Home » Author instructions » Thematic cluster: Apropriate Assessment

Thematic cluster: Apropriate Assessment

Subthemes

  1. Natura 2000 Conservation Objectives
  2. Appropriate Assessment and its relation to EIA Directive
  3. Application to projects not listed under Annex I and II of EIA Directive- mechanism for screening such activities
  4. Procedures
  5. Scope of assessment of biodiversity, geodiversity and landscape diversity
  6. Admissibility of projects found to have adverse effects
  7. Concept of Overriding Public Interest
  8. Approach to alternatives
  9. Ecological Network and Economy
  10. Judicial practice

Possible thematic challenges

  • Can we improve the site-specific conservation objectives to make them clearer but also more feasible at the same time?
  • Which type of projects represent the biggest challenge in appropriate assessment procedures and why
  • What approaches are used in assessments of impacts when restoration of habitats/habitats for the species is part of theSite-specific conservation objectives (SSCO)?)?
  • What approaches are used in assessments of cumulative effects? How is availability of data affecting the assessments?
  • How to strengthen the linkages between SEA and Appropriate Assessments under the Habitat and Birds directives? How to effectively undertake such assessment for plans and programmes that lack details on proposed projects? What is clearly too much or too little to expect from such assessments?
  • How often is the instrument of („Imperative reasons of overriding public interest“) IROPI, utilised and is it contributing to the Habitats/Birds Directive objectives? What are the approaches to HD 6.3 appropriate assessments with transboundary impacts?
  • How are prescribed mitigation measures controlled and their effectiveness monitored? What are the approached to mitigation measures modification when needed and how often is adaptive management approach used?
  • Can (and how) the development of green infrastructure help achieve the goals of NATURA 2000 conservation?
  • To what extent can compensatory measures replace the avoidance or sufficient mitigation of direct impact on conservation objectives?