An Evaluation of the Quality of Environmental Impact Assessment Reports in the Mobile Telecommunications Infrastructure Sector: The Case of Plateau State in Nigeria

• Published in: International journal of environmental research and public health 2022-10, Vol.19 (19), p.12659
• Main Authors: Choji, Vincent D, Rampedi, Isaac T, Modley, Lee-Ann S, Ifegbesan, Ayodeji P
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Best practice; Communication; Decision making; Developing countries; Environment; Environmental impact; Environmental impact assessment; Environmental protection; Environmental quality; Evaluation; LDCs; Legislation; Nigeria; Petroleum industry; Quality assessment; Regulation; Reviews; Sustainability; Telecommunications
• ISSN: 1660-4601; 1661-7827; 1660-4601
• DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912659

Environmental impact assessment reports meant for proposed development actions can be evaluated to reveal their quality and fitness for the purpose of environmental decision-making. Therefore, this study evaluated the quality and identified strengths and weaknesses in environmental impact assessment reports of telecommunications infrastructure proposed for Plateau State in Nigeria. To this end, 80 reports were evaluated using the modified version of the Lee and Colley review package. The results revealed the following points. In Review Area 1.0 (Description of the proposed telecommunications facilities) and Review Area 5.0 (Communication of results), the quality of environmental impact assessment reports was found to be generally satisfactory. However, the quality of all reports was considered 'very unsatisfactory' ('F') regarding their overall legal compliance with the requirements stipulated in the remaining three Review Areas, namely, Review Area 2.0 (Terrain susceptibility in the proposed project areas), Review Area 3.0 (Associated and potential environmental impacts), and Review Area 4.0 (Mitigation measures/alternatives). This 'F' rating was assigned to 65% (52/80) of reports regarding Review Area 3.0 because the information provided was 'very unsatisfactory'; important tasks were poorly carried out or not attempted at all. Moreover, in review areas such as Review Area 2.0 and Review Area 4.0, all reports in the evaluation were assigned an 'F' quality. Such an unsatisfactory quality rating is ascribable to the very unsatisfactory manner in which the reports were populated, especially as important task(s) were poorly performed or not attempted at all. Historically, only Review Area 1.0 and Review Area 5.0 indicated improvements in quality over time, whereas the remaining three review areas (Review Area 2.0, Review Area 3.0 and Review Area 4.0) did not improve. Based on the results obtained from the study, we recommend that there should be periodic reviews of environmental impact assessment reports by independent reviewers and environmental consultants should adhere to the sectoral guidelines for telecommunication infrastructure during the production of these reports. Moreover, in order to build technical capacity, more studies on report quality must be conducted in all sectors in Nigeria.