View
0
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Maria do Rosário Partidário
Professor
Universidade de Lisboa / Aalborg University
mariapartidario@tecnico.ulisboa.pt
Strategic Environmental AssessmentFuture Opportunities
Conferência comemorativa Avaliação Ambiental EstratégicaUma década depois: desafios e oportunidades
APA - Agência Portuguesa do AmbienteAlfragide, 13 de dezembro de 2017
A question of perspective
Where are we with SEA?
International experience with SEA
√ success as a legal procedure
X frustration as a decision support instrument
As a legal procedure
Overall - a positive trend observed in the progress made in the implementation of the SEA Directive, with patterns of good (and poor) practice
Successful SEA:
In all member states there are:
√ SEA legislative framework varies, most introduced new legislation, others integrated in the EIA legislation √ Different organizational models√ No problems with scope of application, screening, scoping, environmental report √ Public consultation
Perspective: legal procedureMilieu (Law and Policy consulting) 2016 Study on the application and effectiveness of the SEA Directive (Directive 2001/42/EC) http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/study_SEA_directive.pdf
Challenges
1. Need to start earlier2. Alternatives ill defined, non strategic 3. Assessment goal often more focused on mitigating negative impacts than
improving the plan or programme4. Public consultation - mixed opinions on its added value (e.g. at the very end
of the process there is little margin of influence). 5. Environmental Reports often overly comprehensive and not sufficiently
tailored to the assessment needs, resulting inefficient 6. Lack of ownership and understanding of SEA procedure by
plan/programme developing authorities and practitioners
Milieu 2016 Study
Perspective: legal procedure
Scotland
The Scottish Strategic Environmental Assessment Review, 2011, http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/921/0119893.pdf
Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act in 2005 (SEA Act)
Fundamental components of SEA in Scotland –legislation, common practice, engagement processes, reporting mechanisms etc – are generally sound and fit for purpose - Where there is good integration between
assessor, policymaker and senior decision-makers - significant influence on PPS
- Many practitioners, through experience, are developing innovative and efficient ways to undertake SEA
- SEA Gateway (SEA portal) – enables institutional coordination
Scottish SEA Review 2016:
Needs to improve:- Understanding of, and buy into, SEA among
policy-makers and senior decision-makers - Ensuring SEA is applied across all sectors- Integration between SEA and PPS
preparation, particularly in the early stages - More focused on the issues of significance- Refocus consultation earlier- Simplicity and clarity of SEA documents
Perspective: legal procedure
IrelandSEA transposed into Irish law in 2004
Not clear if SEA generates environmental, social and economic benefits or the reduction of adverse effects
Irish SEA Review 2012 All procedural steps are successful (screening, scoping, baselines, environmental reports, mitigation, etc.)
Critical: poor integration between SEA and plan-making, alternatives, understanding by senior decision-makers, reporting, monitoring, poor buy-in to the SEA process from senior managers and decision-makers.
2012
EPA 2012. Review of Effectiveness of SEA in Ireland – key findings and recommendationshttp://www.epa.ie/pubs/advice/ea/reviewofeffectivenessofseainireland-mainreport.html
Perspective: legal procedure
As a decision support instrument
ScotlandEnhancement of positive environmental impacts in SEA reports since the 2005 SEA Act in Scotland
McCluskey and João, 2011, The promotion of environmental enhancement in Strategic Environmental Assessment, EIA Review
Sample
15 reports 2006 - 2009
Four point scale
Thorough, Fair, Minimal and Absent
Results
60% (9 in 15) ‘Minimal’ or ‘Absent’.
1. SEA focus mainly on mitigation, frequently ignore opportunity offered by enhancement
2. Little detail on relevance of strategic action to environmental enhancement 3. Ineffective reasonable alternatives to the strategic actions
Perspective: decision instrument
ItalyResearch on SEA’s Usefulness – Review of 11 (of 20) regional plans
Gazzola and Rinaldi, 2016, Reflecting on SEA’s Usefulness: A Case
Study on Italy, JEAPM
Regions in cluster A (before the Directive), B (before national legislation) and C (after national legislation of 2006) Higher usefulness in cluster A
For SEA to make a meaningful difference, it should be integrated into planning processes. Yet, the two processes appear to be disjointed.
Developing alternatives appeared to be the most problematic stage and public participation is too weak – SEA applies upon conclusion of the plan-making process justifying decisions already made, or to comply with existing legal requirements.
Perspective: decision instrument
ChinaSEA in China is Plan-EIA (PEIA) (EIA Law of 2003)
Outcomes of PEIA are falling short of expectations, little more than a pro-forma exercise (Bina et al 2011)
Starts too late (Wu et al, 2011) - PEIAs remain reactive in nature because they only commence after key decisions have already been made (Che et al. 2011).
