v. 36 n. 3 (2023): Revista ION
Artigos

Análise comparativa da Avaliação do Impacto Ambiental, avaliação ex ante e ex post

PDF (Español (España))
  • Juan Felipe Laverde-Salazar,
  • María Adelaida Torres,
  • Daniel Cardona Valencia
Juan Felipe Laverde-Salazar
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
María Adelaida Torres
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Daniel Cardona Valencia
Universidad de Antioquia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18273/revion.v36n3-2023002

Publicado 2023-11-30

Palavras-chave

  • Avaliação do impacto ambiental,
  • Ex ante,
  • Ex post,
  • Gestão de proyectos,
  • Licenciamento ambiental

Como Citar

Laverde-Salazar, J. F. ., Torres, M. A. ., & Cardona Valencia, D. (2023). Análise comparativa da Avaliação do Impacto Ambiental, avaliação ex ante e ex post. REVISTA ION, 36(3), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.18273/revion.v36n3-2023002

Copyright (c) 2023 Juan Felipe Laverde-Salazar, María Adelaida Torres, Daniel Cardona Valencia

Creative Commons License
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Resumo

Este artigo apresenta uma análise das tendências das avaliações ex ante e ex post centradas na gestão de projetos de infra-estruturas, com base num estudo de indicadores bibliométricos complementado por uma análise documental da legislação colombiana relativa à avaliação de impacto ambiental e aos processos de licenciamento ambiental. Os resultados evidenciam o crescente interesse pelo tema, particularmente orientado para as avaliações socioambientais e as tendências nas aplicações da avaliação cumulativa, a justiça social e as aplicações da inteligência artificial e da realidade aumentada como complementos da avaliação. Conclui-se que a gestão de projetos de infra-estruturas requer implementações mais rigorosas de metodologias de avaliação de riscos e que estas podem ser extrapoladas no sentido do desenvolvimento de projetos bem sucedidos. Este estudo fornece informações relevantes para
compreender a abordagem atual das avaliações de projetos e sua aplicabilidade no contexto colombiano, contribuindo para o desenvolvimento de estratégias eficazes de avaliação e gestão ambiental.

PDF (Español (España))

