Is EIA a Relevant Tool in the South East Asian Context?

Written by:
1
Tanuw idjaj a, Gunawan

1
MSc. Environmental Management (NUS), S.T. (ITB)
Urban Planner & Researcher,

Green Impact Indonesia

Integrated Urban, Drainage and Env ironmental Planning and Design
Email: gunteitb@yahoo.com
http://greenimpactindo.wordpress.com/about/

Introduction

Environmental Impact Assessment ( EIA) w as fist developed in US betw een 1969

and 1971, under US National Environmental Policy Act. In 1972 EIA concept w as
accepted in UN Stockholm Conference. Further in 1974, UNAID published EIA
Guidelines for Development Projects. In 1980’s many countries also accepted EIA and
set up EIA legislation. Other international agencies that adopted EIA are UN- ESCA P,
UNEP, World Bank, ADB, and OCED. This proves that EIA now is accepted w orldw ide.1

Several South East Asia countries have also enacted mandatory EIA. For
example Philippines enacted it in 1978; Indonesia, and Malaysia in 1987; and Vietnam in
1993. But still Brunei, Cambodia, Lao, Myanmar, and Singapore have not enacted it in
their legislation. 2

South East Asia Context

South East Asia (SE Asia) is a new economic emerging region w ith population of
522 million, and some of them live in poverty. This is the reason w hy most SE countries
really need economic development. 3 Now new industrial activities, urban settlements
and transportations contribute enormous air, w ater and land pollution to SE Asia
environment. 4

1
 SE Asia actually comprises forest in 48 % of total land area. But population
increase, urbanization, logging and agriculture have caused the deforestation of 1.8 %
forest area per year (2.4 million hectares).

SE Asia currently deposits 50% the world’s biodiversity. And 30 per cent of
world’s coral reefs also are located in SE Asia. But w ith high rate of deforestations; and
coastal and marine degradation, resources depletion is seemed inevitable in the future.5
With these conditions how can EIA can be implemented and reduce environmental
impacts in SE Asia?

How EIA reduce SE Asia environmental problems

EIA purpose is actually to anticipate important possible effects of proposed

activities on biophysical systems (w ater, soil, air, biological systems); man- made
environment (settlement, infrastructures, etc); socio economic systems (including w ork,
education, recreation, and health services); and cultural systems (beliefs, art, literature).6
So theoretically EIA can reduce SE Asia environmental impacts from present and future
development if conducted correctly.

Important principles that should be addressed in EIA are: 7

1. EIA should focus on the main issues of the project
2. It needs trained professionals and experts to ensure quality of practices.
3. It needs public participation in its process.
4. It provides information and data to decision making process.
5. Implementation of EIA in decision- making process holds the key to success to w hole
EIA process.
6. Clear consideration of alternatives and mitigation in EIA is important.

EIA Methodologies

There are four groups of methodologies developed in EIA practices, w hich are: 8
1. Task-oriented methodologies
2. Component methodologies
3. Integrated methodologies

2
4. Adaptive methodologies

Task-oriented Methodologies

Task-oriented m ethodologies consist of impact identification, prediction,

evaluation and communication. Recent literature presented this method is Pendse, Rao,
and Sharma (1989) for water resource projects in developing countries.9 It reviews ad
hoc methods, checklists, overlays, matrices, netw orks. These are basic methods of EIA.

Component Methodologies

Com ponent methodologies are improved to identify essential phases on EIA

not just impact identification. Tw o approaches that describe this are Glasson (1994); and
Morris and Therivel (1995).

According to Glasson (1994) EIA in decision making framew ork should be done
in steps such as:10
1. Project Screening – is an EIA needed?
2. Scoping – w hich impacts and issues to consider?
3. Description of project/ development action
4. Description of environmental baseline
5. Identification of key impacts
6. Prediction of Impacts
7. Evaluation and assessment of significant impacts
8. Identification of mitigating measures
9. Presentation findings in an EIS ( including a non-technical summary)
10. Review of an EIS
11. Decision Making
12. Post-decision monitoring and auditing of predictions and mitigation measures
13. Public consultation (along w ith Process number 1 to 11)

This process is also done iteratively according to results of analysis. Further the method
is described in Diagram 1-1 Appendix 1.

