SEA IN THE CONTEXT OF LANDTUSE PLANNING

More documents

Recommendations

Info

competence for action in the environmental sector (Kläne and Albrecht 2005). Thediscussion of the need to prepare an EC directive on strategic environmental assessmentdeveloped from the critique of the Council Directive on the Environmental ImpactAssessment for projects 85/337/EC and a need to extended its scope to also cover plans andprogrammes that have consequences for the application and granting of permission ofprojects. According to Kläne and Albrecht, the directive is largely based upon the samemethodology as the EIA directive, with extended scope to also cover plans and programmesthat have consequences for the application and granting permission for projects. This is alsoreflected in the methodology of the SEA process that is based upon the same steps as theEIA process, i.e. screening, scoping, report preparation, reporting of environmental impacts,monitoring and follow-up.The obligation laid on member states to carry out a systematic assessment of theenvironmental effects of plans and programmes also applies through the Council Directive79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds; the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC (Article6, paragraph 3) which includes requirements for an environmental assessment; as well as inthe Directive 2000/60/EC that establishes a framework for Community action on waterpolicy (Dalal-Clayton and Sadler 2005, Kläne and Albrecht 2005). Furthermore, the firstStructural Fund Regulations required an assessment of environmental impacts to be includedin the review of the programme, as well as the following Structural Fund Regulationsrequirements for an ‘ex-ante’ assessment to be carried out, which are in many ways similar toSEA (Kläne and Albrecht 2005). However, formal requirements on SEA have not existed andthe Structural Funds were excluded from the SEA requirements until the current period2007-2013. These defects of environmental consideration in European regional growth policyare discussed by Emmelin and Nilsson (2006) as a part of MiSt programme. The applicationof SEA to European programmes was discussed during the establishment of the Trans-European Transport Network as early as 1993/1994 (Richardson 2000), where theimportance of development suitable methods for analysing and evaluating environmentalimpact of the whole network was discussed. However, the importance of the SEA directive interms of strategic assessment is stressed by Dalal-Clayton and Sadler (2005)“…SEA experience associated with these other instruments appears to be limited, and it is probablysafe to say that implementation of the SEA Directive will be more extensive and it will be thecornerstone for meeting the requirements of Community legislation”.2.2 The preparation of the SEA directiveThe initial official commitment by the European Commission to prepare a directive onstrategic assessment dates from 1987, where the stated intention was to include policies aswell as plans and programmes (Dalal-Clayton and Sadler 2005). The first proposal for aCouncil Directive on SEA was presented in 1990, but abandoned until 1995 when the secondand third proposals were presented. The third proposal for the directive was presented in1997 (OJ C 129) and the fourth (OJ C 83) in 1999. The amended text for the proposal servedas a basis for the negotiations at the Council level with 15 Member States during 1999. ACommon Positions was agreed upon in 2000 (OJ C 137) and amendments to the CommonPositions (OJ C 135/155) were agreed upon in 2001 and later confirmed as a CouncilDirective 2001/42/C on the 21 st of June 2001.During the preparation period of the directive the underlying ideas developed andchanged and the ideas were negotiated between the member states. A fundamental idea thatwas changed from the initial ideas of the directive regarded the scope of the directive, whichin the initial proposals from 1995 was intended also to cover policies, as well as plans andprogrammes. The fourth directive proposal in 1996 was limited to spatial plans, but later it20
was extended again to also encompass programmes. Another bone of contention was tieringand the division of responsibility of the assessment between different authoritative levels, aswell as the relation between environmental impact assessment and strategic environmentalassessment in order to avoid duplication between the two processes. Lastly, the idea ofmonitoring was proposed by the European Parliament in 2001 and added to the directive atthe last minute.2.3 Objectives of the directiveThe objectives of the directive are laid down in Article 1:“The objective of this directive is to provide for a high level of protection of the environment and tocontribute to the integration of environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption ofplans and programmes with a view to promoting sustainable development, by ensuring that, inaccordance with this Directive, an environmental assessment is carried out of certain plans andprogrammes which are likely to have significant effects on the environment” (Article 1, Directive2001/42/EC).As seen above, the directive aims both at protecting the environment, and at the proceduralaspects of integrating environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption ofplans and programmes. Furthermore, beyond those objectives is the overall aim of promotingsustainable development.The recitals of the directive provide a further description of the Directive, in particularrecitals (4), (5) and (6):• To ensure that such effects of implementing plans and programmes are taken intoaccount during their preparation and before their adoption (recital 4).