Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spacial Strategies · 2011-05-05 · 1.1 Introduction Role of this guidance 1.1.1 This consultation paper presents draft guidance on how to carry

Sustainability Appraisal ofRegional Spatial Strategies and

Local Development Frameworks

Consultation Paper

September 2004

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: London

Sustainability Appraisal ofRegional Spatial Strategies and

Local Development Frameworks

Consultation Paper

The Office of the Deputy Prime MinisterEland HouseBressenden PlaceLondon SW1E 5DUTelephone 020 7944 4400Web site www.odpm.gov.uk

© Crown copyright 2004.

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the publication specified.

For any other use of this material, please write to HMSO Licensing, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected].

Further copies of this publication are available from:

ODPM PublicationsPO Box 236WetherbyWest YorkshireLS23 7NBTel: 0870 1226 236Fax: 0870 1226 237Textphone: 0870 1207 405E-mail: [email protected]

This document is also available on the ODPM website

Printed in the UK on material containing 75% post-consumer waste and 25% ECF pulp

September 2004

Product Code: 04PD02541

CONTENTSPART 1ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL

1.1 Introduction 9

1.2 Background and context 16

1.3 Public involvement in Sustainability Appraisal 27

PART 2GUIDE TO APPLYING SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL TO REGIONAL SPATIALSTRATEGIES AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORKS

2.1 Applying Sustainability Appraisal to Regional Spatial Strategies 33

2.2 Applying Sustainability Appraisal to Development Plan Documents 50

2.3 Applying Sustainability Appraisal to Supplementary Planning Documents 65

ANNEXESAnnex 1: Other relevant plans, programmes and sustainability objectives 81

Annex 2: Sources of baseline information 85

Annex 3: Collecting and presenting baseline information and trends 90

Annex 4: Recording sustainability issues 98

Annex 5: Devising a Sustainability Appraisal Framework 99

Annex 6: Testing the plan objectives 121

Annex 7: Sustainability Appraisal Reports 122

Annex 8: Predicting and assessing effects 125

Annex 9: Secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects 134

Annex 10: Identifying and comparing options 143

Annex 11: Monitoring implementation of the plan 152

QUALITY ASSURANCE CHECKLIST 157

GLOSSARY 159

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 161

REFERENCES AND FURTHER INFORMATION 162

THE STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT DIRECTIVE 167

Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks – Consultation Paper

6

PART 1

About SustainabilityAppraisal

1


8

1.1 IntroductionRole of this guidance

1.1.1 This consultation paper presents draft guidance on how to carry out SustainabilityAppraisal as an integral part of the process of preparing Regional Spatial Strategies andLocal Development Frameworks. It should be read in conjunction with the new PlanningPolicy Statements 11 and 12, on Regional Spatial Strategies and Local DevelopmentFrameworks respectively, which explain the processes for making these plans.

1.1.2 Under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Sustainability Appraisal ismandatory for Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS), Development Plan Documents(DPDs) and Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) (see Figure 1). SustainabilityAppraisal helps planning authorities to fulfil the objective of contributing to theachievement of sustainable development in preparing their plans.

1.1.3 When preparing RSSs, DPDs and SPDs, planning authorities must also conduct anenvironmental assessment in accordance with the requirements of European Directive2001/42/EC on the ‘assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on theenvironment’ (the ‘strategic environmental assessment’ or SEA Directive).

1.1.4 The requirement to carry out a Sustainability Appraisal and a Strategic EnvironmentalAssessment are distinct. However, it is possible to satisfy both through a singleappraisal process. This guidance is intended to ensure that Sustainability Appraisalsmeet the requirements of the SEA Directive, and it widens the Directive’s approach toinclude social and economic as well as environmental issues. Key areas of emphasisinclude:

• collecting and presenting baseline information

• predicting the significant effects of the plan and addressing them during itspreparation

• identifying reasonable plan options and their effects

• involving the public and authorities with social, environmental and economicresponsibilities as part of the assessment process

• monitoring the actual effects of the plan during its implementation

1.1.5 Throughout this guidance, where reference is made to Sustainability Appraisal it shouldbe taken to include the requirements of the SEA Directive. Guidance on specificobligations of the SEA Directive which must be met during the Sustainability Appraisalis highlighted.

Part 1: About Sustainability Appraisal

9

1.1.6 In this document we use the acronym ‘SA’ to denote Sustainability Appraisal under thePlanning and Compulsory Purchase Act, incorporating the requirements of the SEADirective. The term ‘SEA’ is used to denote an environmental assessment in accordancewith the SEA Directive.

1.1.7 This guidance is not intended as an interpretation of the law, and must be read inconjunction with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, the SEA Directive, andthe legislation that transposes the Directive into English law, the EnvironmentalAssessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 (the SEA Regulations).

1.1.8 This draft guidance incorporates ‘The Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive:Guidance for Planning Authorities’ (ODPM October 2003), and will supersede it whenpublished in its final form following consultation. That earlier guidance was producedto help authorities prepare for the SEA Directive, which came into force in July 2004,but was designed to be extended in due course to cover the full range of SustainabilityAppraisal. It also replaces the DETR ‘Good Practice Guide on Sustainability Appraisalof Regional Planning Guidance’ published in October 2000.

1.1.9 For the sake of brevity, the term ‘plan’ is used throughout this guide to refer to all ofthe documents to which this guidance applies. It should read as including RSSs, DPDsand SPDs.

ODPM, the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly Government and the NorthernIreland Department of the Environment have also published ‘A Draft Practical Guide tothe Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive’ (July 2004). This provides guidanceon how to comply with the SEA Directive for all plans and programmes in the UK fallingwithin the Directive’s scope. It is however not intended to be used where sector-specificguidance such as this draft Sustainability Appraisal guidance is available.


10

Structure of the guidance1.1.10 The guide is divided into two parts:

• Part 1 sets the context to the guidance including an overview of the SA process.

• Part 2 provides detailed guidance on how SA should be applied to RSSs, DPDs andSPDs.

1.1.11 A series of annexes provide guidance on specific aspects of SA. A glossary, index ofabbreviations, Quality Assurance Checklist, and list of references and further readingare also provided.

Figure 1: Plans which will/will not require an integrated Sustainability Appraisaland Strategic Environmental Assessment

Plans which WILL require SA

Regional Spatial Strategy

• Regional Spatial Strategy revisions

Local Development Framework (including Mineral and Waste LDFs)

Local Development Documents:

• Development Plan Documents (including the Core Strategy, site specific allocationsof land, Area Action Plans)

• Supplementary Planning Documents

Modifications of Plans which WILL require SA

Regional Spatial Strategy

• Regional Spatial Strategy revisions

Local Development Framework (including Mineral and Waste LDFs)

Local Development Documents:

• Development Plan Documents revisions (including full revision of Core Strategy,partial revision of Core Strategy, revision/additions to Area Action Plans)

• Supplementary Planning Documents revisions/additions

Documents which WILL NOT require SA

Other Local Development Framework (LDFs) documents (including revisions):

• Statements of Community Involvement

• Local Development Schemes

• Annual Monitoring Reports


11

We would like your views1.1.12 We would welcome your comments on any aspect of this draft guidance, but key

questions on which we would be particularly pleased to have your views are:

1. Is the process of SA clear and feasible? If not, what further information would help?

2. Are the requirements of the SEA Directive clear? If not, what further informationwould help?

3. Is the relationship between SA and SEA clear?

4. Is the relationship between SA and plan-making for RSSs, DPDs and SPDs clear?If not, what further guidance is needed?

5. Does the guidance deal equally with social, environmental, and economic issues?

6. Is the process for developing the SA Framework, including sustainability objectivesand indicators, clear (Annex 5)? Should the guidance be prescriptive in theobjectives and indicators to be used?

7. Are the requirements for identification and assessment of options, particularlyassessment of their cumulative effects, clearly set out?

8. How valuable is the matrix-based approach to assessing the effects of the plan andplan options?

9. Are there other information sources we should include (Annex 3)?

10. Are there other sources of social, environmental and economic objectives atinternational, Community and national levels we should include (Annex 1)?

11. Is the proposed monitoring structure (Annex 11) clear and feasible?

12. Is the structure of the guidance clear and easy to follow?


12

Responding to this consultation document1.1.13 Please note that responses to this consultation document should be received no later

than 10 December 2004.

1.1.14 Responses, and any comments about this consultation, may either be sent to:

Junaid TamimuOffice of the Deputy Prime MinisterPICA(A)3/H3 Eland HouseBressenden PlaceLondon SW1E 5DU

Tel. 020 7944 3922Fax. 020 7944 3919

or

e-mailed to [email protected]

Copies of the consultation document1.1.15 Hard copies of this consultation document can be obtained from ODPM Publications,

PO Box 236, Wetherby, West Yorkshire LS23 7NB (tel. 0870 1226 236; fax. 0870 1226237; Textphone: 0870 120 7405; e-mail: [email protected])

1.1.16 The consultation document is also available on the ODPM website:www.planning.odpm.gov.uk

1.1.17 A summary of responses to this consultation document will be published on theODPM website no later than 10 March 2005. Hard copies of this summary may beobtained after that date from Junaid Tamimu at the address shown above. Unless youspecifically state that your response, or any part of it, is confidential, we shall assumethat you have no objection to its being made available to the public and identified onthe ODPM website. Confidential responses will be included in any numerical summaryor analysis of responses.


13

THE CONSULTATION CRITERIA

This consultation is being conducted in accordance with the Government’s Code ofPractice on Consultation. The criteria below apply to all UK national publicconsultations on the basis of a document in electronic or printed form. They will oftenbe relevant to other sorts of consultation.

Though they have no legal force, and cannot prevail over statutory or other mandatoryexternal requirements (e.g. under European Community Law), they should otherwisegenerally be regarded as binding on UK departments and their agencies, unlessMinisters conclude that exceptional circumstances require a departure.

1. Consult widely throughout the process, allowing a minimum of 12 weeks for writtenconsultation at least once during the development of the policy.

2. Be clear about what your proposals are, who may be affected, what questions arebeing asked and the timescale for responses.

3. Ensure that your consultation is clear, concise and widely accessible.

4. Give feedback regarding the responses received and how the consultation processinfluenced the policy.

5. Monitor your department’s effectiveness at consultation, including through the useof a designated consultation co-ordinator.

6. Ensure your consultation follows better regulation best practice, including carryingout a Regulatory Impact Assessment if appropriate.

The full consultation code may be viewed at: www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/regulation/Consultation/Introduction.htm

Are you satisfied that this consultation has followed these criteria? If not, or you haveany other observations about ways of improving the consultation process pleasecontact:

David Plant, ODPM Consultation Co-ordinator, Room 3.19, 26 Whitehall, London, SW1A 2WH; or by e-mail to:[email protected]


14

Regulatory Impact Assessment1.1.18 A Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) for the SEA Regulations is available on the

ODPM website. This guidance incorporates advice to spatial planners on meeting therequirements of the SEA Directive as part of their SA and meeting the requirement tocarry out SA set out in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The non-SEA elements of SA are requirements previously set out in PPGs 11 and 12 and ‘GoodPractice Guide on Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Planning Guidance” (DETROct 2000). This guidance has no additional impact on business, charities, or thevoluntary and public sectors other than that either assessed under RIAs for the SEARegulations and the Act, or previously required by PPGs 11 and 12, and therefore nofurther RIA has been carried out.

Acknowledgements1.1.19 This guidance was prepared for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister by Land Use

Consultants and Collingwood Environmental Planning in association with SQW Ltdand MTRU. It draws extensively on the previous ODPM publication ‘The SEADirective: Guidance for Planning Authorities’, prepared by Levett-TherivelSustainability Consultants, and on work by TRL and others on aspects of SA inplanning. It also draws on experience to date of carrying out SEAs and SAs, andprovides more detailed examples and advice on the social and economic components ofsustainability. ODPM would like to express its thanks to all of the many individualsand organisations who have contributed to this publication.


15

1.2 Background and contextSustainability Appraisal

1.2.1 The purpose of SA is to promote sustainable development through better integration ofsustainability considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans. SA is anintegral part of good plan-making and should not be seen as a separate activity. Figures2 and 3 provide an overview of the SA process.

1.2.2 SA is an iterative process that identifies and reports on the likely significant effects ofthe plan and the extent to which implementation of the plan will achieve the social,environmental and economic objectives by which sustainable development can bedefined. The Government expects Regional Planning Bodies (RPBs) and Local PlanningAuthorities (LPAs) to take an integrated approach to achieving these objectives in theirplans, seeking to optimise benefits across each objective.

1.2.3 SA should:

• Take a long-term view of whether and how the area covered by the plan is expectedto develop, taking account of the social, environmental, and economic effects of theproposed plan;

• Provide a mechanism for ensuring that sustainability objectives are translated intosustainable planning policies;

• Reflect global, national, regional and local concerns;

• Provide an audit trail of how the plan has been revised to take into account thefindings of the SA;

• Form an integral part of all stages of plan preparation, and

• Incorporate the requirements of the SEA Directive.

1.2.4 Wherever possible, planning authorities should look for opportunities to maximise theefficiency of the integrated plan-making and SA process. For example, the collection ofbaseline information, a critical and early component of plan preparation, may beconducted so that the information is also suitable for use in the SA.


16


17

Figure 2: Sustainability Appraisal: Stages and Tasks

Generic stages Stages and tasks Purposeof plan-making

To consult with the public andstatutory bodies on the SA ofemerging options to ensure the SAcovers all the reasonable optionsand key sustainability issues.

B2: Consulting on the SA ofemerging options

To assist in the development andrefinement of the options, byidentifying potential sustainabilityeffects of options for achieving theplan objectives.

B1: Appraising issues andoptions

Identify issuesand options andprepare forconsultation

Stage B: Developing and refining options

To consult with statutory bodies withsocial, environmental, or economicresponsibilities to ensure theappraisal covers the keysustainability issues.

A6: Consulting on thescope of the SA

To ensure that the overall objectivesof the plan are in accordance withsustainability principles and providea suitable framework for developingoptions.

A5: Testing the planobjectives against theSA Framework

To provide a means by which thesustainability of the plan can beappraised.

A4: Developing the SAFramework

To help focus the SA and streamlinethe subsequent stages, includingbaseline information analysis, settingof the SA Framework, prediction ofeffects and monitoring.

A3: Identifying sustainabilityissues

To provide an evidence base forsustainability issues, effectsprediction and monitoring.

A2: Collecting baselineinformation

To document how the plan isaffected by outside factors andsuggest ideas for how anyconstraints can be addressed.

A1: Identifying other relevantplans, programmes, andsustainability objectives

GatherInformation

Stage A: Setting the context and objectives, establishing thebaseline and deciding on the scope


18

Figure 2: Sustainability Appraisal: Stages and Tasks (continued)


To provide information on how theSA Report and consultees’ opinionswere taken into account in preparingthe plan.

D3: Decision making andproviding information

Publish adoptedplan

To ensure that any significantchanges to the plan are assessed fortheir sustainability implications andinfluence the revision of the plan.

D2: Appraising significantchanges

Examination

Finalise andadopt plan

To provide the public and statutorybodies with an effective opportunityto express their opinions on the SAReport and to use it as a referencepoint in commenting on the plan.

D1: Consulting on the SA Report alongsidethe plan

Full publicparticipationon plan

Stage D: Consulting on the plan and SA Report

To provide a detailed account of theSA process, including the findings ofthe appraisal and how it influencedthe development of the plan, in aformat suitable for publicconsultation and decision-makers.

C5: Preparing the SAReport

To detail the means by which thesustainability performance of theplan can be assessed.

C4: Developing proposalsfor monitoring

To ensure all potential mitigationmeasures and measures formaximising beneficial effects areconsidered and as a result residualeffects identified.

C3: Mitigating adverseeffects and maximisingbeneficial effects

Prepare the planfor formalconsultationstage

To assess the significance of thepredicted effects of the plan andplan options and assist in therefinement of the plan.

C2: Assessing the effects ofthe plan

Consult public onemerging options

To predict the significant effects ofthe plan and it plan options.

C1: Predicting the effects ofthe plan, including planoptions

Identify preferredoptions

Stage C: Appraising the effects of the plan

1.2.5 Figure 2 describes the stages and tasks in the SA process. Figure 3 illustrates how theseindividual tasks inter-relate. As demonstrated in Figure 3, SA is an iterative process andthe individual tasks may need to be repeated as options are appraised and moresustainable options emerge.


19

Figure 2: Sustainability Appraisal: Stages and Tasks (continued)


To ensure that the adverse effectscan be identified and appropriateresponses developed.

E2: Responding to adverseeffects

To measure the sustainabilityperformance of the plan in order todetermine whether its effects are asanticipated, and thereby informfuture revisions.

E1: Monitoring the significanteffects of the plan

Monitor planimplementation

Stage E: Monitoring implementation of the plan

Figure 3: Relationship between Sustainability Appraisal Tasks


20

A1: Identifying otherrelevant plans,

programmes, andsustainability objectives

B2: Consulting on theSA of

emerging options

B1: Appraising issuesand options

A3: IdentifyingSustainability issues

A2: Collectingbaseline

information

A5: Testing the planobjectives against the SA

FrameworkA6: Consulting on thescope of the SA

A4: Developing the SAFramework

Stage A:Setting the context andobjectives, establishingthe baseline anddeciding on the scope

Stage B:Developing andrefining options

Stage C:Appraisingthe effectsof the draftplan

Stage D:Consulting onthe draft plan andSustainabilityAppraisal Report

Stage E:Monitoringimplementation ofthe plan

C1: Predicting the effectsof the plan,

including plan options

C4: Developingproposals for monitoring

C2: Assessing theeffects of the plan

C5: Preparing the SA Report

C3: Mitigating adverseeffects and maximising

beneficial effects

D1: Consulting on theSA Report alongside

the plan

D2: Appraisingsignificant changes

D3: Decision makingand providinginformation

E1: Monitoring thesignificant effects of the

plan

E2: Responding toadverse effects

1.2.6 Although a statutory requirement in preparation of plans, SA Reports do notthemselves form a part of these plans. If the SA Report is published together with theplan it must be clearly distinguishable as being separate from the plan. The SA Reportwill however be considered when determining the soundness of the plan duringExamination.

1.2.7 As with plan-making, to be most effective, SA should be:

• Objectives-led: so that the direction of desired change is made explicit and targetsmay be set.

• Iterative: a process through which successive stages and drafts of the plan can beappraised with the aim of producing more sustainable outcomes.

• Evidence-based: including relevant baseline information against which the potentialeffects of the plan and plan options can be measured and assessed.

• Inclusive: including early and on-going involvement of the public, statutoryauthorities, and other relevant stakeholders at appropriate stages.

• Timely: programmed alongside the whole of the plan preparation process so that theresults are taken into account.

• Transparent: based on tools and methods that can be easily understood, and thatmeet the requirements of the SEA Directive.

• Independent: involving an objective and balanced consideration of the issues andthe plan.

• Useful: providing clear conclusions and recommendations on how the plan can bealtered to increase sustainability and on future monitoring.

1.2.8 SA must focus on the significant social, environmental and economic effects of the plan,ensuring that reasonable plan options that take into account the objectives and thegeographical scope of the plan are considered. The information that may reasonably berequired in a SA must take into account current knowledge and methods of appraisal,the contents and level of detail in the plan, its stage in the decision-making process, andthe extent to which certain matters are more appropriately appraised at different levelsin that process in order to avoid duplication.

1.2.9 The following principles may help in deciding how much detail is required for a SA:

• The SA should provide a level of detail that is appropriate to the spatial scale andlevel of detail of the plan being appraised, including the significant effects of sitespecific allocations and infrastructure proposals where these are included as part ofthe plan.


21

• The SA should provide sufficient baseline information to identify the keysustainability issues that are facing a plan area, and to provide the evidence baserequired to undertake the SA.

• The SA should focus on those aspects of sustainability where the plan is likely tohave a significant effect.

• In assessing likely effects of a plan, the SA should provide sufficient commentary tojustify all conclusions arrived at, with reference to the baseline information whereverpossible.

• The detail to be provided must include information required by the SEA Directive(see Figure 4).

1.2.10 There may be opportunities for avoiding duplication and sharing information as part ofSA within the plan-making hierarchy. The requirement for DPDs to be in generalconformity with the RSS may allow some strategic aspects of the SA of an RSS to beused to inform SA at the local level, thereby reducing the burden on local planningauthorities. Similarly, SA of the Core Strategy DPDs may provide the basis for SA ofan authority’s other DPDs, and SA of DPDs may provide the basis for SA of SPDsprepared in conformity with them.

1.2.11 It is likely, however, that more detailed plans at the local level will require additionalappraisal to identify their specific effects and possible mitigation measures. In somecases planning authorities may also need to update information from appraisals ofhigher level plans, for example if a significant amount of time has elapsed since theirpreparation.

Example: Sustainability Appraisal within a hierarchy of plans

The broad allocation and distribution of industrial land will generally be decided at theregional level, and this will be covered in the SA of the RSS. The SA of a DPDimplementing this decision should therefore not normally be concerned with thedistribution of industrial land which has been allocated to a particular district, unlessthere is good reason for looking again at the issues. The focus of attention at the DPDlevel should be how to deliver the allocated industrial land on the ground, for exampleusing the SA to test the options and choices of different sites, composition ofdevelopment, etc. Similarly, the SA of an SPD should focus on the effects of the moredetailed aspects of the SPD which were not considered in the SA of the related DPD.


22

Sustainable Development andSustainability Appraisal

1.2.12 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act requires planning bodies, in preparingplans, to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. At the heart ofsustainable development is the simple idea of ensuring a better quality of life foreveryone, now and for future generations. A widely used definition was drawn up bythe World Commission on Environment and Development in 1987: ‘development thatmeets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generationsto meet their own needs’.

1.2.13 In 1999 the Government set out four aims for sustainable development in its strategy‘A Better Quality of Life: a Strategy for Sustainable Development in the UK’.Achieving sustainable development means meeting the following four objectives at thesame time, in the UK and the world as a whole.

• social progress which recognises the needs of everyone;

• effective protection of the environment;

• prudent use of natural resources; and

• maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment.

1.2.14 No one of these objectives is more important than another. Although there can betensions between them, in the long term success in one is dependent on the others.

1.2.15 By 2005 the Government aims to have in place a new national strategy that will providea strong basis for renewed action to deliver sustainable development. At the regionallevel, there is a requirement on Regional Chambers to prepare Regional SustainableDevelopment Frameworks. At the local level, County and District authorities have aduty to prepare Community Strategies, reflecting the needs and aspirations of localcommunities. These strategies will provide a framework for preparing, appraising andimplementing more sustainable plans.

1.2.16 Spatial plans at both the local and regional levels have a significant role to play in helpingto achieve the objectives of sustainable development. In applying the principles ofsustainable development planning, authorities should consider how their plans areaddressing the four aims. They should seek to achieve outcomes which enable social,environmental, and economic objectives to be achieved together over time. A planningauthority may consider that, in its circumstances, extra weight ought to be given in itspolicies to a social, environmental or economic objective as against the others, havingregard to national policy on the specific issue and taking account of any other materialconsiderations. Where this is the case, the reasons for so doing should be explicit andthe consequences considered and adverse effects avoided or mitigated whenever orwherever possible.


23

1.2.17 PPS1 on Creating Sustainable Communities explains how the principles of sustainabledevelopment apply in practice to the preparation of Regional Spatial Strategies andDevelopment Plan Documents and Supplementary Planning Documents and suggestsways of integrating the achievement of the four aims of sustainable development.

Sustainability Appraisal and SEA1.2.18 It is intended that SA conducted in accordance with this guidance should meet the

requirements of the SEA Directive for environmental assessment of plans. SEA isfocused primarily on environmental effects. While the Directive defines theenvironment broadly, including population, human health, cultural heritage andmaterial assets as well as biodiversity, air, water and soil, SA goes further by examiningall the sustainability-related effects of plans, whether they are social, environmental oreconomic. Those undertaking the SA should check to ensure that in doing so they meetthe requirements of the SEA Directive.

1.2.19 A key output of the SEA process is an Environmental Report which describes theenvironmental assessment process and the likely significant effects of implementation ofthe plan and reasonable plan options. The Environmental Report should be includedwithin the SA Report covering effects other than those on the environment. The SAReport must clearly show that the Directive’s requirements in relation to theEnvironmental Report have been met through sign-posting the place or places in theSA Report where the information required by the Directive is provided. A table similarto Figure 4 may be used in sign-posting.

Who should undertake SustainabilityAppraisal?

1.2.20 The production of the SA is the responsibility of the relevant planning body. It is likelyto be most effective if undertaken by people who together can:

• consider and respond to local circumstances;

• take a balanced and objective view;

• understand the issues;

• draw on good practice elsewhere;

• evaluate the full range of sustainability issues.

Figure 4 provides a summary of the requirements of the SEA Directive.


24


25

Figure 4: Summary of the requirements of the SEA Directive

Wherecovered in

RequirementsSA process(Stage)

B, Cj) a non-technical summary of the information provided under the aboveheadings

C, Ei) a description of measures envisaged concerning monitoring in accordancewith Art. 10;

B, Ch) An outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with, and adescription of how the assessment was undertaken including any difficulties(such as technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered incompiling the required information;

B, Cg) The measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offsetany significant adverse effects on the environment of implementing the planor programme;

B, Cf) The likely significant effects on the environment, including on issues such asbiodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climaticfactors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural andarchaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between theabove factors. (Footnote: These effects should include secondary,cumulative, synergistic, short, medium and long-term permanent andtemporary, positive and negative effects);

Ae) The environmental protection objectives, established at international,Community or national level, which are relevant to the plan or programmeand the way those objectives and any environmental, considerations havebeen taken into account during its preparation;

Ad) Any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan orprogramme including, in particular, those relating to any areas of a particularenvironmental importance, such as areas designated pursuant to Directives79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC.;

Ac) The environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected;

Ab) The relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likelyevolution thereof without implementation of the plan or programme;

Aa) An outline of the contents, main objectives of the plan or programme, andrelationship with other relevant plans and programmes;

Preparation of an environmental report in which the likely significant effectson the environment of implementing the plan or programme, and reasonablealternatives taking into account the objectives and geographical scope of theplan or programme, are identified, described and evaluated. The information tobe given is (Art. 5 and Annex I):


26

Figure 4: Summary of the requirements of the SEA Directive (continued)

Wherecovered in

RequirementsSA process(Stage)

QAChecklist

Quality Assurance: environmental reports should be of a sufficient standard tomeet the requirements of the SEA Directive

EMonitoring of the significant environmental effects of the plan’s or programme’simplementation (Art. 10)

DProvision of information on the decision:When the plan or programme is adopted, the public and any countriesconsulted under Art.7 must be informed and the following made available tothose so informed:

• the plan or programme as adopted

• a statement summarising how environmental considerations have beenintegrated into the plan or programme and how the environmental report ofArticle 5, the opinions expressed pursuant to Article 6 and the results ofconsultations entered into pursuant to Art. 7 have been taken into account inaccordance with Art. 8, and the reasons for choosing the plan or programmeas adopted, in the light of the other reasonable alternatives dealt with; and

• the measures decided concerning monitoring (Art. 9)

DTaking the environmental report and the results of the consultations intoaccount in decision-making (Art. 8)

B, D• other EU Member States, where the implementation of the plan orprogramme is likely to have significant effects on the environment of thatcountry (Art. 7).

B, D• authorities with environmental responsibility and the public, shall be given anearly and effective opportunity within appropriate time frames to express theiropinion on the draft plan or programme and the accompanying environmentalreport before the adoption of the plan or programme (Art. 6.1, 6.2)

AConsultation:

• authorities with environmental responsibility, when deciding on the scope andlevel of detail of the information which must be included in the environmentalreport (Art. 5.4)

CThe report must include the information that may reasonably be required takinginto account current knowledge and methods of assessment, the contents andlevel of detail in the plan or programme, its stage in the decision-makingprocess and the extent to which certain matters are more appropriatelyassessed at different levels in that process to avoid duplication of theassessment (Art. 5.2)

1.3 Public involvement inSustainability AppraisalPublic involvement in plan-making

1.3.1 Planning Policy Statement 1 sets out the principles that the Government believesshould underpin community involvement in the planning process. The document‘Community Involvement in Planning: The Government’s Objectives’ (ODPMFebruary 2004) expands on these. PPS11 and PPS12 summarise how these policyprinciples should be applied in preparing RSS revisions and LDFs, and also set thecontext for public involvement and consultation.

1.3.2 The Regional Planning Bodies (RPBs) are required under section 6 of the Planning andCompulsory Purchase Act to prepare, publish and keep under review a Statement ofPublic Participation (SPP). The Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) are required undersection 18 of the Act to prepare a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). Theseshould outline how public involvement is to be conducted, making clear how the SArequirements will be met.

1.3.3 For both RSS revisions and LDFs, effective consultation means that the public andother stakeholders are involved in the preparation of the options from the start of theplan making process, and decisions regarding the plan are arrived at early. In this wayall necessary policy options will be identified and appraised by the authority at theappropriate stage.

Sustainability Appraisal requirements 1.3.4 SA should also involve the public. This should be built into the preparation process for

the plan and SA Report from the beginning and sufficient time allowed at each stage.Within the requirements for public involvement in plan preparation there will bespecific requirements for consultation with the public and stakeholders in accordancewith the SEA Directive, as follows:

• Authorities which, because of their social, environmental and economicresponsibilities, are likely to be concerned by the effects of implementing the planmust be consulted on the scope and level of detail of the information to be includedin the SA Report. These authorities include the ‘consultation bodies’ designatedin the SEA Regulations and additional bodies that are designated as ‘specificconsultation bodies’ in the Regional Planning and Local Development Regulations.

Part 1: About sustainability appraisal

27

• The public and the statutory authorities discussed above must be consulted on theissues and options and the SA of issues and options at the appropriate time.

• The public and the statutory authorities discussed above must be consulted on theplan and the SA Report.

• Other EU Member States must be consulted if the plan is likely to have significantenvironmental effects within their territories as required by the SEA Directive(see box on p30).

1.3.5 Responses to consultation must be taken into account during the preparation of theplan and before its adoption. The adopted plan must also be made available to allconsultees in the SA process.

1.3.6 When the plan is adopted a statement must be made available to the public, thestatutory authorities, and other Member States if relevant, summarising how the SA hasbeen taken into account in preparation of the plan. This statement should set out howthe SA and the opinions expressed on it have been taken into account, and the reasonsfor choosing the plan as adopted in light of other reasonable plan options dealt with.At the same time, information must also be made available on the measures decidedconcerning monitoring.

1.3.7 It is for the responsible authority to identify the public to be consulted on a plan andits SA Report. The SEA Directive requires authorities to consult “the public affected or likely to be affected by, or having an interest in” a plan, including relevantnon-governmental organisations. In addition to the SEA Directive’s requirements, theauthority should naturally take account of the legal obligations and guidelines relevantto consultation as part of preparation of the RSS, DPD or SPD described in Part 2.

1.3.8 The Consultation Bodies designated in the SEA Regulations are developing a statementof the standards of service they will provide to authorities which will be relevant to SAConsultation (see box below).

1.3.9 When carrying out consultation, responsible authorities should have regard to:

• The agreement between Government and the voluntary sector, the Compact Codeof Good Practice on Community Groups, which sets out agreed ways of workingwith community groups and voluntary organisations including black and ethnicminority groups and organisations (see http://www.thecompact.org.uk).

• The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 to promote race equality and theDisability Act 1995 to ensure that disabled people are not discriminated against.

• The Cabinet Office Code of Practice on Consultation which sets out criteria forconducting effective consultation. UK non-departmental public bodies and localauthorities are encouraged to follow this code.


28

1.3.10 The Audit Commission has issued briefing on effective community consultation‘Listen Up!’ which sets out a comprehensive range of consultation techniques withadvice on how they can be used, their advantages, disadvantages, and resourceimplications – see References for details.

SEA services from the Consultation Bodies

The Government has designated four consultation bodies – the Countryside Agency,English Heritage, English Nature and the Environment Agency as “authorities withenvironmental responsibility” in relation to the SEA Directive (also termed “consultationbodies” in the Regulations), which must be consulted during the SEA assessmentprocess.

The four Agencies are developing a common set of service standards which will set outthe services and standards which plan-makers can expect when consulting them aspart of a Strategic Environmental Assessment process (and in the case of LocalPlanning Authorities when conducting integrated SEA and SA).

The agencies are anticipating high volumes of SEA consultations, some of which willsubstitute for existing informal and formal consultation (e.g. as part of the DevelopmentPlanning process), and some of which will be completely new. The service standardsare intended as a guide to their own staff, to help with workload management, as wellas to those bodies consulting them as part of SEA assessments. These standards arenon-statutory and are provided only as a guide, although the intention is that agencystaff will use their best endeavours to meet them.

The standards document is expected to describe:

• The general approach the agencies will take to deciding on their consultationresponse e.g. whether to provide a detailed reply or standing guidance, at which ofthe consultation stages they expect to focus their efforts.

• The particular interests, and expertise of each agency and the information theyhold and therefore the different SEA topics on which they are likely to respond(including tables of agencies against SEA topics, and information held).

• Expected response times, and how each consultation type (screening, scoping,environmental report, decision to adopt) will be dealt with.

• A general summary of the type of advice which plan-makers may expect whenconsulting the agencies under each section of the Environmental Report (using thesame headings as in the SEA Regulations Schedule 2).


29

Transboundary Consultation with EU Member States

Where a plan is likely to have significant effects on the environment in another MemberState of the European Union, the SEA Directive makes provision for transboundaryconsultation. This will normally be co-ordinated centrally, and separate guidance will beissued on the practical arrangements. Where a planning authority expects a plan toneed transboundary consultation, it should bear in mind the time needed for contact tobe established between the government bodies concerned, the identification of andconsultation with the public and environmental authorities in the affected MemberState, and consideration of the resulting comments.


30

PART 2

Guide to ApplyingSustainability Appraisal toRegional Spatial Strategiesand Local DevelopmentFrameworks

2


32

2.1 Applying SustainabilityAppraisal to Regional SpatialStrategiesIntroduction

2.1.1 The process of revising a Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) will be largely the same ascurrently for Regional Planning Guidance (RPG), subject to the new statutoryprocedures and the policy and guidance set out in PPS11 ‘Regional Spatial Strategies’(ODPM, August 2004); these include the required new Sustainability Appraisal (SA)process, which incorporates the requirements of the SEA Directive. Ownership of thedraft revision up to submission to the Secretary of State rests with the RegionalPlanning Body (RPB), though partnership working with stakeholders and communityinvolvement will be essential. The Secretary of State remains responsible for issuing therevised RSS, following a public examination, the report of the Panel, and consultationon any proposed changes.

