Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorNoble, Bramen_US
dc.contributor.advisorDubé, Moniqueen_US
dc.creatorBall, Murray Alexanderen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-04-07T10:30:04Zen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-01-04T04:28:25Z
dc.date.available2012-04-15T08:00:00Zen_US
dc.date.available2013-01-04T04:28:25Z
dc.date.created2011-03en_US
dc.date.issued2011-03en_US
dc.date.submittedMarch 2011en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10388/etd-04072011-103004en_US
dc.description.abstractThe accumulating impacts from human development are threatening water quality and availability in the watersheds of Western Canada. While environmental impact assessment (EIA) is tasked with identifying such cumulative impacts, the practice is limited to individual projects, is not widely applied, overlooks activities occurring on the landscape, and fails to capture the effects of multiple projects over time. Limitations of the project-by-project approach are spurring the emergence of a regional framework for assessing aquatic cumulative effects within watershed boundaries. Watershed-based cumulative effects assessment (WCEA) will need a standard set of ecosystem components and indicators for assessment across the watershed, but it is not clear how such valued ecosystem components (VECs) and related measurable parameters should be identified. This study examined how aquatic VECs and indicators were used within project-based EIA in the South Saskatchewan River watershed and considered whether they could be scaled up for use in WCEA. A semi-quantitative analysis compared a hierarchy of assessment components and measurable parameters identified in the environmental impact statements of 28 federal screening, 5 federal comprehensive and 2 provincial environmental assessments from the South Saskatchewan River watershed, and examined factors affecting aquatic VEC selection. While provincial assessments were available online or at a central archive, federal assessments were difficult to access. Results showed that regulatory compliance was the dominant factor influencing VEC selection, followed by the preferences of government agencies with different mandates, and that provincial licensing arrangements interfered with VEC selection. The frequency of VECs and indicators used for aquatic assessment within EIA does not reflect the aquatic cumulative effect assessment (CEA) priorities for the watershed. The effective selection of VECs and indicators for aquatic cumulative effects assessment in practice requires both the implementation of WCEA and updating of guidelines for project-based EIA.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectcumulative effects assessmenten_US
dc.subjectwatersheden_US
dc.subjectenvironmental impact assessmenten_US
dc.subjectvalued ecosystem componenten_US
dc.subjectassessment hierarchyen_US
dc.titleScaling-up valued ecosystem components for use in watershed cumulative effects assessmenten_US
thesis.degree.departmentGeographyen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGeographyen_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Saskatchewanen_US
thesis.degree.levelMastersen_US
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Science (M.Sc.)en_US
dc.type.materialtexten_US
dc.type.genreThesisen_US
dc.contributor.committeeMemberBitter, Brenten_US
dc.contributor.committeeMemberPatrick, Roberten_US
dc.contributor.committeeMemberWestbrook, Cherieen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record