Linking the UN SDGs and environmental assessment: Towards a conceptual framework

Linking UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Environmental Assessment (EA)—for mutual benefit—is an emerging topic within research and practice. Thus, knowledge and models of how to make the link are rather undiscovered and novel. This article aims to contribute to the understanding of linkages between the SDGs and EA in theory and practice. The output of the article is a framework for determining the level of integration of the SDGs and EA. In the framework, three main forms of integration are distinguished: non-integration, partial integration, and radical integration, and covering six levels of integration. A research agenda is proposed to strengthen the framework and to explore potentials and implications of the integration of the two concepts.     

Disparate perceptions about uncertainty consideration and disclosure practices in environmental assessment and opportunities for improvement

The need to better address uncertainties in environmental assessment (EA) is well known, but less known is how those involved in, or affected by, EA processes understand and perceive uncertainties and how uncertainties are considered and disclosed. Based on a survey of 77 Canadian EA practitioners, regulators, and interest groups, this paper explores uncertainties in the EA process, uncertainty consideration and disclosure in EA practice and decision-making, and opportunities for improved disclosure. Nearly 80% of participants indicated that all EAs contain uncertainty; however, uncertainty disclosure was described as poor. Only 15% indicated that uncertainties are sufficiently acknowledged in practice and, when disclosed, considered by decision makers. Perceptions about uncertainty differed significantly between those who conducted EAs compared to those potentially affected by development, suggesting that either communication about uncertainty is poor, or participants' understandings about what is considered ‘good’ practice are very different. Almost half of the participants believe that there is overconfidence in impact predictions and mitigation measures, and the majority indicated that if uncertainties were more openly reported then EA would be a better tool for informing decisions. Most participants did not believe that EAs that openly disclose uncertainties lack credibility; and contrary to proponents' tendencies to limit disclosure, participants perceived limited risk of disclosure in terms of project approval. The majority of participants did not believe that there was sufficient guidance available on how to report uncertainties, or on how to use that information in decision-making. Results indicate a substantial need to better understand how uncertainties are viewed and dealt with in EA; the importance of uncertainty disclosure and consideration in EA; and the risks and benefits of uncertainty disclosure to proponents, decision makers, and the public. We identify several opportunities for improving the practice of uncertainty consideration and disclosure.     

Space for action: How practitioners influence environmental assessment

This article contributes to understanding of how change occurs in the field of environmental assessment (EA). It argues that the integration of new issues in EA, such as human health, is significantly influenced by how practitioners' understandings shape their actions, and by what happens when those, possibly different, interpretations of appropriate action are acted out. The concept of space for action is developed as a means of investigating this relation between understanding and action. Frame theory is also used, to develop a sharper focus on how ‘potential spaces for action’ are created, what these imply for (individuals') preferred choices and actions in certain situations, and what happens in practice when these are acted out and ‘actual spaces for action’ are created. This novel approach is then applied in a Swedish case study of transport planning. The analysis reveals the important work done by practitioners, revealing just how EA practice is decisively shaped by practitioners. Analysis of practice using the lens of spaces for action offers an important new perspective in understanding how the field adapts to new challenges.     

Reconceptualizing public participation in environmental assessment as EA civics

Notwithstanding the considerable attention placed on creating meaningful opportunities for public participation in environmental assessment (EA), many participants and those who have reviewed participation processes often find practice sorely wanting. This reality stands in stark juxtaposition to future environmental governance needs, which will require increased openness, deliberation and transdisciplinary knowledge in order to deal with environmental change that is ever more uncertain, complex and conflictual. In this paper, our purpose was to consider how to meet those needs through reconceptualizing public participation as EA civics, founded on an active citizen base, deliberative in nature and orientated toward learning. We do this through developing a new conceptual model of next generation participation processes that is relevant at multiple spatial scales and institutional levels, is applicable to the entire assessment cycle and spans temporal scales through feedback loops. Our EA civics model builds on the “civics approach” to environmental governance and “action civics” by extending their core ideas to participation in EA. We did this by conducting an integrative literature review (including numerous papers we have contributed over the years) and reflecting on our own experiences as EA participants. We apply current thinking on public participation design to our EA civics conceptualization and highlight important design features that have received scant attention. We conclude that EA civics holds promise for fairer and more robust participation processes if all aspects of the model are considered and the actions related to each are implemented.     

