C4: SEA in spatial planning
Ingrid Belcáková, EIA Centre at Faculty of Architecture,
Slovak Republic Peter Nelson, Land Use Consultants, UK
Key issues to be addressed
Position Paper:
Current situation and trends
Spatial planning usually represents a wider system of spatially relevant planning instruments and it is closely linked with optimal and efficient distribution (allocation) of various development proposals and activities in territory and in space. Regarding the sustainability as the new development concept the coordination of individual (departmental) proposals in order to reach or at least to come close to sustainable development is an obvious challenge. In this respect SEA can play the important role.
The connection of spatial planning and SEA is understood as the inevitable condition for acceptable development and an important opportunity for enforcing approaches leading to sustainable development in the decision making process.
During recent years of SEA development, several SEA systems/approaches and several SEA interpretations have been established (Partidario, 2004). Till now there have been appeared no unified approach among SEA specialists in terms of requirements of complex SEA system. It is obvious that it relates to the different spatial planning mechanisms being very often different in their scope and content. Based upon analysis of different SEA systems it is possible to generalise a complex SEA system as the one consisting of legislation framework, SEA scerening requirements, scoping, EIS, public participation and consulting, review, monitoring and{or audit. Concerning the methodological procedures as well as methods, SEA in spatial planning is often closely related to a consideration of environmental and cummulative effects as well as the rationality of the assessment process.
In most cases the implementation of SEA requirements are specified within the frame of particular sectoral or spatial planning legislative frameworks. Formal requirements are variable – from ministerial decisions to offical regulations at national, regional and local levels. The importance of those three levels differs from country to country and often depends on the degree of centralisation/decentralisation of spatial planning process.
Recently the so called SEA Directive 2001/42/EC has been adopted the purpose of which is to ensure that environmental consequences of certain plans and programmes are identified and assessed during their preparation and before their adoption, but it is left to each Member State to determine the precise implementation. Furthermore, another international requirements for SEA of spatial plans are represented by the UN ECE Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment
SEA in the area of spatial planning in most of countries is practised at the level of regions and/or macro-regions and town settlements especially with their local significance in context with the environment that are the subjects of our interest from the aspect of various time periods and positive perspectives , i.e. ad effectum the sustainable development in the given area. (Belčáková, Finka, 2000, Vitková).
The extent to which the requirements to environmental assessment are applied in physical and spatial plans is significantly different between e.g. Netherlands and the Nordic countries on one hand and some South European countries on the other. The remaining member states could be found in various positions between these two groups. The differences are not so visible between the individual EU member states but between the various types of physical and/or spatial planning, i.e. between the requirements for environmental assessment on national levels that are adopted by governmental decisions and between specific local physical plans that are approved according to precisely defined legal procedures.
Significant progress in legal measures for environmental assessment of physical and spatial plans in EU member states has been achieved during the recent several years. However, SEA legislation is included in these measures only to a very limited extent. The requirements are implemented in a greater extent in governmental decisions and as a consequence they fortify the practise of environmental assessment within the existing legal system. Therefore, a significant progress is expected in this area in all the countries. Some of them focus on the formal SEA requirements and they want to continue in applying governmental decisions and other measures in order to support a better and more efficient strategic environmental assessment in practise.
However, there exist huge differences between countries and individual areas of SEA application. They are mainly in the following issues (Lee a Walsh, 1992, Sadler a Verheem, 1996, Thérivel a Partidário, 1996, DG XI, 1997, Elling 2000, Kleinschmidt a Wagner 2000, Platzer, 2000, ICON 2001):
Legislative framework of the SEA process
The extent of SEA application in individual areas including physical and spatial plans
The form of recording strategic environmental assessment
The types of information necessary for the EIS
Formal requirements for public participation and the process of collecting comments
Measures for integration of the results of environmental assessment of policies, plans and programmes into the decision-making and approval processes
In the EU countries SEA is applied mostly in physical/land use and transport planning (Belčáková, 2001, Fischer 2001 in Fischer 2002). Practical implementation of SEA is concentrated mostly at the level of plans and programmes. The SEA at the policy level is mostly believed to require a brand new approach.
