SEA IN THE CONTEXT OF LANDTUSE PLANNING

The various interpretations of what SEA entails and the level of expectations in terms ofwhat it is likely to achieve differ markedly across these studies, both theoretical discussions onthe aims and objectives of SEA as well as in cases of actual implementation. The discussionon the aims of SEA ranges from seeing SEA as a tool for environmental impact assessmenton a larger scale, through the assessment of the environmental effects of plans andprogrammes, to a wider view of SEA as a process applied to a range of policy tools andstrategic approaches (e.g. Sadler 1986; Wathern 1988; Bregha et al 1990). Many of the initialattempts to apply SEA were introduced in the early 1990s when requirements similar to SEAwere introduced in several countries, and were accounted for in e.g. Therivel et al (1992);Tesli (1998); Lerstang (1999). These requirements on environmental assessment, termed‘para-SEAs’ by Dalal-Clayton and Sadler (2005), do not meet the formal definitions of SEAor their specification in the EU directive or the SEA protocol, although they do meet some ofthe characteristics. It is one of the suppositions of this research that the para-SEAs providevaluable lessons regarding implementation of SEA in an actual planning context and canassist in predicting the challenges and potentials of the actual application of the EU directivein the member countries.3.1.3 Academic discussion on the definition, potential and purpose of SEAThe definition of SEA varies also and has indeed developed over time, as have its basicprinciples and the identification of its main steps. In Bina (2003, p.22) an overview is given ofthe conceptions of SEA formulated by some leading scholars in the field during the period1992 – 2003. On the basis of this overview, it can be concluded that the focus has movedfrom evaluating the environmental impacts of plans, policies and programmes and theiralternatives, towards a stronger emphasis on the wider aims of improving planning practices,integrating environmental aspects in decision making and contributing to the goal ofsustainable development. It can however not be argued that there is unanimity within theSEA research community on the role of SEA, and different, and often conflicting views canbe found in the SEA literature.In the early days of the SEA discussion and development, the focus was on thedevelopment of SEA as an advancement of the well-established practice of EnvironmentalImpact Assessment (EIA). According to this view, the rationale and the design of SEA buildsupon a practice and culture developed in the context of the EIA of projects, and theprocesses bear many resemblances. The academic focus was on the comparison to and thelimitations of the EIA process, such as for instance the fact that EIA occurs too late in theprocess, a call for a wider geographical focus and the assessment of cumulative impacts(Hilding-Rydevik 1990; Emmelin 1998a, 1998b; Lee and Walsh 1992; Wood and Djeddour1992; Dalal-Clayton and Sadler 2005). Furthermore, emphasis was also placed on attaining anoverview of existing practices in the field (Partidário and Clark 1999, Sadler and Verheem1996). In the mid-1990s, the emphasis shifted towards models and methodologies of SEA(e.g. Therivel and Partidário 1996; Petts 1999). Other large areas of the SEA literature areconcerned with the sectoral studies that have been carried out, most notably in the transportsector (Fischer 2002; Goodland 1997; Pinfield 1992; Sheate 1995). Much of the recent SEAliterature has focused to a larger extent on the role of SEA in decision-making processes,while the assessment of environmental impacts has been widened to include economic andsocial components, in order to promote sustainability (Partidário and Clark 2000; Brown andTherivel 2000). This can be interpreted as a sign of the general move from an ‘EIA-type’approach that builds upon existing experiences of environmental impact assessmentbroadened in scope to be applied to plans and programmes, to the embracing of a broaderview of SEA and of increased integration with planning, based upon the political sciences.Petts (1999) illustrates the difference between Environmental Assessment and other28