Integration and integrated approaches to assessment: What do they mean for the environment?

Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 275-294

  Scrase, J Ivan ^a   Sheate, William R ^a  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Decision making; Environmental assessment; Environmental governance; Environmental policy; Integrated assessment; Integration; Sustainable development

Indexed keywords

PANACEA;

EID: 0345570116     PISSN: 1523908X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jepp.117     Document Type: Review

References (75)

1. Amy DJ. 1990. Decision techniques for environmental policy: a critique. In Managing Leviathan: Environmental Politics in the Administrative State, Paehlke R, Torgeson D (eds). Broadview Press: Peterborough; 59-79.
2. Antle JM, Just RE. 1992. Conceptual and empirical foundations for agricultural - environmental policy analysis. Journal of Environmental Quality 21: 307-316.
3. Arthur WB. 1994. Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI.
4. Baumann H, Cowell SJ. 1999. An evaluative framework for conceptual and analytical approaches used in environmental management. Greener Management International 26: 109-122.
5. Berglund E. 2001. Facts, beliefs and biases: perspectives on forest conservation in Finland. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 44: 833-849.
6. 2 allowance trading: how experience and expectations measure up. Resources for the Future Discussion Paper 97-24. Resources for the Future: Washington, DC.
7. Bouman M, Heijungs R, Van der Voet E, Van den Bergh JCJM, Huppes G. 2000. Material flows and economic models: an analytical comparison of SFA, LCA and partial equilibrium models. Ecological Economics 32: 195-216.
8. Cabinet Office. 2002. Policy Makers Checklist. http://www.cabinet-office. gov.uk/regulation/1999/checklist/intro.htm [15 January 2002].
9. CEC (Commission of the European Communities). 1998. Partnership for Integration: A Strategy for Integrating the Environment into European Union Policies, COM (98) 333. http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/docum/98333sm.htm [28 February 2002].
10. Clark J, Burgess J, Harrison CM. 2000. 'I struggled with this money business': respondents' perspectives on contingent valuation. Ecological Economics 33: 45-62.
11. Daly H. 1992. Steady State Economics (2nd edn). Earthscan: London.
12. DEFRA (Department of the Environment, Food and Regional Affairs). 2002. Achieving a Better Quality of Life: Review of Progress Towards Sustainable Development - Government Annual Report 2001. DEFRA: London.
13. DETR (Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions). 1998. Policy Appraisal and the Environment. http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/ appraisal/index.htm [28 February 2002].
14. Dobson A. 1996. Environmental sustainabilities: an analysis and a typology. Environmental Politics 5: 401-428.
15. DoE (Department of the Environment). 1991. Policy Appraisal and the Environment. HMSO: London.
16. EA (Environment Agency of England and Wales). 2001. An Environmental Vision: The Environment Agency's Contribution to Sustainable Development. Environment Agency: Bristol.
17. EC (European Commission). 2001. Green Paper on Integrated Product Policy, COM (2001) 68 final. Office for Official Publications of the European Union: Luxembourg.
18. EC (European Council) Presidency Conclusions. 2001. Conclusions of the Göteborg European Council 15/16 June 2001. Bulletin of the European Union 2001/06(.)
19. Eckley N. 2001. Designing Effective Assessments: The Role of Participation, Science and Governance, and Focus, Environmental Issue Report No. 26. European Environment Agency: Copenhagen.
20. EEA (European Environment Agency). 2002. Update on the environmental dimension of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy. Working paper prepared for Environment Council, 4 March 2002. European Environment Agency: Copenhagen.
21. ENDS Environment Daily. 2002a. Ministers pan Commission sustainability paper. ENDS Environment Daily 1171: 5 March 2002.
22. ENDS Environment Daily. 2002b. Policy makers 'ignoring environment'. ENDS Environment Daily 1230: 6 June 2002.
23. Fiorino DJ. 2001. Environmental policy as learning: a new view of an old landscape. Public Administration Review 61: 322-334.