2.1.2 The preparation of an RSS revision, as outlined in PPS11, is divided into eight stages.These are:

• Stage 1: Draw up a project plan in consultation with the Government Office (GO).The plan should include a statement of public participation, the relevant regionalobjectives and likely issues. This is subject to a one day public conference and/or aseries of sub-regional events;

• Stage 2: Develop strategic options in co-operation with GO and other stakeholders,select preferred options and develop supporting policies in the revision with theinvolvement of the public as appropriate. Successive versions of the SA Report willinform this process;

• Stage 3: Submission of the draft revision to the Secretary of State with SA Reportalongside;

• Stage 4: Examination-in-Public;

• Stage 5: Publication of the Panel Report;

• Stage 6: Publication and consultation on proposed changes with SA Reportalongside, where appropriate;

• Stage 7: Issue of revised RSS; and

• Stage 8: Implementation, monitoring and review.

33

2.1.3 The RSS revision process is illustrated in Figure 5 which also shows the relationshipwith the SA stages described in Part C. The two should be integrated since the SA isfundamental to sound plan making. It is essential to integration that the SA is carriedout or overseen by the RPB.

2.1.4 A rigorous SA is one of the tests of the soundness of an RSS revision, which isinvestigated at the examination-in-public.

2.1.5 The preparation of an RSS revision may involve a degree of parallel working ondifferent streams of work, such as sub-regional strategies, each with their owntimetable. Each of these different streams will need to be subject to SA and the findingspulled together in the evolving SA Report for the RSS revision as a whole in so far asthey concern regionally or sub-regionally significant effects. Where the differentstreams of work could have significant implications for each other a check needs to bekept on their interrelationships and consistency from an early stage.

2.1.6 In conducting the SA, a common SA Framework should be applied across the region.The SA process for the RSS revision should be documented in a single Scoping Reportand a single evolving SA Report for the RSS revision as a whole. There is no need forRPBs to prepare separate SA Reports for each work stream, although authorities mayfind it useful to prepare sub-regional SA Reports as technical papers to support theoverall SA Report for the RSS revision.

2.1.7 The SA Report for the revision as a whole should be continually up-dated and madeavailable to the public and other stakeholders on the RPB’s website. This means that atany point in time the public will have access to the latest SA material and RSS revisionproposals. The SA Report should also refer to more detailed SA technical papers asappropriate. A discrete period of consultation on the initial SA Report should beconducted during the development of options and policies. This will form a key pointin the continuous process of public involvement but should not delay the production ofthe revision.

2.1.8 RPBs may also find it useful to consult the public and other stakeholders (see para2.1.32) on the key aspects of the overall RSS revision and their regional and sub-regional sustainability implications before submission of the draft revision to theSecretary of State. This is likely to be particularly important where the separate streamsof work could be expected to have significant effects when considered together. Earlyconsultation on these key issues may reduce the risk of major changes to the RSSrevision following submission.

2.1.9 Consultation on the draft Revision RSS and the full SA Report should take place whenthe revision is submitted to the Secretary of State.

2.1.10 The sub-regional work will require consideration of the sub-regionally significantsustainability implications of the proposed patterns and form of development to informthe SA for the RSS revision. For example, in choosing the preferred level ofdevelopment an understanding of any regionally or sub-regionally significant effectswill be essential, but it would be impractical to consider in detail the sustainabilityeffects of different levels of development on a district or market on a site by site basis.Further information on sub-regional working is provided in Chapter 2 of PPS11.


34

Figure 5: Regional Spatial Strategy Revision Process

Output of monitoring report.National policies.Objectives & PSA targets. Other regional strategies, plans and programmes.

Up to 15.5

Up to 24-25.5

Up to26-28.5

Up to 32-34.5

3.5

IND

ICA

TIV

E RS

S RE

VIS

ION

TIM

ETA

BLE

(MO

NTH

S) 0 Identify the issues for a revision / prepare project plan

SA process:

Baseline andScoping

Develop options and policies, assess effects and develop draft revision

Refining Strategic Options

Consultation on SA Report&Publish SA Report

Monitoring

Assessing Effects

Publish draft RSS and formal consultation

Consultation on Proposed Changes

Implementation, monitoring and review

Examination-in-public

Publication of Panel report

Issue of final RSS

Panel report

As above plus technical /survey work.

National policies. Objectives & PSA targets. Other regional strategies, plans and programmes. Data on targets and indicators. Socio-economic, demographic trend data etc.

National policies.Objectives & PSA targets. Consideration of all representations.

KEY

Planning Authorities, stakeholders and the public

Regional PlanningBodies

Central Government /Government Offices

Panel

SustainabilityAppraisal*

*Note: the stages within the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) process are taken from draft guidance on SA.

Part 2: Guide to Applying Sustainabilty Appraisal to Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks

35

2.1.11 Where an RSS revision includes regionally or sub-regionally significant developmentproposals or infrastructure schemes, these should be assessed to a sufficient level ofdetail to enable their significant sustainability effects to be broadly predicted. In thesecases it will be necessary to have a good idea of (i) where the development is likely tobe located in broad terms and (ii) what form it might take. Where EnvironmentalImpact Assessment is needed later for the project, it is likely to be informed by thefindings of the SA, but it will not usually be appropriate or even possible to provide thelevel of detail needed for EIA in the context of the RSS.

Incorporating Sustainability Appraisal withinthe RSS revision process

2.1.12 A summary of the key stages and tasks in the preparation of an RSS revision and thecarrying out of the SA is provided in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6: Incorporating SA within the RSS process

RSS Stage 1: Identifying issues for a revision and drawing up a project plan

SA stages and tasks

SA Stage A: Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding onthe scope

• Develop and agree appraisal methodology and programme.

• Produce an outline of stakeholder and community involvement for the appraisal. This shouldform part of the Statement of Public Participation.

• Identify and review other relevant policies, plans and programmes, and sustainabilityobjectives that will affect or influence the RSS revision (A1).

• Initiate collection of relevant social, environmental and economic baseline information jointlywith the RSS revision survey and continue into RSS Stage 2 to produce a characterisation ofthe RSS area (A2).

• Identify key sustainability issues for the SA to address (A3).

• Develop the SA Framework, consisting of the sustainability objectives, indicators andtargets (A4).


36

Figure 6: Incorporating SA within the RSS process (continued)

RSS Stage 2: Develop options and policies

SA stages and tasks

SA Stage A: Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding onthe scope (cont.)

• Test the RSS revision objectives against the sustainability objectives to ensure they areconsistent and use the sustainability objectives as one of the tools for checking that the RSSrevision objectives are consistent with one another (A5).

• With the benefit of the revised RSS revision objectives generate strategic options forsolutions.

• Produce a Scoping Report and consult relevant authorities and public on the scope of theappraisal and the key issues and possible options for solutions (A6).

SA Stage B: Developing and refining options

• Carry out appraisal of options as they are reviewed and identify improvements (B1).

• Prepare an initial SA Report on the revised issues and options so far considered, includingthe likely significant sustainability effects and proposals for mitigating adverse effects (B2).

• Consult relevant authorities, the public and other key stakeholders on the initial SA Reportand the revised issues and options (B2).

SA Stage C: Appraising the effects of the plan

• Take account of relevant authority/public responses on options in ongoing SA approach.

• Undertake additional work and revise the SA Report accordingly as part of developing thedraft RSS revision.

• Predict the effects (C1) and carry out detailed assessment (C2) of preferred options andsupporting policies and refine the draft revision accordingly.

• Propose measures to maximise beneficial effects and mitigate adverse effects (C3).

• Develop proposals for monitoring (C4).

• Prepare the final version of the SA Report of the draft revision (C5).

RSS Stage 3: Submission of the draft revision to the Secretary of State

SA stages and tasks

SA Stage D: Consulting on the plan and SA Report

• Submit the SA Report with the draft revision to the RSS to the Secretary of State.

• Consult on the submitted RSS and SA Report (D1).


37

Figure 6: Incorporating SA within the RSS process (continued)

RSS Stages 4 and 5: Examination-in-public and the Panel Report

SA stages and tasks

SA Stage D: Consulting on the plan and SA Report (cont.)

• Consider new SA evidence accompanying proposed plan options put forward as part ofexamination.

RSS Stages 6 and 7: Publication of proposed changes and issue of revised RSS

SA stages and tasks

SA Stage D: Consulting on the plan and SA Report (cont.)

• Carry out SA if necessary of the Secretary of State’s Proposed Changes. Consult on changesand revised SA Report (D2).

• Produce final version of the RSS revision and inform consultees that RSS revision has beenissued.

• Publish consolidated SA Report of the SA process covering all RSS revision stages (D3).

• Publish statement, agreed by the RPB and Secretary of State, which summarises how the SA results and consultees’ opinions were taken into account, and reasons for choosing theRSS revision as adopted, in the light of other reasonable plan options dealt with (D3).

• Publish the measures decided concerning monitoring (D3).

RSS Stage 8: Implementation, monitoring and review

SA stages and tasks

SA Stage E: Monitoring implementation of the plan

• Monitor significant effects of the RSS, e.g. to be able to identify at an early stage unforeseenadverse effects (E1).

• Publish sustainability monitoring reports periodically as part of the AMR as new informationbecomes available (E1).

• Undertake appropriate remedial action and undertake any necessary additional SA work tosupport further revisions to the RSS (E2).


38

RSS Stage 1: Identify the issues for revisionand prepare project plan

2.1.13 During this stage of a RSS revision, Stage A of the SA process should be undertaken.Some of the tasks in Stage A will also continue into the next stage of the RSS revision.

SA Stage A: Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline anddeciding on the scope

2.1.14 At this stage the RPB should compile the background information needed anddetermine the scope of the SA. RPBs should consider what information they alreadyhave and what more they will need. They will already hold useful informationincluding the SA of the Regional Planning Guidance or more recent RSS revision.

2.1.15 At the outset, the SA methodology and programme should be developed and agreedwith key stakeholders. The proposed partnership working arrangements withstakeholders and community involvement in the appraisal should be outlined in theStatement of Public Participation and included in the Project Plan.

What the SEA Directive requires:

The Environmental Report should provide information on:

• “the relationship [of the plan or programme] with other relevant plans andprogrammes” (Annex I(a))

• “the environmental protection objectives, established at international, [European]Community or national level, which are relevant to the plan or programme … and theway those objectives and any environmental considerations have been taken intoaccount during its preparation” (Annex I (a), (e))

• “relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolutionthereof without implementation of the plan or programme” and “the environmentalcharacteristics of the areas likely to be significantly affected” (Annex I (b), (c))

• “any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programmeincluding, in particular, those relating to any areas of a particular environmentalimportance, such as areas designated pursuant to Directives 79/409/EEC and92/43/EEC” (Annex I (C))

“Authorities which, by reason of their specific environmental responsibilities, are likely tobe concerned by the environmental effects of implementing plans and programmes …shall be consulted when deciding on the scope and level of detail of the informationwhich must be included in the environmental report” (Article 5.4).


39

Task A1: Identifying other relevant plans, programmes, and sustainabilityobjectives

2.1.16 This task should be undertaken during survey and evidence gathering. A RSS revisionwill be influenced by other plans or programmes and by external sustainabilityobjectives, such as those laid down in policies or legislation. These relationships shouldbe identified to enable potential synergies to be exploited and any inconsistencies andconstraints to be addressed.

2.1.17 Key documents include EU Directives, the UK Sustainable Development Strategy,PPGs/PPSs, and the Regional Sustainable Development Framework. There will also bea number of other reference documents such as the Regional Economic Strategy,Regional Environment Strategy, Regional Housing Strategy and others as referred to inPPS11. The RPB should specifically identify any relevant environmental protectionobjectives established at international, European Union, or national level, in order tocomply with the SEA Directive. Annex 1 provides an indicative list of other relevantplans, programmes and sustainability objectives.

2.1.18 Where conflicts arise between objectives or requirements, it may be helpful to considerprinciples of precedence between levels or types of plan, recent policy developments,and legal requirements.

Task A2: Collecting baseline information

2.1.19 This task involves collecting and analysing relevant social, environmental and economicinformation in order to provide the evidence base against which the effects of the RSSrevision can be assessed and monitored. It should be undertaken during survey andevidence gathering and will lead to a characterisation of the region. It should also belinked to the development of the SA Framework and developing proposals formonitoring. Annex 2 lists a selection of sources of information.

2.1.20 The review of other policies, plans and programmes (A1) should provide a considerableamount of this information. The baseline information should include not only thecurrent state of the area to be covered by the RSS revision, but also trends to allow thestrategy’s effects to be adequately predicted and should focus on the characteristics thatrelate to issues likely to be tackled in the RSS revision.

Task A3: Identifying sustainability issues

2.1.21 RPBs will be aware of many sustainability issues or problems which they face at thetime they start their RSS revision. They will be able to identify others in conducting theSA of the RSS revision based on:

• earlier experience with issues identified in other plans and programmes;

• possible tensions or inconsistencies with other plans, programmes and sustainabilityobjectives;


40

• possible tensions or inconsistencies between the current or future baselineconditions and proposed objectives, targets or obligations; and

• consultation with authorities with social, environmental and economicresponsibilities, other key stakeholders, and public (see para 2.1.32).

2.1.22 Any issues identified should, where possible, be linked to evidence by reference tobaseline information.

Task A4: Developing the SA Framework

2.1.23 On the basis of the above analysis, the SA Framework to be used for the appraisalshould be defined. A SA Framework consists of objectives which should, wherepossible, be expressed in the form of targets, the achievement of which should bemeasurable using identified indicators (Annex 5 provides further information regardingthe development of the SA Framework). The sustainability objectives are distinct fromthe objectives of the RSS, though they may in some cases overlap with them.

2.1.24 Sustainability objectives, indicators and targets should be developed with input fromkey stakeholders, and ideally should be open to wider comment and discussion(undertaken formally in Task A6). This should draw on expertise from within theauthority, including for example economic development officers, sustainability officers,and those dealing with social issues.

2.1.25 Objectives and indicators can be revised as baseline data is collected and sustainabilityissues are identified, and can be used in monitoring the implementation of the RSS.

RSS Stage 2: Develop RSS options andpolicies

2.1.26 During this stage of the RSS revision, parts of Stage A, including further refining thebaseline characterisation (A2) and key issues and problems (A3), will continue. Stages Band C of the SA process should also occur at this stage of the RSS revision as follows.

Task A5: Testing the plan objectives against the SA Framework

2.1.27 The objectives of the RSS revision will set out what the plan is aiming to achieve inspatial planning terms. These will set the context for development of a strategy andpolicies for the RSS revision.

2.1.28 It is important that the objectives of the RSS revision are in accordance withsustainability principles, so they should be tested for compatibility with the SAobjectives. This will help in refining the RSS objectives as well as in identifying options.The RSS revision objectives should also be consistent with each other and the SAobjectives will be one way of checking for this. Where there is conflict betweenobjectives, the RPB will need to reach a decision on priorities.


41

2.1.29 Once the RSS revision objectives have been refined, the RPB may need to revise theobjectives and issues set out in the Project Plan, in which case a revised Plan will needto be published. Where the RPB considers there is a significant risk that this couldhappen given its lack of knowledge of sustainability issues at the start of the process, itmay wish to delay consultation on the project plan until task A5 has been completed.

2.1.30 Once the RSS revision objectives have been revised in the light of this check against thesustainability objectives, the RPB can then identify broad options for the revision.

Task A6: Consulting on the scope of the SA

2.1.31 Among the matters which should be set out in the Scoping Report are the social,environmental and economic issues identified as a result of the SA work so farundertaken. It should also set out the broad options identified by the RPB which are tobe considered in more detail in developing the RSS revision. Information on the mattersto be covered in the Scoping Report are set out in Annex 7. Consultation on theScoping Report helps to ensure that the SA will be comprehensive and robust enoughto support the RSS revision during the later stages of the process.

2.1.32 As far as possible SA consultation should be integrated with the stakeholderparticipation and community involvement arrangements set out in Annex D to PPS 11.This advises on the bodies who should be consulted in preparing an RSS revision,although it is not an exhaustive list. In consulting on the Scoping Report, it is importantthat the RPB consults a suitable cross-section of bodies which between them cover allaspects of sustainability. It should include:

• the four SEA Consultation Bodies (Countryside Agency, English Heritage, EnglishNature, Environment Agency);

• representatives of economic interests and local business (e.g. Regional DevelopmentAgency, Chambers of Commerce, economic development officers, Learning andSkills Council); and

• social interests and community service providers (e.g. Health Development Agency,Local Strategic Partnerships, Neighbourhood Areas Committees, officers withresponsibility for access for those with disabilities and social inclusion, primary caretrusts, health development agencies, education authorities, police, utilities, faithgroups, etc).

SA Stage B: Developing and refining options

What the Directive requires:

The Environmental Report should consider “reasonable alternatives taking into accountthe objectives and the geographical scope of the plan or programme” and give “anoutline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with” (Article 5.1 and Annex I (h))


42

Tasks B1 & B2: Appraising issues and options and consulting on the SA of emerging options

2.1.33 Various options will be developed working with the Government Office and otherstakeholders, and with public involvement, to achieve the objectives of the RSSrevision. Each of these reasonable options, including the “do-nothing” or “business asusual” options, should be tested against the SA Framework to determine theirperformance in sustainability terms, with reference to the social, environmental andeconomic characteristics already identified for the geographical area affected by theRSS revision.

2.1.34 This will be an iterative process, whereby the options and supporting policiesdeveloped for the RSS revision are revised to take into account the findings of the SAand the consultation responses. The level of detail in the SA will depend upon the levelof detail provided at each stage in the development of the RSS revision options andsupporting policies. The aim should be to work towards identification and appraisalof the options to be published for consultation as part of the initial SA Report. Annex 10 provides further guidance on identifying and comparing options.

2.1.35 A discrete period of consultation on the initial SA Report should be conducted duringthe development of strategic options and policies. This will form a break point inthe continuous process of public involvement but should not delay the productionof the revision.

2.1.36 In preparing a comprehensive revision of an RSS a large number of options may begenerated for each of the main work streams, with each option capable of beingexpressed in a number of differently worded policies. The initial SA Report shouldfocus on the strategic options relevant to whether or not the RSS revision will havesignificant regional or sub-regional effects, building upon those already identified inthe Scoping Report. More detailed SA information can be provided through supportingtechnical papers cross-referenced in the SA Report. Annex 1 provides an outline of theinformation to be included in the SA Scoping Report.

2.1.37 The SA should identify effects on each of the SA objectives. As each strategic optionis refined, a commentary of the key sustainability issues arising should be prepared,with recommendations as to how each of the options could be improved.

2.1.38 At this stage, it may be possible to drop some options from further consideration.Reasons for eliminating options should be documented. Subsequent versions of the SA Report will then map the development of the preferred options and the supportingpolicies and their significant regional or sub-regional effects.


43

SA Stage C: Appraising the effects of the plan

Tasks C1 and C2: Predicting and assessing the effects of the RSS revision,including revision options

2.1.39 The purpose of this task is to predict the effects of the preferred options to be includedin the RSS revision in social, environmental and economic terms (see Annex 8). Thepotential effects should be quantified where possible, or a subjective judgement madewhere this is not possible, with reference to the baseline situation.

2.1.40 Prediction of effects involves:

• Identifying the changes to the sustainability baseline which are predicted to arisefrom the RSS revision. These can be compared both with each other and with the‘do-nothing’ or ‘business as usual’ scenarios. Note that ‘do-nothing’ and ‘business asusual’ scenarios can still involve changes to the baseline.

• Describing these changes in terms of their magnitude, their geographical scale, thetime period over which they will occur, whether they are permanent or temporary,positive or negative, probable or improbable, frequent or rare, and whether or notthere are cumulative and/or synergistic effects.

2.1.41 Having identified the effects for each SA objective, an assessment of the significance ofthe effect needs to be made. There are a number of factors that will determine thesignificance of an effect, e.g. its scale and permanence and the nature and sensitivity ofthe receptor. It should be noted whether the effect is likely to be positive, negative,neutral or uncertain, and the timescale and significance of the effect – whether it islikely to be short-term or long-term, and whether major or minor. Any cumulativeeffects should also be identified. It will also be useful to refer to the baseline data andtargets defined at Stage A.


In the Environmental Report, “the likely significant effects on the environment ofimplementing the plan or programme … and reasonable alternatives … are [to be]identified, described and evaluated” (Article 5.1). The Environmental Report shouldinclude information that may “reasonably be required taking into account currentknowledge and methods of assessment, the contents and level of detail in the plan orprogramme [and] its stage in the decision-making process” (Article 5.2). Information tobe provided in the Environmental Report includes:

• “the likely significant effects on the environment, including on issues such asbiodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors,material assets, cultural heritage, including architectural and archaeological heritage,landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors. These effects shouldinclude secondary, cumulative, synergistic, short, medium and long-term, permanentand temporary, positive and negative effects” (Annex I (f) and footnote)

• “an outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with” (Annex I (h))

• “the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset anysignificant adverse effects on the environment of implementing the plan orprogramme…” (Annex I (g))


44

2.1.42 Conclusions on the overall sustainability effects of the preferred options should beprovided. Any inconsistencies between the proposed RSS revision policies and theobjectives of the RSS revision should be highlighted, and amendments made wherepossible to reduce conflicts.

2.1.43 As each preferred option is refined, a commentary of the key sustainability issuesarising should be prepared, with recommendations as to how each of the options couldbe improved. Reasons for eliminating options should be documented.

2.1.44 RPBs may wish to consult the public and other stakeholders at this stage on the keyaspects of the overall RSS revision and their regional and sub-regional sustainabilityimplications. This is likely to be particularly important where separate streams of workcould be expected to have significant effects when considered together. Earlyconsultation on these key issues could reduce the risk of major changes to the RSSrevision following submission.

Task C3: Mitigating adverse effects and maximising beneficial effects

2.1.45 Where the SA has identified that the RSS revision is likely to have regionally or sub-regionally significant adverse effects, measures should be considered to avoid, reduce oroffset these effects. These measures are referred to in this guidance as “mitigationmeasures”, but this should be understood to include proactive avoidance of adverseeffects as well as actions taken after effects are noticed. Recommendations formitigating significant adverse effects, and improving positive effects, should be includedin the SA Report.

2.1.46 Mitigation can take a wide range of forms, including:

• changes to the RSS revision as a whole or options concerned, including bringingforward new options, or adding or deleting options;

• refining policies in order to improve the likelihood of positive effects and tominimise adverse effects (e.g. by strengthening policy criteria);

• technical measures to be applied during the implementation stage, e.g. buffer zones,application of design principles;

• identifying issues to be addressed in project environmental impact assessments forcertain projects or classes of projects; and

• proposals for changing other plans and programmes.

Task C4: Developing proposals for monitoring

2.1.47 Decisions on what to monitor and how to do it should be considered early in the SAprocess and throughout the course of preparing the plan. Annex 11 includes furtherguidance on developing aims and methods for monitoring. The outcomes of this taskshould be included in the final SA Report.


45

2.1.48 The Act and associated regulations require RPBs to produce annual monitoring reportsto report on progress in implementing the RSS. This should include the findings of SAmonitoring. Further guidance is set out in the forthcoming ‘Monitoring RegionalSpatial Strategies: Good Practice Guidance on Targets and Indicators’ to be publishedby ODPM.

Task C5: Prepare the SA Report

2.1.49 The work carried out during the SA of the revision of the RSS should be summarisedin the final version of the SA Report to be published with the draft revision. This willalso need to meet the requirements of the SEA Directive for an Environmental Report.The SA Report should clearly show that the Directive’s requirements in relation to theEnvironmental Report have been met. This should be achieved through sign-postingthe place or places in the SA Report where the information required by the Directiveis provided. Annex 7 suggests an outline of the structure and content of the finalSA Report.

2.1.50 The final SA Report of the submitted Revision RSS is a key output of SA. It shouldreflect and support the RSS on which formal public consultation is to be carried out.The relationship between the two documents should be clearly indicated.

RSS Stages 3, 4 and 5: Submission of the draftRSS revision to the Secretary of State,examination-in-public and the Panel Report

2.1.51 During this stage of the RSS revision, part of Tasks of D1 and D2 of the SA processshould be undertaken.

SA Stage D: Consulting on the plan and SA Report


“The authorities [with relevant environmental responsibilities] and the public… shall begiven an early and effective opportunity within appropriate time frames to express theiropinion on the draft plan or programme… and the accompanying Environmental Reportbefore the adoption of the plan or programme” (Article 6(2)).

“The environmental report, … the opinions expressed [by consultees] and the results ofany transboundary consultations … shall be taken into account during the preparationof the plan or programme… and before its adoption…” (Article 8).

“When a plan or programme … is adopted, the [environmental] authorities [and] thepublic … are informed and the following items [shall be] made available to those soinformed: (a) the plan or programme … as adopted, (b) a statement summarising howenvironmental considerations have been integrated into the plan orprogramme….including the reasons for choosing the plan or programme or programmeas adopted, in light of other reasonable alternatives dealt with … and (c) the measuresdecided concerning monitoring” (Article 9(1)).


46

Task D1: Consulting on the SA Report alongside the plan

2.1.52 The SA Report of the draft revision of the RSS should accompany the RSS revision aspart of the formal public consultation process. It will be one of the key documents tobe considered at the examination-in-public before a Panel appointed by the Secretary ofState. One of the tests of soundness of the revision will be whether an adequate SA hasbeen carried out, taking account of the SEA Directive requirements, and how the RPBhas responded to the regionally or sub-regionally significant effects.

2.1.53 Section 1.3 above provides more detailed guidance on consulting statutory bodies andthe public as part of SA. As a minimum, the consultation on the SA Report will need tocomply with the requirements of the SEA Directive and requirements for consultationon the plan. The findings of the SEA and consultation responses must be taken intoaccount and the decision-making process must be documented.

2.1.54 It may also be necessary to consult other EU Member States if it is likely that the RSSrevision may result in significant effects in other EU Member States to satisfy therequirements of the SEA Directive.

RSS Stages 6 and 7: Publication of proposedchanges and issues of RSS

2.1.55 During this stage of a RSS revision the remainder of Stage D of the SA process shouldbe undertaken.

Task D2: Appraising significant changes

2.1.56 The Secretary of State will consider the Panel’s Report and then publish any proposedchanges to the revision. The proposed changes will be subject to public consultation.Where significant changes that have not already been subject to SA are proposed by theSecretary of State, the Secretary of State will ensure that they are subject to a SA, andthat their overall effect on the sustainability of the revision is assessed. Both theproposed changes and the accompanying SA Report must be made available to thepublic for comment. Following consultation on the proposed changes, the Secretary ofState will issue the revised RSS.

2.1.57 Where the Secretary of State undertakes successive consultation exercises in finalisingthe proposed changes to the RSS revision, the implications for the SA Report should bekept under review. If alterations to the RSS revision have not been considered at anearlier stage of the appraisal process and are likely to change the significant effectswhich have been predicted and appraised, new information should be included in theSA Report as appropriate.


47

Task D3: Decision making and providing information

2.1.58 As soon as practicable after the RSS revision has been published by the Secretary ofState, the RPB should publish a consolidated SA Report of the entire SA processcovering all RSS revision stages.

2.1.59 At the same time, the RPB should issue a statement, agreed by the Secretary of Stateand RPB, summarising information on how the SA results and consultees’ opinionswere taken into account and reasons for choice of the preferred options in the lightof other reasonable options dealt with. This summary should provide enoughinformation to make clear how the RSS was changed as a result of the SA processand responses to consultation, or why no changes were made. It should also showwhy options were rejected.

2.1.60 Information must also be made available on how the final monitoring arrangementswill be carried out during implementation. The SA Report will have alreadydocumented proposed monitoring measures, so they should be confirmed or modifiedin the light of consultation responses (and/or the examination).

2.1.61 The RPB may find it useful to publish the consolidated SA Report, the statement, andmonitoring measures in a single document. Where this is done each document must beclearly distinguishable. The SA Report, the revised RSS and statement should bepublished on the Office’s and the relevant GO’s website together with details of whereand when hard copies of the revised RSS and SA Report are available for inspection.These details must also be sent to anybody who has asked to be notified of thepublication of the revision. Hard copies will also be made available to anyone else whorequests a copy, subject to payment of a reasonable charge. Where EU Member Stateshave been consulted, the RSS revision should also be made available to them inaccordance with the SEA Directive.

RSS Stage 8: Implementation, monitoringand review

2.1.62 During this stage of a RSS revision Stage E of the SA process should be undertaken.

SA Stage E: Monitoring implementation of the plan


“Member States shall monitor the significant environmental effects of theimplementation of plans or programme… in order, inter alia, to identify at an early stageunforeseen adverse effects, and to be able to undertake appropriate remedial action”(Article 10.1).

The Environmental Report should provide information on “a description of the measuresenvisaged concerning monitoring” (Annex I (i)).


48

2.1.63 The significant effects of the implementation of the RSS revision must be monitored toidentify any unforeseen adverse effects and to enable appropriate remedial action to betaken (though the SEA Directive does not create any obligations concerningremediation). Monitoring allows the actual effects of the RSS revision to be testedagainst those predicted in the SA. It helps to ensure that problems which arise duringimplementation, whether or not they were foreseen, can be identified and futurepredictions made more accurate. The RPB should also aim to use monitoring to fill anyimportant gaps in baseline information, reduce uncertainties and test the accuracy oftheir predictions.

Task E1: Monitoring the significant effects of the plan

2.1.64 Annex 11 describes how RPBs may go about designing a SA monitoring system. Inmany cases, information used in monitoring will be provided by outside bodies,including those which provide baseline information (see Annex 2). RPBs should takecare to ensure that monitoring information is appropriate to their needs and is up todate and reliable. The results of monitoring the sustainability effects of the RSS shouldbe published periodically as new information becomes available and included in theRSS annual monitoring report.

Task E2: Responding to adverse effects

2.1.65 RPBs should consider how they could react if monitoring reveals adverse effects. Ifadverse effects are identified legislation or licensing arrangements may require action onthe part of either the RPB or another body (although the SEA Directive itself does notcreate new obligations on environmental protection). Details of any contingencyarrangements could be included in the mitigation measures set out in the SA Reportand in the RSS revision itself.


49

2.2 Applying SustainabilityAppraisal to Development PlanDocumentsIntroduction

2.2.1 Development Plan Documents (DPDs) must comprise the following:

• Core Strategy: this will set out the long-term spatial vision for the LPA area and thestrategic policies to deliver that vision. It will contain a set of primary policies fordelivering the core strategy, which will look 10 years ahead. Broad locations fordevelopment may be set out in a key diagram.

• Site specific allocations and policies: allocations of sites for specific or mixed uses ordevelopment will be contained in development plan documents. Policies will identifyany specific requirements for individual proposals.

• Area Action Plans (AAP): where needed, these will be used to provide a planningframework for areas of change and areas of conservation.

• Proposals Map (with Inset Maps, where necessary): the spatial incidence of policywill require SA, however, the cartographic representation of the policy will notspecifically require SA.

And, where necessary;

• Any other DPDs the LPA require.

2.2.2 The DPD preparation process as presented in PPS12 can be divided into four mainstages. These are:

• Stage 1: Pre-Production – survey and evidence gathering leading to decision toinclude a development plan document in the local development scheme;

• Stage 2: Production – preparation of preferred options involving the community,formal participation on these, and preparation and submission of the developmentplan document in light of the representations on the preferred options;

• Stage 3: Examination – the independent examination into the soundness of the plan;and

• Stage 4: Adoption – the binding report and adoption (followed by implementationand monitoring).


50

Key requirements for a SustainabilityAppraisal of Development Plan Documents

2.2.3 The DPD preparation process is illustrated in Figure 7, including the relationship withthe key SA stages described in this section. The stages and tasks for carrying out SA inthe preparation of a DPD are listed in Figure 8. Aspects of these stages are described inmore detail in the annexes.

2.2.4 It is likely that the preparation of a DPD within a LDF will involve a degree of parallelworking, for example, on the core strategy and area action plans. Therefore, at theoutset the appraisal will have to be designed to work at different scales, before beingbrought together at the end to consider the plan as a whole. In cases where the corestrategy is prepared in advance or is not part of the development of allocations oraction plans, it will be necessary to follow the appropriate stages of the SA processright the way through just for the core strategy.

2.2.5 In undertaking the SA of a DPD it will be important to consider appraisals undertakenat other levels in the planning framework, e.g. of the RSS. The findings of a higher levelSA should be incorporated into an appraisal of a lower level policy, to avoid duplicationof work. Depending on the nature of the RSS, the degree of specificity of the optionsconsidered in the DPD may vary depending on the extent to which spatial choices havealready been determined and appraised.


51

Figure 7: Development Plan Document Preparation Process

Reg 25

Reg 26

Reg 27

Reg 28

Reg 29

3

2

1

YEA

RS 0

Co

mm

un

ity

Invo

lvem

ent

(as

ou

tlin

ed in

Par

t 2

Reg

ula

tio

ns)

Rep

rese

nta

tio

ns

and

p

arti

cip

atio

n in

ex

amin

atio

n

Evidence Gathering

Stage E: Monitoring implementation of the DPD

Stage D: Consultation on the preferred options and Sustainability Appraisal report

Stage C: Assessing effects of the preferred options

Stage B: Developing andrefining options

Stage A: Baseline

Prepare issues and alternative options in consultation

Public participation on preferred options

Representations on preferred options

Preparation of Submission DPD

Submission of DPD

Representations on submitted DPD

Pre examination meeting

Independent Examination

Binding Report

Adoption

Monitoring and Review

Pre Production

Production

Examination

Adoption

KEY

SA Stages

Process

Ongoing engagement

Statutory consultation (6 weeks)

Figure 8: Incorporating SA within the DPD process

PRE-PRODUCTION

SA stages and tasks

Stage A: Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding onthe scope


• Ensure stakeholder involvement in the appraisal process has been included in the SCI.

• Identify and review other relevant policies, plans and programmes, and sustainabledevelopment objectives that will affect or influence the DPD and undertake LDF surveys (A1).

• Collect relevant social, environmental and economic baseline information and produce acharacterisation of the DPD area (A2).


• Develop the SA framework, consisting of the sustainability objectives, indicators and targets(A4).

• Test the DPD objectives against the sustainability objectives and whether the DPD objectivesare consistent with one another (A5).

• Produce a Scoping Report and consult relevant authorities, the public and other keystakeholders on the scope of the appraisal and the key issues and possible options forsolutions (A6).

PRODUCTION

SA stages and tasks


• Develop the SA consulting relevant stakeholders, and test issues and options against the SAFramework (B1).

• Consultation on issues and options and initial SA Report (B2).

Stage C: Appraising the effects of the DPD

• Take account of consultation on issues and options in ongoing SA approach.

• Predict the effects (C1) and carry out detailed assessment of the effects (C2) of the PreferredOptions.



• Prepare the final SA Report of the DPD (C5).

Stage D: Consultation on the Preferred Options and SA Report

• Consult on the final SA Report along with the Preferred Options (D1).

• Carry out, where necessary, appraisal of any significant changes made as a result of publicparticipation, including possible alternative site proposals (D2).

• Submit DPD and SA Report to the Secretary of State.


52

Figure 8: Incorporating SA within the DPD process (continued)

EXAMINATION

SA stages and tasks

• If necessary, carry out appraisal of any significant changes proposed as a result ofrepresentations, including possible alternative site proposals (D2).

ADOPTION AND MONITORING

SA stages and tasks

• Inform consultees that DPD is adopted.