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

  1. Hare B. Environmental impact assessment: broadening the framework. Science of The Total Environment. 1991;108(1–2):17–32. doi.org/10.1016/0048-9697(91)90231-3
  2. Gardner J, Roseland M. Thinking Globally and Acting Locally Part II: Acting Locally: Community Strategies for Equitable Sustainable Development. Alternatives: Perspectives on Society, Technology and Environment. 1989;16(3):36-48.
  3. Borsatto RS, Althaus Ottmann MM, da Fonte NN. Biorregionalismo: desenvolvimento rural respeitando as diferenças. Interações. 2006;7(12):93-100. Available: https://interacoesucdb.emnuvens.com.br/interacoes/article/view/480/525
  4. Saxe S, Guven G, Pereira L, Arrigoni A, Opher T, Roy A, et al. Taxonomy of uncertainty in environmental life cycle assessment of infrastructure projects. Environmental Research Letters. 2020;15(8):083003. doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab85f8
  5. Fonseca A, Gibson RB. Testing an exante framework for the evaluation of impact assessment laws: Lessons from Canada and Brazil. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2020;81:106355. doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106355
  6. Asplund T, Hjerpe M. Project coordinators views on climate adaptation costs and benefits–justice implications. Local Environ. 2020;25(2):114–129. doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2020.1712340
  7. Clark BD. Environmental impact assessment (EIA): scope and objectives. In: Perspectives on Environmental Impact Assessment. Clark BD, Gilad A, Bisset R, Tomlinson P, Editors. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 1984. p. 3–13. doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6381-8_1
  8. Ángel E, Carmona SI, Villegas LC. Gestión ambiental En Proyectos de Desarrollo. 4 ed. Medellín; 2010.
  9. Ruiz Citores A. Análisis del atlas de justicia ambiental EJOLT. Álava, 2017.
  10. Martinez-Alier J. Los conflictos ecológicodistributivos y los indicadores de sustentabilidad. Polis. 2006;13.
  11. Martinez-Alier J. Conflictos ecológicos y justicia ambiental. Papeles. 2008;103:11-28.
  12. Irani Z, Love PED, Elliman T, Jones S, Themistocleous M. Evaluating e-government: Learning from the experiences of two UK local authorities. Information Systems Journal. 2005;15(1):61–82. doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2005.00186.x
  13. Annarelli A, Battistella C, Nonino F. Product service system: A conceptual framework from a systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016;139:1011–1032. doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.061
  14. Hidalgo D, Pereira L, Estupiñán N, Jiménez PL. TransMilenio BRT system in Bogota, high performance and positive impact - Main results of an ex-post evaluation. Research in Transportation Economics. 2013;39(1):133–138. doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2012.06.005
  15. Sengupta U, Sengupta U. SDG-11 and smart cities: Contradictions and overlaps between social and environmental justice research agendas. Frontiers in Sociology. 2022;7:995603. doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2022.995603
  16. Kalla M, Jerowsky M, Howes B, Borda A. Expanding Formal School Curricula to Foster Action Competence in Sustainable Development: A Proposed Free-Choice Project- Based Learning Curriculum. Sustainability. 2022;14(23):16315. doi.org/10.3390/su142316315
  17. De Filippo D, Fernández M. Bibliometría: Importancia de los indicadores bibliométricos. Red de Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnología Iberoamericana e Interamericana, 2002.
  18. Page MJ, McKenezie JE, Boussyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;134:103–112. doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.003
  19. Aria M, Cuccurullo C. Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informetr, 2017;11(4):959–975. doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  20. Valencia DC, Arevalo JB, Rodr D. Análisis bibliométrico sobre direccionamiento de los estudios en Riesgos Financieros risks. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia. 2017;38(59):2–13.
  21. Tomás-Górriz V, Tomás-Casterá V. La Bibliometría en la evaluación de la actividad científica. Hospital a Domicilio. 2018;2(4):145–163. doi.org/10.22585/hospdomic.v2i4.51
  22. van Wee B. Accessible accessibility research challenges. J Transp Geogr 2016;51:9–16. doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.10.018
  23. Elia V, Gnoni MG, Lanzilotto A. Evaluating the application of augmented reality devices in manufacturing from a process point of view: An AHP based model. Expert Syst Appl. 2016;63:187–197. doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.07.006
  24. van der Giesen C, Cucurachi S, Guinée J, Kramer GJ, Tukker A. A critical view on the current application of LCA for new technologies and recommendations for improved practice. J Clean Prod. 2020;259:120904. doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120904
  25. Cascetta E, Cartenì A, Henke I, Pagliara F. Economic growth, transport accessibility and regional equity impacts of high-speed railways in Italy: ten years ex post evaluation and future perspectives. Transp Res Part A: Policy Pract. 2020;139:412–428. doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.07.008
  26. Castro Coelho J, Aguiar Pinto P, Mira da Silva L. A systems approach for the estimation of the effects of land consolidation projects (LCPs): a model and its application. Agric Syst. 2001;68(3):179–195. doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(00)00061-5
  27. Todd PE. Chapter 60 Evaluating Social Programs with Endogenous Program Placement and Selection of the Treated. Handbook of development economics. 2007;4:3847–3894. doi.org/10.1016/S1573-4471(07)04060-0
  28. Del Giudice V, De Paola P Manganelli B, Forte F. The Monetary Valuation of Environmental Externalities through the Analysis of Real Estate Prices. Sustainability. 2017;9(2):229. doi.org/10.3390/su9020229
  29. Diez DM, Barr CD, Cetinkaya-Rundel M. OpenIntro Statistics. 2 ed. Boston, USA; 2012.
  30. Henry E, Loseto M, Ottaviani M. Regulation with Experimentation: Ex Ante Approval, Ex Post Withdrawal, and Liability. Manage Sci. 2022;68(7):5330–5347. doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4164
  31. Möhring N, Huber R, Finger R. Combining exante and ex-post assessments to support the sustainable transformation of agriculture: The case of Swiss pesticide-free wheat production. Q Open. 2023;3(3):qoac022. doi.org/10.1093/qopen/qoac022
