Conceptualizing strategic environmental assessment: Principles, approaches and research directions

Highlights

• SEA facilitates strategic thinking, enabling transitions toward sustainability.

• SEA is conceptualized as a spectrum of approaches, from IA-based to strategy-based.

• Each approach variably emphasizes strategic principles in its design and practice.

• There is no one conceptualization of SEA that is best, SEA is fit for PPP purpose.

• Research is needed to advance SEA to facilitate strategic PPP transformations.

Abstract

Increasing emphasis has been placed in recent years on transitioning strategic environmental assessment (SEA) away from its environmental impact assessment (EIA) roots. Scholars have argued the need to conceptualize SEA as a process designed to facilitate strategic thinking, thus enabling transitions toward sustainability. The practice of SEA, however, remains deeply rooted in the EIA tradition and scholars and practitioners often appear divided on the nature and purpose of SEA. This paper revisits the strategic principles of SEA and conceptualizes SEA as a multi-faceted and multi-dimensional assessment process. It is suggested that SEA can be conceptualized as series of approaches operating along a spectrum from less to more strategic – from impact assessment-based to strategy-based – with each approach to SEA differentiated by the specific objectives of SEA application and the extent to which strategic principles are reflected in its design and implementation. Advancing the effectiveness of SEA requires a continued research agenda focused on improving the traditional SEA approach, as a tool to assess the impacts of policies, plans and programs (PPPs). Realizing the full potential of SEA, however, requires a new research agenda — one focused on the development and testing of a deliberative governance approach to SEA that can facilitate strategic innovations in PPP formulation and drive transitions in short-term policy and initiatives based on longer-term thinking.

Introduction

Now in place in some 60 countries (Fundingsland Tetlow and Hanusch, 2012), strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is a familiar member of the impact assessment family. Conceptualized under the philosophy of environmental impact assessment (EIA) as an assessment process appropriate for policies, plans and programs (PPPs) (Wood and Djeddour, 1989), SEA is now viewed as an instrument that can also help shape the formulation and implementation of strategic initiatives, and even play a political role in decision making (Partidário, 2015, Jiliberto, 2011, Bina, 2007). Scholarly research and thinking about the nature and scope of SEA have evolved significantly over the past 25 years (Partidário, 2015, Bina, 2007, Noble, 2000, Bailey and Renton, 1997, Lee and Walsh, 1992). Fischer and Onyango (2012), for example, a comprehensive overview of SEA related research projects and publications, reporting some 500 English language publications in referred journals on the subject. The result has been the development of multiple SEA methodologies and a range of applications (Sizo et al., 2016, Gunn and Noble, 2009, Dalkmann et al., 2004, Noble and Storey, 2001, Thérivel and Partidário, 1996), along with more substantive interpretations of the strategic role of SEA beyond that of appraising PPPs or assessing their impacts (Partidário, 2015, Pang et al., 2014; White and Noble, 2013, Jiliberto, 2011, Slootweg and Jones, 2011).

The realization that SEA can have multiple roles and benefits in different decision contexts has also led to diversity in understandings and expectations about SEA (Noble et al., 2013, Partidário, 2012, Bina, 2007). There is a general consensus that SEA is somehow different than project-based EIA; however “considerations as to what SEA really is, what it delivers and how it should perform are still far from a consolidated stage” (Vicente and Partidário, 2006: 697). Noble (2000) argued that scholars and practitioners have failed to explain why certain assessments are strategic and how they differ from those that are non-strategic. We suggest that notwithstanding the international growth of SEA, and numerous scholarly papers addressing SEA concept and practice, understandings of SEA still vary considerably. Bina (2007: 586), for example, observes that “scholars and practitioners appear divided on such fundamental matters as the concept of and approach to SEA”; whilst Noble et al. (2013) identify the diversity of understandings of what SEA is, and expectations about what it can and should deliver, as major barriers to its advancement.

The purpose of this paper is to revisit the strategic nature of SEA, and to conceptualize SEA as a multi-faceted and multi-dimensional assessment process. Our objective is to help clarify specifically how SEA, as a flexible and multi-purpose assessment tool, relates to the policy and planning processes it is intended to inform. We do so in response to recent scholarly arguments suggesting the need to rethink the strategic nature and role(s) of SEA (Partidário, 2015, Partidário, 2012, Pope et al., 2013, Bina, 2007), and in light of the diversity of SEA expectations and understandings that exist amongst SEA scholars and practitioner communities (Silva et al., 2014, Fidler and Noble, 2013, Noble et al., 2013, Fischer and Onyango, 2012, Wallington et al., 2007). In the sections that follow we first briefly explore the evolution of SEA, and strategic thinking in SEA, followed by the fundamental principles that, based on the scholarly literature and evidence from practice, characterize strategic environmental assessment. We then conceptualize SEA as an approach to impact assessment that reflects multiple purposes, from appraising existing PPPs to assessing the institutional environments needed to enable the development and implementation of successful strategic initiatives. The paper concludes by suggesting directions in research to advance SEA understanding and influence.