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.     

Public participation in Strategic Environmental Assessment: A practitioners' perspective

Public participation is considered a distinguished feature of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), and the SEA literature has traditionally identified several benefits attached to it, from more open and transparent decision-making to greater acceptance of plans/programmes' output by the affected population. However, relatively little empirical evidence has been collected so far on the extent and outcomes of public engagement as it is being carried out in current SEA practice. In this article, we present the results of a study on this theme based on a direct survey of 47 SEA practitioners and scholars from different countries. Respondents were asked to report their experience about a number of items including: the frequency of SEA process featuring deep public participation; its overall influence on plan/programmme-making; the identification of the main factors impeding it; the correlation of public involvement with environmental outcomes; and the increase of costs. Results indicate that public engagement in current SEA practice is still relatively limited and with limited influence on decision-making. The main impeding factors seem to be: lack of political willingness by proponents; insufficient information on the SEA process by the public; and weakness of the legal frames. However, respondents also report that when effective public engagement takes place, benefits do arise and identify a positive correlation between the degree of public involvement and the environmental performance of plans and programmes. Overall, findings suggest that public involvement has indeed the potential to positively influence both SEA and decision-making, although this should be supported from the policy side by stronger legal frames, higher requirements and improved technical guidance.     

Cumulative effects in strategic environmental assessment: The influence of plan boundaries

Cumulative effects (CE) assessment is lacking quality in impact assessment (IA) worldwide. It has been argued that the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) provides a suitable IA framework for addressing CE because it is applied to developments with broad boundaries, but few have tested this claim. Through a case study on the Danish mining sector, this article explores how plan boundaries influence the analytical boundaries applied for assessing CE in SEA. The case was studied through document analysis in combination with semi-structured group interviews of the responsible planners, who also serve as SEA practitioners. It was found that CE are to some extent assessed and managed implicitly throughout the planning process. However, this is through a focus on lowering the cumulative stress of mining rather than the cumulative stress on and capacity of the receiving environment. Plan boundaries do influence CE assessment, though all boundaries are not equally influential. The geographical and time boundaries of the Danish mining plans are broad or flexible enough to accommodate a meaningful assessment of CE, but the topical boundary is restrictive. The study indicates that collaboration among planning authorities and legally appointed CE leadership may facilitate better practice on CE assessment in sector-specific SEA contexts. However, most pressing is the need for relating assessment to the receiving environment as opposed to solely the stress of a proposed plan.     

Integrating adaptation to climate change in regional plans and programmes: The role of strategic environmental assessment

Climate changes exert negative impacts on the global environments and the human beings. They imply more frequent extreme weather events, which are responsible of sea level rise, coastal erosion, flooding, droughts, and desertification. Mitigation and adaptation represent intertwined strategies for counteracting climate changes. Mitigation is associated to the lessening of the causes of climate changes and includes actions reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Adaptation is a proactive concept addressing how humans can adapt and benefit from climate change. The mainstreaming and integration of adaptation to climate change into routine practice can be favored by Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of regional policies, plans and programmes. In this study, we aim at scrutinizing a set of SEA reports of regional plans and programmes adopted in Sardinia (Italy), to investigate if -and to what extent- adaptation to climate change has characterized planning and programming tools. Evidence shows that the integration of adaptation-driven issues into regional planning is still in its infancy but presents the signs of promising expansion.     

Avoiding climate change uncertainties in Strategic Environmental Assessment

This article is concerned with how Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) practice handles climate change uncertainties within the Danish planning system. First, a hypothetical model is set up for how uncertainty is handled and not handled in decision-making. The model incorporates the strategies ‘reduction’ and ‘resilience’, ‘denying’, ‘ignoring’ and ‘postponing’. Second, 151 Danish SEAs are analysed with a focus on the extent to which climate change uncertainties are acknowledged and presented, and the empirical findings are discussed in relation to the model. The findings indicate that despite incentives to do so, climate change uncertainties were systematically avoided or downplayed in all but 5 of the 151 SEAs that were reviewed. Finally, two possible explanatory mechanisms are proposed to explain this: conflict avoidance and a need to quantify uncertainty.     

