台灣環境影響評估在生態調查部份之研究

Abstract

環評制度是所有環境決策制訂前的先行程序，同時也是許多國家將環境保護的觀念法制化的標準。隨著開發造成的環境變遷及環保意識的抬頭，許多研究人員認為我們需要建立一個評估系統，用以評定環境狀況及執行環境保護活動的狀況。本研究欲由生態觀點檢視環境影響評估制度之施行狀況，並就生態環境評估的部份給予具體的建議。研究內容包括：1.由國內外的制度審視台灣環評內生態部分調查評估之狀況，並給予政策建議。2.以實際例子呈現近年台灣開發案中，生態環境評估於執行中所顯現之問題。研究結果發現，依調查規定製做出之專家問卷共258項，其有227項專家群都認為很重要，另外31項專家群認為較不重要，且當中沒有任何一項被專家認為是不重要的，而專家群的意見確實有趨向一致，由此可知《動物生態評估技術規範》中大部份規則是不可忽略的。由結果也可以看出，對不同的動物來說，因為生物特性各有不同因此評估技術規範中的所有規定並非都同等重要。在環評調查品質方面，經過兩次修法及相關準則之確立後，生態評估品質有明顯上昇；調查人員的專業背景對環評品質有極顯著影響。

EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) is a systematic process that examines the environmental consequences of developmental actions. At the end of 1970s , the Taiwanese government installed the Environmental Impact Evaluation Act (EIEA). However, the effectiveness of EIEA has been under constant criticism. It became clear that an objective evaluation system for EIA itself is needed. To understand the performance of ecological assessment in EIA in Taiwan, we want to clarify 2 questions: 1) What is the performance of ecological assessments in EIA over the last 2 decades in Taiwan? 2) What are the problems in EIA in Taiwan? I used the Delphi expert technique and case study to study the 2 questions. The results of Delphi questionnaire survey showed that the experts’ agree upon most score items. I established, and indicated that 227 of 258 score items were important for environmental survey. Therefore, most of regulations about ecological survey in the EIA are important. Because the characteristics of different taxon group differ, all regulations are not equally essential for each organism. The results of scoring for EIA reports showed a significant increase of quality after the installment and modification of law regarding EIA.