• To benefit undertakings by providing a more consistent framework in which to operateby the inclusion of relevant environmental information into decision-making. Theinclusion of wider set of factors in decision-making should contribute to more sustainableand effective solutions (recital 5).• To provide for a set of common procedural requirements necessary to contribute to ahigh level of protection of environment (recital 6).The objectives of integrating environmental consideration into the planning process are inline with the general objectives of the Community environmental policy as laid down in theEC Treaty, where it is stated in Article 5 that environmental protection requirements must beintegrated in the definition and implementation of Community policies and activities, inparticular with a view of promoting sustainable development. The objective of promotingsustainable development is furthermore included in the Sixth Environmental ActionProgramme 2001 – 2010 and in the European Union’s Sustainable Development Strategy(SDS), which was adopted in Gothenburg in 2001, and renewed SDS for an enlarged EU thatwas adopted in 2006. With the introduction of the European Union’s Strategy for SustainableDevelopment an environmental dimension is added to the so-called Lisbon process ofeconomic and social reform in the EU, and the EU Treaty requires policies to be designed ina balanced and mutually reinforcing way to meet economic, environmental, and socialobjectives. However, despite the reference to sustainable developments in the Community’skey documentation, criticism has been raised among researchers that the definition ofsustainable development is considered inadequate, as well as the relation betweenenvironmental components and its social and economic counterparts are not clearly spelledout (Dalal-Clayton and Sadler 2005).21
Page 1 and 2: sea in the context of land-useplann
Page 4 and 5: Blekinge Institute of Technology Li
Page 7: AcknowledgementsThis thesis has dev
Page 10 and 11: CHAPTER 5 INTRODUCTION OF SEA TO TH
Page 13: PART I - Introduction to the resear
Page 16 and 17: In this research the introduction o
Page 18 and 19: my studies and work in the area as
Page 20 and 21: FIGURE 1.1. BASIC TYPES OF CASE-STU
Page 22 and 23: • Process/Strategy Model; i.e. co
Page 25: Chapter 2The SEA Directive 2001/42/
Page 29 and 30: The plans and programmes referred t
Page 31 and 32: effects), with less attention given
Page 33 and 34: widespread voluntary application of
Page 35 and 36: assessment instruments such as Risk
Page 37 and 38: 3.1.4 The origins of SEA and its re
Page 39 and 40: 3.2 Relevance of planning theory fo
Page 41 and 42: development of its central ideas an
Page 43 and 44: aspects of environmental considerat
Page 45 and 46: FIGURE 3.2. SEA TOOLS IN RELATION T
Page 47: planning theory in respect of envir
Page 51 and 52: Chapter 4 Introduction of SEA to th
Page 53 and 54: to the ordinance (2005:356), the fo
Page 55 and 56: planning area and the 0-alternative
Page 57 and 58: 4.4 Preparation work for SEA applic
Page 59 and 60: Housing and Planning has argued tha
Page 61 and 62: Municipal comprehensive plans (öve
Page 63 and 64: 4.6.2 On-going legal revisionsOn-go
Page 65 and 66: municipal comprehensive plans (25 p
Page 67 and 68: A pilot study on impact assessment
Page 69: despite the committee’s suggestio
Page 72 and 73: esources, and the community, includ
Page 74 and 75: There amongst it shall be decided w
Page 76 and 77:
Information made available in the r
Page 78 and 79:
Environmental assessment has been i
Page 80 and 81:
Level Authority Type ofplanningDesc
Page 82 and 83:
National initiatives for sustainabl
Page 84 and 85:
limited research that has been carr
Page 86 and 87:
equired by the SEA directive. Simil
Page 88 and 89:
- Setting the context and objective
Page 90 and 91:
Screening (the determination ifthe
Page 92 and 93:
assessment for the EU structural fu
Page 94 and 95:
Level Authority Type ofplanningDesc
Page 96 and 97:
experience of sustainability apprai
Page 98 and 99:
ensuring that environmental assessm
Page 100 and 101:
The second issue that raises some q
Page 103 and 104:
Chapter 7 A Comparative Description
Page 105 and 106:
system. This notion is reinforced b
Page 107 and 108:
Who decides?The authorities respons
Page 109 and 110:
plans at the municipal level (Impac
Page 111 and 112:
experience of assessing the plan’
Page 113 and 114:
preconditions for the introduction
Page 115 and 116:
that the directive has spurred the
Page 117 and 118:
the SEArequirements,i.e. whichplans
Page 119 and 120:
Chapter 8 FindingsThe aim of the re
Page 121 and 122:
importance of improved knowledge an
Page 123 and 124:
At the same time HB has had access
Page 125 and 126:
References and documentsAlfredsson,
Page 127 and 128:
Christoferson, I. (ed), (2001) Swed
Page 129 and 130:
Kørnøv, L. (1999) Integrating SEA
Page 131 and 132:
Sheate, W., Byron, H., Dagg, S. and
Page 133 and 134:
European Union’s publicationsEC (
Page 135 and 136:
English documents:Countryside Counc
show all

SEA IN THE CONTEXT OF LANDTUSE PLANNING

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?