Evaluating the substantive effectiveness of SEA: Towards a better understanding

Evaluating the substantive effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is vital in order to know to what extent the tool fulfills its purposes and produces expected results. However, the studies that have evaluated the substantive effectiveness of SEA produce varying outcomes as regards the tool's contribution to decision-making and have used a variety of approaches to appraise its effectiveness. The aim of this article is to discuss the theoretical concept of SEA substantive effectiveness and to present a new approach that can be applied for evaluation studies. The SEA effectiveness evaluation framework that will be presented is composed of concepts of, and approaches to, SEA effectiveness derived from SEA literature and planning theory. Lessons for evaluation can be learned from planning theory in particular, given its long history of analyzing and understanding how sources of information and decisions affect (subsequent) decision-making. Key concepts of this new approach are ‘conformance’ and ‘performance’. In addition, this article presents a systematic overview of process and context factors that can explain SEA effectiveness, derived from SEA literature. To illustrate the practical value of our framework for the assessment and understanding of substantive effectiveness of SEA, three Dutch SEA case studies are examined. The case studies have confirmed the usefulness of the SEA effectiveness assessment framework. The framework proved helpful in order to describe the cumulative influence of the three SEAs on decision-making and the ultimate plan.     

Advancing strategic environmental assessment in the offshore oil and gas sector: Lessons from Norway,Canada, and the United Kingdom

Abstract: Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) for offshore oil and gas planning and development is utilized in select international jurisdictions, but the sector has received limited attention in the SEA literature. While the potential benefits of and rationale for SEA are well argued, there have been few empirical studies of SEA processes for the offshore sector. Hence, little is known about the efficacy of SEA offshore, in particular its influence on planning and development decisions. This paper examines SEA practice and influence in three international offshore systems: Norway, Atlantic Canada and the United Kingdom, with the intent to identify the challenges, lessons and opportunities for advancing SEA in offshore planning and impact assessment. Results demonstrate that SEA can help inform and improve the efficacy and efficiency of project-based assessment in the offshore sector, however weak coordination between higher and lower tiers limit SEA's ability to influence planning and development decisions in a broad regional environmental and socioeconomic context.     

The art of underperforming SEA – Symptomatic narratives from Germany

SEA spread around the world as has SEA effectiveness research. International SEA evaluations show mixed findings on SEA effectiveness. In this article, the quality and procedural effectiveness of SEA in Germany is analysed pursuing the hypothesis that SEA is influenced by planning and administrative traditions that tend to counteract to more ambitious SEA approaches. Three SEA case studies were analysed according to a set of criteria and indicators based on international research outcomes involving SEA integration into decision-making, scoping, selection and assessment of alternatives, cumulative effects assessment, tiering, public participation, and monitoring. The analysis draws on documents analysis and interviews with representatives from responsible agencies and involved SEA consultancies.The analysis shows that SEA is facilitating informed decision-making as the responsible agencies used the SEA, the interaction with consultancies, and the participation processes as a source of information. However, the case studies show various degrees of SEA quality in Germany based on the evaluated criteria and indicators. Results demonstrate that procedural effectiveness is limited. Unclear legal regulations, an expert-based planning approach instead of a collaborative approach, and organisational constraints limit the SEA quality. Furthermore, SEA performance is highly influenced by administrations' legalistic tradition, the expert-based planning culture, the home-grown planning system, and the bounded importance of SEA consultancies in the era of staff cuts and under-resourced agencies. Thus, the recommendations aim to strengthen a more collaborative planning approach, to build SEA capacity within SEA responsible agencies, and to clarify SEA regulations.The overall question for SEA evaluation research and practice may be how more collaborative planning approaches can effectively be implemented in planning and SEA practice through institutional learning.     

SEA screening of voluntary climate change plans: A story of non-compliant discretion

Screening within Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is the first critical stage involving considerations on whether an assessment is carried out or not. Although legislation and guidance offer practitioners a legal and logical approach to the screening process, it is inevitable that discretionary judgement takes place and will impact on the screening decision. This article examines the results of discretion involved in screening of climate change plans (CCPs) in a Danish context. These years voluntary CCPs are developed as a response to the global and local emergence of both mitigation and adaptation, and the voluntary commitment by the local authorities is an indication of an emerging norm of climate change as an important issue.This article takes its point of departure in the observation that SEA is not undertaken for these voluntary CCPs. The critical analysis of this phenomenon rests upon a documentary study of Danish CCPs, interviews with a lawyer and ministerial key person and informal discussions between researchers, practitioners and lawyers on whether climate change plans are covered by SEA legislation and underlying reasons for the present practice.Based on a critical analysis of mandatory SEA and/or obligation to screen CCPs according to significance criteria, the authors find that 18 out of the 48 CCPs are mandatory to SEA and 9 would require a screening of significance and thereby potentially be followed by a SEA. In practice only one plan was screened and one was environmentally assessed. The legal, democratic and environmental consequences of this SEA practice are critically discussed. Hereunder is the missed opportunity to use the broad environmental scope of SEA to avoid a narrow focus on energy and CO₂ in CCPs, and the question whether this practice in Denmark complies with the EU Directive.     

