Türkiye'de uygulanan çevresel etki değerlendirme (ÇED) modelinin dünyadaki yaygın kullanılan örneklerle karşılaştırılması
Loading...
Date
2006
Authors
Yürüten, Sevim
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Uludağ Üniversitesi
Abstract
Bu çalışma kapsamında, Türkiye' deki ve dünyadaki Çevresel Etki Değerlendirme (ÇED) uygulamaları incelenmiş ve ülkeler arası karşılaştırmalar yapılmıştır. Özellikle AB ÇED direktifi doğrultusunda ülkelerdeki uygulamalar ortaya konmuştur. Ayrıca Türkiye' deki ÇED' in mevcut durumu ve eksikleri ortaya konmaya çalışılmıştır. Çevresel etki değerlendirmesinin yeri ve önemi, o ülkede yerleşik olan çevre kavramlarının bir sonucu olarak ortaya çıkmakta ve çeşitli ülkelerde farklı şekillerde algılanabilmektedir. ÇED' in kapsamı ve raporu hazırlayan meslek gruplarının yanısıra raporda yer alan konuların önem derecesi ülkeden ülkeye farklılıklar gösterebilmektedir. Bazı ülkelerde ( Brezilya örneği ) çok iyi bir şekilde geliştirilmiş ÇED sistemlerinin olduğu, ancak uygulamanın iyi bir şekilde yürütülemediği görülmüştür. İncelemeler neticesinde Avrupa Birliği ÇED sistemi içerisinde de çok farklı uygulamaların olduğuna dikkat çekilmiş, farklı uygulamaları ile Fransa buna örnek olarak gösterilmiştir. Türkiye' de uygulanan ÇED Yönetmeliğinin AB direktifi ile uyumluluğu ortaya konmuştur. Her ne kadar yönetmelik müktesebat ile uyumlu olsa da halka ilan etme şekli ve halkın katılımı için ayrılan sürenin tekrar üzerinde durulması gerekmektedir. Uygulama örneklerine bakıldığında halkın görüşlerinin en çok alındığı ülkenin ABD olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. ÇED' in temel aşamaları olan eleme, kapsamlaştırma, raporlama, inceleme, değerlendirme ve izleme üzerinde durulmuştur. AB ülkelerinde Natura 2000 alanları tanımlanmış olduğundan ÇED eleme aşamasında Natura 2000 alanları da göz önünde bulundurulmaktadır. Türkiye' de ise bu alanların tanımlanmasına son yıllarda başlandığı tespit edilmiştir. AB ÇED direktifinde kapsamlaştırma zorunlu olmasa da bazı üye ülkelerin resmi hükümleri vardır. Bu ülkeler; Avusturya, Belçika-Valonya, İspanya ve Hollanda' dır. Türkiye' de de kapsamlaştırma zorunludur. Türkiye' de son yıllarda uygulamaya geçilen ÇED izleme hususundaki gelişmelerin ümit verici olduğu düşünülmektedir. Türkiye' de çevre yönetimi ile fiziksel planlama arasında tam bir bağın kurulamaması ÇED uygulamalarını etkilediği sonucuna varılmıştır. Özellikle ABD ve Avrupa ülkelerinde çevre envanterlerinin ve fiziksel planlamanın olması ÇED uygulamalarında büyük kolaylıklar sağlamaktadır. Bölgesel çevre verileri ÇED raporlarının hazırlanmasında etkin kullanıldığından Türkiye' de bu konudaki eksikliği en kısa sürede giderilmesi gerektiği sonucuna varılmıştır. Ülkelerdeki gelişim Türkiye gibi çok hareketli değildir, bunun en büyük nedeni ABD ve AB üye ülkelerinde 1970 ve 1980' li yıllarda ÇED çalışmalarına başlanmış olması ve bugüne kadar büyük ilerlemeler göstermiş olmalarıdır. Ülkemizdeki hareketliliğin en büyük sebebinin AB uyum projeleri olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır.
