Ecological Consequences of Railway Infrastructure Development: A Case Study of the Belgrade-Novi Sad Corridor

Abstract

This study presents a comprehensive evaluation of environmental susceptibility associated with the development of the Belgrade-Novi Sad Railway Route in Serbia. Fostering socio-economic growth through transportation infrastructure necessitates an acute awareness of potential ecological implications, a nexus often overlooked in the haste of progress. Accordingly, a broad spectrum of environmental parameters such as land use, air and noise pollution, water resources, and biodiversity were systematically assessed. The employment of Habitat Equivalency Analysis facilitated the discernment of potential environmental detriments linked with the railway project. Significant findings from this investigation offer critical insights for policymakers, urban planners, and environmental conservationists, thus enriching the understanding of ecological consequences attached to the expansion of the specified railway corridor. These findings, serving as a tool for informed decision-making, are pivotal in striving towards a balanced approach between the exigencies of transportation infrastructure enhancement and the indispensable goal of environmental preservation. Ultimately, the goal of this study is to promote an enhanced understanding of the reciprocal relationship between infrastructure development and environmental impact, thereby contributing to the ongoing discourse on sustainable practices beneficial for current and future generations.

The Limitations of EMSs in Comparison with the SDGs When Considering Infrastructure Sustainability: The Case of the Terzo Valico Dei Giovi, Italy

“…Moreover, part of the recent scientific literature proposes to implement the EIA with methodologies capable of determining the temporal and spatial impact that the realization of an infrastructure would have on the territory by considering its effects and costs over the entire life cycle [8,39,40] and not limiting the analysis to a single project. In addition, some research proposes that to make EIA procedures more comprehensive, proactive interventions necessary for the limitation of potential negative impacts and indications raised by local communities should be integrated into them [41].…”