A methodology for reviewing the quality of strategic environmental assessments in development cooperation

A methodology is described for reviewing the quality of strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) and identifying problems associated with them. It was developed to support the work of the OECD DAC SEA Task Team and designed for application to SEAs undertaken in the context of development cooperation. The methodology is based on internationally accepted principles and elements of good practice and is question-based. Three modules separately address three core attributes of SEA: compliance with requirements, technical quality, and utility and benefits of the SEA. The methodology is applicable in various ways from a relatively quick desk exercise taking one or two days and conducted by an individual, to a longer review involving a team with fieldwork, ground-truthing and stakeholder engagement (e.g. for a multi-country SEA). A range of factors that need to be addressed in reviewing SEAs are considered. Independent and trial applications of the methodology to SEAs for development cooperation in Ukraine, the Caribbean and Namibia have shown that it can be usefully and successfully applied in this context.     

Effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment in Canada under directive-based and informal practice

This article explores the diversity of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) practice in Canada and lessons for improving the effectiveness of SEA. There are multiple dimensions to effectiveness, but core to SEA effectiveness is its strategic nature. SEA under the Canadian federal Cabinet directive is approached largely as an impact assessment tool, and effectiveness evaluated based on compliance. Practice is entrenched in project-based assessment principles, but with no mandatory provision for public engagement, which limits the potential effectiveness of SEA. External to the Cabinet directive, across Canada’s provinces and territories, SEA and SEA-like practices are occurring in diverse forms and represent the more advanced and exemplary cases. A common challenge to SEA effectiveness, however, is that applications are often limited by their ad hoc nature and disconnected from any larger and formal system of participatory and integrated policy, planning and development decision making.     

Lessons for impact assessment from the UK referendum on BREXIT

Despite much recent attention being given to strategic environmental assessment (SEA), there are considerable difficulties moving from a useful concept to widespread and enduring practice. This may be partly because the proponents of the policies, programmes and plans (PPPs) and the decision-makers remain unaware, or unconvinced, that SEA can add value to the existing processes in PPP development, assessment and decision-making. This paper attempts to respond to these difficulties by defining an overarching concept of SEA and a set of principles to assist in the evolution of effective methodologies. A broad range of SEA methodologies will be needed to adapt to the particular PPP-making context and these must be grafted onto the existing PPP process.     

Investigating the effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment in Thailand

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) was introduced in Thailand in 2005, aiming to direct decision-making at the strategic level (policy, programme, plan) towards sustainable development. Given reforms to the SEA requirements in 2018, it is timely to evaluate emerging SEA experience in the Thai context to inform future practice. The effectiveness of 14 SEAs was investigated based on a version of a recently published framework which substitutes ‘legitimacy’ for normative effectiveness and pluralism, modified through the addition of disaggregated sub-criteria associated with each dimension of effectiveness (procedural, substantive, transactive, and legitimacy), to facilitate a richer understanding of the effectiveness of practice. This more detailed effectiveness framework enabled a comprehensive evaluation of practice, and should be transferable to other contexts. The findings suggest that SEA in Thailand currently partially achieves procedural, substantive, and transactive effectiveness. Achieving some elements of substantive effectiveness where practice is currently weak is considered to be particularly challenging, and also determinative in the achievement of legitimacy. Consequently, the majority of SEAs evaluated in this study failed to achieve legitimacy.     

Strategic environmental assessment effectiveness in Portugal

Discussions on effectiveness have been around in impact assessment for many years, blending multiple perspectives. This paper is about the effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) in Portugal. The adopted framework was set by the editors of this special issue and this paper is contributing results obtained through a questionnaire shared with SEA professionals in Portugal, and also from discussions held in a workshop promoted by the Portuguese national authority on SEA. We have tried to understand the influence of SEA in development processes and the perception on SEA added-value to both environmental authorities and other relevant stakeholders in Portugal. Results are mixed and somehow reveal some confusion between expectations with what SEA aims to achieve, and with what it is actually delivering, which question its effectiveness, as expressed by some opinions that SEA ‘magic may be fading away’. However, other outcomes, such as the recognized need for better communication and increased capacity-building, support the conclusion that most SEA practice and experience in Portugal are yet far from SEA full capacity and potential.     

From medicine to poison: how flexible strategic environmental assessment may be? Lessons from a non-regulated SEA system

Empirical research dedicated to Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is mostly grounded on SEA systems guided by legal requirements, clearly stated procedures and systematic use of SEA to policy- and plan-making. Nevertheless, a considerable parcel of SEA practice is currently occurring in countries with no specific legislation or guidance to be followed, i.e. non-regulated SEA systems. Therefore, it is important to understand how SEA is performing in these countries and to establish whether related SEA systems are subject to the same premises and perspectives of effectiveness that have been reported in literature so far. The paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the state-of-practice in Brazil, based on best practice analysis of SEA reports and interviews, reporting empirical evidence regarding the use of SEA and its related timing, procedural performance and key players involved. Main findings reveal an isolated instrument, embroidered in a disperse and unclear framework, poorly coordinated and highly sensitive to circumstances. Provision of a structured system, indicating clear purposes of SEA, systematic procedures and stakeholder’s responsibilities are suggested as potentially relevant measures to balance current system’s flexibility, thus fostering SEA effectiveness.     

First steps toward best practice SEA in a developing nation: lessons from the central Namib uranium rush SEA

The intent of this study is to contribute to the discussion of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) best practice based on experience gained in a recent SEA initiative: the central Namib (Namibia) uranium rush SEA. We evaluate this SEA process against internationally established characteristics of ‘best practice’ SEA to improve and strengthen future practice in Namibia. The study draws primarily on the final assessment report as well as inputs from six informants involved in the assessment. The results reveal some elements of good practice as well as areas for improvement, and in particular, the need for improved baseline data collection; adequate consideration of alternatives; committing to preferred scenario/options; enforceability; and a more robust institutional capacity. We offer insight into how consideration of these factors may help to strengthen SEA practice in Namibia. Overall, the SEA may not represent a ‘best practice’ example according to international standards, but it does suggest a potentially bright future for SEA practice in Namibia.     

Towards a home-grown approach to strategic environmental assessment: adapting practice and participation in Kenya

Abstract

Kenya is among the first countries in sub-Saharan Africa to formally require the assessment of public policies, plans and programs. National strategic environmental assessment (SEA) guidelines were finalized in 2012 to adapt and enhance SEA practice in the Kenyan context. The purpose of this research was to examine recent Kenyan SEA, with a particular emphasis on public participation, by developing and applying an analysis framework that both incorporates commonly accepted SEA principles and approaches and is cognizant of the national context in shaping SEA practice. Results reveal that a number of SEA practices are consistent with the framework in the nine cases considered, such as containing standard SEA components and developing monitoring plans. A requirement that each SEA must include educating the public about SEA is an innovative local adaptation. Results also show a number of practices that are still emerging, such as initiating SEA early and disseminating results to the participants. We conclude that SEA is still developing in Kenya, but processes for conducting it are slowly adapting to the Kenyan context.     

Towards a more effective approach to the development and maintenance of SEA guidance

Written guidance can contribute to the development of effective SEA, delivering relevant information for those involved in policy, plan and programme making processes. Generally speaking, guidance should aim at setting best practice standards. However, to date, how guidance is impacting on SEA effectiveness and how it is best developed and maintained has not been explored to any great extent. As a consequence, it has remained unclear how a key ingredient of effective SEA, namely the support of an enabling context, should be approached. In this paper, we look at the perceived relevance of written guidance for the delivery of effective SEA, based on a two-stage survey with 26 practitioners (all with over 10 years of experience) from the UK and the Republic of Ireland, conducted between 2015 and 2017. Survey participants included representatives of the regulatory, consultancy and academic sectors. Our findings indicate that guidance can promote SEA effectiveness if it: (a) aims to go beyond basic legislative requirements; (b) is able to respond to the specific situation of application; (c) can establish a minimum standard for SEA; and (d) is able to stimulate the advancement of quality standards within a tiered approach to SEA.     

SEA in Austria and the participative SEA Round Table model

This article firstly gives an overview of Austria’s SEA practice. Secondly it explores the effectiveness of a specific SEA approach, the SEA Round Table. The SEA Round Table is a participative SEA model, involving members of public administration, environmental NGOs and external experts throughout the entire SEA process. This SEA team seeks consensus on an environmentally sound plan or programme. The effects of this SEA Round Table approach are presented by a series of four SEAs carried out for the last four Viennese waste management plans from 1999 to 2018. These four case studies are quite specific SEA cases, which do not allow conclusions on overall SEA effectiveness in Austria. However, some of the outcomes give an idea of how SEA can actually contribute to more environmentally sound plans, which are also easier to implement.     

