Repository logo
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
Repository logo
  • Communities & Collections
  • All of NRU
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Kiemo, James Karatu"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    An Evaluation of the Participation of the Affected Public in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) For Manufacturing and Processing Industries in the Central Region of Uganda
    (East African Nature and Science Organization, 2023) Taako, George Edema; Andama, Edward; Kiemo, James Karatu
    Environmental impact assessment (EIA) was legally introduced in Uganda through the National Environment Act (NEA) 1995 (now NEA 2019) and made operational by the EIA Regulations 1998. Since the origin of EIA from the National Environment Policy Act of 1970 in the USA, public participation has taken an essential part of the EIA process. This paper assesses the legal provisions for public participation in the EIA process and the actual practice in Uganda, particularly the affected public. Data was collected using a literature review, survey questionnaire, interview guides and documentary analysis. The results indicated fairly good legal provisions for public participation and involvement in EIA. However, public participation was not well legislated in the early phases of the EIA process (preparation of project brief, screening, and scoping) and the later phases, particularly final decision-making and EIA follow-up. There were gaps between the law and the actual practice due to many contextual factors, including public participation, weak monitoring by the regulator, weak community cohesion and environmental stewardship, limited dissemination of EIA information and lack of community awareness of projects' potential environmental, social and health impacts. The study made recommendations to promote the participation of the affected public in the EIA process
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Environmental Impact Assessment Follow–Up in Central Uganda’s Processing and Manufacturing Industries: Implications for Achieving Sustainable Development
    (East African Nature and Science Organization, 2024) Taako, George Edema; Kiemo, James Karatu; Andama, Edward
    Environmental impact assessment (EIA) was introduced in Uganda by the National Environment Act 1995, now repealed by the National Environment Act 2019. EIA was made operational by the EIA Regulations, 1998, which is now replaced by the National Environment (Environmental and Social Assessment) Regulations 2020. It is generally agreed that the EIA follow-up is an essential part of the EIA process, without which EIA becomes a pro-forma exercise seeking plan or project approval. This paper assesses the legal and regulatory provisions for EIA follow-up and the actual practice in central Uganda’s processing and manufacturing industries for 24 years (1995-2019) of practice. Data was collected from key categories of EIA stakeholders, including the affected public, the interested public, the developers, and the regulator or its delegated entities. Data was collected between 2018 and 2019 using a review of related literature, documentary analysis, checklists, key informant interviews, and specifically designed questionnaires for the different categories of key EIA stakeholders. Data was analyzed using largely descriptive statistics and, to some extent, inferential statistics. Our finding was that there was a wide gap between law and the actual practice of EIA follow-up. Specifically, there was limited monitoring by the regulator, absent post-assessment environmental audit, low to moderate implementation of mitigation measures and poor communication between the developers and the affected public. This was mainly due to poor implementation of the pre-approval phases of the EIA process and other context factors. The paper made several recommendations to improve the design and implementation of the EIA follow-up program

Research Dissemination Platform copyright © 2002-2025 NRU

  • Cookie settings
  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback