introduction to significance

1 files changed, 35 insertions, 8 deletions

diff --git a/assignment2/significance.tex b/assignment2/significance.tex
index d518f30..de8376f 100644
--- a/assignment2/significance.tex
+++ b/assignment2/significance.tex
@@ -4,19 +4,46 @@
 
 \section{Significance}
 
-\textcite{lawrence}
-
-- Significance needs to be determined because: EIA is an open-ended
-process and hence some arbitrary limits have to be imposed on the
-level of detail, what time period is to be considered, how many
-interactions are to be followed, for any of the expected impacts.
-
-- To set these limits, value-laden judgments must be made
+The process of impact assessment is conceptually open-ended. As one of
+its major goals is to aid a decision-making process, however, each
+step in the assessment must be completed within a given time
+frame. Hence, limits are imposed on the level of detail, the length of
+the time period for which impacts can be assessed at the expected
+level of detail, and the number of interactions that can reasonably be
+considered.  To set these limits, judgments must be made on how
+significant each potential impact, a decision on how much detail and
+how much effort in avoiding or mitigating the impact is appropriate.
+These judgments are crucially guided by the practitioners' own values
+and the values they consider in the evaluation
+process \parencite{lawrence}. According to
+\textcite{lawrence-approach}, the approach to determining impact
+significance is usually ``limited to ad hoc and inconsistent judgments
+with reasons and/or to the staged application of thresholds and/or
+criteria.''
 
 - As the determination of significance is inherently subjective, it
 should not be an activity performed only by experts and under the
 aim/appearance/restriction of objectivity.
 
+- three approaches:
+  - the technical approach
+    - led by EIA specialists
+    - heavy reliance on expert and technical data, analyses and knowledge.
+    - 
+  - the collaborative approach
+    problems:
+
+    \begin{quote}
+      The collaborative approach is viewed as too quickly equating
+      public concerns and issues with impact significance, at the expense of
+      other sources of insight and knowledge.
+    \end{quote}
+
+  - the reasoned argumentation approach
+
+
+
+
 
 \subsection{}