How strategic dynamics complicate the framing of alternatives in strategic environmental assessment: the case of the Danish natural gas planning

Unpredictable and complex developments challenge the application of strategic environmental assessment (SEA), for example, in terms of timing, prediction and relevance of assessments. In particular, multi-actor and unstructured strategic-level decision-making processes often seem to be characterised by unpredictable and complex changes. Despite the apparent implications, explorative investigations about how unpredictability influences SEA application in practice are rare. This article aims to shed light on contextual changes and reactions to such changes in practice by a case study of the specific SEA process of the Danish Natural Gas Security of Supply Plan. Special emphasis is given to the framing of alternatives in the SEA process, since alternatives are directly related to the contextual developments. Based on a participative approach, strategic dynamics are mapped and the reactions and concerns in the SEA team are outlined. The contribution of the article is enhanced empirical understanding of strategic dynamics and how it challenges SEA application.     

Effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment in Germany? – meta-review of SEA research in the light of effectiveness dimensions

SEA practice in Germany has been growing since its introduction and so has the number of SEA research projects and publications. This paper provides a meta-review of German SEA effectiveness research published between 2004 and 2018. In this context, we discuss: (1) What is the status quo of SEA application in Germany? (2) What dimensions of SEA effectiveness have been addressed in research to date? and (3) How effective is SEA in Germany? Our findings indicate that there is room and need for SEA improvement, for example, with regards to the practice of screening, transparency, and quality management. With a focus of previous SEA research on the dimension of procedural effectiveness, future research should aim at other dimensions and their interactions (substantive, transactive, knowledge and learning, legitimacy).     

Survey of current methods and guidance for strategic environmental assessment

This paper examines methods promoted and used in strategic environmental assessment (SEA) practice, practitioner choices about methodology and the nature of SEA guidance. Results show that SEA is not challenged by a lack of methods, but the range of methods promoted and used is restrictive. A major challenge to practice is making the ‘right choices’ about methods and methodology. Much SEA guidance is focused on flexibility in SEA, providing high-level principles, and is too generic to facilitate such choices. It is assumed that there is sufficient expertise amongst SEA practitioners, and that practitioners will simply know what methods and methodologies are best. Our results indicate that more detailed operational guidance is needed at the practitioner level on how to make sound methodological choices and how to select the best available methods for the SEA tier and context at hand.     

Towards effective scoping in strategic environmental assessment

The scoping phase in strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is considered a central issue for the effectiveness of the whole SEA process, enhancing decision-making. Understanding SEA should be context-specific and scoping is paramount for a robust SEA; the main goal of this research was to develop a framework for the evaluation of the procedural effectiveness of the scoping stage in a specific political and planning system context – Portugal. The framework developed comprises a set of 21 criteria divided into six broad themes and was applied to 20 Portuguese SEA scoping reports, through content analysis. Overall, it was found that mandatory issues in the Portuguese SEA context were met and the scoping reports used mainly national guidelines. However, issues of public participation are often discarded and there is no evidence that scoping starts early in the decision-making process, or if it is done concurrently. Nonetheless, the framework developed establishes best practice for the SEA scoping phase, needing to be adapted to the different political and planning system contexts in order to reflect legal and institutional specificities.     

How strategic environmental assessment can inform lenders about potential environmental risks

In this paper, we explore the potential for strategic environmental assessment (SEA) to be a useful tool for banks to manage environmental risks and inform lending decisions. SEA is an environmental assessment tool that was developed to assist strategic-level decision-makers, such as policy-makers, planners, government authorities and environmental practitioners in improving developmental outcomes, aiming to facilitate the transition to sustainable development. We propose that SEA may also be a valuable tool for banks because it has the capacity to provide information about environmental risks at a time when it can be used as an input to bank lending decisions, which can assist banks in making lending decisions with better environmental outcomes. For these reasons, we argue that in some circumstances, and particularly for project finance transactions, SEA may be a more useful environmental assessment tool for lenders than environmental impact assessment, which many banks are currently relying on to help assess and mitigate environmental risks. Furthermore, we suggest that the use of SEA by banks would contribute to the sustainability goals of SEA.     

