Requirements issues

Difficulties and limitations

Availability and usage of data

Environmental data is often limited and not relevant because it isn’t collected and stored systematically. The procedure of info collection requires extensive solutions and using these info are difficult because diverse departments have a tendency to collect different group of data. The quality of good data is lacking which issue offers been reported by Member Claims such as for example Germany and Poland (European Commission, 2009).

Best exemplory case of this problem is Poland. They will be facing difficulties of generating and collecting info of affected area because of the implementation of a plan/program. The existing picture of the surroundings has to be identified especially in large areas but they indicate that it’s extremely problematic (European Commission, 2009).

Sometimes, the coverage regions of SEA are large (including few countries and creates massive amount alternatives (URL 1). This will increase the complexity of info collection and analysis (URL 1).

Public Participation

The availability of the data for the public is bound. In the UK, documents and details of the plan are not necessary to be published on their website until ER is definitely finalized in line with the draft Rules (Partidário, 1996).

Therefore, public participation is bound as few public will travel to the plan-maker’s office to see the documents at the very least time frame for consultation. It is important to set up a site to facilitate the discussion process for the general public to participate (Partidário, 1996). Else, people is usually unaware that inspection of the documents are available to them and no feedback can be made (Kørnøv & Thissen, 2000).

EA at higher levels of decision making

As SEA involves larger levels of decision making, the implementation insurance policy of PPs are subject to numerous departments decisions (Kørnøv & Thissen, 2000). For example, a Local Transport Plan requires policy from Regional Spatial Approaches, Aviation and Transport White Papers and Sustainable Communities Method and Planning Coverage Statements (Brown & Thérivel, 2000). Because of these requirements, a complex screening process should be performed and decisions for PPS happen to be even more very hard in the assessment (Brown & Thérivel, 2000).

Deciding on the level of detail of the environmental report

The details of require information in Ocean reports are vary because of insufficient adaptation in evaluation for the amount of abstraction in PPs (European Commission, 2009). According to Member Claims (Latvia and Germany), the practical impacts of PPs will be difficult to be contained in SEA reports because of less information of the proper scale and level required (European Commission, 2009). Therefore, important information for long-term PPs is challenging as no suitable spatial scale of data need to be contained in the report (European Commission, 2009).

Development of assessment methods

As there are no certain guidelines, strong methodological backdrop and insufficient exchange for best practices, developing an effective assessment is quite challenging (Brown & Thérivel, 2000). For example in Operational Programmes’ targets, high level plans in a viable assessment do not necessary show some of the physical ground results although strategic plans are implemented European Commission, 2009).

Assessment of impacts

Although SEA addressing the value of cumulative impacts, there is no standard and effective assessment methodologies are being created (Partidário, 1996). The significant environmental impacts of PPs are difficult to assess and the identification of these aspects happen to be limited (Partidário, 1996).

Monitoring and enforcement (Incorporating issues of indicators)

The assessment of plans is limited because there is no sustainability and environmental standards produced in the monitoring program (European Commission, 2009). Consequently, monitoring indicators (regional agenda 21 for instance) is being used nonetheless it is problematic for monitoring process as mentioned by Member Says like France.

Environmental authorities have no proper enforcement instrument to make certain that monitoring programme is being performed (European Commission, 2009). For instance in the UK, no quality control physique has been set up by the government to monitor the efficiency of monitoring process that is a limitation for Ocean (Verheem, R. & Tonk, J. 2000).

Institutional and legal issues

The supports for Ocean process are still insufficient politically (European Commission, 2009). The bureaucratic prerogatives may hinder the potency of SEA performance. As SEA process is relatively different, lack of human resources especially knowledgeable authorities is a major limitation for SEA (European Commission, 2009).

Requirements

Strategic Environmental Assessment

Sustainability Appraisals

Overall aims

The aim of SEA is to raise the account of environmental considerations as part of an advocative approach during decision-making process (Kørnøv & Thissen, 2000).

In contrast to SEA, it is make use of as a support process in decision-producing and representing a methodology that working towards in all respects of sustainable development. Therefore, the interests on the line are remained neutral in this process (Minas, 2002).

Focus

Environmental effects (Lee & Kirkpatrick, 2000)

A full range of environmental, social and monetary issues (Minas, 2002).

Environmental/ Sustainability aspects

It involves 15 components which is suggested in the 1993 advice with additional social and monetary factors to be considered in 1999 advice (Thérivel, & Minas, 2002).

Aspects of biodiversity, human health, cultural factors, drinking water, landscape, population and material assets are considered primarily (Thérivel, & Minas, 2002).

Report requirements

There happen to be no formal requirements for SA. In great practice assistance, identification of scoping and impacts levels is preferred (Thérivel, & Minas, 2002). The 1999 guidance also recommends that planners should provide and evaluates alternatives. Environmental baseline conditions is highly recommended as well.

It involved considerable requirements of Annex 1 which have previously mentioned (Barth & Fuder, 2002).

Methodology

According to DETR Information, the appraisal should emphasize on strategic alternatives, alternatives, and policy impact matrices in achieving sustainable development. As a result, the methodological statement is quite brief if compare and contrast to SEA (Minas, 2002).

In comparison to SA, weighty emphasis is set up on actually baseline info which set as a benchmark to evaluate the alternatives performance. Additionally it is requires authorities to talk to the final environmental report from the general public on the scope of the evaluation (Thérivel, & Minas, 2002).

Timing

The process has been carried out very early on where every stage of the development program process is recognized as an important component (Thérivel, & Minas, 2002).

In comparison to SA, it is usually being carried out during the preparation of an idea before the submission to the legislative process (Thérivel, & Minas, 2002).

Involvement

The appraisals are put through consultation with outside groups such as public consultation during the plan planning. The appraisal usually made available on the internet where it

is being completed sporadically (Thérivel, & Minas, 2002).

It is not required to offer on the web. The consultation can be achieved during scoping level by specified environmental authorities. Opportunity must be given to the public to comment the draft method (Partidário, 1996).

Documentation required

No formal requirements based on the guidance

A statement should be produced by an authority to summarize all of the considerations of the plan have been integrated. They have to provide a report of consultees’ thoughts and opinions which taken through the consultation procedure and valid factors on why the alternatives are being picked (Partidário, 1996).