• Issue statement summarising information on how the SA results and consultees’ opinionswere taken into account, reasons for choice of options (i.e. policy approach or allocations),and proposals for monitoring, in relation to any recommended changes (D3).

• Make the DPD and SA Report available to the public and other stakeholders.

Stage E: Monitoring implementation of the DPD

• Monitor significant effects of the DPD to identify at an early stage any unforeseen adverseeffects (E1).

• Publish sustainability monitoring reports periodically as part of the Annual Monitoring Reportas new information becomes available (E1).

• Undertake appropriate remedial action where necessary (E2).


53

Incorporating Sustainability Appraisal withinthe DPD process

DPD Stage 1: Pre-Production2.2.6 During the pre-production stage of a DPD, Stage A of the SA process should be

undertaken.

Stage A: Setting the context and and objectives, establishing the baseline anddeciding on the scope

2.2.7 At this stage the LPA compiles the background information needed and determines thescope of the SA. LPAs should consider what information they already have and whatmore they will need. They may already hold useful information, for example appraisalsof previous plans or programmes.

2.2.8 At the outset, the SA methodology and programme should be developed and agreedwith key stakeholders as part of the plan making process. An outline of the proposedstakeholder and public involvement for SA should be developed early as part of theStatement of Community Involvement.






• “any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programmeincluding, in particular, those relating to any areas of a particular environmentalimportance, such as areas designated pursuant to Directives 79/409/EEC and92/43/EEC” (Annex I (c))



54

Task A1: Identifying other relevant plans, programmes, and sustainabilityobjectives

2.2.9 This task should be undertaken during the LDF surveys and evidence gathering. A DPD may be influenced in various ways by other plans or programmes and byexternal sustainability objectives, such as those laid down in policies or legislation.These relationships should be identified to enable potential synergies to be exploitedand any inconsistencies and constraints to be addressed.

2.2.10 The review should consider guidance at the international, EU or national level onsustainable development, as well as other policy documents such as Planning PolicyStatements. Note should be made of any targets or specific requirements includedwithin them, and what these relate to. The review should specifically identify anyenvironmental protection objectives established at international, European Union, or national level, in order to comply with the SEA Directive. Annex 1 provides anindicative list of other relevant plans, programmes and sustainability objectives.



2.2.12 This task should also be undertaken during the LDF surveys and evidence gathering.The review of other plans and programmes (A1) should provide a considerable amountof this information. Baseline information provides the basis for predicting andmonitoring effects and helps to identify sustainability problems and alternative ways ofdealing with them. Sufficient information about the current and likely future state ofthe plan area should be collected to allow the plan’s or programme’s effects to beadequately predicted. Annex 2 lists a selection of sources of information.

2.2.13 The collection of baseline data for the appraisal should be co-ordinated with thedevelopment of the information base for the DPD (note that here the physicalcharacteristics referred to in Section 13 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Actare included within the environmental category for the purposes of SA). This taskshould also be linked to the development of the SA Framework which includesobjectives and indicators (see Annex 5) and to developing proposals for monitoring(see Stage E).

Task A3: Identifying sustainability issues

2.2.14 LPAs will be aware of many sustainability issues or problems which they face whenpreparing their DPD. They will be able to identify others in conducting the SA of theDPD based on:

• earlier experience with issues identified in other plans and programmes;

• analysis of possible tensions or inconsistencies with other plans, programmes andsustainability objectives;


55

• analysis of possible tensions or inconsistencies between the current or futurebaseline conditions and proposed objectives, targets or obligations; and

• consultation with social, environmental and economic authorities, other keystakeholders and the public.

2.2.15 The identification of sustainability problems is an opportunity to define key issues forthe DPD and develop sustainable plan objectives and options. Any issues identifiedshould, where possible, be linked to evidence by reference to baseline information.


2.2.16 On the basis of the above analysis, the SA Framework to be used for the appraisalshould be defined. A SA Framework consists of objectives which should, wherepossible, be expressed in the form of targets, the achievement of which should bemeasurable using identified indicators (Annex 5 provides further information regardingthe development of the SA Framework). The sustainability objectives are distinct fromthe objectives of the DPD, though they may in some cases overlap with them.

2.2.17 Sustainability objectives and indicators and targets should be developed with inputfrom key stakeholders and ideally should be open to wider comment and discussion(undertaken formally in Task A6). At the very least this should draw on expertise fromwithin the authority, including for example economic development officers,sustainability officers, and those dealing with social issues.

2.2.18 Objectives and indicators can be revised as baseline data is collected and sustainabilityissues are identified, and can be used in monitoring the implementation of the DPD.

Task A5: Testing the DPD objectives against the SA Framework

2.2.19 The objectives of the DPD will set out what the plan is aiming to achieve in spatialplanning terms. These will set the context for development of options for the DPD.

2.2.20 It is important that the objectives of the DPD are in accordance with sustainabilityprinciples, so they should be tested for compatibility with the SA objectives. This mayhelp in refining the DPD objectives as well as in identifying options. The DPDobjectives should also be consistent with each other and the SA objectives will be oneway of checking for this. Where there is conflict between objectives, the LPA will needto reach a decision on priorities.


2.2.21 Consultation at this stage helps to ensure that the SA will be comprehensive and robustenough to support the DPD during the later stages of full public consultation andexamination. Consultation should be based on a preliminary scoping report thatsummarises Stage A and the outputs of it (see Annex 7 for an outline of the ScopingReport).


56

2.2.22 Consultation should include the four SEA Consultation Bodies required by the SEADirective (Countryside Agency, English Heritage, English Nature, EnvironmentAgency), and other appropriate social and economic consultees as outlined in PPS12.

2.2.23 It is recommended that the practicalities of consultation with these officers andorganisations are discussed, in order to maximise the value of their input and integrateit with the stakeholder involvement arrangements on the DPD, as outlined in PPS12.

DPD Stage 2: Production2.2.24 During the production stage of a DPD Stages B and C and part of Stage D of the SA

process should be undertaken.


2.2.25 At this stage, the LPA conducts a SA of the broad issues and options and consults withthe statutory authorities and public. Elements of Stage B may need to be carried outmore than once in the course of the DPD’s development.

Task B1: Appraising issues and options

2.2.26 Various policy options will be developed to achieve the objectives of the DPD. Eachreasonable plan option, including the “do-nothing” or “business as usual” options,should be tested against the SA Framework to determine their performance insustainability terms, with reference to the social, environmental and economic factors.Positive as well as negative effects should be considered, and uncertainties about thenature and significance of effects should be noted.

2.2.27 This will be an iterative process, whereby the options developed for the DPD arerevised to take into account the findings of the SA. The level of detail in the SA willdepend upon the level of detail provided at each stage in the development of the DPDoptions. Ultimately, the aim should be to work towards an identification and appraisalof the options to be published for public consultation. Annex 10 provides furtherguidance on identifying and comparing options. The SA should identify effects on eachof the SA objectives.

2.2.28 As each option is refined, a commentary of the key sustainability issues arising shouldbe prepared, with recommendations as to how each of the options could be improved.

2.2.29 At this stage it may be possible to drop some options from further consideration.Reasons for eliminating options should be documented. LPAs should also documentwhy they have not considered options which might appear attractive or practicable.




57

2.2.30 However, it is not the role of the SA to determine which of the options should bechosen as the basis for consultation. This is the role of those who have to decide whichstrategy is appropriate. The role of the SA is to assist with the identification of theappropriate options, by highlighting the sustainability implications of the differentoptions, and by putting forward recommendations for improvement.

2.2.31 Throughout this part of the assessment, it may be necessary to revisit earlier tasks suchas the collection of baseline information, as new information and issues emerge.

Task B2: Consulting on the SA of emerging options

2.2.32 Informed by the SA of options, issues and options will be published for publicconsultation. An Initial SA Report highlighting the options will need to be prepared,including conclusions on the overall sustainability effects of the options. This initialreport should accompany any issues and options consulted on as part of thestakeholder involvement and consultation process required by Regulation 25 of theLocal Development Regulations. Annex 7 outlines information to be included in theInitial SA Report.

Stage C: Appraising the effects of the plan

2.2.33 The findings of consultation and participation on the issues and options will need to betaken into account in the preparation of Preferred Options. Tasks C1 and C2 willappraise the Preferred Options using the SA Framework. Where adverse effects areseen to be likely, possibilities for mitigation should be considered along with proposalsfor monitoring. The final SA Report will be prepared during this stage.


In the Environmental Report, “the likely significant effects on the environment ofimplementing the plan or programme … and reasonable alternatives … are [to be]identified, described and evaluated” (Article 5.1). The Environmental Report shouldinclude information that may “reasonably be required taking into account currentknowledge and methods of assessment, the contents and level of detail in the plan orprogramme [and] its stage in the decision-making process” (Article 5.2).

Information to be provided in the Environmental Report includes:





58

Task C1: Predicting the effects of the Preferred Options

2.2.34 The purpose of this task is to predict the effects of the preferred options to be includedin the DPD in social, environmental and economic terms. The potential effects shouldbe quantified where possible, or a subjective judgement made where this is not possible,with reference to the baseline situation. Annex 8 provides further guidances onpredicting effects.


• Identifying the changes to the sustainability baseline which are predicted to arisefrom the DPD. These can be compared both with each other and with the ‘do-nothing’ or ‘business as usual’ scenarios. Note that ‘do-nothing’ and ‘business asusual’ scenario can still involve changes to the baseline.


2.2.36 Where a DPD includes proposals for individual projects, these should be assessed insufficient level to enable significant sustainability effects to be broadly predicted. WhereEnvironmental Impact Assessment is needed later for the project, it is likely to beinformed by the findings of the SA, but it will not usually be appropriate or evenpossible to provide the level of detail needed for EIA in the context of the plan.

Task C2: Assessing the effects of the Preferred Options

2.2.37 Having identified the effects for each SA objective, an assessment of the significance ofthe effects needs to be made (also see Annex 8). There are a number of factors that willdetermine the significance of an effect e.g. its scale and permanence and the nature andsensitivity of the receptor. It should be noted whether the effect is likely to be positive,negative, neutral or uncertain, and the timescale and significance of the effect – whetherit is likely to be short-term or long-term, and whether major or minor. Any cumulativeeffects should also be identified. It will also be useful to refer to the baseline data andtargets defined at Stage A.

2.2.38 Conclusions on the overall sustainability effects of the preferred options should beprovided. Any inconsistencies between DPD options and the objectives of the DPDshould be highlighted, and amendments made where possible to reduce conflicts.

2.2.39 As each preferred option is refined, a commentary of the key sustainability issuesarising should be prepared, with recommendations as to how each of the options couldbe improved. Reasons for eliminating options should be documented. LPAs should alsodocument why they have not considered options which might appear attractive orpracticable.


59

Task C3: Mitigating adverse effects and maximise beneficial effects

2.2.40 Where the agreed preferred options are likely to have significant sustainability effects,measures should be considered to prevent, reduce or offset any adverse effects andenhance positive effects. These measures are referred to in this guidance as “mitigationmeasures”, but this should be understood to include proactive avoidance of adverseeffects as well as actions taken after effects are noticed. Recommendations formitigating significant adverse effects, and improving positive effects, should be includedin the SA Report.


• Changes to the DPD as a whole or options concerned, including bringing forwardnew options, or adding or deleting options;

• Refining options, in order to improve the likelihood of positive effects and tominimise adverse effects (e.g. by strengthening policy criteria);

• Technical measures to be applied during the implementation stage, e.g. buffer zones,application of design principles;

• Identifying issues to be addressed in project environmental impact assessments forcertain projects or classes of projects;

• Proposals for changing other plans and programmes; and

• Contingency arrangements for dealing with possible adverse effects.



Task C5: Preparing the SA Report

2.2.43 The work carried out during the SA of the DPD should be documented in a final SAReport. Annex 7 suggests an outline of the structure and content of the final SAReport. This will need to meet the requirements of the SEA Directive for anEnvironmental Report. The SA Report should clearly show that the Directive’srequirements in relation to the Environmental Report have been met. This should beachieved through sign-posting the place or places in the SA Report where theinformation required by the Directive is provided.

2.2.44 The final SA Report is a key output of SA. It should reflect and support the submittedDPD on which formal public consultation is to be carried out. The relationshipbetween the two documents should be clearly indicated.


60


Task D1: Consulting on the SA Report and the Preferred Options.

2.2.45 Consultation on the final SA Report will need to be undertaken during the pre-submission public participation stage on the preferred options as outlined in LocalDevelopment Regulation 26.

2.2.46 Section 1.3 above provides more detailed guidance on consulting statutory bodies andthe public as part of SA. As a minimum, the consultation on the SA Report will need tocomply with the requirements of the SEA Directive and requirements for consultationon the plan. The findings of the SEA and consultation responses must be taken intoaccount and the decision-making process must be documented.

2.2.47 It may also be necessary to consult other EU Member States if it is likely that a planmay result in significant effects in other EU Member States to satisfy the requirementsof the SEA Directive.


2.2.48 If significant changes are made to the preferred options in light of the publicparticipation stage during Task D1, an SA will be required for all changes. The final SA Report will need to be amended as necessary to reflect any changes.

2.2.49 Once the DPD is finalised by the LPA, the final SA Report should be submitted to theSecretary of State with the submitted DPD for independent examination.






61

DPD Stage 3: Examination2.2.50 During the examination stage of a DPD part of Stage D of the SA process may need to

be repeated as follows.

2.2.51 The examination will provide an opportunity for discussion and will test in public,before an Inspector, the soundness of the DPD. The examination will consider whetherthe SA Report has been taken into account and the SEA Directive requirements havebeen met. If changes are made to the DPD during the examination process it will benecessary to repeat task D2 to ensure a SA is undertaken for these changes.

Task D2: If necessary, appraising significant changes (as a result ofrepresentations)

2.2.52 The Inspector will consider the submitted DPD, and representations made on it, duringthe examination. The Inspector will need to be satisfied that sufficient evidence is putforward at the Examination to identify the sustainability implications of any proposedchanges to the DPD. Significant changes to the DPD will be the exception rather thanthe rule, since such changes will need to demonstrate that they do not affect thesoundness of the plan (as described in PPS12).

2.2.53 When a DPD is submitted for examination it should be the final document that theLPA wishes to adopt. It is expected for SA that all reasonable plan options should havebeen considered and appraised in the plan’s preparation process. If the LPA hasreceived representations that identify significant changes to the submitted DPD, thathave not already been considered (or considered as part of a relevant core strategyDPD), it will be necessary for the representee proposing the change to ensure that thesocial, environmental and economic effects are appraised.

2.2.54 However, in exceptional situations the Inspector may conclude that the LPA shouldhave originally considered such significant proposal(s) in the preparation of the DPDand request the LPA to undertake the required SA. In this case, it would be necessaryto allow a further opportunity for the public to make representations and there maybea need for the examination to be reconvened.

2.2.55 As a result of the examination, the Inspector will produce a report withrecommendations which will be binding upon the LPA. Where the Inspector suggestssignificant changes in the binding report, an SA would need to be undertaken on thechanges, unless the implications for sustainability have been adequately considered atthe examination. The LPA must then incorporate the changes required by theInspector, amend the final SA Report, and adopt the DPD.

DPD Stage 4: Adoption and Monitoring2.2.56 During the adoption and monitoring stage of a DPD the remainder of Stage D and all

of Stage E of the SA process should be undertaken.


62


2.2.57 The information in the final SA Report and the responses to consultation should betaken into account during the preparation of the DPD and before the final decision istaken to adopt it. Following adoption, LPAs should produce a summary of how theyhave taken the findings of the full SA process into account, and how sustainabilityconsiderations more generally have been integrated into the DPD. This summaryshould provide enough information to make clear how the DPD was changed as aresult of the SA process and responses to consultation, or why no changes were made.It should also show why options were rejected.

2.2.58 Information must also be made available on how the final monitoring arrangementswill be carried out during implementation. The SA Report will have alreadydocumented proposed monitoring measures, so they should be confirmed or modifiedin the light of consultation responses and/or the examination.

2.2.59 The DPD itself, when adopted, will be made available to the public and the statutorybodies in accordance with Local Development Regulation 36. Where EU MemberStates have been consulted, the DPD should also be made available to them inaccordance with the SEA Directive.


2.2.60 The significant effects of the implementation of plans must be monitored to identifyany unforeseen adverse effects and to enable appropriate remedial action to be taken(though the SEA Directive does not create any obligations concerning remediation).Monitoring allows the actual effects of the DPD to be tested against those predicted inthe SA. It helps to ensure that problems which arise during implementation, whether ornot they were foreseen, can be identified and future predictions made more accurate.The LPA should also aim to use monitoring to fill any important gaps in baselineinformation, reduce uncertainties and test the accuracy of their predictions.





63

Task E1: Monitoring the significant effects of the DPD

2.2.61 Annex 11 describes how LPAs may go about designing a SA monitoring system.In many cases, information used in monitoring will be provided by outside bodies,including those which provide baseline information (see Annex 2). LPAs should takecare to ensure that monitoring information is appropriate to their needs and is up todate and reliable. SA monitoring can be incorporated into existing monitoringarrangements and should be included in the Annual Monitoring Report prepared forthe LDF.


2.2.62 LPAs should consider how they could react if monitoring reveals adverse effects.Certain legislation or policies may require action on the part of either the Authority oranother body (although the SEA Directive itself does not create new obligations onenvironmental protection). Details of any contingency arrangements could be includedin the mitigation measures set out in the SA Report.


64

2.3 Applying SustainabilityAppraisal to SupplementaryPlanning DocumentsIntroduction

2.3.1 Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) will be included in the Local DevelopmentFramework and form part of the planning framework for the area. Though not part ofthe statutory Development Plan, SPDs may cover a range of issues, both thematic andsite specific, which provide further details of policies in a DPD. However, they cannotbe used to allocate land. They may take the form of design guides, area developmentbriefs, or issue-based documents that supplement policies in a DPD.

2.3.2 Unlike past supplementary planning guidance they will need to conform to setprocedures, and must be included in the Local Development Scheme. The process forpreparing SPDs will be similar to that for DPDs, except it will be faster and there is norequirement for an independent examination. However, they will be subject to rigorousprocedures of community engagement in accordance with the authority’s Statement ofCommunity Involvement and will be accorded weight in the determination of planningapplications.

2.3.3 There will be a three-stage process of pre-production, production (including a 4 to 6week consultation period) and adoption following consideration of consultationresponses. The SPD preparation process is illustrated in Figure 9 which also shows therelationship with the SA stages described in this section.

65

Key requirements for a SustainabilityAppraisal of Supplementary PlanningDocuments

2.3.4 SPDs must relate to policies in the DPD (or ‘saved’ plan) and may be prepared inparallel with the DPD where the detail provided in the SPD is fundamental to the earlydelivery of policies. Therefore, the appraisal will have to be designed at the outset toreflect the different scales and levels of detail that will be appropriate whilst alsodrawing extensively on, and being consistent with, the SA of the DPD.

2.3.5 The different forms of SPD that may be prepared will necessitate a relatively flexibleapproach to SA to ensure that it is appropriate and relevant. In most cases the SA ofSPDs will draw extensively on appraisals undertaken at the higher level for policieswithin the DPD, such that the need for new work may be limited. Generally, due to thenature of an SPD, its SA is likely to focus on a more limited range of potentiallysignificant effects although it may be appropriate to consider these in more detail. TheSPD SA may therefore be produced more quickly and be of interest to a more limitednumber of stakeholders.

2.3.6 The key stages in the preparation of a SPD and the carrying out of the SA are listed inFigure 10.


66

Figure 9: Supplementary Planning Document Preparation Process

Reg 17

Reg 18

6

MO

NTH

S 0

Co

mm

un

ity

Invo

lvem

ent

(as

ou

tlin

ed in

Par

t 2

Reg

ula

tio

ns)

Stage E: Monitoring implementation of the SPD

Stage B: Developing andrefining options

Stage D: Consultation on the submitted SPD and Sustainability Appraisal Report

Stage A: Baseline

12

Evidence Gathering

Monitoring and Review

8

Pre Production

Production

Adoption

KEY

SA Stages

Process

Statutory consultation (4-6 weeks)Stage C: Assessing effects

of the preferred options

Public Participation on draft SPD

Representations and finalise SPD

Adoption

Prepare draft SPD

Figure 10: Incorporating SA within the SPD process

PRE-PRODUCTION

SA stages and tasks

Stage A: Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding onthe scope


• Ensure stakeholder involvement in the appraisal process has been included in the SCI.

• Identify and review other relevant policies, plans and programmes, and sustainabledevelopment objectives that will affect or influence the SPD (A1).

• Collect relevant social, environmental and economic baseline information drawing extensivelyfrom the DPD SA (A2).


• Develop the SA framework, consisting of the sustainability objectives, indicators and targetsdrawing extensively from the DPD SA (A4).

• Test the SPD objectives against the sustainability objectives and whether the SPD objectivesare consistent with one another (A5).

• Consult relevant authorities, the public and other key stakeholders on the scope of theappraisal and the key issues and possible options for solutions (produce Scoping Report ifnecessary) (A6).

PRODUCTION

SA stages and tasks

Stage B: Developing and refining options (if necessary)

• Carry out appraisal of the plan options and make recommendations for improvement (B1).

• Consult on initial SA Report and issues and options (B2).

Stage C: Appraising the effects of the draft SPD

• Predict the effects (C1) and carry out detailed assessment of the effects (C2) of the draft SPD.



• Prepare the final SA Report of the draft SPD (C5).

Stage D: Consultation on the SA Report and draft SPD

• Consult on the final SA Report along with the Draft SPD (D1).

• Carry out, where necessary, appraisal of any significant changes made as a result ofrepresentations (D2).


67

Figure 10: Incorporating SA within the SPD process

ADOPTION AND MONITORING

SA stages and tasks

• Inform consultees that SPD has been adopted.

• Issue statement summarising information on how the SA results and consultees’ opinionswere taken into account, reasons for choice of options, and proposals for monitoring,including in relation to any recommended changes (D3).

• Make SPD and SA Report available for public viewing.

Stage E: Monitoring implementation of the SPD

• Monitor significant effects of the SPD to identify at an early stage any unforeseen adverseeffects (E1).

• Undertake appropriate remedial action where necessary (E2).


68

Incorporating Sustainability Appraisal withinthe SPD process

SPD Stage 1: Pre-Production2.3.7 During the pre-production stage of a SPD, Stage A of the SA process should be

undertaken.

Stage A: Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline anddeciding on the scope

2.3.8 At this stage the LPA compiles the background information needed and determines thescope of the SA. LPAs should consider what information they already have and whatmore they will need. They may already hold useful information, for example appraisalsof previous plans or programmes.

2.3.9 At the outset, the appraisal methodology and programme should be developed andagreed with key stakeholders. The methodology should be based on the approachdescribed in this guidance. An outline of the proposed stakeholder involvement for theappraisal should be developed and input into the Statement of CommunityInvolvement.






• “any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programmeincluding, in particular, those relating to any areas of a particular environmentalimportance, such as areas designated pursuant to Directives 79/409/EEC and92/43/EEC” (Annex I (c))



69

Task A1: Identifying other relevant plans, programmes, andsustainability objectives

2.3.10 SPDs may be influenced in various ways by other plans or programmes and by externalsustainability objectives, such as those laid down in policies or legislation. This taskshould draw extensively from the SA of the relevant DPD.

2.3.11 The review should consider guidance at the international, EU or national level onsustainable development, as well as other policy documents such as Planning PolicyStatements. Note should be made of any targets or specific requirements includedwithin them, and what these relate to. The review should specifically identify anyenvironmental protection objectives established at international, European Union, ornational level, in order to comply with the SEA Directive. Annex 1 provides anindicative list of other relevant plans, programmes and sustainability objectives.



2.3.13 This task should draw extensively from the surveys and evidence gathering workundertaken for the SA of the relevant DPD. Work undertaken in the development ofthe parent policy should always provide a considerable amount of information forSPDs during this task.

2.3.14 Baseline information provides the basis for predicting and monitoring effects and helpsto identify sustainability problems and alternatives ways of dealing with them.Sufficient information about the current and likely future state of the plan area shouldbe collected to allow the plan’s or programme’s effects to be adequately predicted.Annex 2 lists a selection of sources of information.

Task A3: Identifying key sustainability issues

2.3.15 LPAs will be aware of many sustainability issues or problems which they face whenpreparing their SPD. They will be able to identify others in conducting the SA of theSPD based on:

• earlier experience with issues identified in other plans and programmes, includingthe relevant DPD;

• analysis of possible tensions or inconsistencies with other plans, programmes andsustainability objectives;

• analysis of possible tensions or inconsistencies between the current or futurebaseline conditions and proposed objectives, targets or obligations; and

• consultation with social, environmental, and economic authorities and other keystakeholders (including the public).


70


2.3.16 On the basis of the above analysis, the SA Framework to be used for the appraisalshould be defined, drawing extensively on the SA of the relevant DPD. A SAFramework consists of objectives which should, where possible, be expressed in theform of targets, the achievement of which should be measurable using identifiedindicators (Annex 5 provides further information regarding the development of the SAFramework). The sustainability objectives are distinct from the objectives of the SPD,though they may in some cases overlap with them.

2.3.17 Sustainability objectives and indicators and targets should be developed with inputfrom key stakeholders and ideally should be open to wider comment and discussion(undertaken formally in Task A6). At the very least this should draw on expertise fromwithin the authority, including for example economic development officers,sustainability officers, and those dealing with social issues.

2.3.18 Objectives and indicators can be revised as baseline data is collected and sustainabilityissues are identified, and can be used in monitoring the implementation of the SPD.

Task A5: Testing the SPD objectives against the SA Framework

2.3.19 The objectives of the SPD will set out what it is aiming to achieve in spatial and landuse planning terms. It is important that the objectives of the SPD are in accordancewith sustainability principles, so they should be tested for compatibility with the SAobjectives. This may help in refining the SPD objectives as well as in identifyingoptions. The SPD objectives should also be consistent with each other and the SAobjectives will be one way of checking for this. Where there is conflict betweenobjectives, the LPA will need to reach a decision on priorities.


2.3.20 Consultation at this stage helps to ensure that the SA will be comprehensive and robustenough to support the SPD during the later stages of full public consultation andexamination. Consultation should be based on a preliminary scoping report thatsummarises Stage A and the outputs of it (see Annex 7 for an outline of the ScopingReport).

2.3.21 Consultation should include the four SEA Consultation Bodies required by the SEADirective (Countryside Agency, English Heritage, English Nature, EnvironmentAgency), and other appropriate social and economic consultees as outlined in PPS12.

2.3.22 It is recommended that the practicalities of consultation with these officers andorganisations are discussed, in order to maximise the value of their input and integrateit with the stakeholder involvement arrangements on the SPD, as outlined in PPS12.


71

SPD Stage 2: Production2.3.23 During the production stage of a SPD Stages B and C and part of Stage D of the SA

process should be undertaken.

2.3.24 However, Tasks B1 and B2 may be optional if the local authority has undertaken workat sufficient detail during the SA of the DPD and are confident they can move straightinto developing a draft SPD.


Task B1: Appraising issues and options

2.3.25 Various policy options will be developed to achieve the objectives of the SPD. Eachreasonable option, including the “do-nothing” or “business as usual” options, shouldbe tested against the SA Framework to determine their performance in sustainabilityterms, with reference to the social, environmental and economic factors. Positive as wellas negative effects should be considered, and uncertainties about the nature andsignificance of effects should be noted.

2.3.26 This will be an iterative process, whereby the options developed for inclusion in thedraft SPD are revised to take into account the findings of the appraisal. Ultimately, theaim should be to work towards a detailed appraisal of the options to be published forpublic consultation. Annex 10 provides further guidance on identifying and comparingoptions.

2.3.27 At this stage it may be possible to drop some options from further consideration.Reasons for eliminating options should be documented. LPAs should also documentwhy they have not considered options which might appear attractive or practicable.

2.3.28 As each option is refined, a commentary of the key sustainability issues arising shouldbe prepared, with recommendations as to how each of the options could be improvedin order to maximise the positive effects, and minimise negative effects.




72

Task B2: Consulting on the SA of emerging options

2.3.29 Informed by the SA of the options, an initial SA Report should be produced forconsultation. The results of the consultation should be used to work up a draft SPD.Section 1.3 above provides further information on SA consultation requirements.Annex 7 outlines information to be included in the Initial SA Report.

Stage C: Appraisaing the effects of the plan

2.3.30 Tasks C1 and C2 will appraise the draft SPD using the SA Framework. Where adverseeffects are seen to be likely, possibilities for mitigation should be considered along withproposals for monitoring. The final SA Report will be prepared during this stage.

Task C1: Predicting the effects of the draft SPD, including options

2.3.31 The purpose of this task is to predict the effects of the draft SPD in social,environmental and economic terms. The potential effects should be quantified wherepossible, or a subjective judgement made where this is not possible, with reference tothe baseline situation. This review should take into account the findings of anyappraisal on a relevant DPD in order to avoid duplication of work. Annex 8 providesfurther guidance on predicting effects.


In the Environmental Report, “the likely significant effects on the environment ofimplementing the plan or programme … and reasonable alternatives … are [to be]identified, described and evaluated” (Article 5.1). The Environmental Report shouldinclude information that may “reasonably be required taking into account currentknowledge and methods of assessment, the contents and level of detail in the plan orprogramme [and] its stage in the decision-making process” (Article 5.2).

Information to be provided in the Environmental Report includes:





73


• Identifying the changes to the sustainability baseline which are predicted to arisefrom the SPD. These can be compared both with each other and with the ‘do-nothing’ or ‘business as usual’ scenario. Note that the ‘do-nothing’ and ‘business asusual’ scenarios can still involve changes to the baseline.


2.3.33 Where a SPD includes proposals for individual projects, these should be assessed insufficient level to enable significant sustainability effects to be broadly predicted. IfEnvironmental Impact Assessment is needed later for the project, it is likely to beinformed by the findings of the SA, but it will not usually be appropriate or evenpossible to provide the level of detail needed for EIA in the context of the plan.

Task C2: Assessing the effects of the draft SPD

2.3.34 Having identified the effects for each SA objective, an assessment of the significance ofthe effects needs to be made (also see Annex 8). There are a number of factors that willdetermine the significance of an effect e.g. its scale and permanence and the nature andsensitivity of the receptor. It should be noted whether the effect is likely to be positive,negative, neutral or uncertain, and the timescale and significance of the effect – whetherit is likely to be short-term or long-term, and whether major or minor. Any cumulativeeffects should also be identified. It will also be useful to refer to the baseline data andtargets defined at Stage A.

2.3.35 Conclusions on the overall sustainability effects of the draft SPD should be provided.Any inconsistencies between SPD options and the objectives of the SPD should behighlighted, and amendments made where possible to reduce conflicts.

2.3.36 As the draft SPD is refined, a commentary of the key sustainability issues arisingshould be prepared, with recommendations as to how each option/proposal could beimproved. Reasons for eliminating options should be documented. LPAs should alsodocument why they have not considered options which might appear attractive orpracticable.


74

Task C3: Mitigating adverse effects and maximising beneficial effects

2.3.37 Where the final SPD is likely to have significant sustainability effects, measures shouldbe considered to prevent, reduce or offset any adverse effects and enhance positiveeffects. These measures are referred to in this guidance as “mitigation measures”, butthis should be understood to include proactive avoidance of adverse effects as well asactions taken after effects are noticed. Recommendations for mitigating significantadverse effects, and improving positive effects, should be included in the SA Report.


• Changes to the plan as a whole or options concerned, including bringing forwardnew options, or adding or deleting options;

• Refining options, in order to improve the likelihood of positive effects and tominimise adverse effects (e.g. by strengthening policy criteria);

• Technical measures to be applied during the implementation stage, e.g. buffer zones,application of design principles;

• Identifying issues to be addressed in project environmental impact assessments forcertain projects or classes of projects;

• Proposals for changing other plans and programmes; and

• Contingency arrangements for dealing with possible adverse effects.



Task C5: Preparing the SA Report

2.3.40 The work carried out during the SA of the draft SPD should be documented in aSA Report. Annex 7 suggests an outline of the structure and content of the finalSA Report. This will also need to meet the requirements of the SEA Directive for anEnvironmental Report. The SA Report should clearly show that the Directive’srequirements in relation to the Environmental Report have been met. This shouldbe achieved through sign-posting the place or places in the SA Report where theinformation required by the Directive is provided (see para 1.2.19).

2.3.41 The final SA Report is a key output of SA. It should reflect and support the draft SPDon which formal public consultation is to be carried out. The relationship between thetwo documents should be clearly indicated.


75


Task D1: Consulting on the SA Report alongside the draft SPD.

2.3.42 Consultation on the final SA Report will need to be undertaken during the publicparticipation stage on the draft SPD as outlined in Local Development Regulation 17.

2.3.43 Section 1.3 above provides more detailed guidance on consulting statutory bodies andthe public as part of SA. As a minimum, the consultation on the SA Report will need tocomply with the requirements of the SEA Directive and requirements for consultationon the SPD. The findings of the SEA and consultation responses must be taken intoaccount and the decision-making process must be documented.

2.3.44 It may also be necessary to consult other EU Member States if it is likely that a planmay result in significant effects in other EU Member States to satisfy the requirementsof the SEA Directive.


2.3.45 If significant and valid changes to the draft SPD are raised in representations that havenot already been subject to SA, it will be necessary for the LPA to ensure that thesocial, environmental and economic effects of these changes are appraised.






76

SPD Stage 3: Adoption and Monitoring2.3.46 During the adoption and monitoring stage of the SPD the remainder of Stage D and all

of Stage E of the SA process should be undertaken.


2.3.47 After the adoption of the SPD, a statement should be published setting out any changesto the SPD in response to the SA process, the ways in which responses to consultationhave been taken into account and confirmation of monitoring arrangements. Thissummary should provide enough information to make clear how the SPD was changedas a result of the SA process and responses to consultation, or why no changes weremade. It should also show why options were rejected.

2.3.48 Information must also be made available on how the final monitoring arrangementswill be carried out during implementation. The SA Report will have alreadydocumented proposed monitoring measures, so they should be confirmed or modifiedin the light of consultation responses.

2.3.49 The SPD itself, when adopted, will be made available to the public and the statutorybodies in accordance with Local Development Regulation 19. Where EU MemberStates have been consulted, the DPD should also be made available to them inaccordance with the SEA Directive.


2.3.50 The significant effects of the implementation of SPD must be monitored to identify anyunforeseen adverse effects and to enable appropriate remedial action to be taken(though the SEA Directive does not create any obligations concerning remediation).Monitoring allows the actual effects of the SPD to be tested against those predicted inthe SA. It helps to ensure that problems which arise during implementation, whether ornot they were foreseen, can be identified and future predictions made more accurate.The LPA should also aim to use monitoring to fill any important gaps in baselineinformation, reduce uncertainties and test the accuracy of their predictions.





77

Task E1: Monitoring the significant effects of the SPD

2.3.51 Annex 11 describes how LPAs may go about designing a SA monitoring system. Inmany cases, information used in monitoring will be provided by outside bodies,including those which provide baseline information (see Annex 2). LPAs should takecare to ensure that monitoring information is appropriate to their needs and is up todate and reliable. SA monitoring can be incorporated into existing monitoringarrangements and should be included in the Annual Monitoring Report prepared forthe LDF (overtime SPD monitoring is likely to relate to some of the DPD indicators).


