Good Practices on Strategic Environmental Assessment

1
Good Practices onStrategic Environmental
Assessment

• February 11, 2005
• World Bank Office Manila

2
Why do we need SEAs?

• While project EIAs are increasingly necessary it
  is insufficient to improve economic devt.
• Envtl. quality has deteriorated that piecemeal
  project-by-project approaches of conventional EIA
  no longer suffice to ensure prudent envtl.
  standards
• Limited citizen participation
• Weak legislation, policies and enforcement
  mechanisms

3
Overarching aim

• Devt. goals
• Improving governance
• Enhancing assets of the poor
• Improving the quality of growth
• Reforming international and industrial country
  policies
• SEAs main aim
• To mainstream up-stream environmental
  considerations into strategic decision-making at
  the earliest stages of planning processes

4
SEA process

• uses a family of tools to identify
  address environmental ( associated social
  economic) effects consequences of proposed
  strategic devt. initiatives to enhance
  effectiveness outcomes
• Integrating tool environmental
  sustainability test
• monitoring of PPPs

5
Upstreaming SEA in decision-making
Strategic Environmental Assessment
Policy
Cumulative Impact Assessment
Plan
Program
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
Project
6
SEA

• National devt. plans China, Poland,
  Central/Eastern Europe
• Trade liberalization Vietnam
• Poverty reduction strategy Ghana
• National strategy for growth Tanzania
• Transboundary resources planning and mgt.
  Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia
• Land use planning South Africa
• Tourism devt. plans Fiji, Vietnam
• Sanitation sewerage devt. plans - Philippines
• Agricultural devt. plans South Africa, Namibia
• Mining devt. plans - Mongolia
• Decentralization of envtl. mgt. Australia, New
  Zealand, Indonesia

7
Nine-Step Approach to SEA

• Pre - SEA
• Establish the need / objectives of the proposed
  action
• trade, finance, economic, military other
  agreements
• intl. conventions, multilateral bilateral devt.
  assistance, global issues
• legislation, policies, plans, programs
• govt. spending investment priorities
• Determine if an SEA is required and what level of
  detail

8
Nine steps to SEA

• Scoping Identify the important issues/ impacts
  that need to be examined assemble envtl.
  information.
• Steps 1-3
• 1) Find the stakeholders announce start of
  the SEA process
• 2) Develop a shared vision on
  problems/objectives/ alternatives
• 3) Do a consistency analysis new versus
  existing objectives

9
Nine Steps to SEA

• Assessment identify and compare range of
  alternatives including a best practice envtl.
  option relate to costs and benefits
• Steps 4-6
• 4) Set TOR for the assessment of
  alternatives identified
• 5) Do the assessment and document it
• 6) Organize (independent) quality
  assurance

10
Nine Steps to SEA

• III. Decision making approve, reject or modify
  proposal
• Steps 7-8
• 7) Discuss with all stakeholders the
  alternative to prefer, with reason for decision
• 8) Motivate the (political) decision in
  writing

11
Nine Steps to SEA

• IV. Monitoring and audit check to see if
  implementation is envtly sound in accordance
  with approvals
• Step 9
• 9) Monitor the implementation and discuss
  the
• results

12
Four Phase Approach to SEA
Phases of SEA First phase create
transparency (1) Announce the start of the
SEA (2) Bring Stakeholders to agree on problem,
objectives alternatives (3) Find out existing
objectives in Country/ Region/ Sector whether
the new objectives are in line with the old ones
13
Four Phase Approach to SEA
Second phase technical assessment (4) Develop
terms of reference (5) Do the assessment,
prepare publish a document Publish organize
good quality assurance system
14
Four Phase Approach to SEA

• Third phase Use information in decision-making
• (6) Bring stakeholders together to discuss
  results and make recommendation to decision
  makers
• Fourth phase Post-decision monitoring,
  evaluation audit

15
Key SEA Principles, Measures and Performance
Criteria

• The following describes the components of SEA
  effectiveness / performance distinguish the SEA
  process from other processes with partially
  similar characteristics and/or objectives.
• principles that describe good practice in SEA
  process design and implementation
• key performance criteria and characteristics and
  measures that describe an effective approach

16
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness

• Integrated - identifies key environmental, social
  economic effects of the proposed initiative
  their policy planning implications
• Analyzes environmental, social economic effects
  interrelationships
• Takes account of relevant sector spatial
  linkages , were appropriate, is tiered to
  project EIA decision-making
• Incorporates environmental considerations into
  the mainstream of development policy
  plan-making

17
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness
18
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness
19
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness
20
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness
21
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness
22
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness
23
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness
24
Principles for good practice Characteristics and
measures of effectiveness
25
Perceived constraints vis-à-vis capitalizing
on opportunities

• Little interest in subjecting PPPs to assessment,
  reinforced by fear of losing control, power and
  influence by opening up such processes
• SEAs transparent, participatory process helps to
  realize good governance it supports informed,
  balanced decision-making, reinforces
  accountability and builds public trust and
  confidence

26
Perceived constraints vis-à-vis capitalizing
on opportunities

• Concern that SEA will increase timeframe for
  decision-making or delay devt.
• When integrated within the decision-making
  process appropriately and early, investment
  up-front in an SEA process will save time and
  expense of fixing the consequences of poor
  decisions later on

27
Perceived constraints vis-à-vis capitalizing
on opportunities

• Lack of resources for perceived non-essential
  studies fueling perception that SEA will add
  costs and increase the workload of hard pressed
  agencies
• SEA costs and workload will decrease over time as
  it is institutionalized and shared among various
  stakeholders

28
Perceived constraints vis-à-vis capitalizing
on opportunities

• Unclear lines of accountability and
  responsibility for undertaking SEA limited
  appreciation of the potential utility of upstream
  assessment and doubts about the robustness of
  results
• Efforts to clarify role and utility of SEA,
  international legal instruments and practical
  experience to operate national systems can be
  built on