IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v75y2017icp91-102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utilitarian framings of biodiversity shape environmental impact assessment in development cooperation

Author

Listed:
  • Hugé, Jean
  • Rochette, Anne-Julie
  • Janssens de Bisthoven, Luc
  • Dahdouh-Guebas, Farid
  • Koedam, Nico
  • Vanhove, Maarten P.M.

Abstract

Biodiversity is under threat from anthropogenic pressures, in particular in biodiversity-rich developing countries. Development cooperation actors, who traditionally focus on the improvement of socio-economic conditions in the South, are increasingly acknowledging the linkages between poverty and biodiversity, e.g. by referring to the ecosystem services framework. However, there are many different framings which stress the need for biodiversity integration and which influence how biodiversity and development are and/or should be linked. Moreover, there is a gap between the lip service paid to biodiversity integration and the reality of development cooperation interventions. This study analyses how biodiversity framings are reflected in environmental impact assessment (EIA) practice, and how these framings influence EIA and decision-making. The findings, based on an in-depth qualitative analysis of World Bank EIAs undertaken in West Africa, indicate the incoherent quality but also the dominance of the ‘utilitarian’ and ‘corrective’ framings, which respectively stress human use of nature and mitigation of negative unintended development impacts. Identifying and highlighting these discursive trends leads to increased awareness of the importance of biodiversity among all development actors in North and South. However, some framings may lead to an overly narrow human-centred approach which downplays the intrinsic value of biodiversity. This study proposes recommendations for an improved integration of biodiversity in development cooperation, including the need for more systematic baseline studies in EIAs.

Suggested Citation

  • Hugé, Jean & Rochette, Anne-Julie & Janssens de Bisthoven, Luc & Dahdouh-Guebas, Farid & Koedam, Nico & Vanhove, Maarten P.M., 2017. "Utilitarian framings of biodiversity shape environmental impact assessment in development cooperation," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 91-102.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:75:y:2017:i:c:p:91-102
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2017.06.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901117301090
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.06.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jean Huge & Luc Janssens De Bisthoven & Mathilda Mushiete & Anne Julie Rochette & Soraya Candido & Hilde Keunen & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas & Nico Koedam & Maarten P M Vanhove, 2020. "EIA-driven biodiversity mainstreaming in development cooperation: Confronting expectations and practice in the DR Congo," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/298776, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Kanokporn Swangjang, 2022. "Linkage of Sustainability to Environmental Impact Assessment Using the Concept of Ecosystem Services: Lessons from Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:75:y:2017:i:c:p:91-102. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.