DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

소규모 환경영향평가 제도개선을 통한 지자체 환경영향평가 효과성 증진방안

Effectiveness Enhancement Measures for Local Government Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) by Improving Small-scale EIA Institution

  • 이종욱 (인천연구원 기후환경연구센터) ;
  • 조경두 (인천연구원 기후환경연구센터)
  • Jongook Lee (Incheon Climate & Environment Research Center, The Incheon Institute) ;
  • Kyeong Doo Cho (Incheon Climate & Environment Research Center, The Incheon Institute)
  • 투고 : 2022.09.30
  • 심사 : 2023.02.17
  • 발행 : 2023.02.28

초록

우리나라 소규모 환경영향평가의 대상사업 범위는 사업 유형 및 용도지역 구분에 따라 계획면적이 5,000~60,000m2 이상으로 규정되어 있지만, 지자체 환경영향평가 대상의 하한은 이보다 상단에 위치하므로 중복 범위가 존재한다. 이는 2016년 11월 일부 개정된 「환경영향평가법 시행령」에 소규모 환경영향평가 대상사업으로 도로사업과 지구단위계획이 포함되면서 확대된 사안으로, 기존에 지자체 환경영향평가 대상이었던 사업까지도 지역 차원의 의견수렴과 검토 절차 없이 소규모 환경영향평가만으로 협의가 완료되고 있는 현행 협의 제도는 논의가 필요하다. 지자체 환경영향평가 대상사업에 해당하였으나 소규모 환경영향평가로 협의 완료된 개발사업은 소수이므로 중요성이 작아 보일 수 있으나, 지방 정부가 지자체 환경영향평가 대상사업을 추가하고자 하더라도 소규모 환경영향평가로 인해 실행할 수 없는 상황이 조성되므로 주목할 필요가 있다. 본 연구는 지자체 환경영향평가의 효과성을 증진시키기 위한 제도개선 방안으로 다음을 제시하였다. 첫째, 소규모 환경영향평가 협의 과정에 지역의 구체적 환경특성과 지리 여건이 반영된 검토 의견이 제시될 수 있도록 제도적 장치를 보완하는 방안이다. 둘째, 「환경영향평가법」 제42조 1항의 지자체 환경영향평가 예외 조문에 대한 일부 개정을 통해, 대상사업 범위 중복구간의 사업들이 지자체 환경영향평가 대상으로 우선 협의되도록 하는 방안이다. 셋째, 규모가 작더라도 지역의 특수성을 반영하여 지자체 환경영향평가 수행이 꼭 필요하다고 판단되는 대상사업들을 조례에 포함하는 방안이다. 난개발과 보전 필요지역 훼손 방지라는 소규모 환경영향평가의 긍정적 기능이 있다 하더라도, 지자체 내 다수 사업이 지역으로부터의 검토 없이 협의되는 상황을 개선하기 위한 노력이 필요하다.

In the Republic of Korea, the target project scope of the small-scale EIA is stipulated as the plan area above around 5,000~60,000m2 depending on a type of project and classification of land use. Whereas, the lower limit of the corresponding local government EIA project is generally located above the small-scale EIA's limits, and overlapping ranges exist. This situation has been enlarged since road construction and district unit planning were included as the target projects for small-scale EIA in the "Enforcement Decree of the Environmental Impact Assessment Act", which was partially revised in November 2016, and the current consultation system needed discussion in that small-scale EIA is allowed to be done without gathering review opinions at the local level. In fact, projects subjected to local government EIA but consulted as small-scale EIAs may seem insignificant because of a small number of total cases; however, it is worth paying attention to the fact that a local government may not add a target project due to the small-scale EIA. This study suggested the three policy measures for improving small-scale EIA to enhance the effectiveness of local government EIA: supplementing the institutional arrangements to incorporate the review opinion from the local region in small-scale EIA, giving priority to local EIA for conducing the projects in overlapping ranges with partial amendments on EIA law regarding exceptions to local government EIA, including small target projects (not to be small-scale EIA targets) to the ordinance that are deemed necessary to be conducted as local government EIA. Even though a positive function of small-scale EIA has been confirmed, efforts should be made to improve the situation in which many projects within local governments are consulted without review from the region.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Enriquez-de-Salamanca A. 2021. Simplified environmental impact assessment processes: review and implementation proposals. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 90: 106640.
  2. Environmental Impact Assessment Support System (EIASS). 2022. Small-scale EIA Statistics, Available from: https://www.eiass.go.kr/ [Korean Literature]
  3. Fonseca A, Rodrigues SE. 2017. The attractive concept of simplicity in environmental impact assessment: Perceptions of outcomes in southeastern Brazil. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 67: 101-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.09.001
  4. Gibson RB. 2012. In full retreat: the Canadian government's new environmental assessment law undoes decades of progress. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 30(3): 179-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2012.720417
  5. Joao E. 2002. How scale affects environmental impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 22(4): 289-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(02)00016-1
  6. Kim JO, Min BW. 2020. Problems and Improvement Strategies of Environmental Impact Assessment by Local Government in South Korea - Case Studies of 8 Local Governments including Seoul, Jeju, Busan and Daejeon. J. Environ. Impact Assess. 29: 132-143. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/EIA.2020.29.2.132
  7. Kim K. 2022. A Study on the Legislative Research for the Operation of the Environmental Impact Assessment System. Law and Policy 28(1): 1-20. https://doi.org/10.18215/elvlp.28..202202.1
  8. Korean Law Information Center, EIA Environmental Impact Assessment Act. 2022. Available from: https://www.law.go.kr/ [Korean Literature]
  9. Korean Law Information Center, Enforcement Decree Of The Environmental Impact Assessment Act. 2022. Available from: https://www.law.go.kr/ [Korean Literature]
  10. Korean Law Information Center, Inchoen Metropolitan City Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance. 2022. Available from: https://www.law.go.kr/ [Korean Literature]
  11. Korean Law Information Center, National Land Planning And Utilization Act. 2022. Available from: https://www.law.go.kr/ [Korean Literature]
  12. Lee J, Cho KD. 2022. Analysis of Local Government Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Ordinances and Preparation of Consultation Guidelines for EIA: A Case of Incheon Metropolitan City. J. Environ. Impact Assess. 31(4): 226-240. [Korean Literature]
  13. Lee SB, Ha JY. 2018. The Study of the Improvement of Minor Environmental Impact Assessment. Korean Environmental Institute. [Korean Literature]
  14. Sun HS, Cho KJ. 2015. Local Government Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance Operating Status and Efficiency Measures. Korean Environmental Institute. [Korean Literature]
  15. Sung HC, Kang MS. 2004. I Focusing on target projects and assessment items: A Comparative Study on the Local Governments' Environmental Impact Assessment Systems between Korea and Japan. J. Environ. Impact Assess. 13: 57-71. [Korean Literature]
  16. Sung HC, Min SH. 2003. A Comparative Study on the Local Governments' Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations in Korea. J. Environ. Impact Assess. 12: 137-150. [Korean Literature]