2.3.52 LPAs should consider how they could react if monitoring reveals adverse effects.Certain legislation or policies may require action on the part of either the Authority oranother body (although the SEA Directive itself does not create new obligations onenvironmental protection). Details of any contingency arrangements could be includedin the mitigation measures set out in the SA Report.


78

ANNEXES

Additional Guidance onthe SustainabilityAppraisal Process


80

Annex 1: Other relevant plans,programmes and sustainabilityobjectivesA plan may be influenced in various ways by other plans or programmes andsustainability objectives, such as those laid down in policies or legislation. Theserelationships should be explored to:

• identify any external social, environmental or economic objectives that should bereflected in the SA process;

• identify external factors, such as sustainability issues, that might influence thepreparation of the plan; and

• determine whether the policies in other plans and programmes might lead tocumulative effects when combined with policies in the plan that is subject to the SA.

This process should enable a planning authority to take advantage of potentialsynergies and to clarify and address any inconsistencies and constraints. Some issuesmay already have been dealt with in other plans or programmes, and need not beaddressed further in the plan which is being developed. Where significant tensions orinconsistencies arise, however, it may be helpful to consider principles of precedencebetween levels or types of plans, the relative timing of the plans or programmesconcerned, the degree to which the plans, programmes and objectives accord withcurrent policy or legal requirements and the extent of any appraisals which have alreadybeen conducted.

Figure 11 is an example of how the findings of this review can be summarised. Manyother plans and programmes will contain detailed information. The purpose of thisreview is not to list all this information, but to highlight the key influences on boththe plan and the SA. Planning authorities should focus on those aspects of other plansand programmes that are expected to have a bearing on the likely significant effects ofthe plan.

Much of the information required during Stage A of the appraisal will also be required inplan-making. Therefore information should be used in both the appraisal and plan-making activities. Information will also have underpinned old plans and appraisals andauthorities will be able to build on these existing sources as well as using informationavailable from other authorities and agencies.

Annexes: Additional Guidance on the Sustainability Appraisal Process

81


82

Figure 11: Example table for documenting the requirements of other plansand programmes

Draft PPS – Housing

Regional Environment Strategy

Regional Economic Strategy

• Includesustainabilityobjectives that aimto reducedisparities betweenmost deprivedwards and rest ofregion

• Develop policiesthat support theKnowledgeEconomy

• Baseline – averageannual increase inGVA per head 3.1%(1991-2001); targetby 2012 – 3.2%average annualincrease

• Enterprise –Accelerate businessstart-ups andimprove the survivalrates of youngcompanies

• Growth andinnovation – enableexisting businessesto adapt, prosperand grow throughinnovation

• Review wording ofsustainabilityobjectives toensure that allrelevantEnvironmentStrategy objectivesare covered

• Consider how plancan contribute toEnvironmentStrategy objectives

• No targets, butstrategy includes arange of baselineinformation andindicators related tokey objectives

• Accommodatepopulation andeconomic growthwhilst protectingthe environment

• Reduce the need totravel and achieve aswitch to moresustainable modesof transport

• Check to ensurethat the key policyrequirements arereflected in the SAFrameworkobjectives andappraisal criteria

• Compare plantarget for deliveryof housing onpreviouslydeveloped landwith national target

• National target –60% of additionalhousing should be provided onpreviously-developed land orthroughconversions

• Plan to meet thehousingrequirements of thewhole community,including those inneed of affordableand special needshousing

• Provide greaterchoice and a bettermix in the size, typeand location ofhousing

Implications for SAImplications for planKey targets andindicators relevant toplan and SA

Key objectivesrelevant to plan and SA

Figure 12 outlines an indicative list of sources of social, environmental and economicobjectives which may need to be considered in the SA process. No such list of plans,programmes or objectives can be definitive and planning authorities may need toreview other relevant plans and programmes where appropriate.


83

Figure 12: Indicative list of sources of social, environmental and economic objectives

International Context

National, Regional and Local Context

Neighbouring authority plans andNational Park Plans

Neighbouring RSSs

Community Strategies or PlansRegional Sustainable Development Framework(or Integrated Regional Strategy)

Local Neighbourhood RenewalStrategies, Pathfinder Strategies

Sustainable Communities Plan

Minerals Planning Guidance

Regional Spatial Strategies, RegionalTransport Plan, Local Transport Plans

Planning Policy Guidance/Statements

White Papers (e.g. Urban, Rural, Aviation)

UK Sustainable Development Strategy

EU Sixth Environmental Action Plan

Aarhus Convention

European programmes, such as Objective 1 andObjective 2, Interreg

European Directives, including the Habitats, Birds,Nitrates, Air Quality, Water Framework and WasteFramework Directives

European Spatial Development Perspective

The Johannesburg Declaration on SustainableDevelopment

Strategies, plans and programmes ofpossible relevance to the SA of LDF (inaddition to those relevant to RSS)

Strategies, plans and programmes of possiblerelevance to the SA of RSS


84

Figure 12: Indicative list of sources of social, environmental and economic objectivesand programmes (continued)

Social

Environment

Economic

Minerals strategies

Countryside StrategiesRural Development Plans and Rural Action Plans

Tourism strategies

Cluster strategies

Economic sector specific strategies

Innovation strategies

Business competitiveness strategies

Local Economic Development StrategiesRegional Economic Strategy

Waste strategies

Tree and woodland strategies

Local Biodiversity Action Plans, SpeciesAction Plans, Habitat Action Plans

National and regional Biodiversity Action Plans,Species Action Plans, Habitat Action Plans, CoastalHabitat Management Plans

Environment Agency River Basin Management Plans(or Catchment Flood Management Plans), WaterResources Strategies, Flood and Coastal DefenceStrategies, Shoreline Management Plans

Local Air Quality Action PlansNational and regional air quality strategies

Energy efficiency and renewable energy strategies

Climate change strategies (mitigation and adaptation)including Kyoto Agreement

Environment strategies

Crime and disorder reduction strategies

Housing strategies

Health strategies, Community Care Plans, The NHS Plan

Education and skills strategies

Cultural strategies

Social inclusion strategies

Strategies, plans and programmes ofpossible relevance to the SA of LDF (inaddition to those relevant to RSS)

Strategies, plans and programmes of possiblerelevance to the SA of RSS

Annex 2: Sources of baselineinformationThere are many sources of social, environmental and economic information, butPlanning Authorities should always assess the value of any information in relation to itsneeds. An information set may not be appropriate for an authority’s purpose; it may beunavailable at the right scale, out of date, unreliable, partial or biased. Whereinformation is problematic, choices will need to be made on whether to avoid using it,make use of it with an explanation of its limitations, or collect further information toremove uncertainty. Information collection should focus on issues and scales relevant tothe plan in question, to avoid the preparation of a generalised report on the currentsituation.

Figure 13 lists a selection of sources of information for describing the baseline inan SA. The following sections list information sources that cover multiple topics. Thefollowing sections list sources that focus on specific SA topics. Figure 13 does not claimto be comprehensive. In particular, regional and county level monitoring sites are veryuseful sources of additional information.

The websites are correct as of August 2004.


85

Figure 13: Sources of baseline information

General

LocalIn-depth information for a wide rangeof criteria (includes data on Best ValuePerformance Indicators).

ODPM – Local GovernmentPerformance www.bvpi.gov.uk

NationalNational-level statistics for countriesin the EC, includes topics such asEnvironment, Energy, Transport,Trade and Population.

EUROSTAT – Statistical Office of theEuropean Communitieshttp://europa.eu.int/comm/eurostat/Public/datashop/print-catalogue/EN?catalogue=Eurostat

–Wide range of quality of life indicators.Audit Commission and IDeA – Libraryof Local Performance Indicatorswww.local-pi-library.gov.ukwww.audit-commission.gov.ukwww.idea-knowledge.gov.uk

Smallest scaleof dataavailable

Examples of available datasetsSource of data


86

Figure 13: Sources of baseline information (continued)

General

Social

RegionalHealth in employment relatedstatistics.

Health and Safety Executivewww.hse.gov.uk

LocalStatistics and surveys of health levelsand health care provision.

Department of Healthwww.doh.gov.uk

RegionalAccidents, method of travel towork etc.

Department for Transportwww.transtat.dft.gov.uk

RegionalEducation.Department for Education and Skills(DfES)www.dfes.gov.uk/statistics/DB/SFR

RegionalNoise.Defrawww.defra.gov.uk/environment/noise

LocalRecorded crime statistics.Crime Reductionwww.crimereduction.gov.uk

LocalRural services.Countryside Agencywww.countryside.gov.uk/ruralservices

LocalVarious.County council and other regional andlocal monitoring sites (includingAnnual Monitoring Reports)

LocalProvides access to key regional dataand intelligence on a range of social,environmental and economic issues.

Regional Observatories andInformation Partnerships, IntelligenceUnitswww.regionalobservatories.org.uk

LocalWide range of quality of life data,includes information on Headline,National, Regional, Local andInternational Indicators.

Sustainable DevelopmentThe UK Government Approach:Achieving A Better Quality of Life www.sustainable-development.gov.uk

LocalWide range of data includes topicssuch as housing, education, skills andtraining, health and care, crime andsafety, community well-being etc.Holds the census information.

Office for National Statistics (ONS)www.statistics.gov.ukwww.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk




87


Social

Environment

RegionalState of the Countryside Reports anddata, Countryside Indicator Research,Landscape character, rural servicessurvey etc.

Countryside Agencywww.countryside.gov.uk

NationalBird trends.British Trust for Ornithologywww.bto.org

LocalMinerals, aquifers, unstable land,contaminated land, groundwater etc.

British Geological Survey www.bgs.ac.uk

LocalAccess to species, habitat and localaction plans.

Biodiversity Action Plans www.ukbap.org.uk

LocalVarious public health and relatedstatistics.

Public Health Observatorieswww.pho.org.uk

LocalProvides links to bibliographic,statistical, research sources andonline databases.

Public Health Electronic Librarywww.phel.gov.uk

LocalHealth inequalities, health inequalitytargets, national health targets, etc.

Our Health Nationwww.ohn.gov.uk

LocalEducation, skills and training (includesCensus data).

Office for National Statistics (ONS)www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk

RegionalHousing completions, tenantsatisfaction, etc.

ODPMwww.housing.odpm.gov.uk/statistics/publicat

–ODPM – Social Exclusion Unitwww.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk

RegionalCrime, fear of crime statistics,patterns of criminality, etc.

Home Office – Research andStatisticswww.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/index.htm

LocalEvidence-based public health, healthpromotion and health inequalities.

Health Development Agency EvidenceBase www.hda-online.org.uk/evidence

HealthPromishttp://healthpromis.hda-online.org.uk




88


Environment

LocalBird monitoring and survey work.RSPBwww.rspb.org.ukwww.rspb.org.uk/science/birdweb

LocalA network of biodiversity and wildlifeinformation.

National Biodiversity Networkwww.nbn.org.uk

LocalCountryside GIS data (includes,Agricultural Land Classification,Important Bird Areas, National NatureReserves etc).

Multi-Agency GeographicalInformation for the Countrysidewww.magic.gov.uk

LocalLocal Wildlife Trusts and LocalBiological Record Centres

LocalDesignated and non-designated sites.Local Authority Historic EnvironmentRecord Centres

NationalSite specific information e.g. Ramsarsites, wildlife and nature conservation,marine and coastal information.

Joint Nature Conservation Committeewww.jncc.gov.uk

LocalEnvironmental facts and figures,Environment Agency indicators (air,climate, land, people and lifestyles,pollution, resources and waste, water,wildlife) etc.

Environment Agencywww.environment-agency.gov.uk/yourenv

LocalDesignations, Local Authoritymanaged SSSIs etc.

English Naturewww.english-nature.org.uk

National,Regional

Heritage Counts (State of the HistoricEnvironment Report).

English Heritagewww.english-heritage.org.uk

LocalLocal Air Quality Management Plansand levels of air pollutants.

Defra www.airquality.co.uk

RegionalInland water quality and use, wasteand recycling, noise, land use andland cover, public attitudes toenvironment etc.

Defra www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics

LocalSpatial information about the Britishcountryside, including landscapefeatures, vegetation habitats andtopography.

Countryside Information Service(DEFRA)www.cis-web.org.uk




89


Environment

Economic

RegionalRenewable energy sites, capacity andgeneration etc.

Renewable Energy StatisticsDatabasewww.restats.org.uk

–Links to all the RDA websites.Regional Development Agencies Co-ordination Unit www.rdauk.org/rdauk

LocalLabour market statistics (datacaptured from Annual BusinessInquiry, Census, Jobcentre,Labour Force Survey, New EarningsSurvey etc).

Office for National Statistics (ONS) –Nomiswww.nomisweb.co.uk

LocalEconomic deprivation, workdeprivation, indices of deprivation,(includes Census data).

Office for National Statistics (ONS)www.statistics.gov.ukwww.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk

Regional/National

Economic data and tools.HM Treasury www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/

LocalPopulation of working ages, overstate pension age, income support,etc.

Department for Work and Pensionswww.dwp.gov.uk

RegionalRoad traffic statistics and casualties,transport trends.

Department for Transportwww.transtat.dft.gov.uk

RegionalBusiness Competitiveness Indicators,Public Service AgreementPerformance Indicators, as well asdata on productivity, R&Dexpenditure, labour markets, businesssurvival rates, etc.

Department of Trade and Industry(DTI)www.dti.gov.uk/regions/regionalstats.htm

RegionalAgriculture and farming production.Defrawww.defra.gov.uk

RegionalCO2 emissions, climate changeeffects.

UK Climate Impacts Programmewww.ukcip.org.uk




90

Annex 3: Collecting andpresenting baseline informationand trendsDECIDING WHAT INFORMATION TO COLLECT

Baseline information provides the basis for predicting and monitoring effects and helpsto identify sustainability problems and alternatives ways of dealing with them.Sufficient information about the current and likely future state of the plan area shouldbe collected to allow the plan’s effects to be adequately predicted.

For each indicator selected, enough data should ideally be collected to answer thefollowing questions:

• How good or bad is the current situation? Do trends show that it is getting betteror worse?

• How far is the current situation from any established thresholds or targets?

• Are particularly sensitive or important elements of the receiving environmentaffected (e.g. people, resources, species, habitats)?

• Are the problems reversible or irreversible, permanent or temporary?

• How difficult would it be to offset or remedy any damage?

• Have there been significant cumulative, synergistic or indirect effects over time? Arethere expected to be such effects in the future? (see Stage C)

The review of other policies, plans and programmes should provide a considerableamount of information. It should also be linked to the development of SA Frameworkincluding objectives and indicators and developing proposals for monitoring.

Throughout the appraisal, it may be necessary to revisit the collection of baselineinformation and characterisation of the plan area, as new information and issuesemerge. Where baseline information is unavailable or unsatisfactory, planningauthorities should consider how they could improve it for use in assessments of future

Much of this baseline information will be generic to a region or local authority, ratherthan specific to the particular plan on which SA is being carried out. It could thereforebe used to support assessments of a wide range of plans or strategies. These potentialuses should be kept in mind when information is collected. To get the best value fromthe information, it should be kept up to date and it should not merely be a snapshot ofthe situation at a particular time.

plans. Monitoring information collated during the implementation of various otherplans and programmes has the potential to be a valuable source of baseline information.The need for better information will be an important consideration when deciding howto monitor the implementation of the plan.

Figure 15 below sets out an indicative list of questions that a planning authority mayconsider when deciding what baseline information to collect. No such list can bedefinitive and planning authorities will need to give further consideration to thebaseline information required for the SA of the plan being prepared. Annex 2 includesa list of potential information sources.

The following principles can help to manage the collection of information:

• The information collected should be relevant and appropriate to the spatial scaleof the plan;

• The focus for information collection should be those aspects of the environmentalcharacter of the plan area that are: (i) sufficient to identify the key environmentalissues that are relevant to the plan area; and (ii) aspects upon which the plan mayhave a significant effect; and

• The data and information collected should be relevant to the SEA objectives andindicators.

TYPES AND SOURCES OF BASELINE INFORMATION

Baseline information may be both quantitative or qualitative. Quantitative informationsets are usually built up from existing monitoring and research activities whilequalitative information is likely to be based on judgement. For the purposes of SAqualitative information needs to be supported by reasoned evidence.

Planning authorities will probably already hold some of the social, environmental andeconomic information they need, but there may be gaps in the information that need tobe filled in order to provide an appropriate baseline for the SA process. There are manydifferent sources and forms of information, and so it is important to explore all avenuesbefore deciding that new information needs to be collected. Some different sources ofinformation include:

• Information included in other legislation, strategies, plans or programmes, which setthe context for plan preparation (see Annex 1);

• Service providers (e.g. Consultation Bodies), who may be able to provideinformation as well as technical advice and information (see Annex 2); and

In theory, collection of baseline data could go on indefinitely and a practical approach isessential. Where there are gaps, it will be important to record any resulting uncertaintiesor risks in the appraisal. Provisions should also be made to fill any major gaps for futureplans or reviews.


91

• Other consultees, including both representative bodies and members of the public,who often have a wealth of knowledge and understanding of the strategy or planarea, e.g. local conservation groups.

If it is not possible to find the data required, a record should be made. Such gaps in datamay influence judgements on risks or uncertainties during later stages of the SA. Theymay also need to be documented in the SA Report.

Not all information may be available immediately. The planning authority shouldconsider whether improvements are needed to current information collection to fillexisting gaps. Ways of improving the availability of information can be included inproposals for monitoring the implementation of the plan.

MAPPING AND PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION

It is often useful to map information, to show how it varies across the plan area. Usingtime data series, it is also possible to show how changes have occurred over time.Geographical Information Systems (GIS) are particularly useful in this respect. Theyenable layers of information to be built up, and it is possible to examine how closelyone set of information relates to another. In this way, geographical patterns and linkagescan begin to be established and explored. Where data cannot be mapped, the use ofgraphs, diagrams and other visual forms of representation can help to make the dataeasier to understand.

IDENTIFYING TRENDS

Much information will record the state of the environment at a point or points in time– providing a historic record or a snapshot in time. Where possible, however, it will beimportant to examine trends, both historical trends and likely future trends givencontinuation of existing plans under the “do nothing” or “business as usual” scenarios.There should be agreement about what these scenarios are. “Do nothing” might meanno further development in an area, while “business as usual” often means acontinuation of the current plan. In particular, it will be useful to examine whethertrends demonstrate that existing plans are achieving agreed targets or moving towardsor away from targets. This trend analysis should help to highlight existing andpotential future problems.

THE USE OF MODELLING

Modelling allows the use of baseline information to explore the implications ofdifferent approaches to planning for the future. Many aspects of sustainability can bemodelled, however one key area where modelling has been used is in transport andtravel planning and appraisal. Transport and travel modelling involves building up anunderstanding of the journeys made in an area, including why and how they are made.Using this basic information, it is possible to get an understanding of the contributionof transport to greenhouse gas emissions, air pollutants, and noise. This can be used toexplore how a plan might be able to influence travel patterns.


92

PRESENTING BASELINE INFORMATION

Figure 14 gives as example of how baseline information can be organised and presented.


93

Figure 14: Possible way of organising and presenting baseline data

Social Issues

Environmentalhealth officerconsiders notan issue –no actionrequired

Favourablesituation

No trendavailable

Noise is notperceived tobe a problem

Publicconcern overnoise

Discuss withenvironmentalhealth officerwhether noiseconsidered tobe an issue

Unable toidentifysituation

No trendavailable

Number ofpeopleaffected byambientnoise

Includeappropriateobjectivewithin SAframework;Considerpolicies in theplan thatencouragesport andrecreation,walking andcycling

Unfavourablesituation –low level ofexercise

No trendavailable

This is thelowest ratefor anydistrict in theregion

10% ofpeopleexercise 3 ormore times aweek

Proportion ofpopulationnot gettingminimumlevel ofhealthyexercise

No actionrequired

Favourablesituation.Lower thannationalaverage andgetting better

6.4% in1999: gettingbetter

England andWales 9.2%

5.8%% of peoplein authority’sareadescribingtheir healthas not good

Action/Issuesfor Plan/SA

Issueidentified?

TrendComparatorsand targets

Quantifieddata

Indicator


94

Figure 15: Questions to help decide what baseline information to collect

Social questions

Which sectors of communities are mostassociated with higher crime rates, andwhere is this most pronounced?

Which settlements are associated with aboveaverage rates of crime?

Which sectors of communities are leastable to afford a home, and where is thismost pronounced? Which locationshave houses that are judged unfit tolive in? Where is homelessnessconcentrated?

Which areas are suffering most from lack of housingin general, and lack of affordable housing inparticular?

Which sectors of communities are mostassociated with poorer skills andqualification achievements, and where isthis most pronounced?

What are the patterns of education (skills,qualifications) across the region, and which areasperform particularly poorly?

What are the main reasons for ill-healthand mortality in those areas expectinghigh death rates or lower lifeexpectancy?

What is life expectancy across the region, and arethere any parts of the region where life expectancy isparticularly poor?

Which sectors of communitiesexperience low earnings, and highdependence on benefits, and where isthis most pronounced?

What is the pattern of average earnings across theregion?

Are there concentrations of highunemployment, and does this affectparticular sectors in communities (e.g.ethnic minorities)?

What is the employment/unemployment rate for theregion as a whole, and in different parts of theregion?

Which wards are experiencing the worstlevels of social deprivation?

Are there locations that are suffering fromconcentrations of social deprivation at the regionalscale?

What is the precise distribution ofpopulation between main urban centres,smaller towns, and rural areas?

What is the broad distribution of population betweenmain urban centres, smaller towns, and rural areas?

What is the population of the plan area,and how has this changed over time?

What is the population of the region, and how hasthis changed over time?

Local Development Frameworks(additional information to that requiredfor RSSs)

Regional Spatial Strategies (including sub-regionalstrategies)


95

Figure 15: Questions to help decide what baseline information to collect (continued)

Social questions

Environmental questions

Where and how many properties are atrisk of flooding?

Which areas are at risk of coastal or fluvial flooding?

Where are the derelict, degraded orunderused land and sites? Which sitesare suffering from contamination?

Where are there concentrations of derelict, degradedor underused land and properties?

What is the pattern of developmentdensity across the plan area – are thereany locations where density could beincreased?

What is the pattern in the efficiency of use of land(e.g. densities per hectare)?

Has the landscape and townscapecharacter of the plan area been defined,and which are those locations thatshould be conserved, restored orenhanced?

Which areas have been designated because of theirlandscape quality (National Parks, AONBs)?

Where are features of cultural heritageimportance (e.g. listed buildings,scheduled ancient monuments,conservation areas, historic parks andgardens, views and vistas, etc), andwhat state are they in?

Which parts of the region are rich in cultural heritage,and are they at risk of damage or neglect?

What are the local priorities forbiodiversity included in BiodiversityActions Plans?

What are the regional priorities for biodiversityincluded in Biodiversity Action Plans?

Which features are locally importanthabitats for wildlife? Are there anylocally designated wildlife sites?

Which habitats are nationally/ internationallyimportant, where are they, and what condition arethey in?

Which neighbourhoods or communitiesdo not have easy local access toservices and facilities (e.g. shopping,community, education, health, sport,leisure, open space, etc.) without havingto use car?

What is the distribution of community services andfacilities – which settlements or broad locations arepoorly served?

Which neighbourhoods are particularlyassociated with poor quality andneglected surroundings?

Which settlements offer poor quality livingsurroundings?




96


Environmental questions

Economic questions

Are there parts of the plan area wherethe economy is in danger of over-heating?

Which parts of the region are in danger of over-heating economically?

Which parts of the plan area arestruggling most economically?

Which parts of the region are under-performingeconomically?

Are there any discernible differencesand patterns in productivity across theplan area?

What is the performance and pattern of productivity(GVA per capita) in the region?

How is the economy of the plan areaperforming in terms of total output(GVA)?

What is the total output of the economy, and howhas this changed over time relative to other regions?

Are there any significant localenvironmental issues arising frommineral activities?

Where are the main unexploited mineral reserves inthe region, and what is the record in the use ofrecycled and secondary aggregates?

Which locations have been identified forrecycling and waste disposal (e.g.landfill), and what constraints do theyexperience?

How much waste does the region generate, andwhat is the record of recycling?

Are there any parts of the plan area thatsuffer from excessive noise levels?

Are there any parts of the region that have beendefined as tranquil areas, and how have thesechanged over time?

Are there locations where agriculturalland is degraded?

Where is the best and most versatile agriculturalland?

Which locations have sufferedsignificantly from subsidence in thepast?

Which areas are at risk of subsidence, taking intoaccount climate change?

Are there particular activities (e.g.industry, agriculture) that are highconsumers of water in areas ofshortage?

Are there parts of the region that are experiencing, orlikely to experience, shortages in water supply takinginto account effects on the environment (e.g. water-dependent habitats)?

Which locations are contributing to poorwater quality and why?

What is the quality of water in rivers and otherwaterbodies – are there significant areas whereimprovements are required?

Are any areas subject to Air QualityManagement Plans?

Which areas are suffering from poor air quality?




97


Economic questions

What are the strengths and weaknessesof infrastructure in the plan area, interms of supporting the economy?

What are the strengths and weaknesses ofinfrastructure in the region, in terms of supporting theeconomy?

In what sectors and communities in theplan area are there skills shortages?

In what sectors and parts of the region are thereskills shortages?

What is the local pattern and rate ofR&D (research and development)?

What is the pattern and rate of R&D (research anddevelopment)?

What is the local pattern of industrialand office rental costs?

What is the pattern of industrial and office rentalcosts?

What is the rate and pattern of inwardinvestment in the plan area?

What is the rate and pattern of inward investment inthe region?

What is the rate and pattern ofindigenous investment in the plan area?

What is the rate and pattern of indigenousinvestment in the region?

Which parts of the plan area experiencepoor business survival rates?

What is the set-up and survival rate of businessesin the region, and which sectors/areas perform bestor worst?

What reasons do local businesses givefor success or lack of success indifferent sectors and locations in theplan area?

Which economic sectors have been experiencingabove average growth, which below average growth,and which decline, and how have these varied acrossthe region?

Which economic sectors are strong andwhich are weaker in the plan area?

Are there parts of the region that have concentrationsof specific industrial sectors (e.g. clusters)?

Have different parts of the plan areabeen experiencing converging ordiverging economic performance overtime?

How have disparities between economicperformance in different parts of the region changedover time?



Annex 4: Recordingsustainability issues

Figure 16 provides an example of recording key sustainability issues.


98

Figure 16: Example of documenting key sustainability issues (local level)

Highways Agency (pers comm.), andRegional Transport Strategy (review ofother plans, programmes)

Regional Economic Strategy (review ofother plans, programmes)

Economic

5. There is high traffic congestion at peak hours atthe junction of the motorway.

6. There are skills shortages in high-tech andhealth sectors.

English Nature, (SSSI citations), plusLandscape Character Assessment(review of baseline information)

Environment Agency (floodplain maps,from review of baseline information)

Environment

3. The town is constrained by environmentallydesignated and important land. The greenwedges are an important feature of the townthat should be maintained: they restrictdevelopment.

4. The southern fringe of the town is located in thefloodplain.

Regional Housing Strategy andRegional Economic Strategy (review ofother plans and programmes)

Index of Local Deprivation (review ofbaseline information)

Social

1. The town has a higher than average elderlypopulation, with concerns raised about the out-migration of young skilled people, and thefuture needs of the elderly population.

2. The plan area contains some of the mostdeprived areas in the UK, including wards whichfalls within the top 10% worst deprived in thecountry.

SourceKey issues and problems

Annex 5: Devising aSustainability AppraisalFrameworkSustainability Appraisal Framework

The SA Framework provides a way in which sustainability effects can be described,analysed and compared. It is central to the SA process.

A SA Framework consists of objectives which may be expressed in the form of targets,the achievement of which should be measurable using identified indicators. Thesustainability objectives are distinct from the objectives of the plan, though they may insome cases overlap with them.

Planning authorities may also choose to include more detailed sub-objectives andrelated indicators in their SA Framework. Sub-objectives can help to ensure that all thekey issues to be considered in the SA are incorporated in the SA Framework. Careshould be taken to ensure that the requirements of the SEA Directive (e.g. theidentification of environmental protection objectives, such as those relating to EClegislation) are met. However, planning authorities are encouraged to ensure that thenumber of objectives is manageable.

SA objectives can include both externally imposed social, environmental and economicobjectives laid down by law or policy or in other plans and programmes and othersdevised specifically in relation to the context of the plan being prepared. Other plansand programmes of particular relevance will be the UK Sustainable DevelopmentStrategy, the Regional Sustainable Development Frameworks, and at the local levelCommunity Strategies or Plans. Baseline information collected and sustainability issuesidentified at earlier stages in the SA can also be especially useful in identifyingobjectives and indicators.

SA objectives and indicators can be used in monitoring the implementation of the plan.However, state of the environment indicators are not always applicable. Instead theindicators should help the decision-making process and may not necessarily be thesame during the assessment as in monitoring.

SEA objectives and indicators should be developed in consultation with theConsultation Bodies and relevant stakeholders, and revisited in the light of the baselineinformation and any problems identified.


99

Objectives

An objective is a statement of what is intended, specifying a desired direction of change.For this guidance, a distinction needs to be made between three types of objectives:

• Plan objectives are the objectives adopted for the plan, usually through a process ofexpert consideration, public consultation and political approval. Governmentguidance increasingly requires plan objectives to be based on sustainabilityconsiderations, and the development of SA objectives may help to promote ideas formaking them more sustainable.

• External objectives are other objectives to which planners must have regardindependently from the plan and the SA. They include social, environmental andeconomic objectives which, if binding, must be covered in the SA Report.

• SA objectives provide a methodological yardstick against which the social,environmental, and economic effects of the plan can be tested. These objectives aredistinct from plan and external objectives, though they will often overlap with them.They may be “inherited” from the sustainability objectives reviewed in Stage A, butmay also include additional (often more locally focused) objectives.

Objectives can be expressed so that they are measurable (e.g. an objective to “reducegreenhouse gas emissions”, could be expressed as “reduce CO2 emissions by 12.5% by2010”). The achievement of objectives is normally measured by using indicators.

SA objectives can often be derived from sustainability objectives identified in otherplans and programmes or from a review of baseline information and sustainabilityproblems. The statutory bodies may also have suggestions for SA objectives.

Figure 18 suggests a wide range of potential SA objectives and indicators. They shouldbe adapted to take account of local circumstances and concerns. For instance, localobjectives should be added to reflect local-level circumstances; objectives that areirrelevant to the area deleted; and more detailed objectives added. A plan concernedwith minerals, for example, could include more objectives for soil and water quality,maintenance of the hydrological regime, and mineral reserves, and could express themin more detailed terms.

Planning authorities should bear the following considerations in mind at this stage:

• SA objectives should focus on outcomes (or ends), not how the outcomes will beachieved (“inputs” or means). For example, they should focus on improvedbiodiversity, rather than protection of specific wildlife sites. This provides a cross-check on whether plan objectives, which are often framed in input terms, are thebest possible ones for sustainability;

• The development of SA objectives and indicators and the collection of baselineinformation should inform each other. As the objectives become clearer, they shouldhelp to focus and restrict the collection of baseline information, whilst the baselineinformation should help to identify which SA objectives are of most concern for aparticular plan;


100

• Objectives should be linked to indicators explicitly measuring progress or otherwisetowards them, and likely to be influenced by the plan; and

• Each objective should be genuinely needed and should not duplicate or overlap withother objectives. Experience suggests that between 12 and 25 objectives are normallyenough to cover the range of topics needed for SA and to keep the process efficientand manageable.

Figure 17 provides an example of how a planning authority may record the reasons forchoosing the SA objectives and developing the SA Framework.


101

Figure 17: Sources for proposed SA Objectives (regional level)

Social objectives

Environmental objectives

To reducecontributions toclimate change

CO2 emissions are25% above 1990levels; emissionsfrom trafficincreasing 5% perannum

• RegionalEconomicStrategy

• RegionalClimateChangeStrategy

Climaticfactors

Minimisegreenhouse gasemissions

To maintain andenhancebiodiversity, floraand fauna

30% of SSSIs inunfavourablecondition;farmland birdspopulations falling

• PPG9 NatureConservation

• RegionalEnvironmentStrategy

Biodiversity,flora, fauna

Biodiverse andattractive naturalenvironment

To offer everybodythe opportunity forrewarding andsatisfyingemployment

Difficulty inrecruiting andaccommodatingkey workers tomajor urbanconurbations


• RegionalSocialStrategy

PopulationGood qualityemploymentopportunitiesavailable to all

To provideeverybody with theopportunity to livein a decent home

Homelessnessabove nationalaverage; waitinglists in deprivedwards are acute

• PPG3 –Housing

Population,human health

Quality housingavailable toeveryone

Proposed SAObjectives

Sustainabilityissues identified

Other plans andprogrammes

SEA DirectiveRegional SDFramework

Other sources indicating importanceof issue wording

Source of wording sustainabilityissue/wording

It may be useful to test the internal compatibility of the SA objectives, for instanceusing a framework such as Figure 19. There may be tensions between objectives thatcannot be resolved; the compatibility assessment should clarify these so that subsequentdecisions are well based, and mitigation can be considered.

Some objectives may be more important than others. It may be worthwhile to give arough ranking of objectives, or to highlight those which are judged to be particularlyimportant – for instance because current conditions are problematic or because they areof particular concern to the public – to help focus the later stages of the SA.

The job of appraisal is to test that the policies and objectives included in the plan willhelp achieve the results that are intended. To achieve this, objectives should be framed(so far as possible) in terms of outcomes – the ends rather than the means. This meansthere may not be an objective corresponding to each theme or policy in a plan. Somefamiliar objectives, such as building on brownfield land, developing renewable energy,increasing recycling or economic growth, are likely to be included in many strategiesand plans. But that does not mean they should also be included in the appraisal’sobjectives.

For example, the point of building housing on ‘brownfield’ rather than ‘greenfield’ landis to achieve the objectives of cleaning up and regenerating derelict or degradedenvironments, protecting the countryside and wildlife from being lost to, or damagedby, development, and encouraging development to be located close to amenities. SAshould not therefore ask how much development is being delivered on brownfield land,but whether these objectives are being achieved.


102

Figure 17: Sources for proposed SA Objectives (regional level) (continued)

Economic objectives

To encourageefficient patternsof movement insupport ofeconomic growth

Congestion onmotorwaynetwork; lowproportion offreight by rail


N/ATransportconditions forbusinesssuccess,economic growthand investment

To reducedisparities ineconomicperformance

The regioncontains 20%ofthe most deprived(lower quartile)wards in England


N/AReduceinequalitiesacross the region

Proposed SAObjectives

Sustainabilityissues identified

Other plans andprogrammes

SEA DirectiveRegional SDFramework

Other sources indicating importanceof issue wording

Source of wording sustainabilityissue/wording

Likewise, renewable energy is one means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – energyefficiency is another. Recycling is one means to reduce waste – avoiding it at source,reuse and composting are others. Economic growth is a means to provide people witha better lifestyle – but reducing what people need to spend, and encouraging unpaidservices and benefits are others. In all these cases, appraisal can test whether policiesare delivering what is wanted – and prompt the plan to consider additional or alternativeways. This helps fulfil an important requirement of SA: to consider alternatives to theplan under consideration.