3
 Morris and Therivel (1995) suggest incorporating w ide aspects in EIA practices.
The aspects include social – economic impact; noise; landscape; archaeological and
cultural assets; air and climate; soils and geology; w ater; terrestrial ecology; fresh water
ecology; coastal ecology; and interactions betw een impacts. 11 Even though not all
aspects are significant, but still the certain project w ill cover part of these aspects.

For every components assessment, Morris and Therivel (1995) suggest to

conduct these steps:12

1. Preliminary review to screen significant project and scope the impact that included.
2. Selecting relevant parameter to be investigated.
3. Collecting baseline data, from secondary sources; or field surveys and sampling.
4. Analyse baseline survey.
5. Describe proposed project and alternatives that are related to environment.
6. Identify potential impacts including primary, secondary, and cumulative impacts in
short, medium or long period.
7. Propose mitigation measures to avoid or minimise the impact.
8. Propose monitoring program during construction, operation, decommissioning.
9. Cross check relationship betw een monitoring component.
10. Carry out monitoring program.
These steps can be further described in Diagram 1-2.

Integrated Methodologies

Integrated methodologies are created to integrate many sectors and stages in

the tw o previous methodologies. Tw o examples from this group are Mongkol (1982) and
Sondheim (1978).

Mongkol (1982) suggest four steps, w hic h are:

1. Impact identification by three dimensional matrix, noting on the important impacts for
mitigation measures
2. Build use function value method to indicate the specific impact magnitudes to
measures the environmental change

4
3. Calculate benefit-cost ratio and later divided by environmental changes
4. Compare the benefit-cost ratio betw een proposal, and the environmental changes,
and decide to continue the project or not.
Although the there are many arguments on economic valuation of environment, still this
technique means to quantify the benefit and cost from the project.13

On the other hand Sondheim (1978) suggests the comprehensive methods w ith
panels of people, experts and non-specialists from affected community by the project.
These panels w ill rate aspects of adjacent environment quality and alternatives from
project description. These ratings further are going to be summarized to compare
14
environmental impact. This approach seems to underline the human value.

Adaptive Methodologies

Adaptive methodologies offer the solution to environmental problems w ith

developing partnership betw een scientists, resource managers, decision-makers and
policy-advisers. One example from this method is Adaptive Environmental Assessment
15
and Management (AEA M) w hich is improved by C.S. Holling (1978) ; and Jones and
Greig (1985). The main steps of AEAM after Jones and Greig (1985) further are
presented in Table 1-1 below .

5
Table 1-1. Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management (AEA M) steps after
16
Jones and Greig (1985)

Main Steps Activities

Initial Organisation
Scoping Session
First Workshop
Research Programme
Second Workshop
Communication
Set a core group w ith a project manager, some analysts, and
subject specialists, that equipped w ith computer modelling,
and discussions facilitating skill
The core group discusses the environmental problem and
produces preliminary concept model. Later they identify the
workshop participants including the senior decision-makers,
managers, and disciplinary specialists.
The core group develop a computer environmental
simulation. After understanding the problems, w orkshop
participants identify possible management actions and
monitoring indicator.
Participants decide the spatial and temporal scope.
They also identify main subsystems in model and critical
information flow s between subsystems. Then next steps are
to build the overall model and establish research programme
Special teams investigate specific issues raised by the
workshop and continue to model the environment
The core team produce the final version of the model based
on research finding. Later model is used to analyse
management policies using scenarios and gaming methods
The result of modelling and policy are communicated to the
public

The A EAM brings advantages such as the communications betw een managers
and scientists, and aw areness of managers to environmental problems, mitigation
measures and monitoring plan. The limitations are on the longer time, big cost and
limited expertise skill to conduct the process.

6
Advantage and Disadvantage of EIA Methodologies for SE Asia

The advantages of implementing EIA are very clear. EIA actually prevents
unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, excessive pollutions, and natural
degradation. While in social aspect, EIA offers the w in-win situation for all stakeholders
with the public consultation scheme. This is also one of the sustainable development
criteria from Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. 17

EIA informs decision- makers about future impacts from the development. This
will give benefit to the projects by reducing time delays and additional costs from social
conflict and environmental disasters.