Life cycle assessment as an analytical tool in strategic environmental assessment. Lessons learned from a case study on municipal energy planning in Sweden

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is explored as an analytical tool in strategic environmental assessment (SEA), illustrated by case where a previously developed SEA process was applied to municipal energy planning in Sweden. The process integrated decision-making tools for scenario planning, public participation and environmental assessment. This article describes the use of LCA for environmental assessment in this context, with focus on methodology and practical experiences. While LCA provides a systematic framework for the environmental assessment and a wider systems perspective than what is required in SEA, LCA cannot address all aspects of environmental impact required, and therefore needs to be complemented by other tools. The integration of LCA with tools for public participation and scenario planning posed certain methodological challenges, but provided an innovative approach to designing the scope of the environmental assessment and defining and assessing alternatives.     

Research on the alternatives in a strategic environmental assessment based on the extension theory

The main purpose of a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is to facilitate the early consideration of potential environmental impacts in decision-making processes. SEA alternative identification is a core issue within the SEA framework. However, the current methods of SEA alternative formulation and selection are constrained by the limited setting range and lack of scientific evaluation. Thus, the current paper attempts to provide a new methodology based on the extension theory to identify a range of alternatives and screen the best one. Extension planning is applied to formulate a set of alternatives that satisfy the reasonable interests of the stakeholders. Extension priority evaluation is used to assess and optimize the alternatives and present a scientific methodology for the SEA alternative study. Thereafter, the urban traffic plan of Dalian City is used as an example to demonstrate the feasibility of the new method. The traffic planning scheme and the environmental protection scheme are organically combined based on the extension theory, and the reliability and practicality of this approach are examined.     

Transitions-based strategic environmental assessment

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is emerging as an important tool for sustainability transitions, yet there has been limited research conceptualizing transitions-based SEA. If SEA's primary goal is to facilitate strategic change and guide decision-processes toward sustainability, an assessment framework that accounts for the multi-dimensional factors and relationships influencing transition processes seems highly relevant. This paper advances the transitions-based SEA design – an approach to SEA that is focused on the institutional environment and policy context for the development of strategic initiatives including institutional commitments, supporting policies, and opportunities. We do so within the context of energy transitions, bridging strategic planning theories, decision making, and transition management. Building on existing SEA frameworks that advance strategic thinking, the paper presents the foundational principles and strategic questions to be asked in a transitions-based SEA design. The framework was developed based on a review of sustainability transitions and SEA literature supplemented by expert input. The SEA design focuses on the guiding vision for transitions, the institutional context and governance arrangements, opportunities and risks of proposed sustainability pathways, progress indicators for on-going transition management, and impacts of the exogenous landscape. The framework defines a new functionality for SEA, pushing the boundaries of what SEA can achieve, and should accomplish, as a strategic assessment tool while also challenging conventional thinking and practice beyond its application to policies, plans and programs.     

Implementing Strategic Environmental Assessment of spatial planning tools: A study on the Italian provinces

After more than a decade from the publication of the European Directive 2001/42/CE (Directive) on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), the design and construction of the interested spatial planning instruments has gone through a variety of changes and integrations in European and in world states. This inhomogeneous panorama can be explained with a pattern of institutional structures that have so far affected the implementation of the Directive. The aim of this paper is to investigate the level of implementation of the Directive in Italy by developing a comparative analysis of the quality of integration of SEA within the design of the spatial coordination plan of a set of Italian provinces. Italian practice is analyzed in the framework of a comparative study of worldwide SEA implementation within spatial and land use planning. The results reveal strengths and weaknesses in SEA implementation at the provincial level and, in particular, the emergence of critical areas of research concerning institutional context, public participation, monitoring, and observatory of the spatial transformations.     