In this study, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) implementations both in Turkey and in the world were studied and compared between countries. Specifically, implementations in different countries were emphasized based on the EU EIA directive. Furthermore, the current situation and drawbacks of the EIA implemented in Turkey were tried to be determined. The level and importance of the environmental impact assessment is a result of a country?s understanding of environment and it has been perceived differently by different countries. In addition to that, the scope of the EIA and the occupational groups involved in the preparation of reports as well as the priority degrees of the topics given in the reports change between countries. It has been revealed that some countries (i.e. Brasilia) have well-developed EIA systems, but cannot implement them properly. On the other hand, it has been found out that there are different implementations within the EIA system of the European Union and the system implemented in France was considered as an example. The conformity of the EIA Regulation in force in Turkey with the EU directive has been determined. In spite of the fact that the regulation is in conformity with the acquis, the announcement to the public and the period granted to the public participation should be reviewed. When the implementations in practice in different countries were taken into account, it has been decided that USA attaches more value to the opinion of the public. The main stages of the EIA, which are election, scoping, reporting, investigation, evaluation and monitoring, have been emphasized. Since Natura 2000 sites have been agreed upon between the member states and the EU, these sites have been also considered during the EIA election stage. It has been seen that the studies for the designation of such sites in Turkey have been initiated recently. Although the scoping is not compulsory within the scope of the EU directive, some member states have established official provisions in this respect. These countries are Austria, Belgium-Walloon Region, Spain, and Netherlands. In Turkey, scoping is a compulsory stage. It has been concluded that advances in the EIA monitoring activities that has been initiated recently in Turkey are promising. Furthermore, the lack of a sound cooperation between the environmental management and the physical planning in Turkey has been concluded to affect the EIA implementations. Especially in USA and the EU member states, the environmental inventory and the physical planning have made the EIA implementations easier. It has been concluded that since regional environmental data has been effectively utilized in the preparation of the EIA reports, the absence in Turkey in this respect should be eliminated as soon as possible. Advances achieved in other countries are not as rapid as in Turkey, especially due to the fact that the EIA activities were initiated in USA and the EU member states 1970's and 1980's and significant improvements have been achieved up to date. Finally, the EU harmonization efforts can be given as the most important reason for this rapid improvement in Turkey.
In this study, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) implementations both in Turkey and in the world were studied and compared between countries. Specifically, implementations in different countries were emphasized based on the EU EIA directive. Furthermore, the current situation and drawbacks of the EIA implemented in Turkey were tried to be determined. The level and importance of the environmental impact assessment is a result of a country?s understanding of environment and it has been perceived differently by different countries. In addition to that, the scope of the EIA and the occupational groups involved in the preparation of reports as well as the priority degrees of the topics given in the reports change between countries. It has been revealed that some countries (i.e. Brasilia) have well-developed EIA systems, but cannot implement them properly. On the other hand, it has been found out that there are different implementations within the EIA system of the European Union and the system implemented in France was considered as an example. The conformity of the EIA Regulation in force in Turkey with the EU directive has been determined. In spite of the fact that the regulation is in conformity with the acquis, the announcement to the public and the period granted to the public participation should be reviewed. When the implementations in practice in different countries were taken into account, it has been decided that USA attaches more value to the opinion of the public. The main stages of the EIA, which are election, scoping, reporting, investigation, evaluation and monitoring, have been emphasized. Since Natura 2000 sites have been agreed upon between the member states and the EU, these sites have been also considered during the EIA election stage. It has been seen that the studies for the designation of such sites in Turkey have been initiated recently. Although the scoping is not compulsory within the scope of the EU directive, some member states have established official provisions in this respect. These countries are Austria, Belgium-Walloon Region, Spain, and Netherlands. In Turkey, scoping is a compulsory stage. It has been concluded that advances in the EIA monitoring activities that has been initiated recently in Turkey are promising. Furthermore, the lack of a sound cooperation between the environmental management and the physical planning in Turkey has been concluded to affect the EIA implementations. Especially in USA and the EU member states, the environmental inventory and the physical planning have made the EIA implementations easier. It has been concluded that since regional environmental data has been effectively utilized in the preparation of the EIA reports, the absence in Turkey in this respect should be eliminated as soon as possible. Advances achieved in other countries are not as rapid as in Turkey, especially due to the fact that the EIA activities were initiated in USA and the EU member states 1970's and 1980's and significant improvements have been achieved up to date. Finally, the EU harmonization efforts can be given as the most important reason for this rapid improvement in Turkey.
Description
Keywords
ÇED, Çevresel etki değerlendirmesi, Avrupa Birliği, ÇED direktifi, ÇED raporu, ÇED sistemi, Yönetmelik, The EIA, The environmental impact assessment, European Union, The EIA directive, The environmental impact statement, The EIA system, The regulation
Citation
Yürüten, S. (2006). Türkiye'de uygulanan çevresel etki değerlendirme (ÇED) modelinin dünyadaki yaygın kullanılan örneklerle karşılaştırılması. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.