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.     

Environmental assessment in The Netherlands: Effectively governing environmental protection? A discourse analysis

Environmental assessment (EA) aims to enhance environmental awareness and to ensure that environmental values are fully considered in decision-making. In the EA arena, different discourses exist on what EA should aim for and how it functions. We hypothesise that these discourses influence its application in practice as well as its effectiveness in terms of achieving the above goals. For instance, actors who consider EA as a hindrance to fast implementation of their projects will probably apply it as a mandatory checklist, whereas actors who believe that EA can help to develop more environmentally sound decisions will use EIA as a tool to design their initiatives. In this paper we explore discourses on EA in The Netherlands and elaborate on their implications for EA effectiveness. Based on an innovative research design comprising an online survey with 443 respondents and 20 supplementary semi-structured interviews we conclude that the dominant discourse is that EA is mainly a legal requirement; EAs are conducted because they have to be conducted, not because actors choose to do so. EA effectiveness however seems reasonably high, as a majority of respondents perceive that it enhances environmental awareness and contributes to environmental protection. However, the ‘legal requirement’ discourse also results in decision-makers seldom going beyond what is prescribed by EA and environmental law. Despite its mandatory character, the predominant attitude towards EA is quite positive. For most respondents, EA is instrumental in providing transparency of decision-making and in minimising the legal risks of not complying with environmental laws. Differences in discourses seldom reflect extreme opposites. The ‘common ground’ regarding EA provides a good basis for working with EA in terms of meeting legal requirements but at the same time does not stimulate creativity in decision-making or optimisation of environmental values. In countries characterised by less consensual political cultures we may expect more extreme discourses on EA, the consequences of which are reflected upon in this paper.     

The mutualism of strategic environmental assessment and sustainable development goals

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set a universal agenda intended to stimulate social, economic and environmental action. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has the potential to assist in the implementation of actions supporting the SDGs by providing a systematic framework to incorporate them into policies, plans and programmes; and the SDGs in turn, could substantiate SEA's contribution to sustainable development. Therefore, the partnering of both policy instruments fosters a mutualistic relationship, benefiting both. In this paper, we review current engagement of SEA with the SDGs both in the academic literature and in practice. The findings reveal a recognisable subtle shift towards the adoption of a new paradigm in plan-making, particularly supported by governments' growingly proactive embracement of SDGs, albeit through different approaches, initiatives and commitments. This sets a robust foundation for spatial planning and, by extension, a reference framework for SEA. Nevertheless, operationalising the SDGs is difficult. The extent to which SDG objectives and targets are embedded in SEA and, indeed, integrated into plans/programmes seems to be hampered by the broad scope of both sustainability and SEA, and a general lack of awareness and know-how. This suggest a need to clarify SEA's mandate for engaging with the SDGs, as well as to provide training for a more proactive integration of the objectives and targets. Through initiatives such as these, there are opportunities to optimise mutual gains for both policy instruments.     

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.     

Ecosystem services in environmental assessment — Help or hindrance?

This paper presents a critical analysis of the potential role of ecosystem services within environmental assessment, including both strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and environmental impact assessment (EIA). It identifies some of the common problems with current environmental assessment practice and then explores whether integrating ecosystem services may be able to help address some of these problems. Case studies are included to illustrate different approaches to using ecosystem services within environmental assessment and to highlight how context (e.g. sector, scale, environmental situation) will influence the most appropriate way of integrating ecosystem services into environmental assessment practice. The analysis also reflects on how ecosystem services' potential role may, or may not, differ from previous integrated approaches to environmental assessment and what lessons can be learnt from their development.Two main approaches are recognised from the literature and the case studies to integrating ecosystem services within environmental assessment: firstly a comprehensive approach, where the assessment framework is entirely guided by ecosystem services; and secondly a philosophical approach that applies more of a light-touch ecosystems-thinking mind-set, helping to frame the assessment methodology rather than fundamentally defining it. Inevitably, there are variations between these two extremes, and benefits and criticisms of both.The authors conclude that ecosystem services provides a potentially valuable framing for environmental assessment, but that it requires a pragmatic, context specific consideration of how ecosystem services can be used to help address some of the common problems with current environmental assessment practice. There is also a need to recognise that at times it may just not be appropriate if it does not provide added value.     

