Thai’s Monitoring Mechanism as a Tool for Pollution Control
The research report in this paper focusses on environmental monitoring through a comparison of project for which Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is mandatory (paper production) and those for which EIA is not required (fish processing). The content of an EIS was found to be a key determinant in defining the monitoring procedures for projects requiring EIA. Generally, more comprehensive, an EIS results in extensive requirements for project monitoring. For non-EIS projects, monitoring provisions are more uniform and determined by other provisions, such as pollution control regulations. For both types of project, agencies are responsible for ensuring the performance of both projects that require EIA and those that do not. The results of study confirm that monitoring procedures for projects requiring EIA are more satisfactory since EIS can supply the basic prescription of the project performance.
Biswas, A.K. (1987). Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment in Developing Countries. In: Environmental impact assessment for developing countries. London: Tycooly International, 191-218.
Buckley, R. (1991). Auditing the precision and accuracy of environmental impact assessment in Australia. Environ Impact Assess Rev., 11: 1-23.
Canter, L.W. and G.A. Canty (1993). Impact significant determination: basic consideration and a sequenced approach. Environ Impact Assess Rev., 13: 275-297.
Canter, L.W. (1996). Environmental Impact Assessment: McGraw Hill, Singapore.
Environmental Agency (1995). Viewpoints on the Environment: Developing a National Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Framework. United Kingdom.
Glasson, J., Therivel, R. and A. Chadwick (1994). Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment. UCL, London.
Kakonge, J.O. (1994). Monitoring of environmental impact assessment in Africa. Environ Impact Assess Rev., 14: 295- 304.
Leu, W.S., Williams, W.P. and A.W. Bark (1996). Quality control mechanisms and environmental impact assessment effectiveness with special reference to the UK. Project Appraisal, 11: 2-12.
Leu, W.S., Williams, W.P. and A.W. Bark (1997). Evaluation of environmental impact statement in three southeast Asian nations. Project Appraisal, 12: 89-100.
Marr, K. (1997). Environmental Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom and Germany. Ashgate, England.
Morrison-Sauders, A. (1996). Environmental impact assessment as a tool for ongoing environmental management. Project Appraisal, 11: 95-104.
Munn, R.E. (1979). Environmental Impact Assessment: Scope Report 5, John Wiley, Chichester.
Office of Environmental Policy and Planning (1992). The Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental Quality, 1992. Ministry of Science Technology and Environment, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sadler, B. (1988). The evaluation of assessment: Post-EIA research and process development. In: Wathern, P. (Ed.), Environmental Impact Assessment: Theory and Practice. Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 129-142.
Said, A.M. (1997). The practice of post-monitoring and audit in environmental impact assessment in Malaysia. Ph.D.Thesis, EIA Unit, University of Wales, Aberystwyth.
Shepherd, A. and L. Ortolano (1997). Organizational change and environmental impact assessment at the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand: 1972-1988. Environ Impact Assess Rev., 13: 329-356.
Tongcumpou, P. and N. Harvey (1994). Implications of recent environmental impact assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev., 14: 271-294.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (1990). Post-Project Analysis in Environmental Impact Assessment. Environment Series 3, United Nations ECE/ENVWA/11.
Wathern, P. (1988). An Introduction Guide to Environmental Impact Assessment. In: Wathern, P. (Ed.), Environmental Impact Assessment: Theory and Practice. Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 3-30.
Wood, C. (1996). Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review. The United Kingdom, Longman, United Kingdom.