103


104

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

Ind

ex o

f lo

cal d

epriv

atio

n (2

)

Pro

por

tion

of t

he p

opul

atio

n w

ho li

ve in

war

ds

that

ran

k w

ithin

the

mos

t d

epriv

ed 1

0% a

nd 2

5% o

f w

ard

s in

the

cou

ntry

(3)

Per

cent

age

of p

opul

atio

n of

wor

king

age

who

are

cla

imin

g ke

yb

enef

its (3

)

Pro

por

tion

of c

hild

ren

und

er 1

6 liv

ing

in lo

w in

com

eho

useh

old

s (3

)

Inco

me

dep

rivat

ion

– nu

mb

er o

f p

eop

le w

ithin

fam

ilies

tha

t ar

ed

epen

den

t on

mea

ns-t

este

d In

com

e S

upp

ort

ben

efits

(4)

Ben

efit

reci

pie

nts

(1)

Pro

por

tion

of y

oung

peo

ple

(18-

24 y

ear

old

s) in

ful

l-tim

eed

ucat

ion

or e

mp

loym

ent

(3)

Fuel

pov

erty

(2)

Wat

er a

fford

abili

ty (2

)

Will

it r

educ

e p

over

ty a

nd s

ocia

lex

clus

ion

in t

hose

are

as m

ost

affe

cted

?

Will

it im

pro

ve a

fford

abili

ty t

oes

sent

ial s

ervi

ces

to t

he h

ome?

Ind

icat

ors

of s

ucce

ssin

tac

klin

g p

over

tyan

d s

ocia

l exc

lusi

on(c

hild

ren

in lo

win

com

e ho

useh

old

s,ad

ults

with

out

qua

lific

atio

ns a

nd in

wor

kles

s ho

useh

old

s,el

der

ly in

fue

lp

over

ty) (

2)

To r

educ

e p

over

tyan

d s

ocia

l exc

lusi

on

Figu

res

in b

rack

ets

rela

te t

o th

e fo

llow

ing

natio

nal s

ourc

es o

f in

dic

ator

s

(1)

Loca

l Qua

lity

of L

ife C

ount

s (D

ETR

, Ju

ly 2

000)

(2)

Qua

lity

of L

ife C

ount

s (D

ETR

, D

ecem

ber

199

9)(3

)A

udit

Com

mis

sion

Vol

unta

ry Q

ualit

y of

Life

Ind

icat

ors

(Def

initi

ons

Han

db

ook,

Aud

it C

omm

issi

on,

2002

-200

3)(4

)D

TI B

usin

ess

Com

pet

itive

ness

Ind

icat

ors

(uni

tary

aut

horit

y/lo

cal a

utho

rity

dis

tric

t/Le

arni

ng a

nd S

kills

Cou

ncil

area

s/N

UTS

are

as)

(5)

DE

TR In

dic

es o

f D

epriv

atio

n, 2

000

Ind

icat

ors

in it

alic

s ar

e su

gges

ted

ind

icat

ors

in t

he a

bse

nce

of in

dic

ator

s in

the

sou

rces

list

ed a

bov

e


105

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Mor

talit

y b

y ca

use

(1)

Dea

th r

ates

fro

m c

ance

r, ci

rcul

ator

y d

isea

se,

acci

den

ts a

ndsu

icid

es (2

)

Wor

k fa

talit

ies

and

inju

ry r

ates

; w

orki

ng d

ays

lost

thr

ough

illne

ss (2

)

Dea

th r

ate

by

case

(dire

ct s

tand

ard

ised

mor

talit

y ra

te p

er10

0,00

0 p

opul

atio

n) (3

)

Infa

nt m

orta

lity

(3)

Res

pira

tory

illn

ess

(2)

NH

S h

osp

ital w

aitin

g lis

ts (2

)

Acc

ess

to a

GP

(5)

Acc

ess

to a

hos

pita

l

Par

ticip

atio

n in

sp

ort

and

cul

tura

l act

iviti

es (2

)

Pro

por

tion

of jo

urne

ys o

n fo

ot o

r b

y cy

cle

Acc

ess

to lo

cal g

reen

sp

ace

(2)

Ach

ieve

men

t of

‘A

cces

sib

le N

atur

al G

reen

Sp

ace

Sta

ndar

ds’

How

do

scho

ol c

hild

ren

trav

el t

o sc

hool

? (1

) (2)

Acc

ess

to t

he c

ount

rysi

de

(2)

Hea

lth in

equa

litie

s (2

)

Will

it r

educ

e d

eath

rat

es?

Will

it im

pro

ve a

cces

s to

hig

h q

ualit

y,he

alth

fac

ilitie

s?

Will

it e

ncou

rage

hea

lthy

lifes

tyle

s?

Will

it r

educ

e he

alth

ineq

ualit

ies?

Exp

ecte

d y

ears

of

heal

thy

life

(2)

To im

pro

ve h

ealth

ofth

e p

opul

atio

nov

eral

l


106

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Hom

eles

snes

s (1

)

Tem

por

ary

acco

mm

odat

ion/

rou

gh s

leep

ers

(2)

Affo

rdab

le h

ousi

ng (h

ouse

pric

e/ea

rnin

gs a

fford

abili

ty r

atio

) (3)

Ava

ilab

ility

of

good

qua

lity

hous

ing

for

all s

ocia

l gro

ups

incl

udin

g lo

w in

com

e ho

useh

old

s, lo

ne p

aren

t ho

useh

old

s,et

hnic

min

oriti

es,

dis

able

d a

nd y

oung

peo

ple

Hou

sing

com

ple

tion

figur

es

Affo

rdab

le h

ousi

ng c

omp

letio

n fig

ures

Num

ber

of

unfit

hom

es p

er 1

,000

dw

ellin

gs (3

)

Hom

es ju

dge

d u

nfit

to li

ve in

(1) (

2)

Will

it r

educ

e ho

mel

essn

ess?

Will

it in

crea

se t

he r

ange

and

affo

rdab

ility

of

hous

ing

for

all

soci

algr

oup

s?

Will

it r

educ

e th

e nu

mb

er o

n un

fitho

mes

?

To p

rovi

de

ever

ybod

yw

ith t

he o

pp

ortu

nity

to li

ve in

a d

ecen

tho

me

Qua

lific

atio

ns a

t ag

e 19

(2)

16 y

ear

old

s w

ith n

o q

ualif

icat

ions

(2)

Youn

g p

eop

le w

ith L

evel

2 q

ualif

icat

ions

(a) t

he p

rop

ortio

n of

19 y

ear

old

s w

ith L

evel

2 q

ualif

icat

ions

(5 o

r m

ore

GC

SE

s at

grad

es A

*-C

or

NV

Q e

qui

vale

nt) (

b) B

V38

per

cent

age

of 1

5ye

ar o

ld p

upils

in s

choo

ls m

aint

aine

d b

y th

e lo

cal a

utho

rity

achi

evin

g fiv

e or

mor

e G

CS

Es

at g

rad

es A

*-C

or

equi

vale

nt (3

)

Ad

ult

educ

atio

n (1

)

Lear

ning

par

ticip

atio

n (2

)

Qua

lific

atio

ns/s

kills

– p

erce

ntag

e of

wor

king

age

pop

ulat

ion

(16

to 6

4/59

) with

qua

lific

atio

ns t

o ei

ther

NV

Q L

evel

1 0

2/e

qui

vale

nt,

NV

Q L

evel

3 o

r 4

or a

tra

de

app

rent

ices

hip

or

with

no f

orm

al q

ualif

icat

ions

(4)

Will

it im

pro

ve q

ualif

icat

ions

and

skill

sof

you

ng p

eop

le?

Will

it im

pro

ve q

ualif

icat

ions

and

skill

sof

ad

ults

?

Qua

lific

atio

ns o

fyo

ung

peo

ple

(1)

To im

pro

ve t

heed

ucat

ion

and

ski

llsof

the

pop

ulat

ion

over

all


107

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Leve

l of

crim

e (2

)

Dom

estic

bur

glar

ies

per

1,0

00 h

ouse

hold

s (3

)

Vio

lent

offe

nces

com

mitt

ed p

er 1

,000

pop

ulat

ion

(3)

Vehi

cle

crim

es p

er 1

,000

pop

ulat

ion

(3)

Fear

of

crim

e (1

) (2)

(a) P

erce

ntag

e of

res

iden

ts s

urve

yed

who

fee

l ‘fa

irly

safe

’ or

‘ver

y sa

fe’

afte

r d

ark

whi

lst

outs

ide

in t

heir

loca

l aut

horit

y ar

ea(b

) Per

cent

age

of r

esid

ents

sur

veye

d w

ho f

eel ‘

fairl

y sa

fe’

or‘v

ery

safe

’ d

urin

g th

e d

ay w

hils

t ou

tsid

e in

the

ir lo

cal a

utho

rity

area

(3)

Noi

se le

vels

(2)

Pub

lic c

once

rn o

ver

nois

e (1

)

Per

cent

age

of r

esid

ents

sur

veye

d w

ho a

re c

once

rned

with

diff

eren

t ty

pes

of

nois

e in

the

ir ar

ea (3

)

Will

it r

educ

e ac

tual

leve

ls o

f cr

ime?

Will

it r

educ

e th

e fe

ar o

f cr

ime?

Will

it r

educ

e ac

tual

noi

se le

vels

?

Will

it r

educ

e no

ise

conc

erns

?

Rec

ord

ed c

rime

per

1,00

0 p

opul

atio

n (1

)To

red

uce

anti-

soci

alac

tivity


108

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Soc

ial p

artic

ipat

ion

(1)

Com

mun

ity w

ell b

eing

(1)

Tena

nt/s

atis

fact

ion/

par

ticip

atio

n (1

)

Volu

ntar

y ac

tivity

(2)

Per

cent

age

of v

olun

tary

/com

mun

ity o

rgan

isat

ions

in a

sp

ecifi

ed lo

calit

y p

er 1

,000

tha

t p

erfo

rmed

wel

l or

very

wel

l in

the

pas

t ye

ar (3

)

Ext

ent

of in

form

al v

olun

teer

ing

(3)

Per

cent

age

of a

dul

ts s

urve

yed

who

fee

l the

y ca

n in

fluen

ced

ecis

ions

affe

ctin

g th

eir

own

loca

l are

a (3

)

Per

cent

age

of p

eop

le w

ho f

eel t

hat

thei

r lo

cal a

rea

is a

pla

cew

here

peo

ple

fro

m d

iffer

ent

bac

kgro

und

s an

d c

omm

uniti

esca

nliv

e to

geth

er h

arm

onio

usly

(3)

Will

it e

ncou

rage

eng

agem

ent

inco

mm

unity

act

iviti

es?

Will

it in

crea

se t

he a

bili

ty o

f p

eop

leto

influ

ence

dec

isio

ns?

Will

it im

pro

ve e

thni

c re

latio

ns?

Com

mun

ity s

piri

t (2

)To

enc

oura

ge a

sens

e of

com

mun

ityid

entit

y an

d w

elfa

re


109

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Une

mp

loym

ent

(4)

Cla

iman

t co

unt

(4)

Pro

por

tion

of p

eop

le o

f w

orki

ng a

ge w

ho a

re in

wor

k (2

) (3)

Pro

por

tion

of p

eop

le o

f w

orki

ng a

ge in

wor

kles

s ho

useh

old

s (2

)

Pro

por

tion

of p

eop

le o

f w

orki

ng a

ge o

ut o

f w

ork

for

mor

e th

antw

o ye

ars

(2)

Pro

por

tion

of u

nem

plo

yed

peo

ple

cla

imin

g b

enef

its w

ho h

ave

bee

n ou

t of

wor

k fo

r m

ore

than

a y

ear

(3)

Pro

por

tion

of lo

ne p

aren

ts,

long

-ter

m il

l and

dis

able

d p

eop

lew

ho a

re e

cono

mic

ally

act

ive

(2)

Eth

nic

min

ority

em

plo

ymen

t an

d u

nem

plo

ymen

t (2

)

Peo

ple

in e

mp

loym

ent

wor

king

long

hou

rs (2

)

Low

pay

(2)

Ave

rage

ear

ning

s –

aver

age

hour

ly e

arni

ngs

(incl

udin

gov

ertim

ean

d p

rem

ium

pay

) for

ful

l-tim

e em

plo

yees

onl

y (4

)

Will

it r

educ

e un

emp

loym

ent

over

all?

Will

it r

educ

e lo

ng-t

erm

unem

plo

ymen

t?

Will

it p

rovi

de

job

op

por

tuni

ties

for

thos

e m

ost

in n

eed

of

emp

loym

ent?

Will

it h

elp

to

red

uce

long

hou

rsw

orke

d?

Will

it h

elp

to

imp

rove

ear

ning

s?

Em

plo

ymen

t (4

)To

offe

r ev

eryb

ody

the

opp

ortu

nity

for

rew

ard

ing

and

satis

fyin

gem

plo

ymen

t


110

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

(a) P

erce

ntag

e of

res

iden

ts s

urve

yed

fin

din

g it

easy

to

acce

sske

y lo

cal s

ervi

ces

(b) P

erce

ntag

e of

res

iden

ts d

efin

ed a

s w

ithin

a d

ista

nce

of 5

00m

(15

min

utes

wal

k) o

f ke

y lo

cal s

ervi

ces

(3)

Acc

ess

to a

pos

t of

fice

(5)

Acc

ess

to f

ood

sho

ps

(5)

Acc

ess

to a

GP

(5)

Acc

ess

to a

prim

ary

scho

ol (5

)

New

ret

ail f

loor

sp

ace

in t

own

cent

res

and

out

of

tow

n (2

)

Soc

ial i

nves

tmen

t as

per

cen

t of

GD

P (2

)

Num

ber

of

child

care

pla

ces

avai

lab

le p

er 1

,000

pop

ulat

ion

ofch

ildre

n un

der

5 n

ot in

ear

ly e

duc

atio

n (3

)

Faci

litie

s fo

r yo

ung

peo

ple

(3)

Will

it im

pro

ve a

cces

sib

ility

to

key

loca

l ser

vice

s?

Will

it im

pro

ve a

cces

sib

ility

to

shop

pin

g fa

cilit

ies?

Will

it im

pro

ve t

he le

vel o

f in

vest

men

tin

key

com

mun

ity s

ervi

ces?

Acc

ess

to k

eyse

rvic

es (1

)To

imp

rove

acce

ssib

ility

to

esse

ntia

l ser

vice

san

d f

acili

ties

Per

cent

age

of r

esid

ents

who

are

sat

isfie

d w

ith t

heir

neig

hbou

rhoo

d a

s a

pla

ce t

o liv

e (3

)

Per

cent

age

of r

esid

ents

sur

veye

d w

ho c

onsi

der

the

irne

ighb

ourh

ood

is g

ettin

g w

orse

(3)

Will

it im

pro

ve t

he s

atis

fact

ion

ofp

eop

le w

ith t

heir

neig

hbou

rhoo

ds

asp

lace

s to

live

?

Qua

lity

ofsu

rrou

ndin

gs (2

)To

imp

rove

the

qua

lity

of w

here

peo

ple

live


111

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Env

ironm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

Roa

d t

raffi

c (2

)

Ann

ual a

vera

ge f

low

per

1,0

00km

of

prin

cip

al r

oad

s (3

)

Den

sity

of

dev

elop

men

t

Ove

rsea

s tr

avel

(2)

Hea

vy g

ood

s ve

hicl

e m

ileag

e in

tens

ity (2

)

Pas

seng

er t

rave

l by

mod

es (2

)

Per

cent

age

of r

esid

ents

sur

veye

d u

sing

diff

eren

t m

odes

of

tran

spor

t, t

heir

reas

on f

or,

and

dis

tanc

e of

, tr

avel

(3)

Per

cent

age

of c

hild

ren

trav

ellin

g to

(a) p

rimar

y sc

hool

and

(b)

seco

ndar

y sc

hool

by

diff

eren

t m

odes

of

tran

spor

t (3

)

Leis

ure

trip

s b

y m

ode

of t

rans

por

t (2

)

Will

it r

educ

e tr

affic

vol

umes

?

Will

it r

educ

e th

e ne

ed f

orov

erse

astr

avel

Will

it r

educ

e th

e ef

fect

of

heav

ygo

ods

traf

fic o

n p

eop

le a

nd t

heen

viro

nmen

t?

Will

it in

crea

se t

he p

rop

ortio

n of

jour

neys

usi

ng m

odes

oth

er t

han

the

car?

Ave

rage

jour

ney

leng

th b

y p

urp

ose

(2)

To r

educ

e th

e ef

fect

of t

raffi

c on

the

envi

ronm

ent

Rea

l cha

nges

in t

he c

ost

of t

rans

por

t (1

)

Dis

tanc

e tr

avel

led

rel

ativ

e to

inco

me

(2)

Acc

ess

to s

ervi

ces

in r

ural

are

as (2

)

Acc

ess

for

dis

able

d p

eop

le (2

)

Will

it m

ake

acce

ss m

ore

affo

rdab

le?

Will

it m

ake

acce

ss e

asie

r fo

r th

ose

with

out

acce

ss t

o a

car?

Peo

ple

fin

din

gac

cess

diff

icul

t (2

)To

imp

rove

acce

ssib

ility

for

thos

em

ost

in n

eed


112

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Env

ironm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Num

ber

of

day

s of

air

pol

lutio

n (1

)

(a) N

umb

er o

f d

ays

per

yea

r w

hen

air

pol

lutio

n is

mod

erat

e or

high

er f

or P

M10

, (b

) Ann

ual a

vera

ge n

itrog

en d

ioxi

de

conc

entr

atio

n, a

nd (c

) for

rur

al s

ites,

num

ber

of

day

s p

er y

ear

whe

n ai

r p

ollu

tion

is m

oder

ate

or h

ighe

r fo

r oz

one

(3)

Con

cent

ratio

ns o

f se

lect

ed a

ir p

ollu

tant

s (2

)

Sul

phu

r d

ioxi

de

and

nitr

ogen

dio

xid

es e

mis

sion

s (2

)

Aci

difi

catio

n in

the

UK

(2)

Pop

ulat

ion

livin

g in

Air

Qua

lity

Man

agem

ent

Are

as

Ach

ieve

men

t of

Em

issi

on L

imit

Valu

es

Will

it im

pro

ve a

ir q

ualit

y?D

ays

whe

n p

ollu

tion

is m

oder

ate

orhi

gher

(2)

To im

pro

ve a

ir q

ualit

y

Per

cent

age

of m

ain

river

s an

d c

anal

s as

goo

d o

r fa

ir q

ualit

y (3

)

Dan

gero

us s

ubst

ance

s in

wat

er (2

)

Nut

rient

s in

wat

er (2

)

Est

uarin

e w

ater

qua

lity,

mar

ine

inp

uts

(2)

Com

plia

nce

with

Bat

hing

Wat

er D

irect

ive

(2)

Will

it im

pro

ve t

he q

ualit

y of

inla

ndw

ater

?

Will

it im

pro

ve t

he q

ualit

y of

coas

talw

ater

s

Riv

ers

of g

ood

or

fair

qua

lity

(1) (

2)To

imp

rove

wat

erq

ualit

y


113

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Env

ironm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Net

cha

nge

in n

atur

al/s

emi-

natu

ral h

abita

ts (1

)

Cha

nges

in p

opul

atio

ns o

f se

lect

ed c

hara

cter

istic

sp

ecie

s (1

)

Tren

ds

in p

lant

bio

div

ersi

ty (2

)

Bio

div

ersi

ty in

coa

stal

/mar

ine

area

s (2

)

Nat

ive

spec

ies

at r

isk

(2) e

spec

ially

pro

tect

ed s

pec

ies

Ach

ieve

men

t of

Bio

div

ersi

ty A

ctio

n P

lan

targ

ets

Ext

ent

and

man

agem

ent

of S

SS

Is (2

)

The

area

of

land

des

igna

ted

as

an S

SS

I whi

ch is

in‘u

nfav

oura

ble

con

diti

on’

(3)

Site

s af

fect

ed b

y ab

stra

ctio

n (2

)

Are

a of

woo

dla

nd in

the

UK

(2)

Are

a of

anc

ient

sem

i-na

tura

l woo

dla

nd in

GB

(2)

Sus

tain

able

man

agem

ent

of w

ood

land

(2)

Will

it c

onse

rve

and

enh

ance

natu

ral/s

emi-

natu

ral h

abita

ts?

Will

it c

onse

rve

and

enh

ance

sp

ecie

sd

iver

sity

, an

d in

par

ticul

ar a

void

har

mto

pro

tect

ed s

pec

ies?

Will

it m

aint

ain

and

enh

ance

site

sd

esig

nate

d f

or t

heir

natu

reco

nser

vatio

n in

tere

st?

Will

it m

aint

ain

and

enh

ance

woo

dla

nd c

over

and

man

agem

ent?

Pop

ulat

ions

of

wild

bird

s (2

)To

mai

ntai

n an

den

hanc

e b

iod

iver

sity

,flo

ra a

nd f

auna


114

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Env

ironm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Loss

or

dam

age

to li

sted

bui

ldin

gs a

nd t

heir

sett

ings

Loss

or

dam

age

to s

ched

uled

anc

ient

mon

umen

ts a

ndth

eir

sett

ings

Loss

or

dam

age

to h

isto

ric p

arks

and

gar

dens

and

the

ir se

ttin

gs

Loss

or

dam

age

to h

isto

ric la

ndsc

apes

and

the

ir se

ttin

gs

Per

cent

age

of c

onse

rvat

ion

area

dem

olis

hed

or

othe

rwis

e lo

st

Loss

or

dam

age

to h

isto

ric v

iew

line

s an

d v

ista

s

Will

it p

rote

ct a

nd e

nhan

ce s

ites,

feat

ures

and

are

as o

f hi

stor

ical

,ar

chae

olog

ical

and

cul

tura

l val

ue in

bot

h ur

ban

and

rur

al a

reas

?

Bui

ldin

gs o

f gr

ade

Ian

d II

* at

ris

k of

dec

ay (2

)

To c

onse

rve

and

whe

re a

pp

rop

riate

enha

nce

the

hist

oric

envi

ronm

ent

New

hom

es b

uilt

on p

revi

ousl

y d

evel

oped

land

(1) (

2)

Vaca

nt la

nd a

nd p

rop

ertie

s an

d d

erel

ict

land

(2)

(a) P

rop

ortio

n of

land

sto

ck t

hat

is d

erel

ict

(b) p

erce

ntag

e of

new

hou

sing

dev

elop

men

t on

pre

viou

sly

dev

elop

ed la

nd (3

)

Land

cov

ered

by

rest

orat

ion

and

aft

erca

re c

ond

ition

s (2

)

Are

a un

der

agr

eem

ent

und

er t

he E

nviro

nmen

tally

Sen

sitiv

e A

rea

and

Cou

ntry

sid

e S

tew

ard

ship

agr

i-en

viro

nmen

t sc

hem

es (2

)

Are

a co

nver

ted

to

orga

nic

pro

duc

tion

(2)

Con

cent

ratio

ns o

f p

ersi

sten

t or

gani

c p

ollu

tant

s (2

)

Pes

ticid

e re

sid

ues

in f

ood

(2)

Land

scap

e fe

atur

es –

hed

ges,

sto

ne w

alls

and

pon

ds

(2)

Che

mic

al r

elea

ses

to t

he e

nviro

nmen

t (2

)

Per

cent

age

of h

ighw

ays

that

are

eith

er o

f a

high

or

acce

pta

ble

leve

l of

clea

nlin

ess

(3)

Will

it r

educ

e th

e am

ount

of

der

elic

t,d

egra

ded

and

und

erus

ed la

nd?

Will

it im

pro

ve t

he la

ndsc

ape

and

ecol

ogic

al q

ualit

y an

d c

hara

cter

of

the

coun

trys

ide?

Will

it d

ecre

ase

litte

r in

tow

ns a

ndth

eco

untr

ysid

e?

Cou

ntry

sid

eq

ualit

y(2

)To

mai

ntai

n an

den

hanc

e th

e q

ualit

yof

land

scap

es a

ndto

wns

cap

es


115

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Env

ironm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

CO

2em

issi

ons

by

end

use

r (2

)

CO

2em

issi

ons

by

sect

or a

nd p

er c

apita

em

issi

ons

(tonn

esp

erye

ar) (

3)

Ene

rgy

use

(gas

and

ele

ctric

ity) (

1)

Ene

rgy

use

per

hou

seho

ld (2

) (3)

Ene

rgy

effic

ienc

y of

the

eco

nom

y (2

)

Ther

mal

effi

cien

cy o

f ho

usin

g st

ock

(2)

Ene

rgy

effic

ienc

y of

roa

d p

asse

nger

tra

vel/a

vera

ge f

uel

cons

ump

tion

of n

ew c

ars

(2)

Pro

por

tion

of e

nerg

y su

pp

lied

fro

m r

enew

able

sou

rces

Dep

letio

n of

fos

sil f

uels

(2)

Ozo

ne d

eple

tion

(2)

Will

it r

educ

e em

issi

ons

ofgr

eenh

ouse

gas

es b

y re

duc

ing

ener

gy c

onsu

mp

tion?

Will

it le

ad t

o an

incr

ease

d p

rop

ortio

nof

ene

rgy

need

s b

eing

met

fro

mre

new

able

sou

rces

?

Will

it r

educ

e em

issi

ons

of o

zone

dep

letin

g su

bst

ance

s?

Em

issi

ons

ofgr

eenh

ouse

gas

es (2

)To

red

uce

cont

ribut

ions

to

clim

ate

chan

ge


116

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Env

ironm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Wat

er le

akag

e (2

)

Ab

stra

ctio

ns b

y p

urp

ose

(2)

Wat

er le

akag

e ra

te f

rom

mai

ns a

nd c

usto

mer

pip

es (3

)

Will

it r

educ

e w

ater

con

sum

ptio

n?D

omes

tic w

ater

use

(1) a

nd p

eak

dem

and

(2) a

nd a

vaila

bili

ty (2

)

To p

rovi

de

for

sust

aina

ble

sou

rces

of w

ater

sup

ply

Num

ber

s of

peo

ple

and

pro

per

ties

affe

cted

by

fluvi

alflo

odev

ents

Freq

uenc

y of

flu

vial

flo

od e

vent

s

Dev

elop

men

t in

the

flo

odp

lain

Num

ber

s of

peo

ple

and

pro

per

ties

affe

cted

by

coas

tal f

lood

even

ts

Freq

uenc

y of

coa

stal

flo

od e

vent

s

Pro

por

tion

of c

oast

line

sub

ject

to

man

aged

rea

lignm

ent

whe

rere

qui

red

Num

ber

of

pro

per

ties

affe

cted

by

sub

sid

ence

Dam

age

to p

rop

erty

fro

m s

torm

eve

nts

Will

it m

inim

ise

the

risk

of f

lood

ing

from

riv

ers

and

wat

erco

urse

s to

peo

ple

and

pro

per

ty?

Will

it m

inim

ise

the

risk

of f

lood

ing

top

eop

le a

nd p

rop

ertie

s on

the

coa

st?

Will

it r

educ

e th

e ris

k of

sub

sid

ence

?

Will

it r

educ

e th

e ris

k of

dam

age

top

rop

erty

fro

m s

torm

eve

nts?

Pro

per

ties

at r

isk

offlo

odin

gTo

red

uce

vuln

erab

ility

to

clim

ate

chan

ge


117

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Env

ironm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

(co

ntin

ued

)

Net

loss

of

soils

to

dev

elop

men

t (2

)

Loss

of b

est

and

mos

t ve

rsat

ile a

gric

ultu

ral l

and

to d

evel

opm

ent

Con

cent

ratio

ns o

f org

anic

mat

ter

in a

gric

ultu

ral t

opso

ils (2

)

Are

a of

con

tam

inat

ed la

nd

Will

it m

inim

ise

the

loss

of

soils

to

dev

elop

men

t?

Will

it m

aint

ain

and

enh

ance

soi

lq

ualit

y?

[No

ind

icat

or]

To c

onse

rve

soil

reso

urce

s an

dq

ualit

y

UK

mat

eria

ls c

onsu

mp

tion

per

hea

d (2

)

Was

te a

risin

g an

d m

anag

emen

t (2

)

Hou

seho

ld w

aste

aris

ings

(1)

Rec

yclin

g of

hou

seho

ld w

aste

(1)

Mat

eria

ls r

ecyc

ling

(2)

Per

cent

age

of t

he t

onna

ge o

f ho

useh

old

was

te a

risin

gs w

hich

have

bee

n (a

) rec

ycle

d (b

) com

pos

ted

(c) u

sed

to

reco

ver

heat

,p

ower

and

oth

er e

nerg

y so

urce

s (d

) lan

dfil

led

(3)

Rad

ioac

tive

was

te s

tock

s (2

)

Dis

char

ges

from

the

nuc

lear

ind

ustr

y (2

)

Haz

ard

ous

was

te (2

)

Prim

ary

aggr

egat

es p

er u

nit

of c

onst

ruct

ion

valu

e (2

)

Con

stru

ctio

n an

d d

emol

ition

was

te g

oing

to

land

fill (

2)

Am

ount

of

seco

ndar

y/re

cycl

ed a

ggre

gate

s us

ed c

omp

ared

with

virg

in a

ggre

gate

s (2

)

Will

it le

ad t

o re

duc

ed c

onsu

mp

tion

of m

ater

ials

and

res

ourc

es?

Will

it r

educ

e ho

useh

old

was

te?

Will

it in

crea

se w

aste

rec

over

y an

dre

cycl

ing?

Will

it r

educ

e ha

zard

ous

was

te?

Will

it r

educ

e w

aste

in t

heco

nstr

uctio

n in

dus

try?

Hou

seho

ld w

aste

and

recy

clin

g (2

)To

min

imis

e th

ep

rod

uctio

n of

was

te


118

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Eco

nom

ic o

bje

ctiv

es

Reg

iona

l/loc

al v

aria

tions

in G

DP

/GVA

per

hea

d

Com

par

ativ

e in

dus

tria

l and

offi

ce r

enta

l cos

ts

VAT

regi

stra

tions

in r

ural

are

as

Num

ber

of

pla

nnin

g co

nsen

ts f

or b

usin

ess

pre

mis

es in

rura

lare

as

Will

it im

pro

ve e

cono

mic

per

form

ance

in a

dva

ntag

ed a

nd d

isad

vant

aged

area

s?

Will

it e

ncou

rage

rur

al d

iver

sific

atio

n?

Reg

iona

l/loc

alva

riatio

ns in

GD

Pan

d e

mp

loym

ent/

unem

plo

ymen

t (2

)

To r

educ

e d

isp

ariti

esin

eco

nom

icp

erfo

rman

ce

Per

cent

age

chan

ge in

the

tot

al n

umb

er o

f VA

T re

gist

ered

bus

ines

ses

in t

he a

rea

(3)

Lab

our

pro

duc

tivity

(2)

Con

trib

utio

n to

UK

imp

orts

, ex

por

ts,

trad

e b

alan

ce (2

)

Ind

icat

ors

of c

omp

etiti

vene

ss

Sur

viva

l rat

es f

or V

AT-r

egis

tere

d b

usin

esse

s (4

)

Div

ersi

ty o

f ec

onom

ic s

ecto

rs r

epre

sent

ed in

the

are

a

Rel

ativ

e em

plo

ymen

t/ou

tput

gro

wth

in d

iffer

ent

econ

omic

sect

ors

in t

he a

rea

Lab

our

pro

duc

tivity

in m

anuf

actu

ring

and

oth

er s

ervi

ces

(4)

Res

earc

h an

d d

evel

opm

ent

and

em

plo

ymen

t in

hig

h an

dm

ediu

m-h

igh

tech

nolo

gy in

dus

trie

s (4

)

Gro

wth

rat

es a

nd li

nkag

es in

clu

ster

sec

tors

Will

it im

pro

ve b

usin

ess

dev

elop

men

tan

d e

nhan

ce c

omp

etiti

vene

ss?

Will

it im

pro

ve t

he r

esili

ence

of

bus

ines

s an

d t

he e

cono

my?

Will

it p

rom

ote

grow

th in

key

sec

tors

?

Will

it p

rom

ote

grow

th in

key

clus

ters

?

Tota

l out

put

of

the

econ

omy

(GD

P/G

VAan

d G

DP

/GVA

per

head

) (2)

(4)

To e

ncou

rage

sust

aine

d e

cono

mic

grow

th


119

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Eco

nom

ic o

bje

ctiv

es (c

ont

inue

d)

Trav

el t

o w

ork

(1)

Loca

tion

of jo

bs

in p

roxi

mity

to

resi

den

ts

Pro

pos

ed d

evel

opm

ent/

imp

rove

men

ts o

f ke

yin

fras

truc

ture

/ser

vice

s

Trav

el t

o w

ork

jour

neys

by

mod

e

Traf

fic c

onge

stio

n (2

)

Jour

ney

times

bet

wee

n ke

y em

plo

ymen

t ar

eas

and

key

tran

spor

t in

terc

hang

es

Hea

vy g

ood

s ve

hicl

e m

ileag

e in

tens

ity (2

)

Will

it r

educ

e co

mm

utin

g?

Will

it im

pro

ve a

cces

sib

ility

to

wor

kb

y p

ublic

tra

nsp

ort,

wal

king

and

cycl

ing?

Will

it r

educ

e th

e ef

fect

of

traf

ficco

nges

tion

on t

he e

cono

my?

Will

it r

educ

e jo

urne

y tim

es b

etw

een

key

emp

loym

ent

area

s an

d k

eytr

ansp

ort

inte

rcha

nges

?

Will

it f

acili

tate

effi

cien

cy in

fre

ight

dis

trib

utio

n?

Frei

ght

tran

spor

t b

ym

ode

(2)

To e

ncou

rage

effic

ient

pat

tern

s of

mov

emen

t in

sup

por

tof

eco

nom

ic g

row

th

Bus

ines

s st

art

ups

and

clo

sure

s (1

) (2)

Enq

uirie

s to

bus

ines

s ad

vice

ser

vice

s (B

usin

ess

Link

s)

Gro

wth

of

loca

l bus

ines

ses

by

turn

over

and

em

plo

yee

num

ber

s

Man

ufac

turin

g in

vest

men

t an

d o

utp

ut b

y U

K c

omp

anie

s

Man

ufac

turin

g in

vest

men

t and

out

put b

y fo

reig

n-ow

ned

com

pani

es

Pro

pose

d de

velo

pmen

t of k

ey e

cono

mic

site

s

Empl

oym

ent l

and

avai

labi

lity

Num

ber o

f bus

ines

s ap

plic

atio

ns g

rant

ed p

lann

ing

cons

ent

Will

it e

ncou

rage

ind

igen

ous

bus

ines

s?

Will

it e

ncou

rage

inw

ard

inve

stm

ent?