The effectiveness of environmental assessment in Flanders: An analysis of practitioner perspectives

The extent to which Environmental Assessment (EA) contributes to incorporating environmental values and objectives into decision-making (i.e. the effectiveness of EA) has been subject to much research. Still relatively little is known about how the effectiveness of EA is influenced by the specific features of EA systems and their context. International comparative research can shed more light on these relationships. In this paper we report on a survey of EA in Flanders, taking a similar approach as previous surveys in the Netherlands, UK and Denmark. We observe that the effectiveness of the Flemish project-based EA (EIA) is comparable to that in the other countries, whereas the Flemish plan-based EA (SEA) is more influential than the Dutch one (no data on Denmark and UK). As in the other countries, EA in Flanders has an influence on decision-making both before and after the EIA has been completed. According to respondents to the surveys, in all four countries the legal requirement is the main explanatory factor for EA effectiveness. The mechanisms by which EA characteristics and other factors contribute to EA effectiveness seem rather country-specific, however. Rather than trying to isolate the individual influence of factors we encourage more in-depth, qualitative and case-study based follow-up research in order to better understand the complex interplay between factors related to the EA system itself, how it is applied in practice and influenceds from its specific context.     

Power and environmental assessment: Introduction to the special issue

The significance of politics and power dynamics has long been recognised in environmental assessment (EA) research, but there has not been sustained attention to power, either theoretically or empirically. The aim of this special issue is to encourage the EA community to engage more consistently with the issue of power. The introduction represents a ground-clearing exercise intended to clarify the terms of the debate about power in the EA field, and to contribute to the development of a research agenda. Research trends in the field are outlined, and potential analytic and normative lines of inquiry are identified. The contributions to this special issue represent contrasting conceptual and methodological approaches that navigate the analytical and normative terrain of power dynamics in EA. Together, they demonstrate that power cannot be removed from EA policy or practices, and is a necessary research focus for the development of the field.     

The mediation of environmental assessment's influence: What role for power?

Considerable empirical research has been conducted on why policy tools such as environmental assessment (EA) often appear to have ‘little effect’ (after Weiss) on policy decisions. This article revisits this debate but looks at a mediating factor that has received limited attention to-date in the context of EA — political power. Using a tripartite analytical framework, a comparative analysis of the influence and significance of power in mediating environmental policy integration is undertaken. Power is analysed, albeit partially, through an exploration of institutions that underpin social order. Empirically, the research examines the case of a new approach to policy-level EA (essentially a form of Strategic Environmental Assessment) developed by the World Bank and its trial application to urban environmental governance and planning in Dhaka mega-city, Bangladesh. The research results demonstrate that power was intimately involved in mediating the influence of the policy EA approach, in both positive (enabling) and negative (constraining) ways. It is suggested that the policy EA approach was ultimately a manifestation of a corporate strategy to maintain the powerful position of the World Bank as a leading authority on international development which focuses on knowledge generation. Furthermore, as constitutive of an institution and reflecting the worldviews of its proponents, the development of a new approach to EA also represents a significant power play. This leads us to, firstly, emphasise the concepts of strategy and intentionality in theorising how and why EA tools are employed, succeed and fail; and secondly, reflect on the reasons why power has received such limited attention to-date in EA scholarship.     

