IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i19p12317-d927504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Grounding the SHIELD Model for Tropical Coastal Environments

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina I. Pereira

    (Earth Sciences Department, EAFIT University, Medellín 050022, Colombia
    Coastal Systems Research Group, Playas Corporation Ltd., Santa Marta 470004, Colombia)

  • Camilo M. Botero

    (School of Law, University Sergio Arboleda, Santa Marta 470004, Colombia)

  • Contanza Ricaurte-Villota

    (Marine and Coastal Geosciences Program, Marine and Coastal Research Institute “José Benito Vives de Andréis” (INVEMAR), Salguero Beach, Rodadero, Santa Marta 470006, Colombia)

  • Oswaldo Coca

    (Marine and Coastal Geosciences Program, Marine and Coastal Research Institute “José Benito Vives de Andréis” (INVEMAR), Salguero Beach, Rodadero, Santa Marta 470006, Colombia)

  • David Morales

    (Marine and Coastal Geosciences Program, Marine and Coastal Research Institute “José Benito Vives de Andréis” (INVEMAR), Salguero Beach, Rodadero, Santa Marta 470006, Colombia)

  • Benjamin Cuker

    (Department of Marine and Environmental Science, Hampton University, Hampton, VA 23669, USA)

  • Celene B. Milanes

    (Civil and Environmental Department, GeMarc Group, Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla 080001, Colombia)

Abstract

Customizing environmental assessments to the particularities of the type of environment is crucial for implementing the precautionary principle. This paper uses the SHIELD model (Susceptibility to Human Interventions for Environmental Licensing Determination) in the context of geomorphology for the effective management of coastal environments. This paper describes the customization of the SHIELD model for tropical coastal environments as a way of validating a specific kind of environment. The assessment translates expert knowledge into technical criteria for the environmental control of human interventions through fuzzy logic computations. This assessment identified 21 geomorphological processes across six categories. Moreover, computation of the parameters resulted in a database of susceptibility measures for 4524 interactions. These quantitative results could guide future environmental impact studies of coastal environments, considering licensing instrument requirements. The SHIELD model approach, illustrated here on tropical coastal environments, offers a technical alternative for improving the environmental control of anthropogenic impacts from a geomorphological perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina I. Pereira & Camilo M. Botero & Contanza Ricaurte-Villota & Oswaldo Coca & David Morales & Benjamin Cuker & Celene B. Milanes, 2022. "Grounding the SHIELD Model for Tropical Coastal Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12317-:d:927504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12317/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/19/12317/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joe Weston, 2000. "EIA, Decision-making Theory and Screening and Scoping in UK Practice," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 185-203.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amir Saffari & Mohammad Ataei & Farhang Sereshki & Mostafa Naderi, 2019. "Environmental impact assessment (EIA) by using the Fuzzy Delphi Folchi (FDF) method (case study: Shahrood cement plant, Iran)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 817-860, April.
    2. Susan Owens & Tim Rayner & Olivia Bina, 2004. "New Agendas for Appraisal: Reflections on Theory, Practice, and Research," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(11), pages 1943-1959, November.
    3. Juan Pablo Celemín & Guillermo Ángel Velázquez, 2018. "Spatial Analysis of the Relationship Between a Life Quality Index, HDI and Poverty in the Province of Buenos Aires and the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, Argentina," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 57-77, November.
    4. Ulrike Pröbstl-Haider, 2022. "EIA Effectiveness in Sensitive Alpine Areas: A Comparison of Winter Tourism Infrastructure Development in Germany and Austria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.
    5. Lindsay C. McCallum & Christopher A. Ollson & Ingrid L. Stefanovic, 2016. "Development of a Health Impact Assessment Screening Tool: A Value Versus Investment Approach," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(03), pages 1-22, September.
    6. Graham Wood & Agustin Rodriguez-Bachiller & Julia Becker, 2007. "Fuzzy Sets and Simulated Environmental Change: Evaluating and Communicating Impact Significance in Environmental Impact Assessment," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(4), pages 810-829, April.
    7. Julio A. Soria-Lara & Luca Bertolini & Marco Te Brömmelstroet, 2017. "Towards a more effective EIA in transport planning: a literature review to derive interventions and mechanisms to improve knowledge integration," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(5), pages 755-772, May.
    8. Christopher Snary, 2004. "Understanding Risk: The Planning Officers' Perspective," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(1), pages 33-55, January.
    9. Gałaś, Slávka & Gałaś, Andrzej, 2016. "The qualification process of mining projects in environmental impact assessment: Criteria and thresholds," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 204-212.
    10. Wang, Ying-Ming & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling, 2006. "Environmental impact assessment using the evidential reasoning approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1885-1913, November.
    11. Simin Davoudi, 2006. "The Evidence – Policy Interface in Strategic Waste Planning for Urban Environments: The ‘Technical’ and the ‘Social’ Dimensions," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(5), pages 681-700, October.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12317-:d:927504. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.