Integrating climate change factor into strategic environmental assessment in China

In recent years, climate change has caused a significant impact on the human living environment, and the greenhouse effect caused by gases such as carbon dioxide cannot be ignored. From the viewpoint of environmental management, Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has the functions of value judgment, prediction, and behavioral orientation on the possible impact of strategic planning. Integrating climate change factors into the SEA process can help planners and decision-makers better highlight the importance of climate change in policy and planning stages. Therefore, by combining the development of the SEA of China with relevant international experience, we explore the integration of climate change factors into the SEA framework and construct a technical procedure for such an assessment. A suggestive assessment indicator system for the SEA based on low-carbon targets was established for evaluating the impact of the implementation of strategic planning on low-carbon development goals. The objective is to mitigate the impact of climate change via the SEA and to ensure that the assessment plays an important role in tackling climate change and promoting sustainable development.     

Overcoming implementation barriers: A method for designing Strategic Environmental Assessment guidelines

The effective application of SEA is still limited and needs to be steered through the dissemination of enhanced guidance documents. In this respect, administrative bodies in charge of SEA management have issued guidelines and manuals in order to address the major difficulties that hinder SEA implementation in the day-to-day practice. In this study, we propose a method that assists responsible agencies and professionals in the design of SEA guidance documents. The method uses a comparative approach which builds on the key elements of those documents. We have applied our method to the scrutiny of principles and contents of a selection of SEA guidelines released in the European Union. Results indicate that SEA guidelines should cover a minimum number of relevant issues, including early integration of SEA in the planning and programming processes, development of a fair and inclusive consultation, the construction of credible alternatives, and monitoring strategies. In addition, we found that good SEA guidance documents should build on empirical advice drawn from storytelling referred to a selection of case studies. Our work is intended to support European government agencies as well as practitioners in the design and update of SEA guidelines in a variety of cases, as the general principles that we outline can be systematically applied to any program and plan subject to SEA.     

Enhancing Indigenous impact assessment: Lessons from Indigenous planning theory

Impact assessment faces a number of key challenges. One area singled out as needing attention is community-based impact assessment. Impact assessment related to Indigenous communities is a particular case in point. We lend an Indigenous voice to this conversation. The emerging field of Indigenous impact assessment is under-developed compared to other forms of IA, particularly in terms of its theoretical foundation. In the article we address that gap by highlighting the current conundrum in Indigenous practice, exemplified in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand. Then we base our deliberation in an Indigenous worldview, applying Indigenous planning theory to impact assessment. Indigenous planning theory has an explicit decolonising agenda that supports communities to reclaim traditional planning approaches. We provide key parameters for establishing a theoretical and practical space for Indigenous IA, and for conceptualising the relationship between Indigenous IA other forms of IA. We argue for a ‘third space’ that facilitates co-existence of different forms of IA activity rather than integration of Indigenous endeavours into broader IA types. In doing so, we demonstrate the potential of Indigenous planning theory to connect international dialogue and case studies on Indigenous impact assessment, and to broaden and deepen IA theory and practice.     

Improving the effectiveness of planning EIA (PEIA) in China: Integrating planning and assessment during the preparation of Shenzhen's Master Urban Plan

The enactment and implementation of the 2003 EIA Law in China institutionalised the role of plan environmental impact assessment (PEIA). While the philosophy, methodology and mechanisms of PEIA have gradually permeated through the various levels of government with a positive effect on the process and outcome of urban planning, only a few cities in China have so far carried out PEIA as a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)-type procedure. One such case is the southern city of Shenzhen. During the past three decades, Shenzhen has grown from a small town to a large and booming city as China has successfully and rapidly developed its economy by adopting the “reform and open door” policy. In response to the challenges arising from the generally divergent processes of rapid urbanisation, economic transformation and environment protection, Shenzhen has incrementally adopted the SEA concept in developing the city's Master Urban Plan. As such, this paper reviews the effectiveness of PEIA in three ways:

• •as a tool and process for achieving more sustainable and strategic planning;
• •to determine the level of integration of SEA within the planning system; and,
• •its effectiveness vis-à-vis implementation.

The implementation of PEIA within Shenzhen's Master Urban Plan offers important insights into the emergence of innovative practices in undertaking PEIA as well as theoretical contributions to the field, especially in exploring the relationship between PEIA and SEA and highlighting the central role of local governing institutions in SEA development.     