  32. Hevenstone D, Fraser A, Hobi L, Geuke G. Why is impact measurement abandoned in practice? Evidence use in evaluation and contracting for five European Social Impact Bonds. Evaluation. 2023;29(1):91–109. doi.org/10.1177/13563890221136890
  33. Baglioni T, Ribeiro R. Corporate Bonds Distress and FOMC Announcement Returns. SSRN 4400095. 2023. doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4400095
  34. Karka P, Papadokonstantakis S, Kokossis A. Digitizing sustainable process development: From ex-post to ex-ante LCA using machinelearning to evaluate bio-based process technologies ahead of detailed design. Chem Eng Sci. 2020;250:117339. doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2021.117339
  35. Zhao D, Gu FF, Wang L. The impact of contractual governance on forms of opportunism. Industrial Marketing Management. 2022;102:89–103. doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.01.006
  36. Araya Palma G, Pérez Muñoz C, Bergamini Ladrón K. Gestión del cumplimiento ambiental. 2022.
  37. Martí FP, Teresa M. Evaluación y simulación del impacto de las políticas públicas sobre las PYMES a través del uso de modelos basados en agentes. 2012.
  38. Peloza J. The challenge of measuring financial impacts from investments in corporate social performance. J Manage. 2009;36(6):1518–1541. doi.org/10.1177/0149206309335188
  39. Al-Rumaihi A, McKay G, Mackey HR, Al-Ansari T. Environmental Impact Assessment of Food Waste Management Using Two Composting Techniques. Sustainability. 2020;12(4):1595. doi.org/10.3390/su12041595
  40. Xie J, Wu Z, Zhang X, Hu X, Shi C. Trends and developments in low-heat portland cement and concrete: A review. Constr Build Mater. 2023;392:131535. doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131535
  41. Postacchini L, Simoncini M, Forcellese A, Bevilacqua M, Ciarapica FE, Andreassi G, et al. Environmental assessment of an automated impregnation process of carbon fiber tows. Procedia CIRP. 2020;88:445–450. doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2020.05.077
  42. Velazquez G, Kaplan S, Monzon A. Ex-Ante and Ex-Post Evaluation of a New Transit Information App: Modeling Use Intentions and Actual Use. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2018;2672(50):56–65. doi.org/10.1177/0361198118792753
  43. Hoover FA, Meerow S, Grabowski ZJ, McPhearson T. Environmental justice implications of siting criteria in urban green infrastructure planning. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning. 2021;23(5):665–682. doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2021.1945916
  44. Constitución Política de la República de Colombia, Constitución Política de Colombia. Colombia, 1991. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: http://www.upme.gov.co/guia_ambiental/carbon/gestion/politica/normativ/normativ.htm
  45. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente. Ley 99. Ley general ambiental de Colombia. Normativa. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ley-99-1993.pdf
  46. Departamento Administrativo de la Función Pública. Procedimiento administrativo sancionatorio ambiental. Gestor normativo. Accessed: May 09, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.funcionpublica.gov.co/eva/gestornormativo/norma_pdf.php?i=36879
  47. Departamento Administrativo de la Función Pública. Decreto 1076 de 2015 Sector Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible Accessed: May 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.funcionpublica.gov.co/eva/gestornormativo/norma.php?i=78153
  48. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente. Resolución 1402. Metodología general para la elaboración y presentación de estudios ambientales. Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.minambiente.gov.co/documentonormativa/resolucion-1402-de-2018/
  49. ANLA. ABC del Licenciamiento Ambiental. Servicios a la ciudadanía. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.anla.gov.co/01_anla/tramites-y-servicios/servicios/abc-del-licenciamiento-ambiental
  50. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y ANLA. Metodología general para la elaboración y presentación de estudios ambientales. Bogotá D.C.; 2018. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.anla.gov.co/01_anla/documentos/normativa/manuales_guias/metodologia_estudios_ambientales_2018_0.pdf
  51. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente. Banco de indicadores para el proceso de licenciamiento ambiental. Bogotá D.C.; 2021. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Listado-de-Indicadorespara-la-evaluacion-y-seguimiento-deimpactos-ambientales.pdf
  52. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente. Listado de impactos ambientales específicos 2021. Bogotá D.C.; 2021. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.minambiente.gov.co/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Listadode-Impactos-Ambientales-Especificos-2021-V.4.pdf
  53. Departamento Nacional de Planeación. Manual conceptual de la Metodología General Ajustada (MGA). Bogotá; 2015. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://colaboracion.dnp.gov.co/CDT/MGA/Tutoriales%20de%20funcionamiento/Manual%20conceptual.pdf
  54. Departamento Administrativo de la Función Pública. Decreto 1076. Sector Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible. Gestor normativo. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.funcionpublica.gov.co/eva/gestornormativo/norma_pdf.php?i=78153
  55. Cohen E, Martínez R. Manual de formulación, evaluación y monitoreo de proyectos sociales. Santiago de Chile; 1998. [Online]. Available: http://www.cepal.org/dds/noticias/paginas/8/15448/Manual_dds_200408.pdf
  56. Ministerio del Interior. Qué es la Consulta Previa en Colombia. Accessed: May 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.mininterior.gov.co/que-es-la-consulta-previa-en-colombia/
  57. OMC. Ex ante y ex post. Glosario. Accessed: May 10, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.wto.org/spanish/thewto_s/glossary_s/ex_ante_ex_post_s.htm
  58. Frison Roche MA. Ex ante - ex post, justificación de un derecho propio y específico de la regulación. Revista de responsabilidad civil y seguros: publicación mensual de doctrina, jurisprudencia y legislación. 2010;10:3–13.
  59. Navarro H, Ortegón E, Pacheco JF, King K. Pauta metodológica de evaluación de impacto ex-ante y ex-post de programas sociales de lucha contra la pobreza: aplicación metodológica. Naciones Unidas, CEPAL, ILPES, Área de Proyectos y Programación de Inversiones, Santiago de Chile; 2006.