Since EIA involves many experts and other stakeholders, it actually costs more
than the traditional planning process. Sometimes EIA also causes time delays for
verification findings and is considered not contributing to economic development. These
are the disadvantage of EIA.

SE Asia countries really need practical tools to assess environmental impact. EIA
sometimes is found too expensive, too difficult and taking to much time. EIA often are
not conducted properly or not conducted at all, because the government projects often
only have limited budget and time. That’s w hy SE Asia really needs less cost and
simpler methodologies of EIA.

Further SE Asia countries also have difficulties to implement public participation

properly. This is because the political regime that does not support democracy and
bottom-up approach in planning and development. Public participations sometimes also
are found not effective enough since low level of people education.

7
EIA Practices and Problems in the World and South East Asia

Generally three problems are concerned by experts in EIA w orldw ide practices.
They are:
1. Institutional arrangements problem;
2. Low quality of EIA practices; and
3. Lack of implementation of EIA in decision making process.

The first and second problems are recognized in the International Study of the
Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment 18 ; and Environmental Impact Assessment
in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Srilangka Reports by World Resources Institute in
1995.

While the third problem is described in Development Disasters Japanese-Funded

Dam Pr ojects in Asia, A publication of Rivers Watch East and Southeast Asia (RWESA),
International Rivers Netw ork (IRN) and Friends of the Earth Japan (FOEJ).

First most of the EIA institutional problems exist in the developing countries. It is
related to under-funding, under-staffing government agencies and lack of political w ill to
endorse EIA in all projects. Other institutional problem is not strict enforcement of EIA
requirements because of corruptions and collusions. These cases had been found In
Indonesia and Philippines.19 Further lack of public consultation happened since
unsupportive political regime and low people education. Lastly less EIA information
(legal and guidelines) is distributed because of too centralized EIA Authority.20

Secondly low quality of EIA practices are caused by lack of EIA expertise in
government agency, NGO or private sectors.21 In developed countries, like UK these
problems are also observed, since most stakeholders that involved in EIA process are
22
moderately inexperienced.

Thirdly the implementation of EIA mitigation measures in decision making seems

a critical point of EIA practices. RWESA, IRN and FOEJ have reported the impacts from
several large dams funded Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC). One of the
dams that built w ith EIA is San Roque Multipurpose Project.

8
The San Roque Multipurpose Project23

Project Description
Purpose : 345 MW power, irrigation of 87,000 hectares, flood control
and w ater quality improvements.
Cost : $1.19 billion.
JBIC role : Provided $700 m illion in loans to the consortium and
leveraged additional funds from private banks.
Ow nership : 100% foreign-owned by the San Roque Power Corporation,
consisting of Marubeni, Kansai Electric and Sithe Energies.
Num ber of : 4,400 people resettled, thousands m ore could be affected by
People Affected sedimentation upstream of the dam .
Status : Construction com plete, operational by March 2003.

The San Roque Multipurpose Project is one of JBIC projects in Philippines. The
dam development relocated 4’400 people and affected thousand of indigenous people,
the Ibaloi that live upstream. Since 1998 The Ibaloi had protested this project, but still
the construction phase of the dam w as continued expecting the dam to operate in March
2003.

The Ibaloi people conducted agriculture, fishing and small-scale gold panning in
Agno River and its riparian area. The concern of Cordillera People’s Alliance is 20’000
residents of Itogon, Benguet w ill be affected by sediment in the dam similar to the effect
of Ambuklao and Binga dams in 1950s.

JBIC and the San Roque Pow er Corporation stated that the resettlement plan
would restore the standard of living Ibaloi people. But three years after resettlement,
Ibaloi people w ere struggling w ithout proper income. And from 180 families w ho
resettled, 30 families have moved aw ay because of lack job.