Limited coordination between and within sectoral departments, weak environmental authorities, top-down government, and limited public participation (Bina et al 2011).
Very limited public participation (Wu et al, 2011) (Bina et al 2011)
Adoption and application of EIA tools and methods by practitioners in a cumulative or aggregated manner rather than in a strategic manner (Che et al. 2011).
Perspective: decision instrument
Vietnam
Lack of SEA knowledge and experience at ministerial level, lack of a systematic coordinated inter-agency planning (Victor and Agamuthu 2014)
Institutional constraints challenge the effective use of SEA: inadequate training, technical guidelines, baseline data and financial resources. Limited use of stakeholder and public participation
Incentives to not share information between ministries and severe restrictions on access to information and public participation.
Large gap between how the SEA system is supposed to work, as stipulated in SEA legislation and guidelines, and actual practice.
Daniel Slunge, Trang Thi Huyen Tran, 2014. Challenges to institutionalizing strategic environmental assessment: The case of Vietnam. EIA Review
SEA introduced in 2005 Environmental Protection Law
Perspective: decision instrument
Academia
Literature
“For the environmental
assessment of higher
level PPP, attempts to
apply project-level EIA
methodologies have
generally proven
inadequate.” Nilsson and
Dalkmann, 2001
Is SEA an instrument to safeguard environmental concerns in decision-making? or Is it intended to foster sustainability, or to support balanced decision-making with respect to all normative views and interests concerned? (Thissen 2001: 40)
SEA is a flexible and adaptable instrument that adds value to decision making, a strategic facilitator of sustainability processes (Partidário, 2000)
‘the paradox of progress and performance’ (Sadler and Dusík, 2016) – lack of connection between methodologies and implementation
SEA is performing as a non strategic tool, failing “on its inherent promise” (Bidstrup and Hansen, 2014, p. 34).
Literature
SEA still practiced as a largely "EIA-based" tool (Verheem and Dusik, 2011)
The practice of SEA remains deeply rooted in the EIA tradition and scholars and practitioners often appear divided on the nature and purpose of SEA
Needed:- Transition in SEA away from its EIA roots- Conceptualizing SEA as a process that facilitates strategic transitions is both useful and necessary
The literature
(Noble and Nwanekezie 2017)
Review of international experience with SEA
Success as a procedure – in general there is compliance with legal requirements
Limited capacity as a decision support instrument :o Performs as a non strategic tool o Lacks ownership by decision-makerso Weak integration in decision processeso Unknown environmental and social benefits
Milieu (Law and Policy consulting) 2016 Study concerning the preparation of the report on the application and effectiveness of the SEA Directive (Directive 2001/42/EC)Review of effectiveness in Scotland, Ireland, several authors
Milieu 2016
SEA in its youth crisis
What to do
Change perspective
https://homerdixon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Homer-Dixon-Oxford-Leadership-Journal-Manion-lecture.pdf
1. Recognize the complexity of problems
The world is no longer composed of simple predictable and controlable machines (newtonian perspective)
Proposed PlanProgProj (cause) – assess impacts (effect) – mitigate – next one!!
- Many components- High degree of connectivity- Not bounded – energy flows- Non linear- Emergent
Features that distinguish complex systems (Homer-Dixon, 2017)
No simple activity which can be managed by procedural formulae
It is “a messy, back-and-forth process, with multiple layers of contestation and struggle” (Healey, 2007)
From: World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second NoticeBioScience. Published online November 13, 2017. doi:10.1093/biosci/bix125
BioScience | © The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of
the American Institute of Biological Sciences. All rights reserved. For permissions,
please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com
Second notice from scientists (Nov 2017)Planetary boundaries
Global phenomena changed our perception of the world
Plastic ocean
2007
Economic growth no longer ensures prosperity (Jackson 2009)
Strategy as transformation
Most spatial strategies do little strategic work in the sense of shaping future development trajectories
Strategies that make a difference, then, inherently transform, though such changes may emerge slowly over time and in unpredictable ways.
2. Improve the strategic nature in Plans and Programmes
Healey, Patsy (2009) In Search of Strategic in spatial strategy making
“strategic work” is integrative and geared to efforts to change direction, to open up new possibilities and potentials, and to move away from previous positions.
The art (and craft) of strategic thinking
Thinking strategically is about the art of connecting long-term vision and short-term actions, and of adjusting and adapting to evolving situations.