CEA in policies and plans: UK case studies

This paper examines how cumulative effects assessment (CEA) has been considered in Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEA) of regional and local plans in a number of case studies in the UK. Initially, the paper presents the legislative and regulatory requirements for assessing cumulative effects in plans and programmes in the UK. The two approaches for assessing plans in the UK, Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and SEA are discussed and in most cases, a combined SA and SEA process is undertaken by Regional and Local Planning Authorities. The strengths and weaknesses of this approach are explored, as well as their usefulness in decision making. There are problems relating to baseline, establishing trends and predicting cumulative effects at the strategic level. The issues in assessing cumulative effects within this SA/SEA framework are discussed and recommendations for improvements are made.     

Health impact assessment in spatial planning in England –types of application and quality of documentation

Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is a decision support approach which is applied in various shapes and forms throughout the world. In England, amongst a range of areas of application, HIA is applied in local (spatial) plan making and project development planning. Whilst various authors have reflected on HIA practice in England, the extent of application and its quality has remained unclear. This paper aims at addressing this gap by reporting on the results of a systematic review of HIA in planning. It is found that between 100 and 200 HIAs are likely being produced each year in England. Whilst most assessments are rapid (desk based), there are also examples of comprehensive and intermediate HIAs, where a participatory procedural approach is followed. An important finding is that those HIAs applied within the context of other assessments (integrated impact assessment -IIA, strategic environmental assessment - SEA/ sustainability appraisal -SA and environmental impact assessment – EIA) tend to be of a higher quality than standalone HIAs, mainly because of the existing comprehensive statutory procedural requirements for these other assessments into which HIA can be integrated.     

Confronting reality in strategic environmental assessment in Slovenia — Costs and benefits

We enlarge on the viewpoint published in the Environmental Impact Assessment Review in 2012 — A viewpoint on the approval context of strategic environmental assessments. Additional alerts concerning the procedural ineffectiveness of the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) process from the cost–benefit point of view are advanced. The major contribution to the long lasting, costly SEA processes, comes from ultraistic treatment of Natura 2000.The case study deals with a plan for constructing a traffic bypass around Škofljica, a town near Ljubljana. Based on their conclusions the authors propose that the following elements of the SEA procedure should be improved and optimised:

• –CBA for SEA should become a regular component when measuring its effectiveness.
• –Concretisation of expected SEA inputs to the plan should clarify its role at the earliest stage of the process.
• –SEA should contribute interactively to the optimisation of alternatives; cost–benefit analysis of the SEA process could support this process.
• –Nature protection interest should be confronted and balanced with wider development interests as formulated in the plan and should not be applied in absolute terms (e.g. Natura 2000).

     

Biodiversity and ecosystem services in strategic environmental assessment: An evaluation of six Australian cases

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) aims to provide a sound theoretical basis on which to plan for biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES). With the multi-purpose and increasing use of SEA worldwide, it is timely to evaluate the effectiveness of SEA practice in integrating biodiversity and ES considerations. Here, we derive criteria from the International Best Practice Principles on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Impact Assessment to evaluate six Australian SEAs conducted for urban development plans. We use qualitative and quantitative content analysis to examine the endorsed SEA reports. We identify and analyse text references related to the evaluation criteria and use word counting of keywords to supplement and cross-check the validity of our findings. Four significant results emerge from our analysis. First, while goals to achieve no net loss (NNL) or net gain outcomes for biodiversity are mentioned in all case studies, their poor specification may limit their effectiveness. Second, there is limited integration of ES considerations into the SEA reports, limiting the potential advantages that such an approach could provide. Third, offsetting is the most documented type of mitigation measure, potentially signalling a lack of evidence in implementing early steps of the mitigation hierarchy, including avoidance. This could be explained by the low level of integration of biodiversity and ES considerations from the early stages in the planning process, where there is more flexibility to apply such steps. Fourth, biodiversity management systems and follow-up activities lack detailed information to judge whether they will be useful to demonstrate NNL outcomes. Based on these findings, we present recommendations for enhancing the integration of biodiversity and ES considerations in SEAs. Our approach provides a general framework that can be applied to evaluate SEAs elsewhere in the world from a biodiversity and ES conservation perspective.     