The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA) of the Philippines actually facilitates
indigenous peoples to free and prior informed consent for project developed in their
heritage land. Ibaloi has raised their concern to all author ities, but failed. In 2001, the

9
Office of the Presidential Assistant on Indigenous Peoples’ Affairs confirmed that project
promoter did not obtain the free and prior informed consent of affected indigenous
communities. Ibaloi communities intended to file a law suit stopping the project based on
violation of IPRA and other law s.

One independent EIA review ed the project and discovered that the capacity of
the dam w as only designed for 5-years small flood and it w as not capable to irrigate area
effectively. The research also found that no flood management plan had been
presented to the public. Further it w as found that National Pow er Corporation had to pay
$10 million a month to the SRPC w ithout any guarantee of w ater availability to generate
pow er. And Philippine Government also had to pay $400 million in credit to JBIC to
subsidize the project that w ill burden electricity consumers and taxpayers.24

If EIA had conducted properly as mandated by Philippines Law , the JBIC w ould
not face lawsuit. And the livelihood of Ibaloi people w ould not be affected severely. This
project described the difficulties EIA implementation in SE Asia w hen facing to economic
demand and personal interest of decision maker.

These lessons actually can show how EIA tool is not used properly even though
the legislation, institutions and funding are available. It is obvious that some real action
needed to improve EIA practices worldw ide especially SE Asia.

Recommendations

Regarding institutional problem, I suggest to implement EIA in SE Asia w ith team

of fewer experts. This is related to cost reduction of EIA procedures. These actually can
be implemented in limited budget projects that exist in developing countries. Meanw hile
for EIA Government Agencies I suggest to conduct capacity building training; reduce
number of ineffective and corruptive officers; and improve the IT supports facility. I
believe it w ill reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and promote good governance.

Regarding low quality of EIA practices I also suggest Government Agencies,

private sectors and NGO netw orks to conduct more capacity building training. With this
the authority as w ell as EIA appraiser w ill develop better know ledge. Organization that

10
already conducts these trainings actually is International Association for Impact
Assessment.

While regarding the lack of implementation of EIA in decision making processes,

I think the key to improvements are on the raising of political w ill and environment
aw areness decision-makers. I hope w ith environmental educations and change of
political regime the implementation of EIA w ill be more comprehensive in SE Asia in
future.

11
Appendix 1

Diagram 1-1. The EIA Process from Glasson (1994)25

12
Diagram 1-2. Procedures in the assessment of an environmental components
26
for an EIA (Morris and Therivel,1995)

13
The Writer’s Description
I. Personal Information
Full name : Gunawan Tanu widjaja

e-mail : gunteitb@ yahoo.c om

website : http://greenimpacti ndo.wordpress.com/
Mobile Phone : +62 812 212 208 42 (Indonesia)
Place of Birth : Bandung
Date of Birth : 08 of August 1978

Sex : Male
Nationality : Indonesian
Mother Language : Indonesian
Language Skill : Indonesian, English
II. Education Backgrounds
Formal Educ ation
Name of City/Countr y Study T ime Graduated from Specializ ation GPA
Institution (Months/Years) (Month and Year)

National MSc 3.86

Universit y of Singapore 1 year October 2006 Environment from scale
Singapore Management of 5
Bandung Institute
of Technolog y 2.73
Bandung / Bachelor of
(Institut Indonesia 5 year s July of 2001 Archit ecture from scale
Teknologi of 4
Bandung)
III. Informal Education
Study T ime (Year s) Name of Institution Course Nam e & Specialization

2008 Singapore Ins titute of Planner Spati al Planning for a Sustainable

Singapore (1-day seminar)
2008 Lee Kuan Yew School Of Public Polic y "Lessons Not to Learn from American
Cities" by Prof Alan Alts huler (Half-day
seminar)

2007 National Uni versity of Singapore, Fac ulty of Short C ourse On "A – Z Of Oil & Gas To
Engineering, PAC (Professional Acti vities Petroc hemicals (3-days seminar)
Centre)

2007 Singapore Ins titute of Planner Destinati on Res orts, T he Next Wave
(1-day seminar)
2007 Singapore Ins titute of Planner, Malaysia Semi nar of Planni ng of Is kandar
Institute of Pl anner and Uni versiti Kebangsaan Development R egion (1-day seminar)
Malaysi a

