quality

2 files changed, 24 insertions, 9 deletions

diff --git a/assignment1/discussion.tex b/assignment1/discussion.tex
index db07b3e..2115754 100644
--- a/assignment1/discussion.tex
+++ b/assignment1/discussion.tex
@@ -34,19 +34,23 @@ participants primarily aimed to fulfill the requirements of the Fourth
 Schedule in preparing an AEE and was not concerned with following
 international EIA best practice \parencite{practitioners}.
 
-- poor environmental models / baseline => precautionary principle
+A 2008 review of constent processing performance by the Ministry for
+the Environment further revealed that councils rarely reject subpar
+resource consent applications as permitted by section 88(3) of the
+RMA; much more often faulty applications are accepted and gradually
+improved through requests for additional information in line with
+section 92 of the RMA \parencite{performance}. It is doubtful whether
+poor quality assessments significantly improve through this course of
+action. It is clear, however, that this approach not only delays the
+processing of resource consents, but also increases the likelihood of
+poor quality applications slipping through.
+
 
 \textcite{practitioners}
 - according to survey of practitioners checklists are most often used, matrices and expert EIA systems are not; checklists are overly simplistic.
 
+- poor environmental models / baseline => precautionary principle
 
-% TODO
-http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/rma/review-consent-processing-performance-round-one-jan08/html/page4.html
-poor quality applications are rarely refused as permitted by section
-88(3) of the RMA. Once they have been accepted, inadequancies within
-the application are addressed through the use of section 92; this
-approach not only delays the processing of resource consents, but also
-increases the likelihood of poor quality applications to be granted.
 
 
 \subsection{Participation of the public}
@@ -165,4 +169,7 @@ implementation of environmental management practices \parencite{TODO}.
   management. Application at this level is variable and, overall, it is
   concluded that the unique way that EA is integrated into the Act makes
   evaluation of the effectiveness of implementation difficult
-\end{quote}
\ No newline at end of file
+\end{quote}
+
+other things:
+- consideration of alternatives: how about the RMA?
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/assignment1/references.bib b/assignment1/references.bib
index 918c2ab..e60997a 100644
--- a/assignment1/references.bib
+++ b/assignment1/references.bib
@@ -143,4 +143,12 @@
   series={International study of the effectiveness of environmental assessment},
   year={1996}
   %notes={EAE_10E.pdf}
+}
+
+@techreport{performance,
+  title={A Review of Council {RMA} Resource Consent Processing Performance: round one},
+  year={2008},
+  author={{Ministry for the Environment}},
+  url={http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/rma/review-consent-processing-performance-round-one-jan08/html/page4.html},
+  number={ME 845}
 }
\ No newline at end of file