Transboundary Problems of Caspian Ecology: Knowledge-Based Tools for Solutions
[1]
Karayev R. A. , Institute of Cybernetics, National Academy of Sciences, Azerbaijan.
[2]
Aliyev K. A. , Innovation Technical & Construction Servies LLP, Azerbaijan.
[3]
Sadikhova N. Yu. , Institute of Cybernetics, National Academy of Sciences, Azerbaijan.
The article considers the problem of Environmental Impact Assessment in a transboundary context (EIAT) in the Caspian Sea region, which has become urgent in connection with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the new "oil boom" in the Caspian shelf. The issue of ensuring the reliability and efficiency of the EIAT in difficult conditions of the Sea is discussed. The article presents an intelligent support system that can be used to solve this issue. The system is designed based on the general provisions of Espoo Convention (1991), “best world practice” of EIA (International Association for Impact Assessment, Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (UK), CEFAS (UK)), information databases of the Caspian Environment Programme (CEP, EU, and TACIS), rich experience of local ecologists, and research paradigm of knowledge-based approach. Within this paradigm developed methodology EIAT, which enables the integration of modern theoretical and practical experience of EIAT, adapt it to the conditions of the region and its subregions, and on this basis to improve the reliability and effectiveness of the procedure EIAT. The main components of the methodology are the (1) fuzzy situational model of environment quality, which implemented in the class of holistic (“gestalt”) models, widely used in medical diagnostic, and (2) complex of knowledge-based tools for acquisition and effective use of human (scientists, researches, supervisors, experts, managers, and etc.) knowledge, that extremely useful in connection with a predominantly heuristic (nonformalized) character of the EIAT.
Caspian Sea, Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment, EIA “best world practice”, Knowledge-based approach, Intelligent Support System
[1]
The Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in Transboundary Context. Espoo Convention. Finland. UNDP. 1991.
[2]
Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context¬. ECE. UN. 2003.
[3]
Guidelines on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context in the Region of Caspian Sea. Guide. UNEP. EBRD, CEP. 2003.
[4]
A guide to Environmental Impact Assessment for the state-participants CIS. UNEP, Center of Intern. Projects. Moscow. 2003.
[5]
A guide to Impact Assessment of planned activity ¬ on Environment of Caspian Sea in a transboundary context for the Russian Federation and other ¬ Near-Caspian countries-participants. CIS, UNEP. 2003.
[6]
(2006). U.N. Econ. Comm’n for Eur., Guidance on Public Participation in Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context. U.N. Doc. ECE/MP.EIA/7 www.unece.org/env/documents/2006/eia/ece.mp.eia.7.pdf (accessed 25.01.2014).
[7]
Principles of Envi-ronmental Impact Assessment. Best Practice. International Association for Impact Assessment, Institute of Envi-ronmental Assessment (UK). 2005.
[8]
Framework Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Caspian Sea, Nov. 4, 2003 (entered into force Aug. 12, 2006. The parties to the Convention are Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, and Turkmenistan). http://www.caspianenvironment.org/NewSite/Convention-rameworkConventionText.htm. (accessed 25.01.2014). (2007).
[9]
Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Working Group on Environmental Impact Assessment, Economic Commission for Europe, UN oc.ECE/MP.EIA/WG.1/2007/5 www.unece.org/env/documents/2007/eia/wg.1/ece.mp.eia.wg.1.2007.5.e.pdf (ac-cessed 25.01.2014).
[10]
(2006). Guidance on the Practical Implementation of the Espoo Convention, UN Economic Commission for Europe, UN Doc. ECE/MP.EIA/8. www.unece.org/env/documents/2006/eia/ece.mp.eia.8.pdf (accessed 25.01.2014).
[11]
John H. Knox. The Myth and Reality of Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment, 96 AM. J. INT’L L. 291, 316. 2002.
[12]
Charles, M., Kersten, N. “Rethinking Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment”. The YALE Journal of International Law. 2009; 34: pp. 173-206.