Will

it m

ake

land

and

pro

per

tyav

aila

ble

for

bus

ines

s d

evel

opm

ent?

Tota

l inv

estm

ent

as a

per

cent

age

of G

DP

To e

ncou

rage

and

acco

mm

odat

e b

oth

ind

igen

ous

and

inw

ard

inve

stm

ent


120

Figu

re 1

8:E

xam

ple

Sus

tain

abili

ty O

bje

ctiv

es, S

ub-O

bje

ctiv

es a

nd I

ndic

ato

rs f

or

use

in a

typ

ical

SA

Fra

mew

ork

(co

nti

nu

ed)

Hea

dlin

e O

bje

ctiv

e H

ead

line

Ind

icat

or

Sub

-ob

ject

ive

Det

aile

d In

dic

ato

r

Eco

nom

ic o

bje

ctiv

es (c

ont

inue

d)

Soc

ial a

nd c

omm

unity

ent

erp

rises

(1)

UK

com

pan

ies

imp

lem

entin

g et

hica

l tra

din

g co

des

of

cond

uct

(2)

Bus

ines

s re

cogn

ised

as

Inve

stor

s in

Peo

ple

(2)

Will

it e

ncou

rage

eth

ical

tra

din

g?

Will

it e

ncou

rage

goo

d e

mp

loye

ere

latio

ns a

nd m

anag

emen

t p

ract

ices

?

Com

pan

ies

with

envi

ronm

ent

man

agem

ent

syst

ems

(1) (

2)

To im

pro

ve t

he s

ocia

lan

d e

nviro

nmen

tal

per

form

ance

of

the

econ

omy

‘Imag

e’ in

dic

es d

eriv

ed f

rom

con

sulta

tions

with

bus

ines

s an

dlo

cal p

rop

erty

sp

ecia

lists

as

par

t of

the

pla

nnin

g p

roce

ssW

ill it

att

ract

new

inve

stm

ent

and

add

ition

al s

kille

d w

orke

rs t

o th

e ar

ea?

Con

sens

us v

iew

s of

bus

ines

sor

gani

satio

ns

To e

nhan

ce t

heim

age

of t

he a

rea

asa

bus

ines

s lo

catio

n

Annex 6: Testing the planobjectivesThe compatibility of the plan objectives with each other and with SA objectives can betested using a matrix such as that shown in Figure 19.

121

Figure 19: Example Matrix for Comparing Plan Objectives against SA Objectives

Comments and recommendations:Plan Objective 2 versus SA Objective A: Possible conflict as Plan Objective 2 seeks to deliverhousing that meets unmet demand, whilst SA Objective A aims to meet local housing need.Recommendation: change wording of Plan Objective 2 to ‘need’ rather than ‘demand’.

Plan Objective 4 versus SA Objective A: Possible conflict as Plan Objective 4 is to protectgreenfield land from development, but housing capacity study has shown that in order tosatisfy housing need, some greenfield development will be required. Recommendation: changewording of Plan Objective 4 to prioritise brownfield development over greenfield, but not to ruleout greenfield development completely.

Plan Objective 4 versus SA Objective B: Possible conflict as SA Objective B seeks to deliverdevelopment that reduces the need to travel, and some greenfield locations may be betterplaced to deliver this than some remoter brownfield sites. Recommendation: add to wording ofPlan Objective 4 ‘where in line with the objective to reduce the need to travel’

NeutralNeutralPossible conflictPossible conflictObjective 4

NeutralPositiveCompatible

NeutralNeutralObjective 3

PositiveCompatible


Possible conflictObjective 2

PositiveCompatible

PositiveCompatible


Objective 1

Objective DObjective CObjective BObjective A

SA ObjectivesPlanObjectives

Whilst the aim should be to achieve consistency between plan objectives, in practice theremay be tensions between objectives. Where win-win outcomes cannot be achieved, decision-makers will need to determine where the priorities should lie and this should be recordedexplicitly in the SA.

Annex 7: SustainabilityAppraisal ReportsScoping the Sustainability Appraisal

The SA Scoping Report should include:

• The plan objectives;

• The other plans, programmes and objectives relevant to the plan, with informationon synergies or inconsistencies;

• Baseline information, either already collected or still needed, with notes on sourcesand any problems encountered;

• Social, environmental, and economic issues identified as a result of the workundertaken;

• The SA Framework, including the suggested SA objectives and indicators (andtargets where these are proposed), and how they were chosen;

• The broad options which are proposed to be considered in more detail (duringStage B);

• Any other proposed methodologies; and

• Proposals for the structure and level of detail of the SA Report.

Consultation on the scope of the SA should include the four SEA Consultation Bodies(Countryside Agency, English Heritage, English Nature and Environment Agency).Representatives of other interests may also be consulted including:

• Economic interests and local business such as Regional Development Agency,Chambers of Commerce, economic development officers, Learning and SkillsCouncil may also be consulted;

• Social interests and community service providers such as Health DevelopmentAgency, Local Strategic Partnerships, Neighbourhood Areas Committees, officerswith responsibility for access for those with disabilities, social inclusion, primarycare trusts, health development agencies, education authorities, police and utilities;

• Transport planners and providers such as highways authorities and public transportservice providers; and

• NGOs such as environmental groups, amenity societies, and voluntary services.


122


123

Initial Sustainability Appraisal Report

In addition to information contained in the Scoping Report, the Initial SA Reportshould set out:

• Any revisions of the plan objectives as a result of the initial SA process;

• When the appraisal was carried out, by whom, and who was consulted;

• The strategic options considered and how they were identified;

• Comparison of the social, environmental and economic effects of the options;

• How social, environmental and economic issues were considered in choosing thepreferred options; and

• Proposed mitigation measures.

The Sustainability Appraisal Report

Figure 20 below sets out what needs to be included in the final SA Report and proposesa structure. This is adapted for SA from Annex I of the SEA Directive which sets outwhat the Environmental Report must include.

In deciding the length and the level of detail to be provided in a final SA Report, theplanning authority should bear in mind its purpose as a public consultation document.It is likely to be of interest to a wide variety of readers, including decision-makers,other plan/programme-making practitioners, statutory consultees, NGOs, andmembers of the public. It should be written and prepared with this range of users inmind, and should include a non-technical summary. A Quality Assurance Checklist isprovided at the back of this guidance to help planning authorities ensure that thequality of the Report is sufficient to meet the requirements of the Directive.


124

Figure 20: Example structure and contents of the Sustainability Appraisal Report

7.1. Links to other tiers of plans and programmes and theproject level (environmental impact assessment, designguidance, etc)

7.2. Proposals for monitoring

7. Implementation

6.1. Significant social, environmental and economic effects ofthe preferred policies

6.2. How social, environmental and economic problems wereconsidered in developing the policies

6.3. Proposed mitigation measures6.4. Uncertainties and risks

6. Plan policies

5.1. Main strategic options consider and how they wereidentified

5.2. Comparison of the social, environmental and economiceffects of the options

5.3. How social, environmental and economic issues wereconsidered in choosing the preferred options

5.4. Other options considered, and why these were rejected5.5. Proposed mitigation measures

5. Plan issues and options

4.1. Links to other strategies, plans and programmes andsustainability objectives

4.2. Description of the social, environmental and economicbaseline characteristics and the predicted future baseline

4.3. Difficulties in collecting data and limitations of the data4.4. The SA framework, including objectives, targets and

indicators4.5. Main social, environmental and economic issues and

problems identified

4. Sustainability objectives,baseline and context

3.1. Purpose of the SA and the SA Report3.2. Plan objectives and outline of contents3.3. Compliance with the SEA Directive/Regulations

3. Background

2.1. Approach adopted to the SA2.2. When the SA was carried out2.3. Who carried out the SA2.4. Who was consulted, when and how

2. Appraisal Methodology

1.1. Non-technical summary1.2. Statement on the difference the process has made1.3. How to comment on the report

1. Summary andoutcomes

Table sign-posting the components of the SA Report whichmake up the Environmental Report for the purposes of the SEADirective

Components making upthe Environmental Report

Information to includeStructure of report

Annex 8: Predicting andassessing effectsPredicting sustainability effects

The most familiar form of SA prediction and assessment technique is a table such asthat of Figure 23. Effects predictions are generally broad-brush and qualitative, e.g.

… get worse over the next 15 years;

… be mildly negative, on a scale from strongly positive (++) to strongly negative (– –); or

… be worse under Scenario A than under Scenario B.

But the predictions could also be more detailed and quantitative, e.g. a measurableeffect would:

… increase from 10 to 12 parts per million between 2005 and 2020, or

… increase by 20% between 2005 and 2020;

… increase by 20% by 2020 under Scenario A and by 16% under Scenario B;

… exceed national standards by 6% by 2020; or

… increase employment over a ‘no/existing plan’ scenario by 6% (net of displacement)to 2020.

Hard data may enable planning authorities or expert advisers to make detailedquantitative predictions, and this can be particularly useful where a plan’s effects areuncertain, close to a threshold, or cumulative. But quantification is not alwayspracticable, and broad-based and qualitative predictions can be equally valid andappropriate. As in current practice, these may be expressed in easily understood termssuch as “getting better or worse” or a scale from ++ (very positive) to – – (verynegative). It can be useful to link predictions to specific objectives, e.g. “will the planpromote change in a desired direction?”.

However, qualitative should not mean “guessed”. Predictions should be supported byevidence, such as references to any research, discussions or consultation which helpedthose carrying out the SA to reach their conclusions. The SA Report should documentany uncertainties or limitations in the information underlying both qualitative andquantitative predictions. Assumptions, for instance about underlying trends or detailsof projects to be developed under the plan, should be clearly stated.

125

Reference should be made to the baseline information and key issues (including anytargets) identified in Stage A. It is recommended that a summary appraisal is providedin the matrix for each of the social, environmental and economic effects, together withoverall conclusions and recommendations at the end.

Assessing sustainability effects

When determining the significance of the effect of a policy or plan planning authoritiesmay need to consider the probability, duration, frequency and reversibility of theeffects, including cumulative, secondary and synergistic effects. The magnitude andspatial extent of the effects (geographical area and size of the population likely to beaffected) should also be considered. The value and vulnerability of certain areas andpopulations may also influence the assessment, particularly where thresholds orstandards may be exceeded (e.g. social deprivation thresholds or standards set inlegislation).

When assessing the effects of the plan the following should be considered for eachoption presented:

• Is it clear exactly what is proposed, and how the options differ from each other orrelate to the plan as a whole?

• Is each option likely to have a significant adverse effect in relation to each of theobjectives or targets from Stage A?

• If so, can the effect be avoided or its severity reduced?

• If the effect cannot be avoided, e.g. by conditions or changes to the way it isimplemented, can the option be changed or eliminated?

• If its effect is uncertain, or depends on how the plan is implemented, how can thisuncertainty be reduced?

Planning authorities should also ensure that the analysis of effects includes “short,medium and long-term, permanent and temporary … effects” (Annex I(f) of the SEADirective). Effects may vary over different timescales; for example, public transportinfrastructure may have serious adverse effects in the short term but positive ones in thelong term. The timescales themselves will also vary depending on the plan and theoptions being considered. For air pollution, for instance, the short, medium and longterms could be 3, 10 and 25 years, while for climate change they could be 5, 20 and 100years. Figure 23 allows short, medium and long timescales to be differentiated andspecified as appropriate for particular types of effect.

In considering the effects of a plan, some useful rules of thumb may be:

• When using symbols or other ways of presenting information regarding the likelyeffects (e.g. positive, negative, uncertain, not significant), always explain and justifythe choice of symbol with reference to the baseline situation relevant to the SAobjective.


126


127

• Concentrate on the effects of the plan, rather than other factors that may influencethe achievement of the SA objective – it is the influence of the plan or programmethat is being assessed.

• Consider only effects that are likely to result from the influence of the plan orprogramme – discount those changes which would have happened anyway,irrespective of the plan or programme.

• Consider whether the effect is likely to be permanent or temporary, and thetimescale over which the effect is likely to be observed.

• Provide detailed and quantitative predictions where possible but avoid usingspurious measurements, not grounded in evidence.

• Consider the effects of displacement of sustainability problems to other areas as aresult of the plan or programme.

• If there are risks or uncertainties attached to the assessment, these should be clearlystated.

• Use the measurement of effects to improve the environmental performance ofindividual policies as well as the plan or programme as a whole.

• Consider if certain issues and effects are more appropriately assessed at differentlevels in the planning process.

Figure 21 suggests possible prediction and assessment techniques and sources of furtherinformation.

Figure 22 gives a fuller explanation of issues to consider when filling in Figure 23.Following this flowchart helps to ensure that prediction, assessment and mitigation arelinked and that a full range of mitigation measures are considered.

Figure 23 provides an example of tables that can used for appraisal. The point of theappraisal is not to fill in the table, but to ensure that the option, policy or proposal is asbeneficial or sustainable as possible. The table is only an indicative tool for doing this.


128

Figure 21: Prediction and assessment techniques for SEA

Technique SEA stage Examples or sourcesof further information(see References for detailsof publications)

Expert judgement ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Public participation ✓ ✓ ✓ Audit Commission (2000)

Quality of Life Capital ✓ ✓ Countryside Agency et al(2001)

Geographical information ✓ ✓ ✓ European Environment systems Agency

(1998)

Network analysis ✓ ✓

Modelling ✓ ✓ European Commission (1999)

Scenario/sensitivity analysis ✓

Multi-criteria analysis ✓ DETR (2001)

Carrying capacity, ✓ Chambers et al. (2000)ecological footprints European Commission (1999)

Compatibility assessment ✓

des

crib

e b

asel

ine

iden

tify

imp

acts

pre

dic

t im

pac

ts

asse

ssm

ent

imp

acts

ensu

re c

oher

ence


129

Figure 22: The process of assessing the effects of a plan

negative positive or neutral unclear depends onimplementation

no yes yes no

Implement toachieve the righteffect

The effect of theplan or planoptions will oftendepend on howthe plan isimplemented, so itwill not bepossible to predictthe effects withcertainty. Toreduce this typeof uncertainty –and as amitigationmeasure – the SAteam should aimto put in placemeasures toensure that theissue is handledappropriatelyduringimplementation.

Gather morebaseline data asappropriatebeforereconsidering thisquestion

The SA Reportshould discuss‘any difficulties(such as technicaldeficiencies orlack of know-how)encountered incompiling therequiredinformation’.Examples ofuncertainty couldbe where it isunclear what adevelopmentmight look like onthe ground, whatpublic transportservices might runin the future, orwhat futurepollution controltechnologiesmight beavailable. Oneway of dealingwith uncertainty isto note, in the‘comments/explanation’ column ofFigure 23, thedegree ofcertainty of theeffect prediction.

NoChange

Mitigate the planor plan optionaccordingly anddocument thischange

Mitigationmeasures couldinclude:

– changes to thewording of theplan or planoption;

– the removal ofthe plan optionsthat areunsustainable ordo not promotethe SA objectives;

– the addition ofnew plan options;

– devising newoptions, possiblya combination ofthe best aspectsof existingoptions; or

– identifyingissues to beconsidered inenvironmentalimpactassessment ofspecificdevelopments.

Considerdeleting ormodifyingthe planor planalternatives

What would needto be done toensure that theright effect isachieved?

What further dataare needed toclarify the effect?

Can the effect be enhanced?

Can the effect bemitigated? Particularly ifthe SA objective isimportant, the receptor issensitive, or the effect isirreversible, notsubstitutable, orcumulatively significant?

What kind of effect will the option, policy or proposal have on this objective over the short, medium and longterm? Consider secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects as well as direct effects. In case of doubt, assumea worst case or get more information to reduce the uncertainty.


130

Figu

re 2

3:E

xam

ple

mat

rix

for

do

cum

enti

ng t

he a

pp

rais

ing

of

a p

lan

po

licy

– st

rate

gic

em

plo

ymen

t lo

cati

ons

Sus

tain

abili

tyS

umm

ary

bas

elin

eP

red

icte

d e

ffec

tso

bje

ctiv

esi

tuat

ion/

targ

ets

Ind

icat

or

Nat

ure

of

effe

ctA

sses

smen

t o

f ef

fect

(qua

ntify

whe

re(s

ee k

ey b

elo

w)

po

ssib

le)

Sho

rtM

edLo

ngte

rmte

rmte

rm

So

cial

ob

ject

ives

Etc

.

Will

pro

vid

e fo

r a

sign

ifica

nt in

crea

se in

job

s th

atar

elik

ely

to m

eet

the

skill

s b

ase

of t

he t

owns

’p

opul

atio

ns,

but

lack

of

inte

grat

ion

with

oth

erco

mm

unity

nee

ds

mea

ns t

hat

opp

ortu

nitie

s to

real

ise

grea

ter

ben

efits

not

rea

lised

.

✓✓✓

0S

umm

ary

of

app

rais

al a

gai

nst

soci

al o

bje

ctiv

es

Ther

e is

no

link

mad

e in

the

pla

n b

etw

een

this

pol

icy

and

op

por

tuni

ties

to p

rovi

de

for

mix

ed d

evel

opm

ent

and

com

mun

ity s

ervi

ces

and

fac

ilitie

s cl

ose

to w

here

peo

ple

live

. No

rese

arch

und

erta

ken

to d

eter

min

ew

heth

er n

ew e

mp

loym

ent

site

s m

ay in

crea

sed

eman

d/v

iab

ility

of

com

mun

ity s

ervi

ces,

but

a s

mal

lp

ositi

ve e

ffect

cou

ld a

rise

in t

he lo

nger

ter

ms:

•Li

kelih

ood

/cer

tain

ty:

low

/unc

erta

in

•S

cale

: Th

ree

tow

ns

•Te

mp

orar

y or

per

man

ent:

per

man

ent

•Ti

min

g: L

ong

term

Rec

omm

end

atio

n: c

onsi

der

inte

grat

ing

com

mun

ityfa

cilit

ies

with

em

plo

ymen

t us

e to

ser

ve b

oth

thos

ew

orki

ng o

n th

e si

te a

nd n

earb

y re

sid

ents

.

✓0

0M

inor

effe

ct.

% o

fho

useh

old

sm

ore

than

500m

fro

mp

ost

offic

e,G

P, lo

cal

shop

.

Acc

essi

bili

tyin

dic

es in

dic

ate

that

45%

of

tow

n’s

pop

ulat

ion

are

mor

e th

an 5

00m

from

a p

ost

offic

e,G

P, lo

cal s

hop

.N

ota

rget

.

To im

pro

veac

cess

ibili

ty t

oes

sent

ial

serv

ices

and

faci

liltie

s

Just

ifica

tion

for

asse

ssm

ent

notin

g:

•Li

kelih

oo

d/c

erta

inty

of

effe

ct o

ccur

ring

(hig

h/m

ed/l

ow

)•

Geo

gra

phi

cal s

cale

of

effe

ct.

•W

heth

er t

emp

ora

ry o

r p

erm

anen

t.•

Ass

ump

tions

mad

e.In

clud

e re

com

men

dat

ions

for

miti

gatio

n/im

pro

vem

ent


131

Figu

re 2

3:E

xam

ple

mat

rix

for

do

cum

enti

ng t

he a

pp

rais

ing

of

a p

lan

po

licy

– st

rate

gic

em

plo

ymen

t lo

cati

ons

(con

tin

ued

)

Sus

tain

abili

tyS

umm

ary

bas

elin

eP

red

icte

d e

ffec

tso

bje

ctiv

esi

tuat

ion/

targ

ets

Ind

icat

or

Nat

ure

of

effe

ctA

sses

smen

t o

f ef

fect

(qua

ntify

whe

re(s

ee k

ey b

elo

w)

po

ssib

le)

Sho

rtM

edLo

ngte

rmte

rmte

rm

Env

ironm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

Etc

.

Etc

.✓

/✗✗

✓/

✗

✗S

umm

ary

app

rais

al a

gai

nst

envi

ronm

enta

l ob

ject

ives

Str

ateg

ic e

mp

loym

ent

on t

he b

row

nfie

ld s

ites

wou

ldb

ring

sign

ifica

nt p

ositi

ve b

enef

its in

the

med

ium

to

long

-ter

m:

•Li

kelih

ood

/cer

tain

ty:

high

•S

cale

: To

wns

A a

nd B

•Te

mp

orar

y or

per

man

ent:

per

man

ent

•Ti

min

g: M

ediu

m t

o lo

ng t

erm

Str

ateg

ic e

mp

loym

ent

on t

he g

reen

field

site

to

the

wes

tern

ed

ge o

f To

wn

C w

ould

brin

g si

gnifi

cant

adve

rse

ben

efits

in t

he m

ediu

m t

erm

:•

Like

lihoo

d/c

erta

inty

: hi

gh•

Sca

le:

Tow

n C

, w

ith e

ffect

s on

Cha

lk H

ills

AO

NB

•Te

mp

orar

y or

per

man

ent:

per

man

ent

•Ti

min

g: M

ediu

m t

o lo

ng t

erm

Rec

omm

end

atio

n: r

evie

w o

ptio

ns f

or lo

catio

n an

dd

esig

n of

em

plo

ymen

t si

te in

Tow

n C

. D

eter

min

ew

heth

er v

isua

l im

pac

t on

AO

NB

can

be

miti

gate

db

y d

esig

n/st

ruct

ural

land

scap

ing.

✓✓/

✗✗

✓/

✗✗

0Tw

o of

the

stra

tegi

cem

plo

ymen

tsi

tes

are

wel

llo

cate

d w

ithre

spec

t to

the

tow

n ce

ntre

s,an

d w

ill in

volv

eth

e re

med

iatio

nof

the

tw

ob

row

nfie

ld s

ites.

One

nea

r m

arke

tto

wn

C is

on

the

wes

tern

ed

ge o

fth

e ur

ban

are

aan

d c

an e

asily

be

view

ed f

rom

the

near

by

AO

NB

.

Are

a of

bro

wnf

ield

site

s w

ithin

tow

nssu

itab

lefo

rd

evel

opm

ent.

Bro

wnf

ield

site

of

65 h

ecta

res

inTo

wn

A,

85he

ctar

es in

Tow

nB

, an

d 1

2 he

ctar

esin

Tow

n C

. C

halk

Hill

s A

ON

B t

o th

ew

est

of t

he D

istr

ict,

the

bou

ndar

y of

whi

ch is

4km

fro

mTo

wn

C.T

arge

t:re

clai

m 5

0% o

fb

row

nfie

ld la

nd b

y20

10.

To m

aint

ain

and

enha

nce

the

qua

lity

ofla

ndsc

apes

and

tow

nsca

pes

Just

ifica

tion

for

asse

ssm

ent

notin

g:

•Li

kelih

oo

d/c

erta

inty

of

effe

ct o

ccur

ring

(hig

h/m

ed/l

ow

)•

Geo

gra

phi

cal s

cale

of

effe

ct.

•W

heth

er t

emp

ora

ry o

r p

erm

anen

t.•

Ass

ump

tions

mad

e.In

clud

e re

com

men

dat

ions

for

miti

gatio

n/im

pro

vem

ent


132

Fiig

ure

23:

Exa

mp

le m

atri

x fo

r d

ocu

men

ting

the

ap

pra

isin

g o

f a

pla

n p

olic

y –

stra

teg

ic e

mp

loym

ent

loca

tio

ns

(con

tin

ued

)

Sus

tain

abili

tyS

umm

ary

bas

elin

eP

red

icte

d e

ffec

tso

bje

ctiv

esi

tuat

ion/

targ

ets

Ind

icat

or

Nat

ure

of

effe

ctA

sses

smen

t o

f ef

fect

(qua

ntify

whe

re(s

ee k

ey b

elo

w)

po

ssib

le)

Sho

rtM

edLo

ngte

rmte

rmte

rm

Eco

nom

ic o

bje

ctiv

es

Etc

.

Effe

ct li

kely

acc

ord

ing

to r

esea

rch

und

erta

ken

by

XY

Z E

cono

mic

Dev

elop

men

t co

nsul

tant

s:

•Li

kelih

ood

/cer

tain

ty:

med

ium

•S

cale

: M

ain

thre

e to

wns

in D

istr

ict

•Te

mp

orar

y or

per

man

ent:

per

man

ent

•Ti

min

g: M

ediu

m t

o lo

ng-t

erm

(sig

nific

ant

effe

cts)

Rec

omm

end

atio

n: N

one

✓✓✓✓

✓Th

e ec

onom

icre

gene

ratio

nst

udy

ind

icat

esth

at a

lloca

ted

emp

loym

ent

site

s w

ill r

educ

ed

isp

ariti

es b

y10

% in

the

shor

t-te

rm a

ndb

y 75

% in

the

long

ter

m

% G

VA/h

ead

.G

VA/h

ead

is 2

0%hi

gher

in m

arke

tto

wn

than

in o

ther

tow

ns in

the

Dis

tric

t. T

arge

t:re

duc

e d

isp

arity

by

50%

to

10%

by

2020

.

To r

educ

ed

isp

ariti

es in

econ

omic

per

form

ance

Effe

ct li

kely

acc

ord

ing

to r

esea

rch

und

erta

ken

by

XY

Z E

cono

mic

Dev

elop

men

t co

nsul

tant

s:

•Li

kelih

ood

/cer

tain

ty:

high

•S

cale

: M

ain

thre

e to

wns

in D

istr

ict

•Te

mp

orar

y or

per

man

ent:

per

man

ent

•Ti

min

g: M

ediu

m t

o lo

ng-t

erm

(sig

nific

ant

effe

cts)

Rec

omm

end

atio

n: N

one

✓✓✓✓

✓E

cono

mic

rege

nera

tion

stud

ies

ind

icat

eth

at t

ake-

up o

fth

e si

tes

will

occu

r ov

er a

15

year

per

iod

and

will

incr

ease

inve

stm

ent.

% o

f in

war

din

vest

men

t.In

war

d in

vest

men

tis

run

ning

at

85%

of r

egio

nal l

evel

s,p

ro r

ata.

Tar

get:

imp

rove

to

regi

onal

aver

age

by

2015

.

To e

ncou

rage

and

acco

mm

odat

eb

oth

ind

igen

ous

and

inw

ard

inve

stm

ent

Just

ifica

tion

for

asse

ssm

ent

notin

g:

•Li

kelih

oo

d/c

erta

inty

of

effe

ct o

ccur

ring

(hig

h/m

ed/l

ow

)•

Geo

gra

phi

cal s

cale

of

effe

ct.

•W

heth

er t

emp

ora

ry o

r p

erm

anen

t.•

Ass

ump

tions

mad

e.In

clud

e re

com

men

dat

ions

for

miti

gatio

n/im

pro

vem

ent


133

Figu

re 2

3:E

xam

ple

mat

rix

for

do

cum

enti

ng t

he a

pp

rais

ing

of

a p

lan

po

licy

– st

rate

gic

em

plo

ymen

t lo

cati

ons

(c

onti

nu

ed)

Sus

tain

abili

tyS

umm

ary

bas

elin

eP

red

icte

d e

ffec

tso

bje

ctiv

esi

tuat

ion/

targ

ets

Ind

icat

or

Nat

ure

of

effe

ctA

sses

smen

t o

f ef

fect

(qua

ntify

whe

re(s

ee k

ey b

elo

w)

po

ssib

le)

Sho

rtM

edLo

ngte

rmte

rmte

rm

Eco

nom

ic o

bje

ctiv

es

Key

to

Ap

pra

isal

of

Eff

ects

Will

the

pol

icy

mak

e a

pos

itive

or

nega

tive

cont

ribut

ion

to t

he a

pp

rais

al o

bje

ctiv

e?

✓✓

Maj

or p

ositi

ve✓

Min

or p

ositi

ve✗

Min

or n

egat

ive

✗✗

Maj

or n

egat

ive

0N

eutr

al e

ffect

?

Unc

erta

in e

ffect

Co

nclu

sio

ns:T

his

pol

icy

wou

ld le

ad t

o p

erm

anen

t si

gnifi

cant

eco

nom

ic b

enef

its a

risin

g in

the

med

ium

ter

m,

with

sig

nific

ant

soci

al b

enef

its a

risin

g in

the

long

er t

erm

. Th

e en

viro

nmen

tal e

ffect

s ar

e lik

ely

to b

e m

ixed

, w

ith p

ositi

ve e

ffect

s fr

om d

evel

opm

ent

of t

he s

trat

egic

em

plo

ymen

t si

tes

in T

owns

A a

nd B

, an

d s

igni

fican

t ad

vers

e ef

fect

s fr

om d

evel

opm

ent

of t

he s

trat

egic

em

plo

ymen

t si

te o

n th

e ed

ge o

f To

wn

C.

It m

ay b

e p

ossi

ble

to

miti

gate

som

e of

the

ad

vers

e ef

fect

s th

roug

h la

ndsc

apin

g.

Rec

om

men

dat

ion:

a vi

sual

imp

act

asse

ssm

ent

be

und

erta

ken

to d

eter

min

e na

ture

and

sca

le o

f p

oten

tial e

ffect

, an

d t

o d

eter

min

e d

esig

n st

and

ard

sth

at s

houl

d a

pp

ly.

This

pol

icy

will

lead

to

sign

ifica

nt e

cono

mic

ben

efits

in t

he m

ediu

m t

o lo

ng t

erm

. N

o im

pro

vem

ents

req

uire

d.

✓✓✓✓

✓S

umm

ary

app

rais

al a

gai

nst

eco

nom

ic o

bje

ctiv

es

Just

ifica

tion

for

asse

ssm

ent

notin

g:

•Li

kelih

oo

d/c

erta

inty

of

effe

ct o

ccur

ring

(hig

h/m

ed/l

ow

)•

Geo

gra

phi

cal s

cale

of

effe

ct.

•W

heth

er t

emp

ora

ry o

r p

erm

anen

t.•

Ass

ump

tions

mad

e.In

clud

e re

com

men

dat

ions

for

miti

gatio

n/im

pro

vem

ent

Annex 9: Secondary, cumulativeand synergistic effectsMany sustainability problems result from the accumulation of multiple small and oftenindirect effects, rather than a few large and obvious ones. Examples include loss oftranquillity, changes in the landscape, economic decline, and climate change. Theseeffects are very hard to deal with on a project-by-project basis through EnvironmentalImpact Assessment. It is at the SA level that they are most effectively identified andaddressed.

SA should include assessment of secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects,consistent with Annex I of the SEA Directive.

Secondary or indirect effects are effects that are not a direct result of the plan, butoccur away from the original effect or as a result of a complex pathway. Examples ofsecondary effects are a development that changes a water table and thus affects theecology of a nearby wetland; and construction of one project that facilitates or attractsother developments.

Cumulative effects arise, for instance, where several developments each haveinsignificant effects but together have a significant effect; or where several individualeffects of the plan (e.g. noise, dust and visual) have a combined effect.

Synergistic effects interact to produce a total effect greater than the sum of theindividual effects. Synergistic effects often happen as habitats, resources or humancommunities get close to capacity. For instance a wildlife habitat can becomeprogressively fragmented with limited effects on a particular species until the lastfragmentation makes the areas too small to support the species at all.

These terms are not mutually exclusive. Often the term cumulative effects is taken toinclude secondary and synergistic effects.

PRINCIPLES OF ASSESSING CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

• Cumulative effects should be considered throughout, and as part of the SEA andplan preparation, not as a separate process.

• Assessing cumulative effects should be focused on identifying the total effect of bothdirect and indirect effects on receptors. Receptors may include natural resources (e.g.air, water, soil), sections of the population (e.g. people living in particular areas orvulnerable members of the community) or ecosystems and species (e.g. heathland).

• Cumulative effects need to be considered in relation to the nature and extent of thereceptors, such as ecosystems and communities, rather than administrativeboundaries.


134


135

Figure 24: Key stages of SA and the consideration of cumulative, secondary andsynergistic effects

Identifying other plans or programmes and sustainability objectivesrelevant to the plan

• Identify key receptors which may be subject to cumulative effects.

• Consider any cumulative effects that other current and reasonablyforeseeable plans, programmes and strategies may have on key receptors.Some plans may be more influential than others; this should be noted.

Developing SA objectives, indicators and targets

• Development of SA objectives, indicators and targets should be influencedby significant cumulative effects identified and receptor thresholds/capacity.

Collecting baseline information

• For each key receptor document:

– The current status

– How this has changed over time, and how it is likely to change in thefuture without the implementation of the plan

– What has led to the present condition

– How close to capacity the key receptor is, that is, can it absorb furthereffects before changes become significant and/or irreversible

• Recognise that the scope of cumulative effects can be very wide and that itis important to focus the assessment.

• Baseline for cumulative effects may be summarised in a format similar toFigure 14.

Identifying sustainability problems

• Identify receptors that are particularly sensitive, in decline or are near theirthreshold (since these components may not be able to cope with themultiple stresses).

Stage A:Setting thecontext andobjectives,establishingthe baselineand decidingon the scope

Key points in the assessment of cumulative, secondary and synergistic effects Key Stages ofSustainabilityAppraisal

• The cumulative effects of policies within a plan and those which may result frominteraction with the effects of other plans and programmes should be considered.

• In considering cumulative effects, how close the plan, in association with other past,present and likely future actions, will bring the receptors to their capacity/thresholdto remain productive or sustainable should be assessed.

• Identifying cumulative effects involves considerable uncertainty. If it is not feasibleto eliminate this, the uncertainty should be documented.

ASSESSING CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AS PART OF SEA

Figure 24 sets out key points in the assessment of cumulative, secondary and synergisticeffects during the SEA process.


136

Figure 24: Key stages of SA and the consideration of cumulative, secondary andsynergistic effects (continued)

Predicting the effects of the plan including plan options

• Predict and assess the cumulative effects of the plan on the key receptors,i.e. the cumulative effects of current and reasonably foreseeable plans,programmes and strategies, with and without the plan.

• Recognise that there is uncertainty in predicting effects and determiningsignificance and this can arise due to the variation in social, natural, oreconomic systems and their interactions; a lack of information, knowledgeor scientific agreement regarding cause-effect relationship; or the inability ofpredictive models to accurately represent complex systems.

• Accept that the level of risk and uncertainty associated with cumulativeeffects increases at the higher planning levels because scales are broaderand issues are generally larger.

• Document limitations and inadequacies of information.

• Recognise that there may be several approaches available to assist in theprediction of cumulative effects, and that there is not a single approachapplicable to all situations.

Assessing the effects of the plan including plan options

• Assessment should both in terms of magnitude – the difference betweenthe with and without plan scenarios, and in terms of the capacity/thresholdof the valuable sustainability resources.

Mitigating adverse effects and maximising beneficial effects

• Document the measures envisaged to avoid, mitigate and negatecumulative effects.

Developing proposals for monitoring

• Document measures proposed to monitor significant cumulative effectsrecognising that it may be difficult to determine what ‘share’ of cumulativeeffects is due to the given plan.

Stage C:Assessingthe effects ofthe plan

Test the plan objectives against the SA objectives

• Testing the consistency between plan objectives and SA objectives mayhelp highlight potential cumulative effects.

Carry out appraisal of strategic options

• Ensure that the different options that are selected for testing as part of theassessment are also assessed for their cumulative, secondary or synergisticeffects.