The experience gained so far indicate still open unresolved issues in the following areas :
Limits in the existing planning practise that could slow down the effective integration of SEA approach into this practise,
Probability of reducing the competences of the ministries
Maintaining the application of legally guaranteed tools, mainly at the level of national policies,
Possible additional costs in the planning process and time delay resulting from SEA application,
Limits in the existing SEA methods, in information necessary for such assessment and lack of qualified and experienced experts,
More efficient use of practical experience gained from the environmental information required for applications for structural funds (experience shows that this “quasi-SEA process” can be implemented without extensive administrative and financial barriers also for plans prepared for so called Objective 1,2 and 5b regions).
From the analysis of SEA examples it is obvious that they were all built on the same basic principles of environmental assessment. At the same time they represent many variations in methods of environmental assessment and in individual steps of the assessment process. These differences are mostly linked to a concrete application of environmental assessment within the entire planning process, to individual phases of the assessment within the planning process as well as to different conditions for SEA implementation.
Key issues of concern
Planning practitioners very often claimed that spatial/land use plans already covered a lot of SEA requirements. Thus, similarities between spatial planning and SEA are still considered against the application of SEA. Ii is also assumed that spatial planning and SEA have complementary objectives, that both are instrumental with their aims to achieve sustainable development (Partidario, 2000, Belčáková, 2001).
SEA in spatial planning has to present information on such environmental impacts which own existence and consequences are not exactly defined.
SEA in spatial planning can, in this way, contribute to an improvement of decision-making process since it is a comprehensive, systematic and transparent assessment of environmental, social and economic aspects and problem implications. The coming conflicts between environmental protection and sectoral interests requirements in planning (mostly in land- use planning) can not be solved during SEA process. These requires political solutions that are transformed into decisions about a certain planning alternative. In this decision-making process, SEA can guarantee neither rational decision nor an appropriate consideration on environmental requirements. Its tasks is to contribute to such decision by its transparency and comprehensiveness. In a democratic society it is hardly possible to neglect or ignore the information on predicted environmental impacts of the developments that is systematically gathered and documented and objectively evaluated.
Thus, SEA in spatial planning has, in relation to a sectoral planning, the function of influencing and mitigation of spatial planning negatives. Its task is to contribute to such planning which is from environmental point of view not only bearable but optimal as well, while at the same time it searches for different alternatives when considering the ecological, social and economic impacts. These are evaluated by appointed value scales, their impacts are related to the best alternative and the possible risks revealed.
It is necessary to emphasise the added value of SEA in spatial planning as a facilitator for a sustainable deceisionmaking. But we still have to look for the application of appropriate procedural, institutional and methodological framework and for the utlisation of relevant criteria and indicators in SEA in spatial planning –what are still issues under the discussion.
It is widely recognised that spatial planning and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) are prerequisities for achieving acceptable forms of development and that the combination of the two processes can greatly assist decision-makers in working towards sustainable development. There is however, a continuing debate over the precise role and purpose of each activity.
Fischer (2002) suggested the systematic application of SEA in planning in the form of 3 tier SEA system consisting of policy – SEA, plan-SEA and programme – SEA.
Key issues for consideration
Spatial planning integrates environmental, social and economic aspects of the spatial development. Therefore theoretical approaches describing the individual forms of their integration in spatial planning are intensely matured and on the other hand for relevance of SEA in integrated spatial planning. Taking into account the integration of the above mentioned aspects is not a new requirement in spatial planning. The innovation of this principle lies in a new vision of integrity in a context of sustainability. It is first of all their mutual influence in the final synergetic quality and not in additive integration.
The issue of flexibility, rationality and integration approaches are the main opportunities of effective SEA in spatial planning.
4. ToR for papers
Questions that could usefully be explored include the following:
Legal framework
How does the national legislation deal with SEA in spatial planning (are there any formal SEA provisions within the spatial planning legislation framework or within separate EIA/SEA legislation?
What is the extent of the SEA application in spatial planning (what kind of spatial plans are subject to SEA)?
Is there a clear relationship between SEA and the spatial planning process?
Is there an adequate relationship between SEA and the decision making process?
Procedural aspects
Is it a separate SEA process or is it a SEA process within the spatial planning system or it has a special procedural model. What separates spatial planning and SEA practice?
Should SEA be allowed to evolve as a largely unstructured and creative process for testing planning concepts or should it be more procedural and tied to specific targets and outputs?In which spatial planning stages do the interactions between the planning process and SEA occur? Please outline the steps in spatial planning process and indicate in what stages do the standard SEA elements occur
Are there any system relations between SEAs for spatial plans at different hierarchical levels? (from national to local levels)
Methodological aspects
Please describe the need for quality control and licensing of SEA experts for spatial plans
Has there been any research undertaken in your country /manuals, guidelines, etc.../?
