The CSG arena : a critical review of unconventional gas developments and best-practice health impact assessment in Queensland, Australia

Fernanda Claudio; Kim de Rijke; Andrew Page

doi:10.1080/14615517.2017.1364025

The CSG arena : a critical review of unconventional gas developments and best-practice health impact assessment in Queensland, Australia

Fernanda Claudio, Kim de Rijke, Andrew Page

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper compares a government-commissioned health study of coal seam gas (CSG) developments in Queensland with international best-practice health impact assessment (HIA) methodologies. A literature review was conducted of (HIA) methods and health studies of CSG development areas in Queensland. Forty-eight interviews were conducted in the Darling Downs CSG region in Queensland. One Queensland Health report was identified but failed to meet HIA international best practice because 7 of 9 key steps were omitted. Interview participants reported poor consultation by government and industry within affected communities. Lack of and poor quality health data was found to exacerbate community tensions. We recommend application of HIAs, epidemiological studies, consultation with communities and consideration of social risks of poor quality health studies.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	105-114
Number of pages	10
Journal	Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal
Volume	36
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2017.1364025
Publication status	Published - 2 Jan 2018

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 IAIA.

Keywords

Queensland
coalbed methane
health

Access to Document

10.1080/14615517.2017.1364025

Cite this

@article{5e01448028d04e1c911358a7e03f4a31,

title = "The CSG arena : a critical review of unconventional gas developments and best-practice health impact assessment in Queensland, Australia",

abstract = "This paper compares a government-commissioned health study of coal seam gas (CSG) developments in Queensland with international best-practice health impact assessment (HIA) methodologies. A literature review was conducted of (HIA) methods and health studies of CSG development areas in Queensland. Forty-eight interviews were conducted in the Darling Downs CSG region in Queensland. One Queensland Health report was identified but failed to meet HIA international best practice because 7 of 9 key steps were omitted. Interview participants reported poor consultation by government and industry within affected communities. Lack of and poor quality health data was found to exacerbate community tensions. We recommend application of HIAs, epidemiological studies, consultation with communities and consideration of social risks of poor quality health studies.",

keywords = "Queensland, coalbed methane, health",

author = "Fernanda Claudio and {de Rijke}, Kim and Andrew Page",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2017 IAIA.",

year = "2018",

month = jan,

day = "2",

doi = "10.1080/14615517.2017.1364025",

language = "English",

volume = "36",

pages = "105--114",

journal = "Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal",

issn = "1461-5517",

publisher = "Taylor & Francis",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The CSG arena : a critical review of unconventional gas developments and best-practice health impact assessment in Queensland, Australia

AU - Claudio, Fernanda

AU - de Rijke, Kim

AU - Page, Andrew

PY - 2018/1/2

Y1 - 2018/1/2

N2 - This paper compares a government-commissioned health study of coal seam gas (CSG) developments in Queensland with international best-practice health impact assessment (HIA) methodologies. A literature review was conducted of (HIA) methods and health studies of CSG development areas in Queensland. Forty-eight interviews were conducted in the Darling Downs CSG region in Queensland. One Queensland Health report was identified but failed to meet HIA international best practice because 7 of 9 key steps were omitted. Interview participants reported poor consultation by government and industry within affected communities. Lack of and poor quality health data was found to exacerbate community tensions. We recommend application of HIAs, epidemiological studies, consultation with communities and consideration of social risks of poor quality health studies.

AB - This paper compares a government-commissioned health study of coal seam gas (CSG) developments in Queensland with international best-practice health impact assessment (HIA) methodologies. A literature review was conducted of (HIA) methods and health studies of CSG development areas in Queensland. Forty-eight interviews were conducted in the Darling Downs CSG region in Queensland. One Queensland Health report was identified but failed to meet HIA international best practice because 7 of 9 key steps were omitted. Interview participants reported poor consultation by government and industry within affected communities. Lack of and poor quality health data was found to exacerbate community tensions. We recommend application of HIAs, epidemiological studies, consultation with communities and consideration of social risks of poor quality health studies.

KW - Queensland

KW - coalbed methane

KW - health

UR - http://handle.westernsydney.edu.au:8081/1959.7/uws:44399

U2 - 10.1080/14615517.2017.1364025

DO - 10.1080/14615517.2017.1364025

M3 - Article

SN - 1461-5517

VL - 36

SP - 105

EP - 114

JO - Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

JF - Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

IS - 1

ER -

The CSG arena : a critical review of unconventional gas developments and best-practice health impact assessment in Queensland, Australia

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this