• Recognise that the assessment of cumulative, secondary or synergisticeffects of different options could be used to screen out unacceptableoptions.

Scoping and consultation with consultation bodies

• Set out the likely significant cumulative effects of the preferred strategicoptions and plan to consider cumulative effects as part of the rest of the SAprocess.

Stage B:Deciding thescope of SAanddevelopingoptions


METHODS FOR ASSESSING CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

Figure 25 identifies some of the various techniques that may be used in assessingcumulative effects, along with their advantages and disadvantages. It is for thepractitioner undertaking the appraisal to choose which method is most appropriate.This may involve the use of various approaches that can be adapted and combined tosuit particular needs rather than a single method. When selecting techniques consider:

• ability to organise, analyse and present information

• stage of the assessment (e.g. scoping, baseline data collection, analysis, reporting)

• types of issues involved and cumulative effects being examined

• key receptors being examined

• quality and extent of baseline data

• level of expertise available


137

Figure 24: Key stages of SA and the consideration of cumulative, secondary andsynergistic effects (continued)

Monitoring the significant effects of the plan

• Monitoring should be carried out using the appropriate indicators whichtake account of cumulative effects as well as direct effects.

Responding to adverse effects

• It may be necessary to take action where significant adverse cumulativeeffects are identified as a result of monitoring.

Stage E:Monitoringimplementationof the plan

Consultating on the SA Report alongside the plan

• Use the consultation process to help to predict and assess the cumulativeeffects of the plan.

Appraising significant changes

• Where significant changes are made to the plan identify changes in thecumulative effects.

Decision making and providing information

• Provide information on how the cumulative effects, along with othersignificant effects of the plan, were taken into account in preparing the plan.

Stage D:Consultingon the planand SAReport

Preparing the SA Report

• Report cumulative effects in a transparent and accessible way and explainhow they were identified and assessed.

• Provide a description of how effects are assessed and which methods wereadopted.

• Provide a description of how the various forms of cumulative effects aremost likely to occur in the plan.

• Describe the significant cumulative effects of the plan on each receptor,recording assumptions and uncertainty.

Stage C:Assessingthe effects ofthe plan(continued)



138

Figure 25: Techniques for assessing cumulative, secondary and synergistic effects

Needs a lot oftime and dataand extrapolationis still largelysubjective. Canbe difficult toadapt somemodels to aparticularsituation.

Addressescause–effectrelationshipsand givesquantifiedresults.Geographicboundaries andtime-frames areusually explicit.

An analytical tool which enablesthe quantification of cause–effectrelations which result in cumulativeeffects by simulation of conditions.

Modelling

No spatial ortemporal scaleand diagramscan becomplex andcumbersome.

Facilitateconceptualisa-tion ofcause–effectrelationshipsand identifydirect effects.

Helps to identify the cause–effectrelationships resulting incumulative effects using flowdiagrams. Allows the user toanalyse the multiple effects ofvarious actions and trace indirecteffects on resources thataccumulate from direct effects onother resources.

Causal Chain/Network/Systemsanalysis

Can becomplex andcumbersomeand do notaddresscause–effectrelationships.

Provides goodvisual summaryand can beused to identifyand assesseffects to somedegree.

Matrices use a tabular format toorganise the interactions betweenhuman activities and resources ofconcern (see Figures 26 and 27).

Matrices

Can beinflexible anddo not addressinteractions orcause–effectrelationships.

Systematic andconcise.

Identify potential cumulativeeffects by providing lists ofcommon or likely effects andjuxtaposing multiple actions andresources. This can be seen as ashortcut to scoping.

Checklists

Cannot quantifyeffects andcomparison ofoptions issubjective.

Flexible andable to dealwith subjectiveinformation.

Useful in gathering the wide rangeof information on multiple actionsand receptors needed to addresscumulative effects. Brainstormingsessions, interviews withknowledgeable individuals andgroup consensus buildingactivities can help identify theimportant cumulative effects in thearea.

Questionnaires,interviews andpanels

DisadvantagesAdvantagesDescriptionMethod


139

Figure 25: Techniques for assessing cumulative, secondary and synergistic effects (cont.)

It is not alwayspossible toestablish thethreshold orcarryingcapacity for aparticularresource orreceptor.

Useful inaddressingaccumulation ofeffects againstthresholds andconsideringtrends.

Based in recognition thatthresholds exist and thatcumulative effects can result inthresholds being exceeded.

CarryingCapacity &ThresholdAnalysis

Relies onexperts – mayaffecttransparency oracceptance ofthe assessmentprocess.

Particularlyuseful whereother methodsare not availablebut significantcumulativeeffects areconsideredlikely.

A way of identifying and assessingeffects. Expert panels can beformed to facilitate exchange ofinformation and to express viewson cumulative effects.

Expert Opinion

Can beexpensive andtime consumingand difficult toquantify effects.

Flexible andeasy to update.Can considermultipleprojects andpast, presentand futureoptions. Allowsclear visualpresentation.

Used to identify where effects mayoccur. Can superimpose effects onreceptors or resources to establishwhere effects may be significant.

Overlaymapping andGIS

Needs a lot ofdata andextrapolation isstill largelysubjective.

Addressesaccumulationover time andhelps to identifyproblems.

Assesses the status of a resource,ecosystem, human community, oreconomy over time and usuallyresults in graphical projection ofpast or future conditions. Changesin the occurrence or intensity ofstressors over the same timeperiod can also be determined.Trends can help the analystidentify cumulative effects,establish appropriate baselines orproject future cumulative effects.

Trends analysis

DisadvantagesAdvantagesDescriptionMethod


140

Figure 26: Example of a table for recording cumulative effects and their causes

Poor transport connections, low levels ifinward investment, out migration of skills.

City centreHigh levels ofunemployment

Industrial development and increases intraffic volumes.

CountrysideLoss of tranquillity

Greenhouse gas emissions from industrialdevelopment and increases in trafficvolumes.

WorldwideClimate change

Use of land for flood management,transport infrastructure and industrialdevelopment.

Wildlife habitatsHabitat fragmentation

CausesAffected ReceptorCumulative Effect


141

Figure 27: Assessing the cumulative effects of plan policies against sustainabilityobjectives

Effects on SA objectives

Key to Symbols: + positive, – negative, 0 no effect, ? uncertain effect.

The new roadunder Policy 1will reducecongestionadjacent to thebusiness park,and link withhousingproposal(Policy 4),which shouldprovide newhousinghelpingsupport theskills base ofthe town

No significantcumulativeeffects

Mixed effectsbut thecombinationof improvedroads andPolicy 5housingproposal willlead to 15%increases intraffic in thetown, withoutoffsettingimprovedpublictransport

No significantcumulativeeffectsidentified

The combinedeffect of twonew roadsplus twonew housingdevelopmentswill significantlyfragment anarea ofcontinuouswoodland.Recommendredesigningdevelopmentto reduceimpact andrequirecompensatoryplanting

Commentaryfor significantcumulativeeffects(includingrecommenda-tions forimprovement)

++–– –0– –Cumulativeeffects ofPolicy 1 + 2 +3 + etc.

Etc.

––– –0–Policy 5(e.g. HousingProposal)

+–+0–Policy 4(e.g. HousingProposal)

+00++Policy 3(e.g. Trafficmanagementscheme)

0––00Policy 2(e.g. roadimprovement)

++––––Policy 1(e.g. roadimprovement)

SA objective E:To encourageeconomicregeneration

SA objective D:Minimise theproduction ofwaste

SA objectiveC: Reduceneed to travel

SA objective B:Protect humanhealth

SA objective A:Maintain andenhancebiodiversity

SA Objective

Policy No.

Further information is given in the European Commission’s Guidelines for theAssessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions and theCanadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Addressing Cumulative EnvironmentalEffects – see “References and further information” for details and links.

Individual policies and parts of a plan may perform well in sustainability terms whenappraised individually, but tensions can emerge when considered together. Aconsistency analysis can help to reveal synergies and potential tensions, so that they aremade explicit and tensions reduced wherever possible (see Figure 28). To make thisprocess more manageable, it can be useful to group policies into topic areas, and assesstheir consistency with groups of policies for other topic areas.


142

Figure 28: Example of a consistency matrix

✓ Consistent

X Inconsistent

– No link

Policy 1

Policy 2 ✓

Policy 3 ✓ X

Policy 4 – X –

Policy 5 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Policy 1 Policy 2 Policy 3 Policy 4

Analysis of inconsistencies:

Policy 2 versus Policies 3 and 4: Development of 600 homes on remote former airfield(Policy 2) is inconsistent with the aim to guide development to existing urban centres(Policy 3) and the requirement to protect and conserve nature conservation as theairfield has grasslands of local importance for nature conservation. Recommendation:reassess whether option more sustainable sites for 600 homes are more sustainable,and if not establish the criteria that development of the airfield (e.g. mixed-uses,community facilities, avoidance of grasslands where possible and off-site compensationwhere development is necessary). If resources allow, use modelling to determine effectsof travel patterns, to ensure that there is no increase to journeys arising.

Annex 10: Identifying andcomparing optionsOptions may be described as the range of rational choices open to plan-makers fordelivering the plan objectives. This guidance assumes that the term “alternatives” isnormally synonymous with “options” in plan-making.

Assessment always involves comparison. The effects of a plan can only be understoodby comparing it with a state, an option or an objective. Alternatives should becompared with each other and with the “do nothing” or “business as usual” options.For example, a new plan which must accommodate a given number of new houses cancompare the effects of different spatial options for locating the new housing with eachother. These options could then be compared with the predicted implementation of thecurrent or existing plan, to show what would happen without the new plan. Acomparison of this could then be made with current conditions to show which optionswould improve or worsen current conditions. There is no one “correct” comparison:different comparisons will reveal different points, and more than one may be significant.

IDENTIFYING OPTIONS

Options put forward should be reasonable, realistic and relevant. Options should alsobe sufficiently distinct in order to highlight the different sustainability implications ofeach, so that meaningful comparisons can be made.

Some options are discrete. These involve a choice between one option and another, as inFigure 29. These are often the broad options considered early in plan preparation.Other options can be combined in various ways. Plan policies are often alternatives ofthis type. Options may be grouped into scenarios, for instance rapid economic growth,“most sustainable” option, etc.

Figure 29: Example of discrete options

An analysis of higher-level strategies identified three dimensions related to the provisionof new housing as part of a wider exercise to stem population loss:

• The number of new houses needed to create sustainable neighbourhoods and attracthouseholds back.

• The density of housing, which has a bearing on house type and design and is a keydeterminant of what prospective occupiers might find attractive.

• The location of housing: in simplistic terms, greenfield v. brownfield.

Eight options representing various combinations of these dimensions were identified:

1. Do the minimum: Little or no net new development – new build as replacement fordemolition, only modest increases in dwellings through conversion of existingbuildings, reduction in vacant properties and land, and more intensive use ofbuildings. De-allocate all existing greenfield allocations and no windfalldevelopments beyond those already with permission.

143

To keep the big issues clear, the alternatives considered at an early stage should not beelaborated in too much detail. Only the main differences between the alternatives needto be considered and documented.

Figure 31 gives examples of alternatives which could fall under each of these headings.

For key plan issues, a hierarchy of options should be considered, as shown at Figure 30.Obviation of demand is often more sustainable than providing for demand or rationingconsumption through price or limited capacity. For example, better local amenities orservices might make some journeys unnecessary; and insulation and design standardscan reduce the need for domestic heating. Obviation is not the same thing as restrictingor thwarting demands which may simply lead to the displacement of a problem: itshould be seen as looking for different, more sustainable, means to achieve humanquality of life ends.

Figure 29: Example of discrete options

2. No change: Maintain existing densities and greenfield allocations and allowdevelopment on windfall sites. Modest net increase in housing stock.

3. Meet target of 200 net new dwellings per year through option 1, plus densityincrease on cleared sites and development on previously developed land not usedas open space. De-allocate all existing greenfield allocations.

4. Meet the RPG target through option 1, plus lower density increase than option 2,by retaining existing greenfield allocations.

5. Meet the RPG target through option 1, plus lower density increase than option 3,and increasing density on existing greenfield allocations, seeking up to a maximum25% of development on greenfield sites.

6. Meet the regeneration strategy target (about 500 net new dwellings per year)through option 3, but with much higher densities.

7. Meet the regeneration strategy target through option 4, but with higher densities.

8. Meet the regeneration strategy target through option 5, with new greenfieldallocations.

Clearly there could be many other targets between 200 and 500 net new dwellingsper year.


144

Figure 30: ‘Hierarchy’ of alternatives

need or demand: is it necessary?

Can the need or demand be met without implementing the plan at all?

Can the proposal (development, infrastructure etc) be obviated?

mode or process: how should it be done?

Are there technologies or methods that can meet the need with less adverse effectsthan ‘obvious’ or traditional methods?

location: where should it go?

timing and detailed implementation:

When, in what form and in what sequence, should developments be carried out?

What details matter, and what requirements should be made about them?


145

Figure 31: Example of hierarchy of options

Match timing ofhousing developmentto needs and to publicservice provision.

Incorporate energy andwater efficiencymeasures into design.

Minimise newinfrastructuredemands (e.g. byavoiding locationsremote fromamenities).

Focus new housing onbrownfield sites andaway from floodplains.

Make best use of land:

• Encourage infill,development ofsmall sites,rebuilding at higherdensities.

• Promote dense andland-efficient builtforms, e.g. terraces,low rise flats,communal openspaces.

• Maximise density.

• Use existinginfrastructure in newconstruction.

Match supply to needs:

• Encourageadaptation ofbuildings to maximisethe potential forcomfortableoccupation (e.g.loft and garageconversions,subdivision of largehouses).

• High standardshelteredaccommodation forolder people as analternative to stayingin unnecessarily largehouses. Make bestuse of existingbuilding stock.

Housing

Have walking/cyclinginfrastructure andpublic transportservices in placebefore developmentcomes into use

If extra traffic capacityis unavoidable, designat minimum necessarycapacity, avoiddiscouraging othermodes (e.g. design intraffic calming, saferoutes for pedestriansand cyclists), minimisenoise, land take andvisual intrusion.

Locate amenities andservices together, sopeople canaccomplish severalerrands in one trip,e.g. multi-functionaltown centres.

Locate bike standsand bus stops moreconveniently thanparking.

Encourage walkingand cycling.

Support good publictransport, matchedto journey desires(e.g. provide sites formodal interchange,protect rail corridors).

Reduce the need totravel by locatingamenities/servicesnearer their users, orhousing users nearerthe amenities they need;helping people meetmore needs at home(e.g. homeworking,information technology).

Support community-scale infrastructureand services to reduceneed to transportgoods, e.g. small-scaleincinerators, reservoirs,wind turbines.

Transport/accessibility

Include appropriatepolicies in LDF, andencourage businesssupport services(e.g. Business Link)to provide advice andguidance to SMEs.

Within major districtcentres and largervillages, at theneighbourhood level.

Allow for flexible useof buildings for smalland medium sizedenterprises, andsupport expansionof existing businesspremises.

Reduce the need toattract a major inwardinvestor byencouraging thegrowth of indigenousbusinesses.

Economic Development

Timing and detailedimplementation

LocationMode/ProcessObviation of need anddemand suppression


146

Figure 31: Example of hierarchy of options (continued)

Use best availableenergy efficiencytechnologies inbuilding constructionand operation; sitehousing to optimisesolar gain; usematerials with lowembodied energy.

Small-scale,Community ownedrenewable energyinstallations tominimise transmissionloss.

Promote renewableenergy, energy fromwaste, CombinedHeat and Power.

Reduce demand forenergy in housing bypromoting low energylighting andappliances, veryefficient boilers, highinsulation standards,conservatoriesand lobbies, largesouthfacing andsmall northfacingwindows etc.

Energy

Timing and detailedimplementation

LocationMode/ProcessObviation of need anddemand suppression

Clearly not all of these options are applicable in all cases. For instance, demandreduction measures are often outside the control of the planning authority. Someoptions may not be practical, or within a planning authority’s powers, while others maynot be appropriate to a particular stage or level of plan. A wider range of options willbe available at a regional level than at a local level, and decisions made at the “higher”level will close off some options. Nevertheless, “up the hierarchy” thinking couldsuggest a wider, and more sustainable, range of options than hitherto considered.

Stakeholders may usefully be involved in the generation and assessment of bothstrategic and more detailed options through consultation. Demonstrating that there arechoices to be made is an effective way of engaging stakeholders in the process. Theoptions considered throughout the process should be documented and reasons given asto why they are or are not taken forward.

ASSESSING OPTIONS

The assessment of options should be made against the SA Framework. This will be aniterative process, whereby the options and policy choices developed for the plan arerevised to take into account the findings of the SA. Ultimately, the aim should be towork towards a detailed appraisal of the preferred options and draft plan (see Stage C).

The assessment of options should be in sufficient detail to identify the significant effectsof each option against each objective, and where appropriate highlighting anycumulative (including secondary and synergistic), short, medium, and long-term effects,and whether they are likely to be permanent or temporary (see Annex 8 on predictingand assessing effects).

When assessing options, it may be helpful to consider:

• Are the options distinct and clearly presented?

• Are they likely to have any adverse effects? Can these be reduced, avoided, oroffset?

• Can positive effects be enhanced?

• Can any of the effects be quantified in a meaningful way?

• Who are likely to be the “winners”, and “losers” for each option (e.g. rural versusurban dwellers; young versus old; people with cars versus those without; futureversus current generations, etc)?

• Are any effects of the options unclear or ambiguous? Is any further analysisappropriate?

• Are the effects likely to be variable over the short, medium and long-term?

Planning authorities are encouraged to use a matrix similar to the example provided inFigure 23 to document the prediction and appraisal of plan options against the SAFramework. It may be useful in selecting preferred options, to summarise theassessment results for the different options in one table (e.g. Figure 32 or Figure 33).This can help to identify the most sustainable option overall, or different options thatpromote different aspects of sustainability. It can also suggest new, more sustainable,options composed of different aspects of the initial options.

However, it is not the role of the SA to determine which of the options should bechosen as the basis for the preferred options and the draft plan. This is the role of thosewho have to decide which strategy is appropriate. The role of the SA is to assist withthe identification of the appropriate options, by highlighting the sustainabilityimplications of the different options, and by putting forward recommendationsfor improvement.

Symbols or other ways of presenting information regarding the likely effects (e.g.positive, negative, uncertain, not significant) can be used in appraising and comparingoptions. These should always be accompanied by a commentary explaining andjustifying the choice of symbol with reference to the baseline situation relevant to thesustainability objective. This helps promote transparency and aids users of the appraisaland secondly provides an opportunity to record options for enhancement or mitigation.In principle, weighting and scoring can also be used to clarify the decision-makingprocess, by making explicit the preferences decision-makers place on differentobjectives.

Numerical analysis can be applied to a SA Framework in two stages:

• Weighting – Numerical weights can be assigned to define the relative value of eachobjective, between the top and bottom of the chosen scale.

• Scoring – The predicted effects of each option can be assigned a numerical score ona preference scale for each objective. For example, more preferred options mayscore higher and less preferred options may score lower.

The results will highlight the contribution of each option to the achievement of thedifferent objectives. Results can be aggregated for each objective to elicit whichoptions deliver the best outcomes or where options can be revised to improve results.Results can also be analysed on a case by case basis if preferred.


147

The process of predicting and appraising options will provide a basis for the ongoingmonitoring of effects of chosen options. Information derived during the appraisalprocess will be an important information base for authorities to use in futuremonitoring and reporting.


148

Figure 32: Example of comparison of optionsScale: + positive, – negative, +/- range of positive and negative effects

Potential impactif new treatmentsites affectvalued orprotectedlocalities or sites.Unquantifiableat present

–––Has no obviousimpact

Preservehistoricbuildings,and otherculturallyimportantfeatures

As above++++++Limited numberof treatment sitesresults in more andlonger trips. Effectaccumulates asthe volume ofwaste producedper capita rises

–+/–Reducethe needto travel

Easier accessto treatmentfacilities shouldreduce thenumber andlength of trips toassemble wasteat the site. Effectis cumulative

++++++Operatingconditions mayreduce amount ofpollution fromwaste treatment,but more vehicletrips needed tobring waste to thelimited numberof sites

+/–+/–+/–Limit airpollutionto levelsthat donotdamagenaturalsystems

Comments/explanation

Longterm

Medterm

Shortterm

Comments/explanation

Longterm

Medterm

Shortterm

SEA/SAObjective

Option 2: limited function wastetreatment facilities (management,recycling, and some treatment) dottedaround the county provided on a basisof one facility per 10,000 inhabitants

Option 1: multi-function wastetreatment facilities (management,storage and processing) in eachpopulation centre with >25,000inhabitants


149

Figure 33: Example of comparison of options

Option A: Concentrate development Option B: Even developmenton MOD Site, on northern edge of within three main towns,main market town brownfield prioritised

Sustainability Perform- Commentary/ Perform- Commentary/ Objective ance explanation ance explanation

Social objectives

Etc.

Environmental objectives

Would bring backinto use derelict anddegraded sites,which are currentlycausing visual blightacross all threetowns.

++Visual impact of thedevelopment, and changein character of the town(e.g. setting) could besignificant. Setting asidesuch a large area of landfor development couldtake mean thatdevelopment of otherbrownfield sites in thetown would become moredifficult to develop.

–To maintain andenhance thequality oflandscapes andtownscapes

A few positiveeffects, but benefitsof developmentwould be diluted asspread across threetowns, makingservice provisionmore difficult.

+/0Should provide anopportunity to meet anumber of socialobjectives, but to besuccessful needs to beintegrated into existingtown (e.g. provideaccessible new facilitiesfor existing residents), andshould include 40%affordable and essentialworker housing.

++Summaryappraisal againstsocial objectives

Little discernibleeffect as scale ofdevelopment wouldnot bring majorchanges in quality ofeducational provision

0Positive effect possible,but depends upon trainingprovided by newemployer, and ability torecruit teachers to thetown FE college –currently proving difficult.

+To improve theeducation andskills of thepopulation

Would improveaccessibility acrossall three towns, butmay not providesufficient demand forall essential servicesto be provided.

+Provides an opportunity todevelop a new localshopping and servicecentre, capable ofsupporting a healthcentre, primary school,post office, bank andsmall supermarket.

+To improveaccessibility toessential servicesand facilities


150

Figure 33: Example of comparison of options (continued)



Environmenal objectives (continued)

Etc

Economic objectives

Etc

Would continueexisting patterns ofeconomicperformance.

0Market town acts as amajor employer forsurrounding villages,therefore significantnumber of residentsshould benefit. Couldadversely affect othermarket towns.

_To reducedisparities ineconomicperformance

Would encourageinvestment across allthree towns, butscale of developmentin any one town notlikely to make majordifference.

+Effect likely as severalcompanies have alreadymade enquiries to theRDA, with shortlist ofthree developed.

++To encourage andaccommodateboth indigenousand inwardinvestment

Generally positive(some minor effectsre. ecological valueof brownfield sites).Would make mostefficient use of land.

+Cumulative effects couldbe major, withoutappropriate policies toensure that landscapequality is maintained, lossof grassland biodiversity iscompensated for, and thata significant switch fromcar use to public transportand/or walking /cycling isachieved.

– –Summaryappraisal againstenvironmentalobjectives

As brownfield sitesare centrally located,should allow fordevelopment to takeplace that wouldencourage walkingand cycling, and lessreliance on the car

+Could lead to air qualitystandards being breached

–To improve airquality


151

Figure 33: Example of comparison of options (continued)



Economic objectives (continued)

Summary appraisal

Option A performs marginally better against economic and social objectives, but less well againstenvironmental objectives, although this varies across the District.

Recommendation: Option A would be the preferred choice if strict criteria were to be applied todevelopment in terms of quality of built environment, provision of affordable and key workerhousing, and so long as brownfield sites within towns are prioritised before development of theMOD site is allowed to go ahead. This may mean looking at a longer time-scale for developmentof the MOD site. It is also recommended that public transport links between the three towns areimproved in order that the benefits of the major development of the MOD site can be felt by allthree towns.

Key for appraisal:

++ major positive + minor positive – minor negative

– – major negative 0 neutral ? uncertain

Would lead to moreeven economicdevelopment acrossthe District, butpossible loss ofeconomicopportunities by notidentifying a majorsite to attract aninward investor

?Would provide asignificant opportunity toboost economicinvestment. May increaseeconomic performancewith other parts of theregion, but supply policiescould mitigate the worsteffects.

+Summaryappraisal againsteconomicobjectives

Annex 11: Monitoringimplementation of the planThe significant sustainability effects of implementing the plan should be monitored toidentify unforeseen adverse effects and to enable remedial action to be taken. Planningauthorities may already be monitoring implementation of plans against their objectivesor targets. Some of these may be sustainability objectives, but this will not necessarilybe enough to satisfy the SA process and new monitoring arrangements may berequired. For convenience, this guidance will use the term “SA monitoring” to coverthe overall monitoring of sustainability effects.

SA monitoring can be used to answer questions such as:

• Were the assessment’s predictions of sustainability effects accurate?

• Is the plan contributing to the achievement of desired SA objectives and targets?

• Are mitigation measures performing as well as expected?

• Are there any adverse effects? Are these within acceptable limits, or is remedialaction desirable?

PROPOSED MONITORING FRAMEWORK

A step-by-step guide for how planning authorities may develop a monitoring systemfor their plans is provided below.

Step 1: What needs to be monitored?

The first step is to consider exactly what needs to be monitored. Monitoring measuresmust be clearly linked to the SA process, for example consider:

• The objectives, targets and indicators that were developed for the SA (see Stage A).

• Features of the baseline that will indicate the effects of the plan (see Stage A).

The SEA Directive does not specify that monitoring of significant environmental effectshas to be done for each plan or programme individually. Nor does it need to be donedirectly by the Responsible Authority. Monitoring may cover several plans andprogrammes as long as sufficient information about environmental effects is providedfor the individual plans and programmes. There is in other words scope for authority-wide monitoring, providing this can be done in such a way that the requirements of theDirective are met. The appropriate level at which to monitor depends on the type andscale of the plan or programme to be monitored.


152

• The likely significant effects that were identified during the effects assessment (seeStages B and C).

• The mitigation measures that were proposed to offset or reduce significant adverseeffects (see Stage C).

Monitoring should consider both positive and negative effects.

Effects relate to the plan as a whole and monitoring should including consideration ofcumulative, secondary and synergistic effects over and above the effects of theindividual measures in the plan, and effects over the lifespan of the plan.

It is not necessary to monitor everything or monitor an effect indefinitely. Insteadmonitoring should be focussed on:

• Significant sustainability effects that may give rise to irreversible damage, with aview to identifying trends before such damage is caused.

• Significant effects where there was uncertainty in the SA and where monitoringwould enable preventative or mitigation measures to be taken.

Step 2: What sort of information is required?

The type (e.g. quantitative or qualitative) and the level of detail of SA monitoringinformation required will depend on the characteristics and level of detail of the planand its forecasted effects.

SA monitoring should involve measuring indicators which enable us to establish acausal link between implementation of the plan and the likely significant effect beingmonitored. The monitoring framework should be established in a way that seeks totake account of external factors and focus upon the links between the planimplementation and the effect. Where it is difficult to establish these links it might benecessary to collect further information on plan output indicators (e.g. emissions).

It might also be appropriate to undertake more contextual monitoring of social,environmental or economic change. This may involve measuring effects or aspects ofsustainability that were not identified in the assessment, or identifying changes in thebroader social, environmental or economic context. However, this is not required forSA.

When selecting indicators to monitor consider how the indicators will be analysed.Emphasis in the monitoring system should be on undertaking proper analysis andinterpretation of changes in the indicators, and on identifying the effects of the plan,rather than simply collecting information on large numbers of indicators. Analysis ofindictors may include:

• Change in indicators: The effects of plans can be gauged by examining patterns ofchange in the indicators and the extent to which related indicators have changed.This can be achieved through analysing groups of indicators together to create aprofile of the issue being measured.


153

• Baselines and predicted effects: Changes and shifts in the direction of indicatorsshould be measured against the baseline position and predicted effects documentedin the SA Report.

• Benchmarking: Changes and shifts in the direction of indicators can also bemeasured against other comparable areas to analyse if similar effects are occurring.Benchmarking may help in the assessment of relative performance by taking intoaccount external forces of change. This is best achieved by establishing a commonset of core indicators.

• Use of qualitative and quantitative information: Monitoring of most indicatorswill be based on the collection of quantitative information. But there may also be aneed to incorporate some qualitative information in the analysis to enrichunderstanding.

• Interpretative commentaries: One task of analysis is providing a consideredinterpretation of the results. This may be presented via appropriate explanations andcommentaries within monitoring reports.

Step 3: What are the existing sources of monitoring information?

Many authorities undertake some form of sustainability monitoring. In some cases, theimplementation of a plan is monitored against plan objectives, targets and indicators.This type of performance monitoring does not necessarily include sustainability effects,unless the planning authority has developed sustainability performance indicators orsustainability best value indicators. But plan performance monitoring can be helpfulwhen considered together with SA monitoring. Other existing monitoring is typicallyfocussed on what is required by regulations and legislation (e.g. SEA monitoring ofother plans and programmes, monitoring required under the Environment Act 1995)but may provide data which is useful either directly or with some degree of analysis ormanipulation.

Wherever possible, use existing monitoring arrangements to obtain the requiredinformation identified in Step 2. Consider issues such as:

• What are the existing monitoring arrangements for the plan, and does this provideany of the required information?

• What are the existing monitoring arrangements for other plans, programmes orprojects within the authority, and is there scope for disaggregating/aggregating datato obtain any of the required information?

• Is any of the required information available from other sources, e.g. higher or lowerlevel authorities or data sources used for establishing the sustainability baseline?

• What organisational arrangements are needed to deliver the monitoring?


154

Step 4: Are there any gaps in the existing information, and how can these be filled?

Additional information collection may be required to monitor those aspects selected inStep 1. Some ways in which the required information can be obtained in a cost-effectiveand efficient way include:

• Incorporate SA monitoring into existing performance monitoring for plans.

• Expand other existing monitoring systems to include additional parameters.

• Where applicable, enter into agreements with other authorities to standardisemonitoring methods and share information.

Step 5: What should be done if adverse effects are found?

A Responsible Authority may establish a mechanism or framework to identify if andwhen remedial action is needed, including:

• Criteria or thresholds for when remedial action is proposed (i.e. what are the social,environmental or economic conditions that would be regarded asundesirable/unacceptable).

• Potential remedial actions that could be taken if a significant effect was identified(e.g. review aspects of the plan that are causing the effects and make amendments,develop avoidance, mitigation, and enhancement measures).

• Those responsible for taking the remedial action (e.g. another authority or agencymay be responsible for taking the remedial action and may need to be consulted).

Step 6: Who is responsible for the various monitoring activities, when should thesebe carried out, and what is the appropriate format for presenting the monitoringresults?

When documenting the monitoring strategy consider:

• The time, frequency and geographical extent of monitoring (e.g link to timeframesfor targets; and monitoring whether the effect is predicted to be short, medium orlong-term).

• Who is responsible for the different monitoring tasks, including the collection,processing and evaluation of environmental information.

• How to present the monitoring information with regard to its purpose and theexpertise of those who will have to act upon the information (e.g. information mayhave to be presented in a form accessible to non-environmental specialists).

Figure 34 suggests a format for documenting how the monitoring process should bemanaged.


155

Figure 35 shows a possible format for documenting a proposed monitoring programme.This includes actions which could be taken if adverse effects were found.


156

Figure 34: Managing the monitoring process

Status/problemsencountered

How should theresults bepresented/appropriateformat?

When should itbe carried out(dates andfrequency)?

Who isresponsible forundertaking themonitoring?

Monitoringactivity to beundertaken

Figure 35: Documenting the monitoring data

Whatremedialaction couldbe taken?

When shouldremedialaction beconsidered?

Are there anygaps in existinginformationand how canthese beresolved?

Where can theinformationbe obtained(sources ofinformation)?

What sort ofinformation isrequired(indicator)?

What needsto bemonitored(effect)?

Quality Assurance ChecklistQuality assurance is an important element of the appraisal exercise, helping to ensurethat the SEA Directives requirements are met, highlighting any problems with the SAReport, and showing how effectively the appraisal has integrated sustainabilityconsiderations into the plan-making process.

The quality assurance checklist covers both the technical and procedural steps of theappraisal process, and can be applied at any stage of the appraisal to check the qualityof work carried out up to that point.

Quality assurance checklist

Objectives and context

• The appraisal is conducted as an integral part of the plan-making process.

• The plan/strategy’s purpose and objectives are made clear.

• Sustainability issues and constraints, including international and EC environmental protectionobjectives, are considered in developing objectives and targets.

• SA objectives, where used, are clearly set out and linked to indicators and targets whereappropriate.

• Links with other related plans, programmes and policies are identified and explained.

• Relates the requirements of the SEA Directive to the wider SA.

Scoping

• Authorities and other key stakeholders with a range of interests that are relevant to the planand SA are consulted in appropriate ways and at appropriate times on the content andscope of the SA Report.

• The assessment focuses on the significant issues.

• Technical, procedural and other difficulties encountered are discussed; assumptions anduncertainties are made explicit.

• Reasons are given for eliminating issues from further consideration.

Options

• Realistic options are considered for key issues, and the reasons for choosing them aredocumented.

• Options include ‘do nothing’ scenario wherever relevant.

• The sustainability effects (both adverse and beneficial) of each option are identified andcompared.

• Inconsistencies between the options and other relevant plans, programmes or policies areidentified and explained.

• Reasons are given for selection or elimination of options.

Baseline information

• Relevant aspects of the current state of the plan area (including social, environmental, andeconomic characteristics) and their likely evolution without the plan are described.

• Characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected are described.

• Difficulties such as deficiencies in data or methods are explained.

157

Quality assurance checklist

Prediction and evaluation of likely significant effects

• Effects identified include the types listed in the SEA Directive (biodiversity, population, humanhealth, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climate factors, material assets, cultural heritage andlandscape), as well as other wider sustainability issues (employment, housing, transport,community cohesion, education, etc).

• Both positive and negative effects are considered, and the duration of effects (short, mediumor long-term) is addressed.

• Likely cumulative (including secondary and synergistic) effects are identified wherepracticable.

• Inter-relationships between effects are considered where practicable.

• Where relevant, the prediction and assessment of effects makes use of accepted standards,regulations, and thresholds.

• Methods used to appraise the effects are described.

Mitigation measures

• Measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and offset any significant adverse effects ofimplementing the plan are indicated.

• Issues to be taken into account in project consents are identified.

The SA Report

• Is clear and concise in its layout and presentation.

• Uses simple, clear language and avoids or explains technical terms.

• Uses maps and other illustrations where appropriate.

• Explains the methodology used.

• Explains who was consulted and what methods of consultation were used.

• Identifies sources of information, including expert judgement and matters of opinion.

• Contains a non-technical summary covering the overall approach to the appraisal, theobjectives of the plan, the main options considered, and any changes to the plan resultingfrom the appraisal.