Assessment of alternatives (have you also considered the „do nothing“ alternative?|
Relevant documentation (in which form is the documentation usually submitted – as a separate one or as a part of the planning documentation)
What principles, criteria and indicators are used in the SEA for spatial plans
Summarize the main methods for assessment of impacts
Does SEA address just environmental impacts or any health, social, economical or cultural impacts as well
What sort of objectives and indicators should be employed in SEAs of spatial plans?
Can the experience of particular countries provide role models for wider application?
What are the essential components of a successful SEA linked with spatial planning?
How far should SEA focus on the environmental dimensions of plans and programmes, given its role in integrating broader social and economic objectives?
How can the standards and performance of spatial planning SEAs be measured?
Public participation
Please describe the following:
How is the concerned /affected public identified
What techniques are used for obtaining public comments
Other elements of public consultations that are crucial
What are the main challenges and key rules for good practice
What consitutes effective public participation in SEAs of spatial plans, as opposed to public involvement in plan-making?
Reflection of SEA results in the decision-making process
Please explain to what extent the SEA results is reflected in the decision making process, whether the SEA effects were satisfactory with respect to the overall SEA objectives
Financial sources
From which sources can SEA for spatial plan be financed (part of spatial plan budget or other)
From your experience, how much would it cost (in comparison with planning costs)
What is the most expensive? Does the SEA costs depend on the SEA procedure and on the SEA approach (for example if SEA is over-detailed and technical)
Professional skills
What specific skills are required to undertake the SEA of spatial plans?
Conclusions and recommendations
What are the remaining most pressing national needs in this field in the country (legislation, procedure, expertise, public participation, etc.)
Any other suggestions which can be shared with the participants
References:
Belčáková, I, Finka, M, 2000: Strategic Environmental Assessment of land use/spatial plans in EU and SR. In: Gal, P and Belcakova,I (Ed.):Current legislation and standards of spatial planning in social transformation and European integration, FA STU Bratislava, ISBN 80 –88999-03-0, pp.257 – 264
Belčáková,I, 2001: New trends of SEA in spatial planning.PhD thesis (in Slovak), 127pp.
Commission of the European Communities - DGXI, 1998: SEA prípadové štúdie (Case studies on SEA), Európska komisia, Brusel.
Elling,B., 2000: Integration of strategic environmental asssesment into regional spatial planning , Project Appraisal, 18, 3 p. 233 – 243.
Fischer, T,B, 2002: SEA approaches and tools – requirements of tiered planning systems. In: Marsden,S. and Dovers,S (eds): SEA in Australasia
ICON – IC Consultants LTD 2001. SEA and Integration of the Environment into Strategic Decision-Making, European Commission, Brussels.
Kleinschmidt, V., Wagner,D., 1998: Strategic environmental assessment in Europe, Kluwe Academic Publisher, Germany.
Lee, N., Walsh, F., 1992: Strategic Environmental Assessment: An Overview, Project Appraisal, 7, 3, p.126 - 136 .
Partidario, M., R, 2004: The Contribution of Strategic Impact Assessment to planning evaluation. In: Miller, D and Patassini, D (Ed.): The Contribution of Strategic Impact Assessment to planning evaluation. In: Miller, D and Patassini, D (Ed.): Accounting for non-market values in planning evaluation, Ashgate Publ.
Partidario, M.R., 2000: Integration of environmental, social and economic issues in planning and how it can be used in SEA. In: In: Gal, P and Belcakova,I (Ed.):Current legislation and standards of spatial planning in social transformation and European integration, FA STU Bratislava, ISBN 80 –88999-03-0, pp.118 – 128
Platzer,U., 2000 : Strategic Environmental Assessment, Report of the Workshop in Semering, Austria, October 1998.
Sadler, B., Verheem, R., 1996: Strategic Environmental Assesment. Status, Challenges and Future Directions, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, The Netherlands: 188 pp.
Thérivel, R., Partdario, M.R., 1996: The Practice of Strategic Environmental Assessment, Earthscan, London, 188 pp.
Vitková, Ľ, 2000: A comparison of the existing Slovak territorial planning procedures and documentation with planning process in market based economy. In: Kovac, B and Komrska, J (Ed.):Recent developments in urban and rural theories and new trends in spatial planning, FA STU Bratislava, ISBN 80 – 88999-01-4