Bridging the divide between theory and guidance in strategic environmental assessment: A path for Italian regions

Clear and effective legislation is a requisite to bring sustainable development from theory into practice. This paper develops a methodology to investigate how Italian regional legislation disciplines the use of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), the procedure used in the European Union (EU) to pursue sustainable development of policies, plans, and programs (PPPs). Our case study is the Italian regional level, examined to identify eventual flaws and areas for improvement for each regional legislative framework. For this purpose, this study refers to a selection of analytical criteria recurring in the international debate on sustainability assessments. Statistical multi-dimensional analysis is used to identify Italian regions with similar SEA legislation. We recognize four taxonomies, depending on the way regional legislation provides information about i) legislation and guidelines, ii) integration between SEA and PPPs, iii) sustainability goals, iv) technical organization, v) participatory organization, and vi) monitoring. The results suggest that Italian administrators should cooperate to improve legislation at the regional level. Acknowledging the institution-centred nature of SEA, this methodology could drive the EU to better support SEA development in countries with diversified traditions.     

Consideration of climate change on environmental impact assessment in Spain

Most of the projects subject to environmental impact assessment (EIA) are closely related to climate change, as they contribute to or are affected by it. The growing certainty about climate change and its impacts makes its consideration an essential part of the EIA process, as well as in strategic environmental assessment (SEA).This paper examines how climate change (CC) has been taken into account in EIA in Spain through the analysis of 1713 environmental records of decision (RODs) of projects submitted for EIA. In 2013 Spain approved one of the most advanced laws in terms of CC consideration in environmental assessment, although it had not yet accumulated extensive practice on the issue. This contrasts with the situation of countries like Canada or the USA, which have a significant body of experience without specific legal requirements.Only 14% of the RODs analysed included references to CC, and in more than half of the cases it was a mere citation. Thermal power plants, which are subject to specific GHG regulations, show the highest consideration, while transport infrastructures, which are important contributors to CC, show a very low consideration. Almost all the references are related to their contribution to CC, while consideration of the effects of CC is minimal.The increasingly common incorporation of CC into SEA, should not imply its exclusion from EIA, because both processes have different aims and uses. Including the obligation to consider CC in the EIA regulations is highly desirable, but probably not enough without other measures, such as practical guidance, training and motivational programmes for practitioners and evaluators. But even these actions cannot ensure effective and adequate assessments of CC. Probably more resources should be spent on creating greater awareness in all the agents involved in EIA.     

Case studies: Application of SEA in provincial level expressway infrastructure network planning in China — Current existing problems

Since the Law of the People's Republic of China on Environmental Impact Assessment was enacted in 2003 and Huanfa 2004 No. 98 was released in 2004, Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been officially being implemented in the expressway infrastructure planning field in China. Through scrutinizing two SEA application cases of China's provincial level expressway infrastructure (PLEI) network plans, it is found that current SEA practice in expressway infrastructure planning field has a number of problems including: SEA practitioners do not fully understand the objective of SEA; its potential contributions to strategic planning and decision-making is extremely limited; the employed application procedure and prediction and assessment techniques are too simple to bring objective, unbiased and scientific results; and no alternative options are considered. All these problems directly lead to poor quality SEA and consequently weaken SEA's effectiveness.     

Case studies: Application of SEA in provincial level expressway infrastructure network planning in China — Current existing problems

Since the Law of the People's Republic of China on Environmental Impact Assessment was enacted in 2003 and Huanfa 2004 No. 98 was released in 2004, Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been officially being implemented in the expressway infrastructure planning field in China. Through scrutinizing two SEA application cases of China's provincial level expressway infrastructure (PLEI) network plans, it is found that current SEA practice in expressway infrastructure planning field has a number of problems including: SEA practitioners do not fully understand the objective of SEA; its potential contributions to strategic planning and decision-making is extremely limited; the employed application procedure and prediction and assessment techniques are too simple to bring objective, unbiased and scientific results; and no alternative options are considered. All these problems directly lead to poor quality SEA and consequently weaken SEA's effectiveness.     