2001 The British Institute IELTS Preparation Course

2000 Language Center ITB English Writing Course

1999 Gradasi Bulletin Student U nion of Architec ture Journalistic Traini ng
Gunadharma ( IMA-Gunadharma)
1997 Architecture Department ITB AutoC ad R 14 Traini ng

1993-1995 Saint Angela’s English Course English Course level C 6 to C11

14
 Study T ime (Year s) Name of Institution Course Nam e & Specialization

1990-1992 Saint Angela’s English Course English Course l evel J 2 to J5

IV. Working Exper ience
Name of Contract
City/ Countries Position Job Description
Institute/Companies Periods
Green Impact Indonesia Bandung Manager Team Leader and March 2003 to
Integrated Urban, Urban Pl anner now
Drainage and
Environmental Planning
Consultant
Agenc y for Research and Bandung Urban Pl anni ng Assistant October 2008 to
Development, Institute of and Management now
Water Resources, Ministr y Expert
of Public Wor ks, Republic
of Indonesi a,
Jurong Cons ultants Pte Singapore Planner Physical Planner November 2006
Ltd., Planning Di vision to October 2008
National Par ks Boar d, Singapore Intern Researcher July 2006 to Aug
Republic of Singapore 2006
Agenc y for Research and Bandung/ Indonesia Junior Res earcher GIS Expert Assistant Jan 2005 - Aug
Development, Institute of (Arc View 3.2), in 2005
Water Resources, Ministr y Polder T eam
of Public Wor ks, Republic
of Indonesi a,
Satyamitra J asapuri Bandung/ Indonesia Junior Architect, House, Factory and Aug 2003 - Dec
Engineering Estimator Café Design 2004
PT. Trinitas Buana Utama Bandung/ Indonesia Junior Architect Apartment Design Aug 2002 - Aug
2003
PT. Imesco Dito Jakarta/ Indonesia Junior Architect Junior Architect Jan 2002 – Aug
2002
COMBINE Bandung/ Indonesia Junior Res earcher Urban Development Aug 2001 - Jan
Research, es peciall y 2002
on Urban Garbage
Management

CV. Cipta Bina Sar ana Bandung/ Indonesia Wor k Trainee Junior Architect May - J uly 2001
ASPEK Bandung/ Indonesia Program Garbage Jan 2000 - Aug
Facilitator Management , 2001
Community Mechanis m Making
Recover y Program and Contr olling of
(CRP-HUI) in RW Cooperati ve Credit
11, Cibang kong Unit
District
V. Resear ch, Planning & Design Works
Name of Project Position Year

Under Green Impact Indonesia

Assistanc e for Directorate of Spatial Team Leader and Urban Planner Dec 2009
Planni ng, Public Works D epartment
(2009), Sus tainable Urban
Improvement Program (SUSIP) -
Executi ve Pres entation
Drainage Master Plan Revitalisati on Team Leader and Urban Planner Apr – D ec 2009
in Summarec on, Kelapa Gading,
Jakarta, Indonesia
Hospital Pr eliminar y D esign and Team Leader and Senior Architect Apr – Aug 2009
Study in Pangalengan, West J ava,

15
 Name of Project Position Year
Indonesi a (Proposal to KPBS, Milk
Produc er Cooperative in
Pangalengan)
Community Bas ed Development Team Leader and Environmentalist Aug 2009
Revitalisation in PT Newmont Nusa
Tenggara, Sumba, N usa T enggara
Barat, Indonesia (Pr opos al)
Traditional Market Mapping, GIS Team Leader and Urban Planner Aug 2009
Database and Anal ysis in the
framework of Implementing
Presidential Decree No 112/2007 on
Development of Traditional Mar ket
and Relocation of M odern Mar ket in
Indonesi a (Proposal to Ministr y of
Trade of Republic of Indonesia)