[13]
Rie Tsutsumi & Kristy Robinson “Environmental Impact Assessment and the Framework Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Caspian Sea”. In: Theory and practice of transboundary environmental impact assessment (Eds. by C. J. Bastmeijer; Timo Koivurova). 2008.
[14]
Review of European Community & International Environmental Law. Leiden; Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. http://www.worldcat.org/title/theory-and-practice-of-transboundary-environmental-impact-assessment/oclc/175286353/viewport (accessed 25.01.2014).
[15]
(2013). Assessment of effectiveness of environmental impact assessment (EIA) system in Azerbaijan. http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/eia/documents/CENN_EIA_reviews/Azerbaijan_English_FINAL.pdf (accessed 25.01.2014).
[16]
(2013). Workshop on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context in Eastern Asia. Organized by Korea Environment Institute, ROK Ministry of Environment http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/eia/documents/Events/SeoulJun12/2012TEIA_Workshop_report_final.pdf (accessed 25.01.2014).
[17]
Proc. of the Intern. Conf. “Problems of the Caspian ecosystem conservation under conditions of oil and gas fields development”. Moscow-Astrakhan: Publishing House CaspNIRKH. 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011 (in Russian).
[18]
Karayev R.A. et al. “Environmental Monitoring of Caspian Oilfields: New Paradigm. New Solutions”. Interdisciplinary Environmental Review. N. Y.: Inderscience Publishers, 2003; 6: Issue 1. 2003.
[19]
Research report. Development of scientific bases on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the Caspian Sea region (at the current stage) (4 volumes). Institute of Cybernetics of NAS of Azerbaijan. 2013 (in Russian).
[20]
Ecological Indicators. (Eds. by McKenzie D.H., Hyatt D.E.). N. Y.: Elsevier. 1990. 1600 p.
[21]
Cherles W. et al. Pattern of Environmental Management. The World Bank. Washington Dc. 1994. 221 p.
[22]
(2004). Institute for Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), Guidance on EIA . UK http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/eia-guidelines/g-review-full-text.pdf (accessed 25.01.2014).
[23]
CEP E-library (http://www.caspianenvironment.org) (accessed 25.01.2014).
[24]
Proc. of the IEEE Intern. Conf. on Cognitive Modeling (ICCM). 2013. Ottawa, Canada.
[25]
Global Marine Biological Diversity. A Strategy for Bulding Conservation in to Decision Making (Ed. By Elliot A. Norse). Washington: Island Press. 1993. 342 p.
[26]
Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management (Ed. by C.S.Holling). N. Y.: John Wiley&Sons. 1978. 397 p.
[27]
Rosenberg G.S. Adequacy of mathematical modeling of environmental systems. Russian Journal of Ecology, 1986; 6: pp. 8-14 (in Russian)
[28]
L. Zade. “Concept of a linguistic variable and its application to the approximate decision- making”. Information Sciences. 1976; 9: pp. 43 – 80.
[29]
Waterman, D.A. Guide on Expert Systems. Addison-Wesley Publ. Co., Inc.1986.
[30]
Karayev, R.A., et al. “Fuzzy models of qualimetry in drilling”. Proc. of the Fourth Intern. Conf. on Application of Fuzzy Systems and Soft Computing, ICAFS'2000. Siegen, Germany, Quadrat Publish. 2000.
[31]
Shortliffe E. Computer Based Medical Consultations. MYCIN. N. Y.: American Elsevier. 1976.
[32]
OSPARCOM Recommendation 2010/3 on a Harmonised Offshore Chemical Notification Format (CEFAS, UK) http://www.cefas.defra.gov.uk/media/439905/hocnf.doc (accessed 25.01.2014).
[33]
A Risk Management Standard (IRM, ALARM, AIRMIC) http://www.theirm.org/publications/documents/Risk_Management_Standard_030820.pdf.