Consultation

• Authorities and the public likely to be affected by, or having an interest in, the plan areconsulted in ways and at times which give them an early and effective opportunity withinappropriate time frames to express their opinions on the draft plan and SA Report.

Decision-making and information on the decision

• The SA Report and the opinions of those consulted are taken into account in finalising andadopting the plan.

• An explanation is given of how they have been taken into account.

• Reasons are given for choosing the plan as adopted, in the light of other reasonable optionsconsidered.

Monitoring measures

• Measures proposed for monitoring are clear, practicable and linked to the indicators andobjectives used in the appraisal.

• Proposals are made for action in response to significant adverse effects.

• Monitoring enables unforeseen adverse effects to be identified at an early stage. Theseeffects should include predictions which prove to be incorrect.

• During implementation of the plan, monitoring is used where appropriate to make gooddeficiencies in baseline information in the appraisal.


158

GlossaryA description of the present and future state of an area, in theabsence of any plan, taking into account changes resulting fromnatural events and from other human activities.

An authority which because of its environmental responsibilitiesis likely to be concerned by the effects of implementing plans andprogrammes and must be consulted under the SEA Directive. TheConsultation Bodies, designated in the SEA Regulations are theCountryside Agency, English Heritage, English Nature, and theEnvironment Agency.

A form of environmental assessment used in the UK (primarilyfor development plans) since the early 1990s, supported by‘Environmental Appraisal of Development Plans: A GoodPractice Guide’ (DoE, 1993); more recently superseded bysustainability appraisal. Some aspects of environmental appraisalforeshadow the requirements of the SEA Directive.

Generically, a method or procedure for predicting the effects onthe environment of a proposal, either for an individual project ora higher-level “strategy” (a policy, plan or programme), with theaim of taking account of these effects in decision-making. Theterm “Environmental Impact Assessment” (EIA) is used, as inEuropean Directive 337/85/EEC, for assessments of projects. Inthe SEA Directive, an environmental assessment means “thepreparation of an environmental report, the carrying out ofconsultations, the taking into account of the environmental reportand the results of the consultations in decision-making and theprovision of information on the decision”, in accordance with theDirective’s requirements.

Document required by the SEA Directive as part of anenvironmental assessment, which identifies, describes andappraises the likely significant effects on the environment ofimplementing a plan or programme. see SA Report.

A measure of variables over time, often used to measureachievement of objectives.

– Output Indicator: An indicator that measures the direct outputof the plan or programme. These indicators measure progress inachieving plan or programme objectives, targets and policies.

– Significant Effects Indicator: An indicator that measures thesignificant effects of the plan or programme.

Indicator:

EnvironmentalReport:

Environmentalassessment:

Environmentalappraisal:

ConsultationBody:

Baseline:

159

– Contextual indicator: An indicator used in monitoring thatmeasures changes in the context within which a plan orprogramme is being implemented.

Used in this guidance to refer to measures to avoid, reduce oroffset significant adverse effects.

A statement of what is intended, specifying the desired directionof change in trends.

In the SEA Regulations, means an organisation which prepares aplan or programme subject to the SEA Directive and isresponsible for the SEA.

The process of deciding the scope and level of detail of an SA,including the sustainability effects and options which need to beconsidered, the assessment methods to be used, and the structureand contents of the SA Report.

European Directive 2001/42/EC ‘on the assessment of the effectsof certain plans and programmes on the environment’.

The Environmental Assessment of Plans and ProgrammesRegulations, 2004.

Effects which are significant in the context of the plan. (Annex IIof the SEA Directive gives criteria for determining the likelyenvironmental significance of effects)

Generic term used internationally to describe environmentalassessment as applied to policies, plans and programmes. In thisguidance, ‘SEA’ is used to refer to the type of environmentalassessment required under the SEA Directive.

Generic term used in this guidance to describe the form ofassessment that considers social, environmental and economiceffects, which fully incorporates the requirements of the SEADirective.

Term used in this guidance to describe a document required to beproduced as part of the SA process to describe and appraise thelikely significant effects on sustainability of implementing a plan,which also meets the requirement for the Environmental Reportunder the SEA Directive.

SustainabilityAppraisal Report:

SustainabilityAppraisal (SA):

StrategicEnvironmentalAssessment (SEA):

Significant effect:

SEA Regulations:

SEA Directive:

Scoping:

ResponsibleAuthority:

Objective:

Mitigation:


160

AbbreviationsAcronyms and other abbreviations used in this report are listed below.

AAP Area Action Plan

AMR Annual Monitoring Report

DETR Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions,responsible for planning prior to 2001

DfT Department for Transport

DPD Development Plan Document

DTLR Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions,responsible for planning between 2001 – 2002

GO Government Offices for the Regions

GOMMMS Guidance on the Methodology for Multi Modal Studies

LDF Local Development Framework

LDD Local Development Document

LDS Local Development Scheme

LPA Local Planning Authority, i.e. Unitary Authorities and DistrictCouncils. But used in this Guide to embrace County Councils whererelevant to their role in producing Minerals and Waste LDDs

LTP Local Transport Plan

MPG Mineral Planning Guidance

NATA New Approach to Appraisal

ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, responsible for planning from2002 onwards

PPG Planning Policy Guidance note

PPS Planning Policy Statement, previously PPG

PSA Public Service Agreement

RPB Regional Planning Body

RPG Regional Planning Guidance

RSDF Regional Sustainable Development Framework

RSS Regional Spatial Strategy, taken in this guide to include the SpatialDevelopment Strategy (SDS) in London

RTS Regional Transport Strategy

SA Sustainability Appraisal

SCI Statement of Community Involvement

SDS Spatial Development Strategy

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

SPD Supplementary Planning Document

UDP Unitary Development Plan

161

References and FurtherInformationAudit Commission (2002). Using Quality of Life Indicators.

Audit Commission (2000). Listen up! Effective Community Consultation. AuditCommission, Londonwww.audit-commission.gov.uk

Cabinet Office (2004). Code of Practice on Consultation.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (1999). Addressing CumulativeEnvironmental Effects. CEAA, Gatineau, Quebechttp://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/013/0001/0004/index_e.htm

Countryside Agency et al (2001). Quality of Life Capital: overview report.Countryside Agency, Cheltenhamwww.qualityoflifecapital.org.uk

Department of the Environment (1993). Environmental Appraisal of DevelopmentPlans: A Good Practice Guide. HMSO, London

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1999). A Better Qualityof Life: A strategy for sustainable development for the UK TSO, Londonhttp://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/uk_strategy/content.htm

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1999). Quality of Life Counts: Indicators for a strategy for sustainable development for the UK – a baseline assessment. DETR, Londonhttp://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/sustainable/quality99/

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000). Local quality oflife counts: a handbook for a menu of local indicators of sustainable development.DETR, Londonhttp://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/indicators/local/localind/index.htm

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000). Good PracticeGuide on Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Planning Guidance. TSO, Londonhttp://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_planning/documents/page/odpm_plan_606943.hcsp

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000). Multi CriteriaAnalysis: A Manual. DETR, Londonhttp://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_about/documents/page/odpm_about_608524.hcsp


162

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000). Indices ofDeprivation. DETR, Londonhttp://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_urbanpolicy/documents/page/odpm_urbpol_608140.hcsp

Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Sustainable DevelopmentUnit) (2002). Regional Quality of Life Counts.http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/indicators/regional/2002/

Department of Trade and Industry (2001). UK Competitiveness Indicators: Second Edition.http://www.dti.gov.uk/opportunityforall/indicators2

Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (2001). Planning GreenPaper: Planning: Delivering a fundamental change. HMSO, London.http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_control/documents/contentservertemplate/odpm_index.hcst?n=2163&l=2

Environment Agency (2003b). Integrated Appraisal Methods – R&D TechnicalReport E2-044/Thames Region.

European Commission (2003). Implementation of Directive 2001/42 EC on theAssessment of the Effects of Certain Plans and Programmes on the Environment.http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/eia/030923_sea_guidance.pdf

European Commission (2001). SEA and Integration of the Environment intoStrategic Decision-Making. ICON, Londonhttp://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/eia/sea-support.htm

European Commission (1999). Guidelines for the Assessment of Indirect andCumulative Impacts as well as Impact Interactions. Commission of the EuropeanCommunities, Brusselshttp://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/eia/eia-studies-and-reports/guidel.htm

European Environment Agency (1998). Spatial and Ecological Assessment of theTEN: Demonstration of Indicators and GIS Methods. Environmental Issues SeriesNo. 11 EAA, Copenhagenhttp://reports.eea.eu.int/GH-15-98-318-EN-C/en

European Parliament and Council of the European Union (2001). Directive2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on theenvironment. Commission of the European Communities, Brusselshttp://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_197/l_19720010721en00300037.pdf

European Parliament and Council of the European Union (1992). Directive 92/43/EECon the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Commission ofthe European Communities, Brussels.


163

Home Office, Active Community Unit. (1) Black and minority ethnic voluntary andcommunity organisations: a code of good practice; (2) Consultation and policyappraisal: a code of good practice; (3) Code of good practice on community groups.http://www.thecompact.org.uk.

Imperial College Press, Eds, Sheate, W. (2003). Special Issue: Public and Stakeholderparticipation in environmental decision-making. Journal of EnvironmentalAssessment Policy and Management, Vol. 5 No. 3.

Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) (2002). Perspectives:Guidelines on participation in environmental decision-making. IEMA, Lincoln.

Levett-Therivel (2002). Implementing the SEA Directive: Analysis of ExistingPractice. Report to the South-West Regional Assembly.http://www.southwest-ra.gov.uk/swra/ourwork/environment/sea.shtml

Levett-Therivel (2003). Implementing the SEA Directive: Five Pilot Studies. Reportto the South-West Regional Assembly.http://www.southwest-ra.gov.uk/swra/ourwork/environment/sea.shtml

National Assembly of Wales (1999). Developing health impact assessment in Wales.National Assembly of Wales.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2002). Making Plans: A Practical Guide.Good practice in plan preparation and management of the development plan process.ODPM, London.http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_planning/documents/page/odpm_plan_606198.pdf

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004). Planning Policy Statement 11 (PPS11) –Regional Planning.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004). Planning Policy Statement 12 (PPS12) –Local Development Frameworks.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2003). The Strategic EnvironmentalAssessment Directive: Guidance for Planning Authorities – Practical guidance onapplying European Directive 2001/42/EC ‘on the assessment of the effects of certainplans and programmes on the environment’ to land use and spatial plans inEngland, October 2003.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004). Local Development Frameworks – Guideto Procedures. (Forthcoming)

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004). Creating Local DevelopmentFrameworks. (Forthcoming)

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2003). The Relationships Between CommunityStrategies and Local Development Frameworks.


164

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Scottish Executive, Welsh Assembly Governmentand Northern Ireland Department of the Environment (2004). A Draft Practical Guideto the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive.http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_planning/documents/page/odpm_plan_029817.pdf

RSPB and Bedfordshire County Council (1996). A Step by Step Guide toEnvironmental Appraisal, Bedfordshire County Council.

Scott, P., Wood, C. Jones C. and Billing L. (2001). Environmental Appraisal ofDevelopment Plans: Training Guide. Occasional Paper 59, University of Manchester.

Scottish Executive Development Department (2003). Environmental Assessment ofDevelopment Plans, Interim Planning Guidance. Scottish Executive.http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/planning/eadp.pdf

Smith, S.P. and W.R. Sheate (2001a). Sustainability appraisal of English regionalplans: incorporating the requirements of the EU Strategic EnvironmentalAssessment Directive. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 19(4), December 2001, pp. 263-276.

Smith, S.P. and W.R. Sheate (2001b). Sustainability appraisal of Regional PlanningGuidance and Regional Economic Strategies in England: An Assessment. Journal ofEnvironmental Planning and Management 44(5), September 2001, pp. 735-755.

Smith, S. (2002). Sustainability Appraisal of Key Regional Strategies: A Step-by-StepGuide. Imperial College London.

Sustainable Development Plans Group (2001). Development Plans and SustainableDevelopment: Making the Links and Measuring the Impacts. Local GovernmentAssociation website: http://www.lga.gov.uk/content.asp?lSection=0&id=SX793A-A77F7DF8

Stationery Office (2004). The Environmental Assessment of Plans and ProgrammesRegulations 2004.

Therivel, R. and P. Minas (2002). Ensuring effective sustainability appraisal ofdevelopment plans. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 20(2), June 2002,pp81-92.

TRL Ltd and Collingwood Environmental Planning (2002). Analysis of Baseline DataRequirements for the SEA Directive – Final Report.http://www.southwest-ra.gov.uk/swra/ourwork/environment/sea.shtml

UN-Habitat (2001). Tools to support participatory urban decision-makingHS/628/01E (part of Urban Governance Toolkit Series), Nairobi.


165

Yorkshire and the Humber Assembly (undated). A Step-by-Step Guide to RSDFSustainability Appraisal.http://www.yhassembly.gov.uk/p_contentdocs/245_3.pdf

Welsh Assembly Government (2002). Sustainability Appraisal of UnitaryDevelopment Plans in Wales: A Good Practice Guide. National Assembly of Wales.

World Health Organisation (2001). Health impact assessment as part of strategicenvironmental assessment. A review of Health impact assessment concepts, methodsand practice to support the development of a protocol on strategic environmentalassessment to the Espoo Convention, which adequately covers health impacts.Advanced Copy. Eds Breeze, C.C and Lock, K. www.who.dk/document/e74634.pdf


166

EN Official Journal of the European Communities 21.7.2001L 197/30

DIRECTIVE 2001/42/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCILof 27 June 2001

on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THEEUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the EuropeanCommunity, and in particular Article 175(1) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (1),

Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and SocialCommittee (2),

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of theRegions (3),

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article251 of the Treaty (4), in the light of the joint text approved bythe Conciliation Committee on 21 March 2001,

Whereas:

(1) Article 174 of the Treaty provides that Communitypolicy on the environment is to contribute to, inter alia,the preservation, protection and improvement of thequality of the environment, the protection of humanhealth and the prudent and rational utilisation of naturalresources and that it is to be based on the precautionaryprinciple. Article 6 of the Treaty provides that environ-mental protection requirements are to be integrated intothe definition of Community policies and activities, inparticular with a view to promoting sustainable develop-ment.

(2) The Fifth Environment Action Programme: Towardssustainability — A European Community programme ofpolicy and action in relation to the environment andsustainable development (5), supplemented by CouncilDecision No 2179/98/EC (6) on its review, affirms theimportance of assessing the likely environmental effectsof plans and programmes.

(3) The Convention on Biological Diversity requires Partiesto integrate as far as possible and as appropriate theconservation and sustainable use of biological diversityinto relevant sectoral or cross-sectoral plans andprogrammes.

(4) Environmental assessment is an important tool for inte-grating environmental considerations into the prepara-tion and adoption of certain plans and programmeswhich are likely to have significant effects on the envir-onment in the Member States, because it ensures thatsuch effects of implementing plans and programmes aretaken into account during their preparation and beforetheir adoption.

(5) The adoption of environmental assessment proceduresat the planning and programming level should benefitundertakings by providing a more consistent frameworkin which to operate by the inclusion of the relevantenvironmental information into decision making. Theinclusion of a wider set of factors in decision makingshould contribute to more sustainable and effective solu-tions.

(6) The different environmental assessment systems oper-ating within Member States should contain a set ofcommon procedural requirements necessary to contri-bute to a high level of protection of the environment.

(7) The United Nations/Economic Commission for EuropeConvention on Environmental Impact Assessment in aTransboundary Context of 25 February 1991, whichapplies to both Member States and other States, encour-ages the parties to the Convention to apply its principlesto plans and programmes as well; at the second meetingof the Parties to the Convention in Sofia on 26 and 27February 2001, it was decided to prepare a legallybinding protocol on strategic environmental assessmentwhich would supplement the existing provisions onenvironmental impact assessment in a transboundarycontext, with a view to its possible adoption on theoccasion of the 5th Ministerial Conference ‘Environmentfor Europe’ at an extraordinary meeting of the Parties tothe Convention, scheduled for May 2003 in Kiev,Ukraine. The systems operating within the Communityfor environmental assessment of plans and programmesshould ensure that there are adequate transboundaryconsultations where the implementation of a plan orprogramme being prepared in one Member State islikely to have significant effects on the environment ofanother Member State. The information on plans andprogrammes having significant effects on the environ-ment of other States should be forwarded on a reci-procal and equivalent basis within an appropriate legalframework between Member States and these otherStates.

(1) OJ C 129, 25.4.1997, p. 14 andOJ C 83, 25.3.1999, p. 13.

(2) OJ C 287, 22.9.1997, p. 101.(3) OJ C 64, 27.2.1998, p. 63 and

OJ C 374, 23.12.1999, p. 9.(4) Opinion of the European Parliament of 20 October 1998 (OJ C

341, 9.11.1998, p. 18), confirmed on 16 September 1999 (OJ C54, 25.2.2000, p. 76), Council Common Position of 30 March2000 (OJ C 137, 16.5.2000, p. 11) and Decision of the EuropeanParliament of 6 September 2000 (OJ C 135, 7.5.2001, p. 155).Decision of the European Parliament of 31 May 2001 and Decisionof the Council of 5 June 2001.

(5) OJ C 138, 17.5.1993, p. 5.(6) OJ L 275, 10.10.1998, p. 1.

167

The SEA Directive

EN Official Journal of the European Communities21.7.2001 L 197/31

(8) Action is therefore required at Community level to laydown a minimum environmental assessment framework,which would set out the broad principles of the environ-mental assessment system and leave the details to theMember States, having regard to the principle of subsi-diarity. Action by the Community should not go beyondwhat is necessary to achieve the objectives set out in theTreaty.

(9) This Directive is of a procedural nature, and its require-ments should either be integrated into existing proced-ures in Member States or incorporated in specificallyestablished procedures. With a view to avoiding duplica-tion of the assessment, Member States should takeaccount, where appropriate, of the fact that assessmentswill be carried out at different levels of a hierarchy ofplans and programmes.

(10) All plans and programmes which are prepared for anumber of sectors and which set a framework for futuredevelopment consent of projects listed in Annexes I andII to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 onthe assessment of the effects of certain public andprivate projects on the environment (1), and all plansand programmes which have been determined to requireassessment pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitatsand of wild flora and fauna (2), are likely to have signifi-cant effects on the environment, and should as a rule bemade subject to systematic environmental assessment.When they determine the use of small areas at local levelor are minor modifications to the above plans orprogrammes, they should be assessed only whereMember States determine that they are likely to havesignificant effects on the environment.

(11) Other plans and programmes which set the frameworkfor future development consent of projects may nothave significant effects on the environment in all casesand should be assessed only where Member States deter-mine that they are likely to have such effects.

(12) When Member States make such determinations, theyshould take into account the relevant criteria set out inthis Directive.

(13) Some plans or programmes are not subject to thisDirective because of their particular characteristics.

(14) Where an assessment is required by this Directive, anenvironmental report should be prepared containingrelevant information as set out in this Directive, identi-fying, describing and evaluating the likely significantenvironmental effects of implementing the plan orprogramme, and reasonable alternatives taking intoaccount the objectives and the geographical scope of theplan or programme; Member States should communi-

cate to the Commission any measures they takeconcerning the quality of environmental reports.

(15) In order to contribute to more transparent decisionmaking and with the aim of ensuring that the informa-tion supplied for the assessment is comprehensive andreliable, it is necessary to provide that authorities withrelevant environmental responsibilities and the publicare to be consulted during the assessment of plans andprogrammes, and that appropriate time frames are set,allowing sufficient time for consultations, including theexpression of opinion.

(16) Where the implementation of a plan or programmeprepared in one Member State is likely to have a signifi-cant effect on the environment of other Member States,provision should be made for the Member Statesconcerned to enter into consultations and for the rele-vant authorities and the public to be informed andenabled to express their opinion.

(17) The environmental report and the opinions expressed bythe relevant authorities and the public, as well as theresults of any transboundary consultation, should betaken into account during the preparation of the plan orprogramme and before its adoption or submission to thelegislative procedure.

(18) Member States should ensure that, when a plan orprogramme is adopted, the relevant authorities and thepublic are informed and relevant information is madeavailable to them.

(19) Where the obligation to carry out assessments of theeffects on the environment arises simultaneously fromthis Directive and other Community legislation, such asCouncil Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on theconservation of wild birds (3), Directive 92/43/EEC, orDirective 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament andthe Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a frame-work for Community action in the field of waterpolicy (4), in order to avoid duplication of the assess-ment, Member States may provide for coordinated orjoint procedures fulfilling the requirements of the rele-vant Community legislation.

(20) A first report on the application and effectiveness of thisDirective should be carried out by the Commission fiveyears after its entry into force, and at seven-year inter-vals thereafter. With a view to further integrating envir-onmental protection requirements, and taking intoaccount the experience acquired, the first report should,if appropriate, be accompanied by proposals for amend-ment of this Directive, in particular as regards the poss-ibility of extending its scope to other areas/sectors andother types of plans and programmes,

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. Directive as amended by Directive 97/11/EC (OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5). (3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1. Directive as last amended by Directive

97/49/EC (OJ L 223, 13.8.1997, p. 9).(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. Directive as last amended by Directive97/62/EC (OJ L 305, 8.11.1997, p. 42). (4) OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.


168


HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Article 1

Objectives

The objective of this Directive is to provide for a high level ofprotection of the environment and to contribute to the integra-tion of environmental considerations into the preparation andadoption of plans and programmes with a view to promotingsustainable development, by ensuring that, in accordance withthis Directive, an environmental assessment is carried out ofcertain plans and programmes which are likely to have signifi-cant effects on the environment.

Article 2

Definitions

For the purposes of this Directive:

(a) ‘plans and programmes’ shall mean plans and programmes,including those co-financed by the European Community,as well as any modifications to them:

— which are subject to preparation and/or adoption by anauthority at national, regional or local level or whichare prepared by an authority for adoption, through alegislative procedure by Parliament or Government, and

— which are required by legislative, regulatory or adminis-trative provisions;

(b) ‘environmental assessment’ shall mean the preparation ofan environmental report, the carrying out of consultations,the taking into account of the environmental report andthe results of the consultations in decision-making and theprovision of information on the decision in accordancewith Articles 4 to 9;

(c) ‘environmental report’ shall mean the part of the plan orprogramme documentation containing the informationrequired in Article 5 and Annex I;

(d) ‘The public’ shall mean one or more natural or legalpersons and, in accordance with national legislation orpractice, their associations, organisations or groups.

Article 3

Scope

1. An environmental assessment, in accordance withArticles 4 to 9, shall be carried out for plans and programmes

referred to in paragraphs 2 to 4 which are likely to havesignificant environmental effects.

2. Subject to paragraph 3, an environmental assessmentshall be carried out for all plans and programmes,

(a) which are prepared for agriculture, forestry, fisheries,energy, industry, transport, waste management, watermanagement, telecommunications, tourism, town andcountry planning or land use and which set the frameworkfor future development consent of projects listed inAnnexes I and II to Directive 85/337/EEC, or

(b) which, in view of the likely effect on sites, have beendetermined to require an assessment pursuant to Article 6or 7 of Directive 92/43/EEC.

3. Plans and programmes referred to in paragraph 2 whichdetermine the use of small areas at local level and minormodifications to plans and programmes referred to in para-graph 2 shall require an environmental assessment only wherethe Member States determine that they are likely to have signif-icant environmental effects.

4. Member States shall determine whether plans andprogrammes, other than those referred to in paragraph 2,which set the framework for future development consent ofprojects, are likely to have significant environmental effects.

5. Member States shall determine whether plans orprogrammes referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 are likely tohave significant environmental effects either through case-by-case examination or by specifying types of plans andprogrammes or by combining both approaches. For thispurpose Member States shall in all cases take into accountrelevant criteria set out in Annex II, in order to ensure thatplans and programmes with likely significant effects on theenvironment are covered by this Directive.

6. In the case-by-case examination and in specifying types ofplans and programmes in accordance with paragraph 5, theauthorities referred to in Article 6(3) shall be consulted.

7. Member States shall ensure that their conclusionspursuant to paragraph 5, including the reasons for notrequiring an environmental assessment pursuant to Articles 4to 9, are made available to the public.

8. The following plans and programmes are not subject tothis Directive:— plans and programmes the sole purpose of which is to

serve national defence or civil emergency,— financial or budget plans and programmes.

9. This Directive does not apply to plans and programmesco-financed under the current respective programmingperiods (1) for Council Regulations (EC) No 1260/1999 (2)and (EC) No 1257/1999 (3).

(1) The 2000-2006 programming period for Council Regulation (EC)No 1260/1999 and the 2000-2006 and 2000-2007 programmingperiods for Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999.

(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 layingdown general provisions on the Structural Funds (OJ L 161,26.6.1999, p. 1).

(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 onsupport for rural development from the European AgriculturalGuidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealingcertain regulations (OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 80).

169


Article 4

General obligations

1. The environmental assessment referred to in Article 3shall be carried out during the preparation of a plan orprogramme and before its adoption or submission to the legis-lative procedure.

2. The requirements of this Directive shall either be inte-grated into existing procedures in Member States for the adop-tion of plans and programmes or incorporated in proceduresestablished to comply with this Directive.

3. Where plans and programmes form part of a hierarchy,Member States shall, with a view to avoiding duplication of theassessment, take into account the fact that the assessment willbe carried out, in accordance with this Directive, at differentlevels of the hierarchy. For the purpose of, inter alia, avoidingduplication of assessment, Member States shall apply Article5(2) and (3).

Article 5

Environmental report

1. Where an environmental assessment is required underArticle 3(1), an environmental report shall be prepared inwhich the likely significant effects on the environment ofimplementing the plan or programme, and reasonable alterna-tives taking into account the objectives and the geographicalscope of the plan or programme, are identified, described andevaluated. The information to be given for this purpose isreferred to in Annex I.

2. The environmental report prepared pursuant to para-graph 1 shall include the information that may reasonably berequired taking into account current knowledge and methodsof assessment, the contents and level of detail in the plan orprogramme, its stage in the decision-making process and theextent to which certain matters are more appropriately assessedat different levels in that process in order to avoid duplicationof the assessment.

3. Relevant information available on environmental effectsof the plans and programmes and obtained at other levels ofdecision-making or through other Community legislation maybe used for providing the information referred to in Annex I.

4. The authorities referred to in Article 6(3) shall beconsulted when deciding on the scope and level of detail of theinformation which must be included in the environmentalreport.

Article 6

Consultations

1. The draft plan or programme and the environmentalreport prepared in accordance with Article 5 shall be made

available to the authorities referred to in paragraph 3 of thisArticle and the public.

2. The authorities referred to in paragraph 3 and the publicreferred to in paragraph 4 shall be given an early and effectiveopportunity within appropriate time frames to express theiropinion on the draft plan or programme and the accompa-nying environmental report before the adoption of the plan orprogramme or its submission to the legislative procedure.

3. Member States shall designate the authorities to beconsulted which, by reason of their specific environmentalresponsibilities, are likely to be concerned by the environ-mental effects of implementing plans and programmes.

4. Member States shall identify the public for the purposesof paragraph 2, including the public affected or likely to beaffected by, or having an interest in, the decision-makingsubject to this Directive, including relevant non-governmentalorganisations, such as those promoting environmental protec-tion and other organisations concerned.

5. The detailed arrangements for the information andconsultation of the authorities and the public shall be deter-mined by the Member States.

Article 7

Transboundary consultations

1. Where a Member State considers that the implementationof a plan or programme being prepared in relation to itsterritory is likely to have significant effects on the environmentin another Member State, or where a Member State likely to besignificantly affected so requests, the Member State in whoseterritory the plan or programme is being prepared shall, beforeits adoption or submission to the legislative procedure, forwarda copy of the draft plan or programme and the relevant envir-onmental report to the other Member State.

2. Where a Member State is sent a copy of a draft plan orprogramme and an environmental report under paragraph 1, itshall indicate to the other Member State whether it wishes toenter into consultations before the adoption of the plan orprogramme or its submission to the legislative procedure and,if it so indicates, the Member States concerned shall enter intoconsultations concerning the likely transboundary environ-mental effects of implementing the plan or programme and themeasures envisaged to reduce or eliminate such effects.

Where such consultations take place, the Member Statesconcerned shall agree on detailed arrangements to ensure thatthe authorities referred to in Article 6(3) and the public referredto in Article 6(4) in the Member State likely to be significantlyaffected are informed and given an opportunity to forwardtheir opinion within a reasonable time-frame.

3. Where Member States are required under this Article toenter into consultations, they shall agree, at the beginning ofsuch consultations, on a reasonable timeframe for the durationof the consultations.


170


Article 8

Decision making

The environmental report prepared pursuant to Article 5, theopinions expressed pursuant to Article 6 and the results of anytransboundary consultations entered into pursuant to Article 7shall be taken into account during the preparation of the planor programme and before its adoption or submission to thelegislative procedure.

Article 9

Information on the decision

1. Member States shall ensure that, when a plan orprogramme is adopted, the authorities referred to in Article6(3), the public and any Member State consulted under Article7 are informed and the following items are made available tothose so informed:

(a) the plan or programme as adopted;

(b) a statement summarising how environmental considera-tions have been integrated into the plan or programme andhow the environmental report prepared pursuant to Article5, the opinions expressed pursuant to Article 6 and theresults of consultations entered into pursuant to Article 7have been taken into account in accordance with Article 8and the reasons for choosing the plan or programme asadopted, in the light of the other reasonable alternativesdealt with, and

(c) the measures decided concerning monitoring in accordancewith Article 10.

2. The detailed arrangements concerning the informationreferred to in paragraph 1 shall be determined by the MemberStates.

Article 10

Monitoring

1. Member States shall monitor the significant environ-mental effects of the implementation of plans and programmesin order, inter alia, to identify at an early stage unforeseenadverse effects, and to be able to undertake appropriate reme-dial action.

2. In order to comply with paragraph 1, existing monitoringarrangements may be used if appropriate, with a view toavoiding duplication of monitoring.

Article 11

Relationship with other Community legislation

1. An environmental assessment carried out under thisDirective shall be without prejudice to any requirements under

Directive 85/337/EEC and to any other Community lawrequirements.

2. For plans and programmes for which the obligation tocarry out assessments of the effects on the environment arisessimultaneously from this Directive and other Community legis-lation, Member States may provide for coordinated or jointprocedures fulfilling the requirements of the relevantCommunity legislation in order, inter alia, to avoid duplicationof assessment.

3. For plans and programmes co-financed by the EuropeanCommunity, the environmental assessment in accordance withthis Directive shall be carried out in conformity with thespecific provisions in relevant Community legislation.

Article 12

Information, reporting and review

1. Member States and the Commission shall exchange infor-mation on the experience gained in applying this Directive.

2. Member States shall ensure that environmental reportsare of a sufficient quality to meet the requirements of thisDirective and shall communicate to the Commission any meas-ures they take concerning the quality of these reports.

3. Before 21 July 2006 the Commission shall send a firstreport on the application and effectiveness of this Directive tothe European Parliament and to the Council.

With a view further to integrating environmental protectionrequirements, in accordance with Article 6 of the Treaty, andtaking into account the experience acquired in the applicationof this Directive in the Member States, such a report will beaccompanied by proposals for amendment of this Directive, ifappropriate. In particular, the Commission will consider thepossibility of extending the scope of this Directive to otherareas/sectors and other types of plans and programmes.

A new evaluation report shall follow at seven-year intervals.

4. The Commission shall report on the relationship betweenthis Directive and Regulations (EC) No 1260/1999 and (EC) No1257/1999 well ahead of the expiry of the programmingperiods provided for in those Regulations, with a view toensuring a coherent approach with regard to this Directive andsubsequent Community Regulations.

Article 13

Implementation of the Directive

1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulationsand administrative provisions necessary to comply with thisDirective before 21 July 2004. They shall forthwith inform theCommission thereof.

171


2. When Member States adopt the measures, they shallcontain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied bysuch reference on the occasion of their official publication. Themethods of making such reference shall be laid down byMember States.

3. The obligation referred to in Article 4(1) shall apply tothe plans and programmes of which the first formal prepara-tory act is subsequent to the date referred to in paragraph 1.Plans and programmes of which the first formal preparatoryact is before that date and which are adopted or submitted tothe legislative procedure more than 24 months thereafter, shallbe made subject to the obligation referred to in Article 4(1)unless Member States decide on a case by case basis that this isnot feasible and inform the public of their decision.

4. Before 21 July 2004, Member States shall communicateto the Commission, in addition to the measures referred to inparagraph 1, separate information on the types of plans andprogrammes which, in accordance with Article 3, would besubject to an environmental assessment pursuant to thisDirective. The Commission shall make this information avail-

able to the Member States. The information will be updated ona regular basis.

Article 14

Entry into force

This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publica-tion in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Article 15

Addressees

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Luxembourg, 27 June 2001.

For the European Parliament

The President

N. FONTAINE

For the Council

The President

B. ROSENGREN


172


ANNEX I

Information referred to in Article 5(1)

The information to be provided under Article 5(1), subject to Article 5(2) and (3), is the following:

(a) an outline of the contents, main objectives of the plan or programme and relationship with other relevant plans andprogrammes;

(b) the relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementationof the plan or programme;

(c) the environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected;

(d) any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programme including, in particular, thoserelating to any areas of a particular environmental importance, such as areas designated pursuant to Directives79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC;

(e) the environmental protection objectives, established at international, Community or Member State level, which arerelevant to the plan or programme and the way those objectives and any environmental considerations have beentaken into account during its preparation;

(f) the likely significant effects (1) on the environment, including on issues such as biodiversity, population, humanhealth, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural andarchaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors;

(g) the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset any significant adverse effects on theenvironment of implementing the plan or programme;

(h) an outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with, and a description of how the assessment wasundertaken including any difficulties (such as technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered in compilingthe required information;

(i) a description of the measures envisaged concerning monitoring in accordance with Article 10;

(j) a non-technical summary of the information provided under the above headings.

(1) These effects should include secondary, cumulative, synergistic, short, medium and long-term permanent and temporary, positiveand negative effects.

173


ANNEX II

Criteria for determining the likely significance of effects referred to in Article 3(5)

1. The characteristics of plans and programmes, having regard, in particular, to— the degree to which the plan or programme sets a framework for projects and other activities, either with regard to

the location, nature, size and operating conditions or by allocating resources,— the degree to which the plan or programme influences other plans and programmes including those in a hierarchy,— the relevance of the plan or programme for the integration of environmental considerations in particular with a

view to promoting sustainable development,— environmental problems relevant to the plan or programme,— the relevance of the plan or programme for the implementation of Community legislation on the environment (e.g.

plans and programmes linked to waste-management or water protection).

2. Characteristics of the effects and of the area likely to be affected, having regard, in particular, to— the probability, duration, frequency and reversibility of the effects,— the cumulative nature of the effects,— the transboundary nature of the effects,— the risks to human health or the environment (e.g. due to accidents),— the magnitude and spatial extent of the effects (geographical area and size of the population likely to be affected),— the value and vulnerability of the area likely to be affected due to:

— special natural characteristics or cultural heritage,— exceeded environmental quality standards or limit values,— intensive land-use,

— the effects on areas or landscapes which have a recognised national, Community or international protection status.


174