Use of sustainability appraisal by English planning inspectors and judges

This article considers how sustainability appraisals (SA — an English form of SEA that also considers social and economic issues) are treated at the end of the plan-making process: by planning inspectors who review plans before they are adopted, and by judges in the case of legal challenge to plans and their SAs. It briefly describes the role of inspectors and judges, and how their decisions influence SA. It presents the conclusions of 81 planning inspectors' reports about local authority development plans and their SAs, including three cases where inspectors required further SA information and reasons given by inspectors for not challenging the legal adequacy of other SAs. The three main successful English legal challenges to SA are then summarised. Planning inspectors seemed prone, until recently, to not challenge even quite poor quality SAs. This seems to be changing in the wake of recent court judgements, and in turn is affecting planners' SA practice. However it is unclear whether these changes will affect only the procedural aspects of SA or also planners' and inspectors' ‘hearts and minds’.     

Conceptualizing strategic environmental assessment: Principles,approaches and research directions

Increasing emphasis has been placed in recent years on transitioning strategic environmental assessment (SEA) away from its environmental impact assessment (EIA) roots. Scholars have argued the need to conceptualize SEA as a process designed to facilitate strategic thinking, thus enabling transitions toward sustainability. The practice of SEA, however, remains deeply rooted in the EIA tradition and scholars and practitioners often appear divided on the nature and purpose of SEA. This paper revisits the strategic principles of SEA and conceptualizes SEA as a multi-faceted and multi-dimensional assessment process. It is suggested that SEA can be conceptualized as series of approaches operating along a spectrum from less to more strategic – from impact assessment-based to strategy-based – with each approach to SEA differentiated by the specific objectives of SEA application and the extent to which strategic principles are reflected in its design and implementation. Advancing the effectiveness of SEA requires a continued research agenda focused on improving the traditional SEA approach, as a tool to assess the impacts of policies, plans and programs (PPPs). Realizing the full potential of SEA, however, requires a new research agenda — one focused on the development and testing of a deliberative governance approach to SEA that can facilitate strategic innovations in PPP formulation and drive transitions in short-term policy and initiatives based on longer-term thinking.     

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.     

Spheres of public conversation: Experiences in strategic environmental assessment

This paper draws on earlier research, a national review of Scottish SEA practice and a survey of practitioners and stakeholders engaged in SEA and spatial planning in one Scottish city-region, to explore claims being made in the academic literature for Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as a tool for deliberative plan-making. We consider whether there is evidence that Scottish SEA practice is helping create more inclusive plan-making processes in light of recent legislative changes, thereby fulfilling one of the expectations of Scottish Government. The macro analysis found that although there are opportunities for stakeholders to engage in the Scottish SEA process the level in practice is extremely low, a finding which mirrors experience in England and elsewhere. The more detailed micro analysis reveals a more nuanced picture within the spatial planning system, however, suggesting the existence of two distinct spheres of public conversations, one characterised by active dialogue about the environmental effects of alternative strategies amongst public sector stakeholders and the other involving non-governmental stakeholders and community groups in a much more limited way. The paper concludes with a discussion of possible explanations for this outcome, concerning asymmetric incentive structures and the application of power, and a consideration of the implications in relation to the competing discourses of SEA.     

