reports are conducted by the Commission members, who are not necessarily experts
on EIA. It would be worth developing a qualification strategy to improve the
capability of Commission members, encompassing all the relevant ministries which
are also engaged in the EIA Process.
In Turkey, the conduct of EIA is a legal obligation which derives from both
national and international law. In the early days of the adoption of EIA as a policy
objective, Turkey was not ready to translate EIA into practice. Turkish
Environment Code Article 10 became operational after a decade under the 1993
EIA By-Law. EIA is not the sole instrument for protecting nature and the environment, but this initial decade did provide a good opportunity to acquire experience of EIA. There has been significant development in Turkey with respect to the
scientific and technical capacity of EIA. The administrative capacity of the MoEU
is also remarkable compared to the 1990s.
The way to identify and address the challenges is greatly conditioned by the
political discourse, which is shaped by the political culture of society. Turkey’s
commitment to sustainability as a value can be expected to be reflected more
strongly in the environmental field and will hopefully stimulate both the practitioners and decision-making bodies to address the core challenges faced in the EIA
systema as well.
References
Alıca Süheyla Suzan (2011). “Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesinin Yargı Kararları Çerçevesinde
İncelenmesi [Examination of Environmental Impact Assessment within the Framework of
Judicial Decisions]”, in: Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, XV, 3: 97–130.
Arıkan, Esra (2011). “Relationship Between World Bank and National Requirements”, in:
Environmental Assessment, ECA Safeguard Training for PIUs (Ankara).
Boşça, Aysun V.; Hamamcı Nihan Ş. (2013). “Kümülatif Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi
[Cumulative Environmental Impact Assessment]”, in: Uluslararası ÇED Kongresi (8–10
November 2013), Bildiri Kitabı [Conference Proceedings]: 33–47.
Güneş, Şule (2007). Uluslararası Hukuk Açısından Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi [Environmental
Impact Assessment in Terms of International Law] (Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi).
Innanen, E.R. Sally (2004). “Environmental Impact Assessment System in Turkey: Capacity
Building for European Union Accession”, in: Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22, 2:
141–151.
Saygılı, Abdurahman (2007). Çevre Hukuku Açısından Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi
[Environmental Impact Assessment In terms of Environmental Law] (Ankara: İmaj Kitabevi).
Tekayak, Deniz (2014). “An Overview of Environmental Impact Assessment in Turkey: Issues
and Recommendations”, in: Ankara Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13, 2: 133–151.
Turan, Emine Su; Güner, Esra Deniz (2017). “Türkiye’de Çevresel Etki Değerlendirme
Mevzuatındaki Değişimler [Revisions in Environmental Impact Assessment Legislation in
Turkey]”, in: Artvin Çoruh Üniveristesi, Doğal Afetler Uygulama ve Araştırma Merkezi, Doğal
Afetler ve Çevre Dergisi (January 2017), 3, 1: 39–47.
Turgut, Nükhet (2003). “EIA with Reference to the EU Directive”, in: Environment Policy and
Law, 33, 3–4: 163–169.
96
Ş. Güneş
on EIA. It would be worth developing a qualification strategy to improve the
capability of Commission members, encompassing all the relevant ministries which
are also engaged in the EIA Process.
In Turkey, the conduct of EIA is a legal obligation which derives from both
national and international law. In the early days of the adoption of EIA as a policy
objective, Turkey was not ready to translate EIA into practice. Turkish
Environment Code Article 10 became operational after a decade under the 1993
EIA By-Law. EIA is not the sole instrument for protecting nature and the environment, but this initial decade did provide a good opportunity to acquire experience of EIA. There has been significant development in Turkey with respect to the
scientific and technical capacity of EIA. The administrative capacity of the MoEU
is also remarkable compared to the 1990s.
The way to identify and address the challenges is greatly conditioned by the
political discourse, which is shaped by the political culture of society. Turkey’s
commitment to sustainability as a value can be expected to be reflected more
strongly in the environmental field and will hopefully stimulate both the practitioners and decision-making bodies to address the core challenges faced in the EIA
systema as well.
References
Alıca Süheyla Suzan (2011). “Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesinin Yargı Kararları Çerçevesinde
İncelenmesi [Examination of Environmental Impact Assessment within the Framework of
Judicial Decisions]”, in: Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, XV, 3: 97–130.
Arıkan, Esra (2011). “Relationship Between World Bank and National Requirements”, in:
Environmental Assessment, ECA Safeguard Training for PIUs (Ankara).
Boşça, Aysun V.; Hamamcı Nihan Ş. (2013). “Kümülatif Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi
[Cumulative Environmental Impact Assessment]”, in: Uluslararası ÇED Kongresi (8–10
November 2013), Bildiri Kitabı [Conference Proceedings]: 33–47.
Güneş, Şule (2007). Uluslararası Hukuk Açısından Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi [Environmental
Impact Assessment in Terms of International Law] (Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi).
Innanen, E.R. Sally (2004). “Environmental Impact Assessment System in Turkey: Capacity
Building for European Union Accession”, in: Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22, 2:
141–151.
Saygılı, Abdurahman (2007). Çevre Hukuku Açısından Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi
[Environmental Impact Assessment In terms of Environmental Law] (Ankara: İmaj Kitabevi).
Tekayak, Deniz (2014). “An Overview of Environmental Impact Assessment in Turkey: Issues
and Recommendations”, in: Ankara Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13, 2: 133–151.
Turan, Emine Su; Güner, Esra Deniz (2017). “Türkiye’de Çevresel Etki Değerlendirme
Mevzuatındaki Değişimler [Revisions in Environmental Impact Assessment Legislation in
Turkey]”, in: Artvin Çoruh Üniveristesi, Doğal Afetler Uygulama ve Araştırma Merkezi, Doğal
Afetler ve Çevre Dergisi (January 2017), 3, 1: 39–47.
Turgut, Nükhet (2003). “EIA with Reference to the EU Directive”, in: Environment Policy and
Law, 33, 3–4: 163–169.
96
Ş. Güneş