Integrated Water Resources Team Leader and Environmentalist Aug 2009

Management Plan for Bar ang kal
River, s ub c atchment of Brantas
River Basin, i n relati on with Soci al
Aspect and Institution Capacity
Building (Proposal to JICA)
“9 Pearl” Elementary School in Team Leader and Architect 2003
Bandung
Propos al 99’ers Radi o Sc hool Team Leader and Architect 2003
(Proposal)
Under Jurong Consultants Pt e
Ltd.
Preliminar y Study and Brief Planner 2007 to 2008
Development C oncept of QEZ3,
Petroc hemical Complex, Qatar

Dera Bassi D etailed Master Plan, Planner 2007 to 2008

Greater Mohali Ar ea, Punjab, India
Libya Africa Ec onomic City Planner 2007 to 2008

Wonogiri Indus trial Par k, Indonesia Planner 2007 to 2008

(Guanxi State Far m - Biofuel Plant)

Master Plan An Tay Industrial Planner 2007

Servic e Centre

Master Plan Zhangzhou Waterfront Assistant Planner 2006-2007

City, Chi na
Master Plan AMRL Internati onal Assistant Planner 2007
Tech City, T amil Nadu, India
W ith MSc Environmental
Management Program
“Neotiewpia” Ec o Village Mas ter Planner & Environmentalist 2006
Plan in Kranji Singapore

Under SJP Engineering

BTC Café Junior Architect 2004

Kopomas Fac tor y Junior Architect 2004
Private Houses Bandung Junior Architect, Design Devel opment 2003 – 2004

Under PT. Trinitas Buan a Utama

Rental H ouses in Bandung Studi o Coordinator 2002 – 2003
Bukit Resi k Exclusi ve Apar ment Studi o Coordinator 2002 – 2003

16
 Name of Project Position Year
Site Pl an “S. Par man” Elite H ousing Studi o Coordinator 2002

Under PT. Im esco Dito

Private Houses i n Jakarta Junior Architect 2002
Freelance Project
Cibangkong Low Cost H ousing, Final Year Student 2001
Bandung Indonesia

Design Development of KARANG Junior Architect, Design Devel opment 2001

SETRA Hotel, Spa and Cottages,
Bandung Indonesia under Cipta
Bina Sarana

Master Plan of Cipulir Housi ng Site Junior Architect 2001

Plan, J akarta under Prof Ir.
Danisworo
VI. Awards, Prestige, A ctivities, and Publication

Awards/ Best Dissertation Prizes from Shell, MEM National Uni versity of Singapore, 2006-2007
Prestig e Shell Grant Bursar y Holder in MEM National Uni versity of Si ngapore, 2005-2006
Second C hampion of Design Competition of Infor mal Traders Stand held by The Municipal\
Government of Kota Bandung, Praksis dan IMA-Gunadharma IT B Year 2001
Activities Bandung Independent Li ving Center (BILIC)
2003 - 2004 : Vol untary Attendant for Difabl e (Disable) Person
2003 : Coordi nator Research T eam in Accessibility Issue for Difable (Disabl e) Person in Several
Location i n Bandung
Forum Gelar Kota Bandung (City Devel opment Discussion Forum)
2002 : F orum Gel ar Kota Secretariat
2001 : J uni or Researcher
Ikatan Mahasis wa Arsitektur Gunadhar ma IT B (Gunadhar ma Student Uni on of Architecture
Department of ITB)
2001 Member of Legislative Bodies of IMA - Gunadharma
Member of Sus tainable Human Settlement Discussi on Group
Coordinator of TOR T eam of Sustainable Human Settl ement Seminar
1999 – 2000 Coordinator of Gradasi (Architecture Bulletin of IMA-G)
OSIS SMAK I BPK Penabur (Student Union of BPK Penabur Senior High School)
OSIS SMP St Aloysius (Student Uni on of St Al oysius Junior High School)

