Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in a Transboundary Context

Resource Manual to Support Application of the Protocol on SEA

Draft Final

 

Introduction	Contents	A2. Integration of SEA into plan and programme making
Disclaimer Copyright Abbreviations	Chapter as printable file Draft Slides	Annex A1.1 Annex A1.2

Chapter A1: A brief introduction to Strategic Environmental Assessment

A1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE CHAPTER

The Protocol refers throughout to ‘the environment, including health’. To avoid repetition, the Manual refers only to ‘the environment’, but this should always be understood to include health. For more information on health issues, please see [Annex] [Chapter] [XX].

1. This Chapter provides a short introduction to strategic environmental assessment (SEA), beginning by answering the question 'what is SEA?' (section A1.2), what is it supposed to achieve and how it compares with environmental impact assessment (EIA), the widely used tool for the environmental assessment of projects.

2. The Chapter then looks at the costs and benefits of SEA (section A1.3) and at some guiding principles for SEA (section A1.4).

3. Finally, the Chapter looks at some broader considerations (section A1.5), including:

• SEA as a sustainability tool
• Links between SEA and other assessment tools
• SEA at more strategic levels of decision-making

A1.2 WHAT IS SEA?

4. Various definitions of SEA are enshrined in law or policy or referenced in the literature on the topic. As generally understood, SEA is a systematic and anticipatory process, undertaken to analyze the environmental effects of proposed plans, programmes and other strategic actions and to integrate the findings into decision-making.

5. In this Manual, the term 'SEA' has a specific meaning that is consistent with the definition contained in the Protocol on SEA to the UNECE Convention on EIA in a Transboundary Context (hereafter the SEA Protocol). It refers to:

the evaluation of the likely environmental, including health, effects, which comprises the determination of the scope of an environmental report and its preparation, the carrying-out of public participation and consultations, and the taking into account of the environmental report and the results of the public participation and consultations in a plan or programme (art. 2, para. 6).

A1.2.1 What is the purpose of SEA?

6. The purpose of SEA, broadly stated, is to ensure that environmental considerations inform and are integrated into strategic decision-making in support of environmentally sound and sustainable development. In particular, the SEA process assists authorities responsible for plans and programmes, as well as decision-makers, to take into account:

• Key environmental trends, potentials and constraints that may affect or may be affected by the plan or programme
• Environmental objectives and indicators that are relevant to the plan or programme
• Likely significant environmental effects of proposed options and the implementation of the plan or programme
• Measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate adverse effects and to enhance positive effects
• Views and information from relevant authorities, the public and - as and when relevant - potentially affected States

A1.2.2 What is the added value of SEA compared with EIA?

7. SEA has evolved largely as an extension of EIA principles, process and procedure and this is certainly the case with respect to the SEA Protocol (see Annex A1.1 for key legal and policy milestones in the development of the field). But it also offers a number of advantages compared to the EIA of projects. These follow from SEA application to the higher level of plan and programme making, which sets a framework for projects subject to EIA and potentially many other actions that may have an impact on the environment. At this level, SEA facilitates consideration of the environment in relation to fundamental issues (why, where and what form of development) rather than addressing only how an individual project should be developed. The potential for environmental gain is much higher with SEA than with EIA.

8. In that regard, the specific value added by SEA of plans and programmes includes:

• The opportunity to consider a wider range of alternatives and options at this level compared with the project stage
• Influencing the type and location of development that takes place in a sector or region, rather than just the design or siting of an individual project
• Enhanced capability to address cumulative and large-scale effects within the time and space boundaries of plans and programmes as opposed to the project level
• Facilitating the delivery of sustainable development through addressing the consistency of plan and programme objectives and options with relevant strategies, policies and commitments
• Streamlining and strengthening project EIA by ‘tiering’ (see Box A4.3) this process to the SEA report and thereby avoiding questions (whether, where and what type of development should take place) that have been decided already with environmental input

A1.3 BENEFITS AND COSTS OF SEA [3]

A1.3.1 Benefits of SEA

9. The immediate benefits of SEA application can be found in information that assists sound decision-making and in the consequent gains achieved in environmental protection and sustainable development. In addition, there are other, secondary benefits that are integral to the participatory approach and transparent procedures followed in accordance with the SEA Protocol. When properly implemented, the SEA process should:

