Evaluating the substantive effectiveness of SEA: Towards a better understanding

Abstract

a b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f oEvaluating the substantive effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is vital in order to know to what extent the tool fulfills its purposes and produces expected results. However, the studies that have evaluated the substantive effectiveness of SEA produce varying outcomes as regards the tool's contribution to decision-making and have used a variety of approaches to appraise its effectiveness. The aim of this article is to discuss the theoretical concept of SEA substantive effectiveness and to present a new approach that can be applied for evaluation studies. The SEA effectiveness evaluation framework that will be presented is composed of concepts of, and approaches to, SEA effectiveness derived from SEA literature and planning theory. Lessons for evaluation can be learned from planning theory in particular, given its long history of analyzing and understanding how sources of information and decisions affect (subsequent) decision-making. Key concepts of this new approach are 'conformance' and 'performance'. In addition, this article presents a systematic overview of process and context factors that can explain SEA effectiveness, derived from SEA literature. To illustrate the practical value of our framework for the assessment and understanding of substantive effectiveness of SEA, three Dutch SEA case studies are examined. The case studies have confirmed the usefulness of the SEA effectiveness assessment framework. The framework proved helpful in order to describe the cumulative influence of the three SEAs on decision-making and the ultimate plan.

Key criteria for sustainable wind energy planning—lessons from an institutional perspective on the impact assessment literature

“…Whereas EIA is the evaluation of effects likely to arise from a major project (or action) significantly affecting the environment, SEA refers to the systematic process of the analysis of environmental effects on policies, plans and programmes. Several authors argue that planning institutions could use IA measures in an "effective" manner by better integrating environmental considerations into the decision-making process [1,2,4,26]. Nevertheless, studies have shown that IA procedures often have a relatively weak impact on planning decisions -several critical challenges are pinpointed.…”

“…One is related to the difficulties of guiding commercially oriented industry actors to deploy wind energy in specific zones, to consider excluding other zones, as environmental and commercial concerns such as wind speed can often collide [16]. For the SEA to be an effective mechanism, it is critical that it is applied by the planning institution in the decision-making process, thus having an effect on the final planning outcome [26,34].…”

O tiering de informações e decisões ambientais e a estrutura de planejamento de uso e ocupação do solo

“…VAN DOREN et al, 2013); (SCHULTZ, 2012); (GACHECHILADZE-BOZHESKU; FISCHER, 2012); (LUNDBERG et al, 2010) Tabela 1 -Critérios para avaliação da efetividade do tiering (conclusão).…”

A limits-oriented approach to sustainable planning assessments: a comparative analysis of South East Queensland (Australia) and Lombardia (Italy)

“…As a result, the survey considers not only the analytical criteria (A-F), but also relevant case studies identified in the literature (Smith & Sheate 2001;Hanusch & Glasson 2008;Thérivel et al 2009;Slunge et al 2011;Van Doren et al 2013;Victor & Agamuthu 2013). The set of questions generated features an investigation of how policy actors consider their current role in SEA processes, and how they would eventually improve it.…”

“…The policy-making perspective on SEA collects several factors and aims, synthesised by van Doren et al (2013) with the achievement of performance and conformance. This approach outlines the goals of SEA capacity building in supporting decision-making processes, and refers to two criteria used to evaluate effectiveness in decision-making and policy-making (Alexander & Faludi 1989;Barrett & Fudge 1981;Faludi 2000;Mastop & Faludi 1997).…”