Publication s Integration of Sustai nable Pl anni ng Polic y and D esign of Low-Cost Apartment, in the Context of
Sustai nable Urban Development, National Seminar of Low-Cost Apartment, M aranatha Uni versity,
Bandung, Indonesia, 2009.
Bamboos as Sus tainabl e and Affordable Material for Housing as one of alternatife material of Low-
Cost Apartment, Nati onal Seminar of Low-Cost Apartment, Maranatha U niversity, Bandung,
Indonesi a, 2009.
Guidelines for Developing Polder System in Indonesia, Agenc y for Res earch and Development,
Institute of Water Resources, Ministr y of Public Wor ks, Republic of Indonesia, 2008-2009.
Developi ng a Landscape Evaluation Tool for Developing Countries, Cas e Studies Bi ntan Island,
Indonesi a, MSc Environment M anagement Program, National Uni versity of Singapore (Bes t
Dissertation Award)
Report of Resear ch in Accessibilit y Issue for Difab le (Disable) Per son in Several Location in
Bandung
Reports of Bandung Urban Discu ssion Forum on Urb an Solid W aste Managem ent, Januar y
2002.
Reports of Bandung Urban Discu ssion Forum in Housing Needs, August 2001.
Thesis of Design Studio, Cas e of Low Economy Flat for Cibang kong Village, Bandung, Indonesia
(Kelurahan Cibang kong), Theme Pattern Language Arc hitecture
Semi nar Report of Housing Devel opment Based on Low Ec onomy People.

17
1
Johnson C. Environment Management & Asse ssment Class Material
2
Ibid
3
http://www.rrcap.unep.org/indicator/Vertical%20South%20East%20Asia.pdf
4
Ibid
5
Ibid
6
Morgan R.K. Environmental Impact Asse ssment, The Methodological Perspective, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 1998 p.23
7
Ibid., p.30
and Johnson C. Environment Management & Assessment Class Material
8
Morgan R.K. Environmental Impact Asse ssment, The Methodological Perspective, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 1998 pp.53-54
9
Pendse Y.D., Rao R.V., and Sharma P.K. Environmental Impact Assesment Methodologies;
Shortcomings and Appropriateness for Water Resources Projects in Developing Countries. Water
Resources Development, pp.252-258
10
Glasson J., Therivel R., and Chadwick A. Introduction to Environmental Impact Asse ssment,
London 1994
11
Morris P., and Therivel R. Methods of Environmental Impact Asse ssment, The Natural and Built
Environment Series 2, London 1995
12
Ibid., pp.4-7
13
Mongkol P. “A Conceptual Development of Quantitative Environmental Impact Asse ssment
Methodology for Decision-makers” in Journal of Environmental Management 1982
14
Sondheim M.W. “A Comprehensive Methods for Assessing Environmental Impact” in Journal of
Environmental Management. 1978 p.27-42
15
Holling C.S. (ed) Adaptive Environmental Asse sment and Management. John Willey and Sons,
New York 1978
16
Jones M.L., and Greig L.A. “Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management; A New
Approach to Environmental Impact Assessment.” in MacLaren V.W. and Whitney J.B.R. (eds)
New Directions in Environmental Impact Assessment in Canada. Methuen,Toronto 1985 pp.21-42
17
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm
18
Morgan R.K. Environmental Impact Assessment, The Methodological Perspective, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 1998 p.283

18
19
Smith D.B., and van der Wansem M., Strengthening EIA Capacity in Asia: Environmental
Impact Asse ssment in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Srilangka. World Resources Institute 1995
p.13
20
Smith D.B., and van der Wansem M., Strengthening EIA Capacity in Asia: Environmental
Impact Asse ssment in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Srilangka. World Resources Institute 1995
pp.14-17
21
Ibid., p.17
22
Morris P., and Therivel R. Methods of Environmental Impact Asse ssment, The Natural and Built
Environment Series 2, London 1995 pp.4-7
23
http://www.irn.org/programs/seasia/pdf/030309.irnjbic.pdf
24
Ibid.,
Dr. Peter Willing (1999) Technical Review of Flood Control Aspects of the San Roque EIA,
available at www.irn.org/programs/sanroque
Dr. Wayne White (2000) A Review of the Power Purchase Agreement between NPC and SRPC,
available at www.irn.org/programs/sanroque
25
Glasson J., Therivel R., and Chadwick A. Introduction to Environmental Impact Asse ssment,
London 1994
26
Morris P., and Therivel R. Methods of Environmental Impact Asse ssment, The Natural and Built
Environment Series 2, London 1995 p.5

19