Turkish EIA system which makes it different from the system in many other
countries (Turgut, 2003).
According to the 2014 EIA By-Law Article 6/3,
No incentive, approval, permission, construction and usage licence can be given, no
investment can be initiated, nor any tender may be awarded for projects subject to this
By-Law, unless an “EIA is Positive” decision or “No EIA is Required” decision is made.
The “EIA is Positive” decision constitutes environmental clearance for the
project, and the project owner can proceed to conduct further permission and
licensing transactions. There is a statute of limitation on the “EIA is Positive”
decision. If the project is not initiated within seven years, the “EIA is Positive”
decision is invalid (EIA By-Law, Article 14/4). The “EIA is Negative” decision is
an impediment to proceed with the project.
The Ministry and Governorates should announce the content of the “EIA is
Positive” or “EIA is Negative” decision to the public (2014 EIA By-Law, Article
14/3). Reasons are not necessarily included. However, being required to include the
‘reasons’ in the announcement of the Final Decision on the EIA would have the
potential to pressurize and force administrative bodies to take measures with regard
to access to information, public consultation and transparency. The administrative
bodies would be obliged to explain under which conditions they made the decisions, and would have to identify why they did not choose to make a different
decision, which would help to improve the quality of the EIA.
5.3.6 Monitoring and Control
In the Turkish EIA system, the project cycle is taken into consideration as a whole.
The EIA By-Law envisaged the EIA process as a system which includes the
monitoring and control phases. The “EIA is Positive” and “No EIA is Required”
decisions given by the MoEU constitute environmental clearance and provide the
project owner with the opportunity to proceed with further permission requirements
and finally to launch the project. The MoEU continues the monitoring and control
activities over these projects at post-project level with the aim of revealing any
unpredictable and unacceptable impacts and providing feedback to inspire future
EIA practices (Saygılı, 2007).
While the previous stages of the EIA process are conducted on a planned activity
which has not yet been put into practice, monitoring and control are exercised over
an investment which actually operates. As the project proposal has already been put
into force by the monitoring phase, examination, control and assessment are performed over an existing activity.
This is categorized as a process for
checking whether the project has been carried out in accordance with the development
consent, rather than ‘impact monitoring’ or ‘impact audit’ (Turgut, 2003).
5 Environmental Impact Assessment in Turkey: …
93
countries (Turgut, 2003).
According to the 2014 EIA By-Law Article 6/3,
No incentive, approval, permission, construction and usage licence can be given, no
investment can be initiated, nor any tender may be awarded for projects subject to this
By-Law, unless an “EIA is Positive” decision or “No EIA is Required” decision is made.
The “EIA is Positive” decision constitutes environmental clearance for the
project, and the project owner can proceed to conduct further permission and
licensing transactions. There is a statute of limitation on the “EIA is Positive”
decision. If the project is not initiated within seven years, the “EIA is Positive”
decision is invalid (EIA By-Law, Article 14/4). The “EIA is Negative” decision is
an impediment to proceed with the project.
The Ministry and Governorates should announce the content of the “EIA is
Positive” or “EIA is Negative” decision to the public (2014 EIA By-Law, Article
14/3). Reasons are not necessarily included. However, being required to include the
‘reasons’ in the announcement of the Final Decision on the EIA would have the
potential to pressurize and force administrative bodies to take measures with regard
to access to information, public consultation and transparency. The administrative
bodies would be obliged to explain under which conditions they made the decisions, and would have to identify why they did not choose to make a different
decision, which would help to improve the quality of the EIA.
5.3.6 Monitoring and Control
In the Turkish EIA system, the project cycle is taken into consideration as a whole.
The EIA By-Law envisaged the EIA process as a system which includes the
monitoring and control phases. The “EIA is Positive” and “No EIA is Required”
decisions given by the MoEU constitute environmental clearance and provide the
project owner with the opportunity to proceed with further permission requirements
and finally to launch the project. The MoEU continues the monitoring and control
activities over these projects at post-project level with the aim of revealing any
unpredictable and unacceptable impacts and providing feedback to inspire future
EIA practices (Saygılı, 2007).
While the previous stages of the EIA process are conducted on a planned activity
which has not yet been put into practice, monitoring and control are exercised over
an investment which actually operates. As the project proposal has already been put
into force by the monitoring phase, examination, control and assessment are performed over an existing activity.
This is categorized as a process for
checking whether the project has been carried out in accordance with the development
consent, rather than ‘impact monitoring’ or ‘impact audit’ (Turgut, 2003).
5 Environmental Impact Assessment in Turkey: …
93