Analysis of reports on the impact of building investments on Natura 2000 sites in Poland based on own research

Abstract

<jats:p>The paper presents the results of several analyses of reports on the impact of SFRs on Natura 2000 sites. The reports enumerated are documents which are the basis for the assessment of an undertaking (building project) on valuable natural areas. Legal regulations determine fairly precisely the scope of a report on the impact of an undertaking on the environment, although they are imprecise in regards to how the impact on Natura 2000 sites should be evaluated. The reports are prepared at the request of investors, who are not interested in demonstrating a significant impact of construction works and planned building structures on the condition that the protected features and the integrity of Natura 2000 sites. An incomplete report may foster neglect of environmental threats and be contradictory to the basic aim of the assessment, which it to exclude a possible occurrence of a significant impact of a building on the Natura 2000 network. The present paper shows analyses of reports in the context of the content required by the Act of 23 November 2008 on the release of information about environment and its protection, participation of the public in the environment, and protection and assessments of the environmental impact. The analysis presented in this article has shown that the reports did not have the characteristics of an expert environmental examination, wich is commonplace with respect reports on the environmental impact required in a classical impact assessment. Some reports were incomplete, and the predicted impact on Natura 2000 sites was not based on actual data.</jats:p>

Method of Construction Projects’ Classification for Habitat Assessment in Poland and the Problem of Choosing Materials Solutions

“…It is also confirmed by the research of [43]. In this sense, the principle serves more conservation of the environment (i.e., upkeeping of the present condition) than an active shaping of the environment and restoring its state.…”

“…HA, as well as EIA, is on the critical path determining the time of preparing the construction project to carry it out. However, it shows the essential differences in terms of the aim, range, methodology, subjects, or responsible clerks for their accomplishment [13,43]. HA is required in the case of different construction projects than those which may significantly influence the environment and which are not directly related to the protection of a Natura 2000 area or do not stem from this protection.…”

“…A construction project can significantly influence a Natura 2000 area and can be excluded from HA at the same time. In this case, an environment report will not be made, which as the only one can minutely analyze the impact of a construction project on the integrity of a Natura 2000 area [39,43]. There is also a situation possible when a project with an insignificant impact on the Natura 2000 site may be subjected to HA in which the investor would be required to prepare a report, although, in practice, it would not provide essential and decisive content.…”

“…One of the reasons for this situation is the lack of a coherent set of criteria. The main principle applied in the qualification for both EIA and HA is the precautionary principle [39][40][41][42][43]. Practical realization of this principle demonstrates, however, shortcomings in its methodology [43].…”

“…The main principle applied in the qualification for both EIA and HA is the precautionary principle [39][40][41][42][43]. Practical realization of this principle demonstrates, however, shortcomings in its methodology [43]. Moreover, this is also not a good practice to use checklists as a tool to check the quality and completeness of the data.…”