24. Fouquet R, Slade R, Karakoussis V, Gross R, Bauen A, Anderson D. 2001. External costs and environmental policy in the United Kingdom and the European Union, Imperial College Centre for Energy Policy and Technology Occasional Paper, No. 3, June 2001. http://www.iccept.ic.ac.uk [16 August 2002].
25. Gibbons A. 1999. Sustainable development and appraisal methodology: reconciling legislation and principles for the Environment Agency in the UK. In Valuation and the Environment: Theory, Method and Practice, O'Connor M, Spash C (eds). Edward Elgar: Cheltenham; 205-221.
26. Glasbergen P. 1996. Learning to manage the environment. In Democracy and the Environment, Lafferty WM, Meadowcroft J (eds). Edward Elgar: Cheltenham; 175-193.
27. Hajer M. 1995. The Politics of Environmental Discourse. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
28. Hall P. 1993. Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policy making in Britain. Comparative Politics 25: 275-296.
29. Harrison C, Burgess J. 2000. Valuing nature in context: the contribution of common good approaches. Biodiversity and Conservation 9: 1115-1130.
30. Healy RG, Ascher W. 1995. Knowledge in the policy process: incorporating new environmental information in natural resources policy making. Policy Sciences 28: 1-19.
31. Helm D. 1998. The assessment: environmental policy - objectives, instruments and institutions. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 14: 1-19.
32. Lee N, Kirkpatrick C. 1997. Integrating environmental assessment with other forms of appraisal in the development process. In Sustainable Development in a Developing World: Integrating Socio-economic Appraisal and Environmental Assessment, Kirkpatrick C, Lee N (eds). Edward Elgar: Cheltenham; 3-24.
33. Lee N, Kirkpatrick C. 2001. Methodologies for sustainability impact assessments of proposals for new trade agreements. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 3: 395-412.
34. Lund HG, Iremonger S. 2000. Omissions, commissions and decisions: the need for integrated resource assessments. Forest Ecology and Management 128: 3-10.
35. Margerum RD. 1997. Integrated approaches to environmental planning and management. Journal of Planning Literature 11: 459-475.
36. McDonald JS, Hession M, Rickard A, Kendall M, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ. 2002. Air quality management in UK local authorities: public understanding and participation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 45: 571-590.
37. Mugabe J, Tumushabe GW. 1999. Environmental governance: conceptual and emerging issues. In Governing the Environment: Political Change and Natural Resources Management in Eastern and Southern Africa, Okoth-Ogendo HWO, Tumushabe GW (eds). ACTS Press: Nairobi; 9-27.
38. Nardini A. 1997. A proposal for integrating environmental impact assessment, cost-benefit analysis and multicriteria analysis in decision-making. Project Appraisal 12: 173-184.
39. Niemeyer S, Spash CL. 2001. Environmental valuation analysis, public deliberation, and their pragmatic synthesis: a critical appraisal. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 19: 567-585.
40. Nierynck E. 1998. Life-cycle assessment. In Environmental Management in Practice, Nath B, Hens L, Compton P, Devuyst D (eds). Routledge: London; 211-243.
41. Nilsson M, Dalkmann H. 2001. Decision making and strategic environmental assessment. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 3: 305-327.
42. Nitz T, Brown AL. 2001. SEA must learn how policy making works. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 3: 329-342.
43. Nooteboom S. 2000. Environmental assessments of strategic decisions and project decisions: interactions and benefits. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 18: 151-160.
44. Nooteboom S, Wieringa K. 1999. Comparing strategic environmental assessment and integrated environmental assessment. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 1: 441-457.
45. Norton BG, Steinemann AC. 2001. Environmental values and adaptive management. Environmental Values 10: 473-506.
46. O'Callaghan PW. 1996. Integrated Environmental Management Handbook. Wiley: Chichester.
47. Owens S. 2000. 'Engaging the public': information and deliberation in environmental policy. Environment and Planning A 32: 1141-1148.
48. Owens S. 2002. Commentaries: 'A collision of adverse opinions'? Major projects, planning inquiries, and policy change. Environment and Planning A 34: 949-957.
49. Owens S, Cowell R. 2002. Land and Limits: Interpreting Sustainability in the Planning Process. Routledge: London.