Environmental impacts of climate change adaptation

Climate change adaptation reduces adverse effects of climate change but may also have undesirable environmental impacts. However, these impacts are yet poorly defined and analysed in the existing literature. To complement this knowledge-gap, we reviewed the literature to unveil the relationship between climate change adaptation and environmental impact assessment, and the degree to which environmental impacts are included in climate change adaptation theory and practice. Our literature review showed that technical, social and economic perspectives on climate change adaptation receive much more attention than the environmental perspective. The scarce interest on the environmental impacts of adaptation may be attributed to (1) an excessive sectoral approach, with dominance of non-environmental perspectives, (2) greater interest in mitigation and direct climate change impacts rather than in adaptation impacts, (3) a tendency to consider adaptation as inherently good, and (4) subjective/preconceived notions on which measures are good or bad, without a comprehensive assessment. Environmental Assessment (EA) has a long established history as an effective tool to include environment into decision-making, although it does not yet guarantee a proper assessment of adaptation, because it is still possible to postpone or even circumvent the processes of assessing the impacts of climate adaptation. Our results suggest that there is a need to address adaptation proactively by including it in EA, to update current policy frameworks, and to demand robust and reliable evaluation of alternatives. Only through the full EA of adaptation measures can we improve our understanding of the primary and secondary impacts of adaptation to global environmental change.     

Meaningful and efficient? Enduring challenges to Aboriginal participation in environmental assessment

This paper explores the underlying practice-based challenges to meaningful and efficient Aboriginal participation in environmental assessment (EA) - participation that provides meaningful opportunities for Aboriginal communities to shape EA, yet assures a degree of efficiency for project proponents who need to obtain EA approvals in a timely and financially viable manner. We do so based on an analysis of the EA policy community's experience with uranium exploration and mining in Saskatchewan, Canada. Many of the challenges to meaningful and efficient Aboriginal participation that emerged are multi-dimensional, often concerning participation processes, decision-making, and relationships. Although scholars have explored many of these issues and have proposed numerous solutions, challenges persist in practice. Several other issues also emerged from our study that have received limited attention, including the non-commitment to early and ongoing participation by smaller project proponents, and the EA exemption of exploration projects; the limited availability of information to project developers on local right holders and Aboriginal interests; expectations about the integration of traditional knowledge and land use in EA not aligning with the information that is available to proponents; confusion about who is responsible for initiating early participation and consultation processes; the lack of early relationship building with potentially affected communities, particularly by governments; and the lack of other viable avenues, outside EA, for Aboriginal communities to raise more strategic issues of concern that affect traditional lands and treaty rights.     

A comparative evaluation of the environmental impact assessment legislation of South Africa and Zambia

This study evaluates the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) legislation of South Africa and Zambia against the modified criteria developed by Wood (1995) to determine the extent to which they follow “good practices” and incorporate emerging environmental issues into EIA. We modified the criteria of Wood due to new environmental issues that have emerged since their formulation. Some of these issues are in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). National Environmental Acts and EIA Regulations for the two countries were reviewed to evaluate the current legislation. We also used telephone interviews to gather additional information that was not in the documents. As a fundamental component of the EIA system, the legislation needs to be clear, concise and inclusive of all the major environmental issues that affect the performance of the EIA system. Literature reveals that the performance of the Zambian EIA system is generally low compared with that of some African countries such as South Africa and Ghana; especially in terms of the quality of EIA reports and substantive environmental protection. Therefore, we hypothesised that the Zambian legislation does not follow the good practice hence the low EIA system performance. Results, however, showed that the two countries are almost on a par in terms of meeting the criteria used in this study. Hence there is more to be done to improve the quality of both countries' EIA legislation. Nevertheless, compared with the previous evaluations by Wood (1999) and Harrison (2005), the results show that there is considerable improvement in the quality of the South African EIA legislation following a series of amendments.     

Many roads may lead to Rome: Selected features of quality control within environmental assessment systems in the US,NL, CA,and UK

As there is no one-and-only concept on how to precisely define and establish quality control (QC) or quality assurance (QA) in the making of environmental assessments (EA), this paper presents selected features of international approaches that address quality in EA systems in the USA, the Netherlands, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Based on explanative case studies, we highlight the embedding of specific quality control features within the EA systems, the objectives and processes, and relevant transparency challenges. Such features of QC/QA approaches can be considered in cases where substantial quality control and assurance efforts are still missing. Yet further research needs to be conducted on the efficacy of these approaches, which remains beyond the scope of this study.     