Policy SEA: lessons from development co-operation

This professional practice report reflects upon lessons learned from piloting and evaluating an innovative approach to policy strategic environmental assessment (SEA) in developing countries. The primary analytical focuses of the approach are institutions and governance characteristics, plus it places strong emphasis on learning. The piloting provides valuable insights about the conduct of SEA at the policy level and in socio-political where there is limited experience with SEA. From our observations we reflect upon the importance of appropriate ownership of an SEA; the practical implications of working in contested political environments; the challenges in using SEA as a tool to promote good governance; and the centrality of a long-term perspective to environmental and social mainstreaming.     

A social impact perspective on the Browse LNG Precinct strategic assessment in Western Australia

The Western Australian (WA) Government wants to construct a large liquid natural gas processing precinct in the remote Kimberley region. The WA and Australian federal governments jointly conducted a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) of the Browse Precinct proposal. This article examines how the Browse SEA process affected the consideration of alternative development options and the management of social impacts. Resource development proposals often stimulate debate about the best means to achieve sustainable development outcomes and an SEA can provide a public space in which such social choices can be explored. However, the Browse SEA provided no such opportunity and this may have contributed to the severity of collateral social impacts. WA and federal SEA processes result in legally binding conditions of approval that can be applied to actions (e.g. projects) arising from a strategic proposal. This is a significant benefit to project proponents but can leave affected communities with high levels of uncertainty regarding their futures. This uncertainty is heightened by the fact that the SEA approval process cannot accommodate a broad range of social impacts.     

Outcomes and contextual aspects of strategic environmental assessment in a non-mandatory context: the case of Brazil

Within the ample body of literature devoted to strategic environmental assessment (SEA) outcomes and the assessment of its effectiveness, it is accepted that the performance of SEA systems is influenced by contextual aspects. Procedural aspects, objectives, guidance, approach, timing, amongst others, are reported as key components of the different dimensions of SEA effectiveness but their linkage to SEA outcomes is yet to be adequately investigated. In this paper, contextual aspects and related outcomes of a non-mandatory SEA system were identified through systematic literature review and personal interviews with key actors of SEA, aiming at the identification of the influence of contextual factors on SEA effectiveness. The findings indicate three main aspects that may explain the lengthy process of introduction of SEA in plan- and policy-making in the country: (i) lack of proper SEA legislation, (ii) the influence of Environmental Impact Assessment practice and (iii) the influence of the environmental licensing culture. Nevertheless, SEA contributes to improving communication between stakeholders along the planning process and to providing a better level of information for lower tiers of decision-making. In spite of the minor influences on the nature of the strategic action, valuable lessons credited to SEA have been learnt.     

Resilience thinking improves SEA: a discussion paper

Strategic environmental assessment is often referred to as a tool for predicting the consequences of planned development. The assumption of predictability of outcomes is inconsistent with reality which is characterised by uncertainty and complexity. Furthermore, the capacity of our life support systems to absorb disturbance and re-organise without changing into undesirable states appears to be of critical importance. Resilience thinking provides a structured way of looking at complexity, uncertainty and interrelatedness of systems and processes, and above all, provides us with new ways of dealing with planning and more effective use of SEA. Resilience thinking provides inspiration for those who want to extend their thinking about sustainability, but it also challenges some ideas underpinning the impact assessment profession (the future is unpredictable; change is inevitable; increasing stability leads to vulnerability). This paper is the result of a lively and well-visited workshop on resilience thinking and SEA at the 2010 IAIA conference in Geneva. It introduces the basic concepts of resilience thinking, and develops ideas for its integration within SEA practice.     

The environmental impact assessment process for oil and gas extraction projects in the Russian Federation: possibilities for improvement

This paper considers how the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process in Russia (OVOS) could benefit from incorporating some of the process and documentary features of European strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and US Environmental Impact Statements respectively. While the strategic level is addressed in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, the USA system of Environmental Assessment) and in the European Directive on SEA implemented in 2004, SEA is not currently undertaken in the Russian system in terms of legislation or practice. The first section of the paper describes the present state of the OVOS process, through presentation of the relevant legislation in Russia, taking into account European Union (EIA and SEA Directives) and US (Policy Act EIS/EA) experiences. In the second section, the Irkutsk case study (an OVOS report for the gas exploration and extraction project in the Irkutsk Region of Russia) is compared with the EIA undertaken for the Cook Inlet oil and gas lease sales in Alaska (planned activities under the considered projects are quite similar) to show differences between the two documents. In the third section the current situation with Irkutsk case study is presented and an example of how SEA tools could be integrated in the report is provided.