Looking up,down, and sideways: Reconceiving cumulative effects assessment as a mindset

Despite all the effort that has gone into defining, researching and establishing best practices for cumulative effects assessment (CEA), understanding remains weak and practice wanting. At one extreme of implementation, CEA can be described as merely an irritant to the completion of a project-specific environmental assessment (EA). At the other extreme, the conceptual view is that all effects in EA should be deemed cumulative unless demonstrated otherwise. Our purpose here is to consider how we might reconceive CEA as a mindset that is at the heart of absolutely every assessment of valued ecosystem component (VEC) to ensure that we understand the relative contributions of various stressors and can decide when cumulative effects may foreclose future activities due to impacts on VECs. Conceptually, we ground the CEA mindset in the context of three lenses that must all be functioning and working together for the mindset to be operative: a technical lens; a law and policy lens; and a participatory lens. Our arguments are based on a review of the CEA, strategic effects assessment (SEA) and regional effects assessment literatures, an examination and consideration of Canadian EA and SEA case practice, and our combined professional experiences. Through using the Bay of Fundy in Canada as a case example, we establish the concept of the CEA mindset and an approach for moving forward with implementation.     

The significance of structural power in Strategic Environmental Assessment

This article presents a study of how power dynamics enables and constrains the influence of actors upon decision-making and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). Based on structuration theory, a model for studying power dynamics in strategic decision-making processes is developed. The model is used to map and analyse key decision arenas in the decision process of aluminium production in Greenland. The analysis shows that communication lines are an important resource through which actors exercise power and influence decision-making on the location of the aluminium production. The SEA process involved not only reproduction of formal communication and decision competence but also production of alternative informal communication structures in which the SEA had capability to influence.It is concluded, that actors influence strategic decision making, and attention needs to be on not only the formal interactions between SEA process and strategic decision-making process but also on informal interaction and communication between actors as the informal structures, which can be crucial to the outcome of the decision-making process. This article is meant as a supplement to the understanding of power dynamics influence in IA processes and as a contribution to the IA research field with a method to analyse power dynamics in strategic decision-making processes. The article also brings reflections of strengths and weaknesses of using the structuration theory as an approach to power analysis.     

Mind the gap in SEA: An institutional perspective on why assessment of synergies amongst climate change mitigation, adaptation and other policy areas are missing

This article takes its point of departure in two approaches to integrating climate change into Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA): Mitigation and adaptation, and in the fact that these, as well as the synergies between them and other policy areas, are needed as part of an integrated assessment and policy response. First, the article makes a review of how positive and negative synergies between a) climate change mitigation and adaptation and b) climate change and other environmental concerns are integrated into Danish SEA practice. Then, the article discusses the implications of not addressing synergies. Finally, the article explores institutional explanations as to why synergies are not addressed in SEA practice. A document analysis of 149 Danish SEA reports shows that only one report comprises the assessment of synergies between mitigation and adaptation, whilst 9,4% of the reports assess the synergies between climate change and other environmental concerns. The consequences of separation are both the risk of trade-offs and missed opportunities for enhancing positive synergies. In order to propose explanations for the lacking integration, the institutional background is analysed and discussed, mainly based on Scott's theory of institutions. The institutional analysis highlights a regulatory element, since the assessment of climate change synergies is underpinned by legislation, but not by guidance. This means that great focus is on normative elements such as the local interpretation of legislation and of climate change mitigation and adaptation. The analysis also focuses on how the fragmentation of the organisation in which climate change and SEA are embedded has bearings on both normative and cultural-cognitive elements. This makes the assessment of synergies challenging. The evidence gathered and presented in the article points to a need for developing the SEA process and methodology in Denmark with the aim to include climate change in the assessments in a more systematic and integrated manner.     

Assessment of transboundary environmental effects in the Pearl River Delta Region: Is there a role for strategic environmental assessment?

China's EIA Law does not require transboundary proposals to be assessed, despite recognition of this globally, for example in the Espoo Convention and Kiev Protocol, and in the European EIA and SEA Directives. In a transboundary context assessment within a state is unusual, as regulating these effects is primarily about the relationship between states. However where a state has more than one legal system such as in the Pearl River Delta (PRD) Region of southern China, transboundary effects should also be addressed. Yet despite the geographical connections between Guangdong Province in mainland China (where the EIA Law applies) and the Hong Kong and Macau Special Administrative Regions (which have their own provisions, neither of which requires transboundary assessments), EIA and SEA are carried out separately. Coordinated or joint approaches to transboundary assessment are generally absent, with the legal autonomy of Hong Kong and Macau a major constraint. As a result institutional responses at the policy level have developed. The article considers global experiences with regulating transboundary EIA and SEA, and analyses potential application to land use, transport and air and water planning in the PRD Region. If applied, benefits may include prevention or mitigation of cumulative effects, broader public participation, and improvements to environmental governance. The PRD Region experience may encourage China to conduct and coordinate EIA and SEA processes with neighbouring states, which has been non-existent or extremely limited to date.