Community-based approaches to strategic environmental assessment: Lessons from Costa Rica

Sinclair, A. John; Sims, Laura; Spaling, Harry

doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2008.10.002

Cited by 46 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors of the European Union Directive on SEA, for example, argue that one of its key goals is to achieve sustainable development (Feldmann et al, 2001), and many authors make the assumption that this is appropriate (for example, Lawrence, 1997;Nooteboom, 2007;Nykvist and Nilsson, 2009;Partidário, 1999;Sinclair et al, 2009). The Rio Earth Summit pre-dates widespread adoption of SEA practice and use of impact assessment tools to address sustainable development was advocated via Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).…”

Section: "…Development That Meets the Needs Of Current Generations Wimentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-evaluating Sustainability Assessment: Aligning the vision and the practice

Bond

Morrison‐Saunders

2011

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

198

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable Development is the core goal of the expanding field of Sustainability Assessment (SA). However, we find that three key areas of debate in relation to SA practice in England and Western Australia can be classified as policy controversies. Through literature review and analysis of documentary evidence we consider the problem of reductionism (breaking down complex processes to simple terms or component parts) as opposed to holism (considering systems as wholes); the issue of contested understandings of the meaning of sustainability (and of the purpose of SA); and the definition of 'inter-generational' in the context of sustainable development and how this is reflected in the timescales considered in SA. We argue that SA practice is based on particular framings of the policy controversies and that the critical role of SA in facilitating deliberation over these controversies needs to be recognised if there is to be a move towards a new deliberative sustainability discourse which can accommodate these different framings.

show abstract

Section: "…Development That Meets the Needs Of Current Generations Wimentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-evaluating Sustainability Assessment: Aligning the vision and the practice

Bond

Morrison‐Saunders

2011

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

198

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the above perspective the Integrated Spatial Assessment (ISA) approach has been proposed, in which the recognition of tangible and intangible values is the basis for a collective decision-making that includes: the development of goals, the sharing of knowledge, negotiation and compromise, problem-posing and problem-solving, the evaluation of needs, and the definition of goals, but also the attention to questions of justice and equity (Sinclair et al, 2009). …”

Section: The Integrated Spatial Assessment (Isa) Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Spatial Assessment (ISA): A Multi-Methodological Approach for Planning Choices

Cerreta¹,

Toro²

2012

Advances in Spatial Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In decision-making processes for urban planning and design, evaluation can be considered a relevant tool to build choices, to recognize values, interests and needs, and to explore the different aspects that can influence decisions. Evaluation can be considered a process to integrate approaches, methods and models, able to support the different needs of the decision-making process itself. According to Trochim and Donnelly (2006), it is possible to define a planning-evaluation cycle with various phases requested by both planners and evaluators. The first phase of such a cycle, the so-called planning phase, is designed in order to elaborate a set of potential actions, programs, or technologies, and select the best ones for implementation. The main stages are related to (1) the formulation of the problem, issue, or concern; (2) the broad conceptualization of the main alternatives to be considered; (3) the detailing of these alternatives and their potential implications; (4) the evaluation of the alternatives and the selection of the preferable one; and (5) the implementation of the selected alternative. These stages are considered inherent to planning, but they need a relevant evaluation work, useful in conceptualization and detailing, and in assessing alternatives and making a choice of the preferable one. The evaluation phase also involves a sequence of stages that includes: (1) the formulation of the major goals and objectives; (2) the conceptualization and operationalization of the major components of the evaluation (program, participants, setting, criteria, measures, etc.); (3) the design of the evaluation, detailing how these components will be coordinated; the analysis of the information, both qualitative and quantitative; and (4) the utilization of the evaluation results. Indeed, evaluation is intrinsic to all types of decision-making and can take different meanings and roles within decision-making processes, especially if it is related to spatial planning (Alexander, 2006). ”Evaluation in planning” or ”evaluation within planning” seems to better interpret the concept of planning-evaluation proposed by Lichfield (1996) where the binomial name makes explicit the close interaction and reciprocal framing of evaluation and planning: evaluation is conceived as deeply embedded in planning, affecting planning, and evolving with it (Cerreta, 2010). Indeed, the evolution of evaluation methods reflects their evolving relationship with the planning process and the way in which they interact with the diversity and multiplicity of domains and values. To identify an analytic and evaluative structure able to integrate different purposes and multidimensional values within the decision-making processes means to develop evaluation frameworks not focusing only on the environmental, social and economic effects of different options, but also considering the nature of the stakes, selecting priorities and values in a multidimensional perspective. It is crucial to structure complex decision-making processes oriented to an integrated...

show abstract

“…Moreover, EIA has limited SEA by perpetuating evaluation patterns that are not appropriate for assessing strategic decisions that usually present undefined, unclear and complicated planning and decision making contexts (Partidário, 2000;Álvarez-Arenas, 2006;Bina, 2007;Jiliberto, 2007). In these situations, involving individuals in SEA has been challenging (Rauschmayer and Risse, 2005;Sinclair et al, 2009), as has been involving the public at an early stage in the formulation of visions and the identification of key issues (Sheate and Partidário, 2010).…”

Section: Strategic Focused Strategic Environmental Assessment (Sea)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Network strategic assessment approach for dialogue and capacity development in NGOs

Azcárate

Balfors²

2013

Int. NGOJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As platforms for dialogue non-governmental organizations play an important role in facilitating the inclusion of a diversity of views in the debates and decisions that shape society. However, to successfully influence societal development non-governmental organizations need to develop and mobilize their capacities. This paper argues that organizational capacities can be developed and mobilized with strategic dialogues, which can be enabled and fostered with network strategic assessment approaches. Through a case study, research was carried out to draw experiences from designing a network strategic assessment approach in the context of a network-based nongovernmental organization that aims to strengthen the development of its members and communities. Even though conceptualizing the network strategic assessment approach was challenging, research results were participant engagement, process ownership and strategic dialogues. It is argued that by fostering strategic dialogues network strategic assessment approaches allow networks to synchronize and mainstream their strategic elements in the daily activities of their member organizations. Moreover, it is claimed that such approaches contribute to integrate aspects of capacity development with network planning and decision making, enhancing organizational understanding and performance.

show abstract

Community-based approaches to strategic environmental assessment: Lessons from Costa Rica

Cited by 46 publications

References 19 publications

Re-evaluating Sustainability Assessment: Aligning the vision and the practice

Re-evaluating Sustainability Assessment: Aligning the vision and the practice

Integrated Spatial Assessment (ISA): A Multi-Methodological Approach for Planning Choices

Network strategic assessment approach for dialogue and capacity development in NGOs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About