Development of Eia Guidelines of Significant Factors For Diamer Basha Dam Gilgit Baltistan

Wajahat Ali 1 , Iqtidar Hussain 2 , Haroon Rashid 1  and Abdul Nasir 1
  • 1 Department of Structures & Environmental Engineering, Faisalabad
  • 2 Department of Environmental Sciences, Gilgit – Baltistan


Energy crises is the one of the major problem that was faced by Pakistan in order to overcome on that crises Pakistan need to be developed and improvement in energy sector, Throughout in the country the demand of water and power increasing day by day therefore hydropower project are the need of the hour in Pakistan. Before initiation of any project EIA play important role in evaluating the nature of the project on different factors. Government of Pakistan planned one of the mega hydropower project diamer basha dam was planned in Gilgit Baltistan. It was intended to conduct the research work on describing significant factors so as to evaluate the influence of the project on them and develop guidelines for environmental assessment for these factors. To find out these significant factors the methodology was adapted to conducting field investigation. Besides to assess the relevant impact questionnaires were developed. Finally, in order to reduce the negative impact of the project on the predefine factor mitigation measure was suggested. It is anticipated that this study work support in developing structure work to be executed as mitigation measures and boost the advantages of the project.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • [1] J. Glasson, R., and Therivel, A., Chadwick, “Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment”, Second Edition. UCL Press, London, 1999.

  • [2] B. Sadler, “Environmental assessment in a changing world: Evaluating practice to Improve performance”, International Study of the effectiveness of environmental assessment, 1996.

  • [3] J. Petts, “Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Canberra, Australia”, Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment. Volume 1. Environmental Impact assessment: Process, methods and potential. Blackwell Science, Oxford, 1999.

  • [4] L.K. Caldwell, “Achieving the NEPA Intent: New Directions in Politics, Science and Law. In: Hildebrand, S.G.; Cannon, J.B. (eds.). Environmental Analysis”, The NEPA Experience. Lewis Publishers, London, 1993.

  • [5] D. Devuyst, T. van Wijngaard, and L. Hens, “Implementation of SEA in Flanders: Attitudes of Key Stakeholders and a User-friendly Methodology”, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 65-83, 2000.

  • [6] M. Cashmore, R. Gwilliam, R. Morgan, D. Cobb, and A. Bond, “The Interminable Issue Of Effectiveness: Substantive Purposes, Outcomes and Research Challenges in the Advancement of EIA Theory”, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, in press, 2004.

  • [7] T. O’Riordan, “The Sustainability Debate. In: O’Riordan, T. (ed.). Environmental Science for Environmental Management”, Second Edition. Prentice Hall, London, pages 29-63, 2000.

  • [8] R. Goodland, and H. Daly, “Environmental Sustainability: Universal and Non-Negotiable”, Ecological Applications, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1002-1017, 1996.

  • [9] World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). “Our common future”. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1987.

  • [10] D. Pearce, A. Markandya, and E.B. Barbier, “Blueprint for a Green Economy”, Earthscan, London, 1992.

  • [11] R.K. Turner, D. Pearce, and I. Bateman, “Environmental Economics: An Elementary Introduction”, Prentice Hall, London, 1994.

  • [12] Umweltbundesamt (UBA), “A Guide to Environmental Institutions in Germany”, UBA, Berlin, 2004.

  • [13] BMU. “Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit (BMU)”, Umweltpolitik. BMU, Berlin, 2004.

  • [14] B. Texte, “Umweltrecht. 15. Auflage. Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, München”, Wood, C. Environmental Impact Assessment. A Comparative Review. Second Edition, 2003.


Journal + Issues