Role of SEA in Complex Decision Making

Kaja Peterson

Objective of the study

To provide (practical) guidelines for increasing effectiveness of taking environmental considerations into account in drafting and adoption process of policy documents (sectoral plans and programmes)

The study explores the interactions of two processes - drafting and adoption process of policy documents and SEA. Also perceptions and expectations of those involved in both processes – authorities, environmental experts and the stakeholders for the final outcome of the two processes are studied.


Background

SEA is required by national law (EST, LAT, LIT):
* should go in parallel to the drafting process of the policy document (EST, LAT, LIT)
* impacts arising from the plan and programme should be taken into account (EST,LAT,LIT)
*EIS should form a separate document (EST)
SEA is required by EU Directive

Problem
Since nothing specifically is stated in the national law how, when and to what extent the two processes (drafting of plan or programme and SEA) should interact, the main idea of SEA – to identify, describe and evaluate the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing a plan or programme and reasonable alternatives, gets usually lost in  formal bureaucratic process and eventually has limited impact on the policy document. Moreover, SEA is much regarded as a waste of time, creating unnecessary  problems, which result in delays of the drafting, and adoption of policy documents and by that increases the total cost. In practice, the two processes (policy doc drafting and SEA) do not  usually go in parallel, neither complement each other, and rather stay separate and have little impact on each other.  

SEA is usually launched later than the drafting process of the policy document starts, which in majority of cases result in situations where SEA experts found themselves framed, with limited options to consider since important policy decisions have been made in the earlier stages of the drafting process. For example, at the launch of an energy policy drafting process, the relevant Ministry (sometimes together with an expert team or working group) sets objectives of the policy, the Government agrees on the scope and content of the document, sets the time frame and allocates budget.

Once the scope and sometimes the objectives are fixed it leaves limited manouver, if any at all, for environmental experts and stakeholders to propose possible amendments and alternative settings to the outline of the policy document. This will increase the likelyhood of facing delays in completion of the draft policy document and of excessive costs by the public authorities, if changes are forced, either by environmental experts or stakeholders, to be still made.

Hypothesis to test

1. SEA is launched at the same time with policy drafting process to keep environmental options open and to have max impact on the scope and objectives of the policy document, which are set in the lauch of the process and fixed for the full drafting process to follow.

2. Environmental objectives are set at the same time with policy doc objectives. There is little use of setting environmental objectives in later stages of policy doc drafting process when policy objectives are already fixed, and the latter may contradict with environmental objectives

3. SEA report cannot be “better” (concise, comprehensive impact forecasting etc ) than the policy doc itself is. If  the policy doc is non-specific and general doc (no measurable targets, no action plan, etc) , the SEA report also follows the line.

4. Once environmental objectives/criteria have been set and agreed, policy doc drafters follow environmental objectives/criteria  when drafting the doc. SEA experts assess whether the environmental objectives/criteria have been applied and elaborate if needed.

5. Policy doc and SEA findings (draft report) are made public (put on public display) altogether at the same time. This will enable the public and stakeholders to have a concise overview of the two processes, the interactions between them and evaluate the final outcome.

6. Public hearings and meetings are recorded, minutes put on internet, answers to questions provided to those who requested so. This provides the public and stakeholders with good involvement in the process.

7. SEA report will form a separate document which is attached to the policy doc. A policy memo will contain SEA memo, i.e. key findings of SEA.

8. SEA process and policy doc drafting process are forms of social learning process. Public authorities (else than Ministry of the Environment) learn about the law, methods and principles of environmental law and policy, and environmental experts, stakeholders and general public on the other hand learn about the policy drafting process.

9. SEA process has a significant role in opening up public policy making process due to  mandatory public involvement requirement throughout the process, whereas policy drafting process may not necessarily have public involvement component at all.

10. SEA modifies the policy document to a large extent by increasing the consideration of environmental risks

11. Objectives of SEA are perceived differently  by different parties of the SEA process, this causes confusion and even conflicts between the stakeholders' expectations and the public authorities


Outline of the study

1. Introduction. Problem setting
2. Methodology
3. What is a policy document? Diff interpretations by ministries of EST,LAT, LIT
4. When to start SEA
5. Environmental objectives and criteria – what, when and what for?
6. Who assesses the environmental impact and why – role of policy drafters and SEA experts
7. How to assess the environmental impact
8. Interaction of SEA with policy drafting process
9. What to consult and make public and why
10. When SEA ends
11. How to assess the impact of SEA on the policy document? Did SEA make a difference?
12. ........
13. Conclusion
14. Bibliography
15. Appendix