50. Parson EA. 1995. Integrated assessment and environmental policy making: in pursuit of usefulness. Energy Policy 23: 463-475.
51. Pearce D. 1993. Blueprint 3: Measuring Sustainable Development. Earthscan: London.
52. Petts J. 1999. Environmental impact assessment versus other environmental management decision tools. In Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment, Petts J (ed.). Blackwell Science: Oxford; 33-59.
53. Pierson P. 2000a. The limits of design: explaining institutional origins and change. Governance 13: 475-499.
54. Pierson P. 2000b. Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review 94: 251-267.
55. RCEP (Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution). 1998. Setting Environmental Standards, Cm 4053. The Stationery Office: London.
56. Rist RC. 1998. Choosing the right policy instrument at the right time: the contextual challenges of selection and implementation. In Carrots, Sticks and Sermons: Policy Instruments and their Evaluation, Bemelmans-Videc M, Rist RC, Vedung E (eds). Transaction: London; 159-162.
57. Sabatier P (ed.). 1999. Theories of the Policy Process. Westview Press: Oxford.
58. Scrase JI. 2001. Curbing the growth in UK commercial energy consumption. Building Research and Information 29: 51-61.
59. Scrase JI, Hall DO. 2002. Biomass energy in subSaharan Africa. In Climate Change for Africa: Science, Technology, Policy and Capacity Building, Low PS (ed.). Kluwer: Amsterdam; 161-180.
60. Sheate WR, Dagg S, Richardson J, Aschemann R, Palerm J, Steen U. 2001. SEA and Integration of the Environment into Strategic Decision-Making, Vol. 1, Main Report, European Commission Contract B4-3040/99/136634/MAR/B4. IC Consultants: London (available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/eia/sea- support.htm#int). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg.
61. Sheate WR, Dagg S, Richardson J, Aschemann R, Palerm J, Steen U. 2002. Integrating the environment into strategic decision-making: conceptualising policy SEA. European Environment (in press).
62. Simon HA. 1957. Models of Man. Wiley: New York.
63. Smith SP, Sheate WR. 2001a. Sustainability appraisals of regional planning guidance and regional economic strategies in England: an assessment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 44: 735-755.
64. Smith SP, Sheate WR. 2001b. Sustainability appraisal of English regional plans: incorporating the requirements of the EU Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 19: 263-276.
65. Tonn B, English M, Travis C. 2000. A framework for understanding and improving environmental decision making. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43: 163-183.
66. Twigger-Ross C, Smith C. 2000. Public Involvement in Agency Activities. National Centre for Risk Analysis and Options Appraisal/Environment Agency of England and Wales: London.
67. UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe). 1998. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. http://www.unece.org/env/pp/treatytext.htm [28 February 2002].
68. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 2001. Reference Manual for the Integrated Assessment of Trade-Related Policies. http://www.unep.ch/etu/etp/ acts/manpols/rmia.htm [28 February 2002].
69. UNICE (Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations of Europe). 2001a. European Industry's Views on the Instruments Proposed in the Green Paper on Integrated Product Policy. http://www.unice.org [28 February 2002].
70. UNICE (Union of Industrial and Employers' Confederations of Europe). 2001b. European Industry's Views on EU Environmental Policy-Making for Sustainable Development. http://www.unice.org [28 February 2002].
71. Van der Vorst R, Grafe-Bukens A, Sheate WR. 1999. A systemic framework for environmental decision-making. Journal of Environmental Assessment Planning and Management 1: 1-26.
72. Walther P. 1987. Against idealistic beliefs in the problem-solving capacities of integrated resource management. Environmental Management 11: 439-446.
73. Warren RF, ApSimon HM. 2000. Integrated assessment of sulphur dioxide reduction schemes: robustness studies, choice of environmental targets and country roles. Journal of Environmental Management 59: 3-20.
74. Wijkman A. 1999. Sustainable development demands integrated approaches: a world in transition. Policy Sciences 32: 345-350.
75. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press: Oxford.