Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Report (5)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (3)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Working Paper (3)
- Book (1)
- Conference Object (1)
- Contribution to Periodical (1)
Language
- English (17) (remove)
Division
Sustainable mobility : how to move more goods from road to rail ; a comparison of Germany & Britain
(2000)
Strategic Environmental Assessment aims to incorporate environmental and sustainability considerations into strategic decision making processes, such as the formulation of policies, plans and programmes. In order to be effective, the assessment must take the real decision making process as the departure point. Existing SEA approaches are frequently tailored after an EIA model conceived from a rational perspective on decision making. However, there are good reasons to assume that most strategic decision making processes are characterised by a bounded rationality. Furthermore, the predictability of environmental consequences generally becomes weaker at strategic levels than at the project level and complexity increases in terms of the numbers of actors involved in the decision. This paper examines various theoretical perspectives to decision making and discusses the implications for decision support in general and SEA in particular. The authors argue that the design of the SEA must be more sensitive to the real characteristics of the decision making context.
From 10 to 14 September 2003, the Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiated over a further liberalization of world trade. A lot was at stake there for the environment. It is true that in the current round of negotiations the Doha Declaration has agreed certain points relating to the environment. But this should not conceal the fact that the WTO is still a long way from taking due account of ecological aspects in its policies. The present paper begins by analyzing the discussion on environmental issues within the WTO, which for more than ten years has been conducted mainly in its Committee on Trade and Environment. It is shown that many environmental effects of trade liberalization have not been discussed at all, that conflicts of interest among WTO member-states prevent any deep discussion, and that an ecological reform of the WTO has up to now stood no chance. This analysis then forms the background for a twofold strategy. First, arguments are presented as to why the WTO, given its environmental policy deficits, should afford sufficient scope to institutions actively concerned with environmental policy. The conflictual relationship between Multilateral Environmental Agreements and the WTO is examined at this point. A distinction is drawn between minor and potentially critical conflicts, and it is shown how a limitation of the competence of the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body, together with cooperative political-legal processes to resolve conflicts between affected institutions, might offer a solution and lead to greater institutional equity in the global political arena. Second, the paper discusses how ecological aspects might be integrated step by step into the WTO. After a detailed examination of the potential and limits of instruments like impact assessments, it makes a number of recommendations for their further development. Finally, it considers how impact assessments might be integrated into the WTO's institutional structures, so that ecological aspects can be systematically input into policy-making processes and better public participation in WTO policy be ensured. In this connection, the paper discusses both the integration of impact assessments into the WTO's Trade Policy Review Mechanism and the creation of a new Strategic Impact Assessment Body within the WTO.
The objective of analytical strategic environmental assessment (ANSEA) is to provide a decision-centred approach to the SEA process. The ANSEA project evolved from the realisation that, in many cases, SEA, as currently practised, is not able to ensure an appropriate integration of environmental values. The focus of SEA is on predicting impacts, but the tool takes no account of the decision-making processes it is trying to influence. At strategic decision-making levels, in turn, it is often difficult to predict impacts with the necessary exactitude. The decision-making sciences could teach some valuable lessons here. Instead of focusing on the quantitative prediction of environmental consequences, the ANSEA approach concentrates on the integration of environmental objectives into decision-making processes. Thus, the ANSEA approach provides a framework for analysing and assessing the decision-making processes of policies, plans and programmes (PPP). To enhance environmental integration into the decision-making process, decision windows (DW) can be identified. The approach is designed to be objective and transparent to ensure that environmental considerations are taken into account, or - from an ex-post perspective - to allow an evaluation of how far environmental considerations have been integrated into the decision-making process under assessment. The paper describes the concepts and the framework of the ANSEA approach and discusses its relation to SEA and the EC Directive.
While the number of projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is expanding rapidly, there currently are relatively few transport projects in the global CDM portfolio. This article examines existing CDM transport projects and explores whether sectoral approaches to the CDM may provide a better framework for transport than the current project‐based CDM. We ask: Would a sectoral approach to the CDM promote the structural change and integrated policymaking needed to achieve sustainable transport policy, making it hence more desirable than the framework of the current project‐based CDM? We conclude that it is possible to design sectoral transport activities within clear project boundaries that fit into a framework of a programmatic or policy‐based CDM. Although we are able to ascertain that transport policy research yields several modelling tools to address the methodological requirements of the CDM, it becomes apparent that sectoral approaches will accentuate transport projects' problems regarding high complexity and related uncertainties. The CDM may need new rules to manage these risks. Nonetheless, sectoral approaches allow the scaling up of activities to a level that affects long‐term structural change.