• Provide for a high level of environmental protection
• Improve the quality of plan and programme making
• Increase the efficiency of decision-making
• Facilitate the identification of new opportunities for development
• Help to prevent costly mistakes
• Strengthen governance
• Facilitate transboundary cooperation

SEA provides for a high level of environmental protection

10. This is the stated objective of the SEA Protocol (art. 1); it defines the reason why SEA is undertaken. A high level of environmental protection may be subject to different interpretation but, at a minimum, SEA should ensure avoidance of irreversible and severe effects, safeguard protected areas and sites, and maintain critical habitats and other areas that are important for the conservation of biodiversity.

SEA improves the quality of plan and programme making

11. Whether undertaken in parallel to or as an integral part of plan and programme making, SEA has the potential to improve or reinforce the quality of the plan or programme, leading to better outcomes. It does so in a number of ways but particularly by helping to ensure that the process is focused, rigorous, open to alternatives and considers the full range of potential effects and opportunities for achieving more sustainable forms of development.

SEA increases the efficiency of decision-making

12. SEA helps to streamline decision-making by enabling environmental issues to be taken into account consistently at the different stages or tiers of decision-making. Time efficiency (and as a consequence cost effectiveness) is expected to be improved by better and more consistent decision-making at the plan or programme level, leading to fewer appeals and less discussion at the operational or EIA level. Ultimately, SEA supports project-level decisions as these can be based on previously optimized plans and programmes. The shared use of information produced at different stages of the planning hierarchy may also increase the efficiency of decision-making.

SEA facilitates the identification of new opportunities for development

13. SEA facilitates the improved consideration of environmental limits in the formulation of plans and programmes. It helps in considering alternatives and encourages the search for win-win options that open opportunities for new developments within the carrying capacity of ecosystems. SEA thus supports a shift of decision-making towards genuine sustainable development.

SEA helps to prevent costly mistakes

14. SEA provides early-warning signals about environmentally unsustainable development options. A sound application of SEA may therefore limit the risk of costly remediation of avoidable harm or corrective actions, such as relocating or redesigning facilities. SEA also helps in saving human and financial resources in the development of plans and programmes as unsustainable options can be disregarded early on.

SEA strengthens governance

15. SEA increases the overall transparency of strategic decision-making and allows the early consideration of the opinions of key stakeholders in the plan- or programme-making process. Properly undertaken and accountable SEA enhances the credibility of plans and programmes. It may mobilize public support for implementation - a plan or programme may be more effective when the values, views, opinions and knowledge of the public have become part of the decision-making process.

SEA facilitates transboundary cooperation

16. SEA can provide an important arena for regional cooperation to address difficult issues concerning, for example, shared protected areas, waterways, transport connections and transboundary pollution.

A1.3.2 Costs of SEA

17. An EC study on the costs and benefits of EIA [4] indicated that introducing SEA to regional and local land-use planning usually increased planning costs by 5-10%. This study also found examples of good SEAs that increased planning costs by less than 5%, but the costs depend on the amount and detail of alternatives elaborated and their assessment. A more recent study on the first year of application of the SEA Directive in the United Kingdom,[5] which surveyed 201 authorities that had conducted SEAs, concluded that most SEAs required approximately 70-80 person days to complete (roughly half for scoping and half for the environmental report). At the same time, the majority of respondents consulted in this study agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that 'SEA was an effective use of time and resources'.

18. The main costs associated with the operation of an SEA system occur during the initial applications of SEA when appropriate approaches and tools are tested and developed, and when basic data sets are compiled. Subsequent SEAs tend to be less costly as they can build on previous experience and may require only standard analytical work and process management. (Indeed, respondents to the latter above-mentioned study indicated that they expected future SEAs to take considerably less time.) These costs can be regarded as marginal compared with the overall costs of implementation of plans and programmes.

A1.4 GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR APPLICATION OF SEA

19. In this Manual we are looking at the specific requirements of applying the SEA Protocol and, to a lesser extent, the SEA Directive. Nonetheless, a number of more general guiding principles for the application of SEA are available and may be of value. These include various statements in national guidance materials or in the literature of the field. In addition, reference can be made to the performance criteria for a good quality SEA process developed by the International Association for Impact Assessment (see Annex A1.2).

