32. Sadler B. 1996. International Study of the Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment: Final Report: Environmental Assessment in a Changing World: Evaluating Practice to Improve Performance. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency.
  33. Seo HS. 1998. A Study on the Balance of Science and Technology Expertise among Conflicted Parties. Korean Journal of Local Government & Administration Studies. 12: 153-162. [Korean Literature]
  34. Simon HA. 1976. Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-making Processes in Administrative Organization. New York.
  35. 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
  36. Weil D, Archon F, Mary G, Elena F. 2006. The Effectiveness of Regulatory Disclosure Policies, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 25(1): 155-181. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20160
  37. Wood CM. 1995. Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review. Harlow, Longman.
  38. Yoon KS, Kim HS. 2010. Enhancing Public Information Disclosure System. The Korea Institute of Public Administration. [Korean Literature]
  39. 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): 283-312. [Korean Literature]