The inherent tensions arising from attempting to carry out strategic environmental assessments on all policies,plans and programmes

This paper evaluates the tensions that result from routinely applying SEA to all policies, plans and programmes within Scotland. The European Union SEA Directive, effective in many EU member states from 2004, introduced a requirement for environmental assessment of certain plans and programmes. Scotland, a devolved nation within the EU member state of the United Kingdom, aimed to be a ‘world leader in SEA’ by legislating for SEA to be undertaken of all public sector plans, programmes and strategies, with the word ‘strategies’ being equated with ‘policies’. This paper presents detailed data regarding Scottish SEA activity between 2004 and 2007, including responses to consultations on SEA reports. This empirical research found that, reflecting a general difficulty in determining where and when SEA should be applied, engagement with the SEA process was not as widespread as intended (including the pre-screening and screening stages). Eight tensions evident from Scotland's application of SEA are identified, and their broader relevance is examined.     

The application of strategic environmental assessment in a non-mandatory context: Regional transport planning in New Zealand

There is no legal mandate for strategic environmental assessment (SEA) in New Zealand. However, a requirement to consider environmental and sustainability issues is a key feature of many statutes, including that relating to regional transport planning. Given this, the research sought to determine whether SEA could be used to improve the incorporation of environmental and sustainability aspects into the regional transport planning process in New Zealand. Existing practice was evaluated, examining what factors currently limiting the consideration of environmental and sustainability issues and to what extent elements of SEA are currently being used. The research culminated in the development of a conceptual model where SEA elements could be incorporated into the existing framework to promote improved consideration of environmental and sustainability issues. The results provide some reassurance about the value of SEA even where its application is not legally mandated. However, it also highlighted some ongoing issues around the integration of SEA in existing frameworks and around the scope of SEA as a decision-aiding tool.     

Can we infer about ecosystem services from EIA and SEA practice? A framework for analysis and examples from Portugal

Biodiversity, soil, water, air, climate, landscape and other components are typically analyzed in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) when looking for the effects of a given project on the biological and ecological components of the environment. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) tends to follow the same general pattern, when looking for the environmental effects of plans and programs. In both cases, ecosystem services are often not explicitly considered. We developed a framework to analyze environmental assessment (EA) practice and infer about ecosystem services based on existing evidence from EIA and SEA reports and supporting information. Our framework addresses the relations between ecosystem services and the environmental factors assessed in EIA and SEA, considering the relevant conceptual frameworks such as the ES cascade model and the DPSIR framework applied to ES provision. We base our proposals on results from a preliminary meta-analysis of recent EIA and SEA reports from several types of plans and projects in Portugal, in which implicit assessments of ES were clearly predominant. We discuss the implications of those results and the opportunities to infer about ecosystem services, and conclude on the need for more dedicated and explicit efforts to ecosystem services assessment in EIA and SEA.     

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.     

Coping with climate change related conflicts – The first framework to identify and tackle these emerging topics

Climate change is supposed to exacerbate conflicts arising from resource scarcity and contrasting objectives. Some European authors highlighted already the need to look at conflicting interests when elaborating and applying adaptation and mitigation strategies. This study analysed the level of consideration of these emerging topics arising through increased competition of resources, contrasting interests, climate change adaptation as well as mitigation measures for Austria and Southern Germany in detail. Furthermore, it surveyed the application of possible approaches for conflict prevention and mitigation in an international perspective and additionally examined the particular role of SEA as one of the instruments to cope with conflicts related to climate change. The results express the strong need to look at emerging conflicts in cross-sectoral and sectoral adaptation early enough and a strategic perspective. Based on the content analysis of the Austrian and German adaptation and mitigation documents, expert interviews as well as the international literature review, a rather low consideration of these emerging topics as well as approaches to cope with them became evident. In response to these deficiencies, the paper introduces a first framework to identify and tackle emerging and exacerbated conflicts related to climate change. This novel framework is internationally applicable. In the final step of the framework approaches to prevent and minimize conflicts are the key topic. Among these approaches, SEA could take a leading role in case mandatory planning instruments cover the topics related to potential or existing exacerbated fields of conflicts. Overall a mix of formal and informal instruments and a more cross-sectoral perspective seems necessary. To this aim, the paper introduces four main guiding principles to consider and minimize up-coming conflicting topics.