20. Despite some differences, there is a measure of agreement on the basic principles of SEA and the actions that need to be taken for its effective application. These include the following:

• SEA should be undertaken by the authority responsible for a plan or programme. Ideally it should be integrated into and customized to the logic of the plan- or programme-making process.
• SEA should be applied as early as possible in the decision-making process when all the alternatives and options remain open for consideration.
• SEA should focus on the key issues that matter in the relevant stages of the plan- or programme-making process. This will facilitate the process being undertaken in a timely, cost-effective and credible manner.
• SEA should evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives, recognizing that their scope will vary with the level of decision-making. Wherever possible and appropriate, it should identify the best practicable environmental option.
• SEA should provide appropriate opportunities for the involvement of key stakeholders and the public, beginning at an early stage in the process and carried out through clear procedures. Ideally, it should employ easy-to-use consultation techniques that are suitable for the target groups.
• SEA should be carried out with appropriate and cost-effective methods and techniques of analysis. It should achieve its objectives within the limits of the available information, time and resources and should gather information only in the amount and detail necessary for sound decision-making.

21. These guiding principles should be applied in concert as a package in order to meet the aims and deliver the benefits of SEA as described above. If applied in this way, they should assist in undertaking a good quality process that satisfies the spirit of the SEA Protocol and helps delivery of its specific requirements. The legal provisions, of course, must be paramount in governing SEA process design and application.

A1.5 SOME BROADER CONSIDERATIONS

22. In concluding, it should be noted that there are interpretations of the role and scope of SEA that extend beyond the framework of the SEA Protocol, although these are by no means universally shared. These are briefly introduced here because they are the focus of ongoing debate in the field and because of process developments underway or proposed in certain countries and international organizations.

A1.5.1 SEA as a sustainability tool

23. A major and controversial issue concerns whether SEA should explicitly address the sustainability implications of plans and programmes (or other strategic actions) or continue to focus only on their environmental effects. With regard to the former position, there are then a number of critical questions as to how such an approach could be undertaken. For present purposes, there are two broad schools of thought on these issues (and many shades of opinion in between):

1) SEA should address only or primarily environmental effects and concentrate on implementing what has been agreed to already in accordance with legal requirements and widely-accepted principles of good practice. In this way, the process can best contribute to sustainable development. This might be termed the mainstream or majority position and is probably held by many SEA administrators and practitioners. A variant is to consider certain social aspects as well within the context of the environment. Some social aspects are already considered part of the environment, e.g. health and material assets (housing).

2) SEA should make an explicit, 'best effort' attempt to address the sustainability implications in addition to environmental effects, while recognizing the limitations of such an approach. In this context, arguments have been put forward to reorient SEA in two main directions, namely toward:

• Environmental sustainability assurance of proposed plans, programmes and other strategic actions, for example through the evaluation of impact significance within a framework of precautionary principles on the one hand and safe-minimum or threshold criteria on the other, including provision to ensure damage (residual impact) is compensated or made good. This approach, developed in an international study of environmental assessment effectiveness, remains a minority position, although facets are applied nationally and internationally.
• Sustainability assessment or appraisal of the environmental, economic and social effects of proposed plans, programmes and other strategic actions, for example as now implemented in the United Kingdom (UK) as part of regional and local land-use planning [6] and in the internal European Commission (EC) process of impact assessment of policy and regulatory initiatives. The UK approach has been initiated as part of a major reform of planning that also implements the provisions of the SEA Directive. As such, it might be followed closely as a 'road test' of how the relationship between SEA and sustainability assessment can be given practical effect.

A1.5.2 Logical links between SEA and related assessment tools

24. Despite recent developments, sustainability assessment of plans and programmes presents a number of institutional and methodological challenges that are largely outside the scope of this Manual. However, the framework of the SEA Protocol provides a number of potential links with socio-economic assessment, recognizing these follow a similar analytical logic even though they have a different substantive focus. The SEA Protocol is also consistent with the basic principles of integrated assessment and planning for sustainable development as outlined in the framework developed by UNEP.[7] A series of pilot projects to test this framework has highlighted windows of opportunity for linking various assessment tools. These are broadly outlined in Table A1.1 below, which illustrates how SEA might be linked to socio-economic or sustainability assessment. In the present context, of course, the SEA process undertaken as part of such an approach must conform fully to the fundamental purpose and requirements of the SEA Protocol.