Carrying capacity for SDGs: A review of connotation evolution and practice

The integration of carrying capacity and sustainable development (sustainability) has prevailed since the end of the 20th century, but the connotation evolution and practice of carrying capacity for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have not been fully reviewed. Scientific measurement analysis and visualization are helpful to reflect the global picture of the connotation evolution and the practice in the field of carrying capacity for SDGs. This work retrieved the literature in the core collection database of Web of Science with topic words “carrying capacity and sustainable development” or “carrying capacity and sustainability” from 1985 to 2020. A set of 897 records were obtained as the data source. First, the evolution trend and mutation point detection, the theme mining and clustering, the citation chronology chart were visualized using the bibliometric analysis. Then, the focus of carrying capacity for SDGs and the main way to improve were summarized from the economic, environmental and social dimensions by researchers' intervention. This work examined the connotation and practice of carrying capacity for SDGs as thoroughly as possible, we attempted to supplement more meaning understanding, nuances, and critical thinking, and the current challenges and future prospects were summarized. It is expected that it will inspire new opportunities for academic research and practical applications, as well as enable policy managers to pay full attention to the potentially important value of carrying capacity in promoting the realization of SDGs.     

An investigation of environmental and sustainability discourses associated with the substantive purposes of environmental assessment

This paper investigates the discursive construction of the substantive purposes of environmental assessment (EA). It addresses these purposes by exploring the complex and often multifaceted linkages between political factors and plural views of democracy, public participation, and the role of science that are embedded in environmental and sustainability discourses. The interaction between policy-making and public actors leads to the formulation of divergent and potentially competing rationales for public participation, and for social appraisal more generally. Participatory approaches have also given impetus to the development of several interpretations on the role of science in assessment procedures. Science is important in mediating public participation and the two are therefore reciprocally linked. This leads to discourses that become manifest in the construction of substantive purposes. Discourse analysis in EA is a relevant method for examining trends and patterns in sustainable development. It is argued that public participation is an important, if not decisive, variable in the articulation and civil legitimacy of certain purposes. A general proposition that results from this paper is that EA, although typically presented as an objective scientific tool, is an intrinsically normative process. Enhanced knowledge on the construction, and reconstruction over time, of substantive purposes is required if environmental and sustainability discourses are to be used and understood as meaningful analytical instruments to assess the socio-political implications of EA.     

Capacity strengthening for environmental assessment in Benin

For over three decades, environmental assessment (EA) has gained increasing international recognition as a means of ensuring sustainable development. In light of environmental challenges, Benin has endorsed the principle that a healthy environment is a human right. This concern is manifested by the creation of many institutions for managing environmental issues. But until today, environmental problems are still on the rise and getting worse day by day because of Benin's limited experience in the field of EA. If EA is to be perceived as an instrument of sustainable development, it is important to take into account the achievements and the needs of the country in this field; because we cannot respond properly and adequately in the field of capacity strengthening in EA without first be familiar with what exists, what is fact, and what is needed. In this study, we address and analyze the status of existing resources in the field of EA in Benin with the purpose of identifying the needs for capacity strengthening to enhance environmental assessment effectiveness in the country. The detailed presentation of the results shows that the legislative and institutional resources are available and represent a strong element in the system of environmental management in Benin. However, there is still a room for improvements towards environmental governance before it becomes a solid system of decision supporting all sectors of intervention because the effective application of those laws and texts still constitute big challenges. Below are the main reasons that explain the particular situation: majority of the laws are put in force very late or taken without implementing decree at all; the organizational capabilities have large gaps; the absence of a mechanism for evaluating the needs for strengthening capacity for EA. Recommendations pinpointed three types of needs which must be filled to enhance the effectiveness of EA in Benin: upstream needs of the structure of EA; implementation and enforcement needs; and, maintenance and efficiency needs.