3. Adopt Strategic thinking in planning and in assessment
Partidário, 2012
To help create contexts for sustainable development
Framework for Strategic Thinking for Sustainability (Partidário 2007, 2012)
Strategic EA
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
As a strategic assessment framework for achieving sustainable development
Strategic Reference Framework – macro-policies that set the reference for strategic assessment
Questions - Which SDG / targets are relevant for this strategic assessment?- How can strategy S contribute to achieving SDG X, Y and Z?
Key elements- Focused on the strategy- Prioritization framework – selective systemic (CDF)- Collective intelligence – Dialogues, Collaboration, Negotiation- Starts early, keeps continuity- Follow-up for control (find points of connecting to EIA)
A socio-political and governance exercise more than doing technical studies
Strategic Thinking for Sustainability (SEA) (Partidário 2007, 2012)
International applications(Partidário, 2007, 2012)
Austria – SEA portal (http://www.strategischeumweltpruefung.at/ms/strategischeumweltpruefung/sup_praxis/sup_leitfaeden/)
“A Portuguese study was also found on the Austrian SEA portal as an aid for Austrian practitioners. ”
Milieu, 2016: pg 40
Sweden - lectures
Chile
International application of the strategic thinking approach in SEA and CDF
Decreto Supremo N°32 que Aprueba Reglamento de la EAE del Ministerio del Medio Ambiente(2015)
“ g) Factores Críticos de Decisión: corresponden a aquellos temas desustentabilidad (sociales, económicos y ambientales) relevantes o esenciales, que en función del objetivo que se pretende lograr con la política, plan o instrumento de ordenamiento territorial, influyan en la evaluación.”
ChileInternational application of the strategic
thinking approach in SEA and CDF
Indonesia
Transition process – Two SEA models
Impacts-based SEA (similar to EIA) –detailed scale, before project or multiple projects, when there is no strategy
SEA with strategic thinking – when there is a long term vision and a broad perspective, and the strategic discussion is still possible (regulations 2017)
DIM and KLHK (Min Environment), Guidelines for SEA, 2017
International application of the strategic thinking approach in SEA and CDF
Innovative Training and Experiential learning
Inwent, MOVE Manual
TOT aim at preparing local trainers pioneering a transition from Impact based to Strategic Thinking SEA in IndonesiaMinistry of Environment and Forestry of Indonesia supported by ESP 3– Danida 2016
Marine Spatial Planning
Strategic Environmental Assessment
Focus on key
problems and
priorities
Assess risks and
opportunities of
strategic options
Follow-up with dialogues
and monitoring to backup a
strategic framework
Spatial and temporal scales, capacity and complexity
Incorporating traditional knowledge
and engagement of indigenous and
local communities Clearly articulated markers
for progress
Platform for inter-governmental dialogues
Understanding competing
interests and conflicting uses
Role of context in MSP
Cyclical and adaptive process
Address multiple, challenging objectives
Monitoring and evaluation
Cross-sectoral engagement
Governance
Public policies
IntegratedInvestment Plan
Povertyerradication
Generation anddistribution of
wealth
Social inclusion
Environmental andclimate management
Adaptation andmitigation to
climate change
Environmentalmanagement
Pressure on natural andcultural resources
Communityconflicts
Sustainable use
Critical Decision Factors and assessment criteria
SEA of the Spatial Development Programme 2014-2035,
Mozambique
How can we improve strategic thinking
Acknowledge complexity and systems thinking
It is like dancing tango
With this dancer
Avoid rigid procedures
RigidStandard movesZero emotion
Focus on root causesProblem tree
loss of biodiversity
congestion
justice and inequalities
equity
water quality and availability
depletion of natural resources
air quality
Symptoms of the problem
Causes of the problem
Root causes of the problem
values
mind-sets
culturesocial issues
economic issues
Policy options and priorities in planning and
programming
natural features
DevelopmentProjects
potentialsobjectives
constraints
environmental riskslack of institutional and human capacities
poverty
Development Context
EIASEA
Partidário, 2012)
Risk out of comfort zone
Improve flexibility and adaptation
Transition to successful strategic thinking
Fom Reactive integration(check and control)….
To Proactive integration, coordinated and collaborative (owned by decision-makers)
From problem solving… To creating motivations
Transition to successful strategic thinking
To help create the futureFrom delivering information…
Transition to successful strategic thinking
Strategic Thinking for Sustainability
Emphasis on values and not on problems (constructive)
Selective systemic and focused on what matters Changing, adjusting (flexible), learning (resilient) Long-term view connected to short term action
Look for futures that enable opportunities
Opportunities related to SEA
Transition for a more strategic thinking SEA
Sustainable Development Goals
New generation assessment: regional, strategic, cumulative
Institutional capacity -Governance / ownership
More integration and collaboration
Focus on priorities
Recommended