Table A1.1: Logical linkages between usual tasks in SEA, social and economic assessments and sustainability assessments [9]

SEA	Social and economic assessments	Sustainability assessment
Environmental baseline	Economic and social baseline	Evaluation of sustainability of current development trends and patterns
Determination of relevant environmental objectives and evaluation of how they were considered in the plan or programme making	Determination of relevant economic and social objectives and evaluation of how they were considered in the plan or programme making	Determination of relevant sustainability objectives and principles and evaluation of how they were considered in the plan or programme making
Assessment of environmental impacts of proposed options and inputs into their optimization	Assessment of economic and social impacts of proposed options and inputs into their optimization	Assessment of economic, social and environmental impacts of proposed options with reference to relevant sustainability objectives (aspirations) and limits (bottom lines), suggesting win-win options or options that optimize trade-offs
Outline of measures for mitigation of significant adverse effects and their monitoring during implementation of the plan or programme	Outline of measures for mitigation of significant adverse effects and their monitoring during implementation of the plan or programme	Outline of measures for mitigation of significant adverse effects and their monitoring during implementation of the plan or programme

A1.5.3 SEA at more strategic levels of decision-making

25. The issue of whether and how SEA should be applied at more strategic levels of decision-making continues to be a subject of debate. Strong arguments have been made in the literature for SEA to be applied to all types of strategic proposals, beginning at the highest level of policy formulation and particularly where this sets a context or framework for plans and programmes. However, there is no consensus on this position. Many SEA practitioners have noted there are practical and institutional barriers that stand in the way of this course of action, generally and in particular countries. There are also various shades of opinion on how SEA should be applied to policymaking, recognizing the often iterative, flexible nature of this process compared to plan and programme making.

26. The SEA Protocol encourages but does not oblige the Parties to ensure that the environment is integrated to the extent appropriate in policy- and law-making and to consider its principles and elements in doing so (for further information see Chapter A6). A number of UNECE member States, as well as the EC, already have SEA systems or near-equivalent appraisal-type processes that apply to policies and legislation. Experience at this level is less than that for the SEA of plans and programmes but it is not inconsiderable. SEA practice at the policy level in selected countries is described in a volume prepared on behalf of the Czech Ministry of Environment, as additional information to this Manual.[8] The volume also includes a brief notional review of how the key elements of the SEA Protocol might be applied to policy and legislation, as well as other possible approaches. This material and particularly the reviews of national experience in seven UNECE member States may be of interest to those who want to place the requirements of the SEA Protocol in a broader context.

Notes

[3] Based on REC and UNDP (2003), Benefits of a Strategic Environmental Assessment, Briefing paper . Szentendre (Hungary); and on OECD/Development Assistance Committee (2006), Applying Strategic Environmental Assessment: Good Practice Guidance for Development Co-operation , available at http://www.sourceoecd.org/development/9264026576.

[4] European Commission (1996), A study on costs and benefits in EIA/SEA, out of print, but summary available.

[5] Therivel, R. and F. Walsh (2005) 'The Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive in the UK: One Year On', submitted to Environmental Impact Assessment Review, available at http://www.levett-therivel.fsworld.co.uk.

[6] UK Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2005, Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents, available at http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/ planningandbuilding/sustainabilityappraisal

[7] UNEP (2004) Integrated Assessment and Planning for Sustainable Development: Guidelines for pilot project , UNEP, Geneva.

[8] Sadler, B. (ed.) (2005), Strategic Environmental Assessment at the Policy Level - Recent progress, current status and future prospects , prepared by the Regional Environment Center for Central and Eastern Europe, on behalf of the Czech Ministry of Environment.

[9] For an extensive discussion of such linkages, see OECD/Development Assistance Committee (2006), Applying Strategic Environmental Assessment: Good Practice Guidance for Development Co-operation , available at http://www.sourceoecd.org/development/9264026576.

Introduction

Top

A2. Integration of SEA into plan and programme making