Comparative Study of the Environmental Impact Assessment System in the State of Kuwait with International Best Practice using Gap Analysis Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study addresses the issue of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)in the State of Kuwait, which has become inherent in many development projects. Numerous international and local institutions require assessment of environmental impacts prior to final approval of project implementation. In addition, item number (1) of Law No. 16 of 1996 amended provisions of Law No. 21 of 1995 issued by the General Authority for Environment stipulates the need for an environmental impact assessment, which became incumbent on everyone before the implementation and operation of any facility, whether industrial or recreational. The study aims to evaluate the methodology of the Kuwaiti Environmental Impact Assessment system, with regards to its stages and mechanism of follow-up procedures. And to compare it with the components, methods, criteria and policies of the current best global practices implemented by the World Bank and environmental impact assessment systems in Bahrain, Sultanate of Oman and Egypt. The study aims also to identify deficiencies and policy draw backs of EIA system in Kuwait, and to propose procedures that improve the application of environmental impact assessment methodologies. To achieve the objectives of the study an analysis of the data gathered from reports, scientific assessments, as well as from private consultancy offices was performed. The use of Gap approach enabled the researchers to identify the various gaps and limitations in the current practices and application of EIA procedures in the State of Kuwait. The EIA procedures and policies of the World Bank were the basic references of the study. The findings of the analysis show that: there is a gap between the environmental policies in Kuwait and how thoroughly these policies are applied in the field. This gap led to an imbalance in the practice of environmental impact assessment procedures. Public participation was weak in the stages (Scoping and Review) of environmental impact assessment. Participation is considered an effective part of the environmental assessment planning processes. The study proposed several recommendations for improving the EIA system in the State of Kuwait including: preparation of new procedural guidelines that will provide the basis to be applied by the General Authority for Environment during the audit of the environmental impact assessment reports, up-grading of the consultancy offices and encourage the active participation of the public in the stages of environmental impact assessment planning processes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".