
This chapter discusses some of the shortcomings of environmental impact assessments (EIAs) of mining companies. Utilizing the existing literature, Baghdasaryan illustrates that EIAs often underestimate the future impacts of projects and overestimates the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Shortcomings of EIAs include being politicized rather than being based on genuine scientific knowledge, overlooking some environmental risks, the unaccountability of experts implementing EIAs, and more. Part of the explanation of the shortcomings of EIAs, as seen by Baghdasaryan, is contemporary neoliberalism, which favours deregulation and economic growth rather than sustainability. The paper concludes with a case study of the EIA of the Amulsar mine project in Armenia.
EIA, Amulsar, Neoliberalism, Expert analysis, Extractivism, Mining
EIA, Amulsar, Neoliberalism, Expert analysis, Extractivism, Mining
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
