Browse all documents

NATURA HINDAMISE PRAKTIKAST JA KVALITEEDIST 2010

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This report analyzes the practice and quality of Natura 2000 impact assessments in Estonia as of 2010. It evaluates the compliance of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports with European Union directives and surveys experts on the availability of baseline data and the effectiveness of current procedures.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • An analysis of ten EIA reports completed in 2010 revealed a significant lack of compliance with Natura assessment requirements; only one report was found to be prepared more or less in accordance with the requirements.
  • Natura assessment information is rarely presented as a unified chapter in EIA reports, which hinders external evaluators from determining if necessary information is present and sufficiently addressed.
  • There is a critical shortage of quantitative baseline data regarding the 'favourable conservation status' of species and habitat types in Estonia, leading experts to rely primarily on qualitative assessments.
  • Baseline data for Natura assessments is fragmented across multiple agencies and registries, often proving contradictory or missing, which forces experts to compile information based on their individual knowledge and resources.
  • Experts report that the most frequent need for additional field studies during Natura assessments is to clarify the specific location or habitat of a particular species.
  • In practice, the impact on Natura 2000 sites is most frequently considered during the issuance of activity permits (project level) and least frequently during the preparation of national development plans.
  • Experts suggest that improving the quality of Natura assessments requires providing practical guidelines for implementation and training species and habitat experts in EIA and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) procedures.

Cite the original document

APA
Peterson, K. (2011). NATURA HINDAMISE PRAKTIKAST JA KVALITEEDIST 2010. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4383.pdf
Chicago
Peterson, Kaja. NATURA HINDAMISE PRAKTIKAST JA KVALITEEDIST 2010. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2011. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4383.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |last1=Peterson |first1=Kaja |title=NATURA HINDAMISE PRAKTIKAST JA KVALITEEDIST 2010 |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=January 2011 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4383.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{peterson2011natura, author = {Peterson, Kaja}, title = {{NATURA HINDAMISE PRAKTIKAST JA KVALITEEDIST 2010}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2011}, month = jan, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4383.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated