Technical quality of fauna monitoring programs in the environmental impact assessments of large mining projects in southeastern Brazil

Biodiversity monitoring is a key element of impact assessment follow-up activities, as it has the potential to generate relevant information about the actual impacts of approved projects on the environment. However, the effectiveness of such monitoring programs depends on issues such as technical quality. The extent to which this issue actually affects biodiversity monitoring is unclear. This knowledge gap was addressed in this study, whose main objective was to analyze the technical quality of fauna monitoring, using empirical data from large-scale mining enterprises in the state of Minas Gerais in southeastern Brazil. More specifically, this study aimed at analyzing: 1) whether license conditions related to fauna monitoring programs were being met by mining companies; 2) the extent to which fauna monitoring programs met a set of technical quality criteria; 3) whether there were significant differences among taxonomic groups; and, finally, 4) how fauna monitoring programs can be made more meaningful to decision-makers. A total of 236 fauna monitoring reports were analyzed. Findings indicated that, while companies complied with all license conditions, their fauna programs met, on average, 32% of the desirable technical requirements, and there were no significant differences among taxonomic groups. The main technical quality gaps were found to be lack of driving questions, hypothesis-testing and conceptual models, as well as lack of comparisons between control and impacted areas. Overall, findings indicated that the data generated in such programs have very limited value to decision-makers as they do not shed sufficient light on the actual impacts of mining activities on biodiversity. The study discusses a number of barriers to more meaningful fauna monitoring programs, and highlights the urgent need for revising current Terms of Reference.

The use of administrative sanctions to prevent environmental damage in impact assessment follow-ups

Scholars have long been highlighting the value of administrative sanctions in improving environmental policy enforcement. However, few studies have evaluated how such sanctions are implemented, particularly in the context of environmental impact assessments (EIA) and their respective follow-up programs. The main objective of this article was to evaluate how administrative sanctions have been used in EIA follow-ups, using the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais as the empirical context. More specifically it tried to understand what have been the main triggers, frequency, nature and financial values of the sanctions issued to noncompliant mining projects operating under the conditions of environmental licenses. First, through literature reviews, the study characterized the institutional and regulatory framework in which administrative sanctions are applied. Content analyzes of 29 infraction processes further revealed that lump sum fines are the preferred option of administrative sanction in EIA follow-ups. The analysis also revealed that the fines could be perceived as disproportionally small if one considers the size and financial power of non-compliant companies. The great majority of the fines were paid by developers: a fact that contradicts previous empirical findings and anecdotal evidence in Brazil. Overall, the study suggests that the impact of administrative sanctions in corporate behavior, while unclear, is likely small. The study concludes by discussing practical and academic implications.