Conceptual and methodological challenges to integrating SEA and cumulative effects assessment

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 154-160

  Gunn, Jill ^a   Noble, Bram F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

Author keywords

Conceptual challenges; Cumulative effects assessment; Integration; Methodological challenges; Strategic environmental assessment

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL CHALLENGES; CUMULATIVE EFFECTS; CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT; CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENTS; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS; INTERNATIONAL EXPERTS; METHODOLOGICAL CHALLENGES; POTENTIAL BENEFITS; PROJECT-BASED; STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS; TO EFFECT;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS; INTEGRATION; RATING; REGIONAL PLANNING;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; REGIONAL PLANNING; STRATEGIC APPROACH;

EID: 78651451413     PISSN: 01959255     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2009.12.003     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Antoniuk T. Cumulative effects assessment of pipeline projects. Cumulative environmental effects management: tools and approaches 2000, Alberta Society of Professional Biologists, Calgary, Canada. A. Kennedy (Ed.).
2. Baxter W., Ross W., Spaling H. Improving the practice of cumulative effects assessment in Canada. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 2001, 19(4):253-262.
3. Beanlands, G, Erckmann, W, Orians, G, O'Riordan, J, Policansky, D, Sadar, M, Sadler, B, editors. Cumulative environmental effects: a bi-national perspective. Ottawa, Canada: The Canadian Environmental Assessment and Research Council and the United States National Research Council, Minister of Supply and Services; 1986.
4. Benson J. What is the alternative? Impact assessment tools and sustainable planning. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 2003, 21(4):261-280.
5. Bérubé M. Cumulative effects assessments at Hydro-Québec: what have we learned?. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 2007, 25(2):101-109.
6. Bonnell S., Storey K. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 2000, 2(4):477-499.
7. Canter L. Chapter 18: cumulative effects assessment. Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment: Process, Methods, and Potential 1999, Oxford Blackwell Science Ltd, London. J. Petts (Ed.).
8. Charland J. The problem-isolation paradigm in natural resources management. Journal of Forestry 1996, 6-9. May.
9. Cooper L., Sheate W. Cumulative effects assessment: a review of UK environmental impact statements. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2002, 22:415-439.
10. Cooper L. Draft guidance on cumulative effects assessment of plans. EPMG occasional paper 03/LMC/CEA 2003, London, Imperial College.
11. Cooper L., Sheate W. Integrating cumulative effects assessment into UK strategic planning: implications of the European Union SEA Directive. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 2004, 22(1):5-16.
12. Creasy R. Moving from project-based cumulative effects assessment to regional environmental management. Cumulative environmental effects management: tools and approaches 2002, Alberta Society of Professional Biologists, Calgary, AB. A. Kennedy (Ed.).
13. Dalal-Clayton B, Sadler B. Strategic Environmental Assessment: A Sourcebook and Reference Guide to International Experience. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.; 2005.
14. Damman D. The challenges of developing regional frameworks for cumulative effects assessment. Cumulative environmental effects management: tools and approaches 2002, Alberta Society of Professional Biologists, Calgary, AB. A. Kennedy (Ed.).
15. Dubé M. Cumulative effect assessment in Canada: a regional framework for aquatic ecosystems. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2003, 23:723-745.
16. Duinker P. Cumulative effects assessment: What's the big deal? In: Kennedy A, editor. Cumulative Effects Assessment in Canada: From Concept to Practice, Calgary, AB: Alberta Society of Professional Biologists; 1994.
17. Duinker P., Greig L. The impotence of cumulative effects assessment in Canada: ailments and ideas for redeployment. Environmental Management 2006, 37(2):153-161.
18. Finnveden, G, Nilsson, M, Johansson, J, Persson, A, Moberg, A, and Carlsson, T. Strategic environmental assessment methodologies-applications in the energy sector. N.pub; N.d. doi:10.1016/S0195-9255(02)00089-6.
19. Fischer T. Strategic environmental assessment performance criteria: the same requirement for every assessment?. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 2002, 4(1):83-99.
20. Fischer T. Strategic environmental assessment in post-modern times. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2003, 23:155-170.
21. Fischer T. Theory & practice of strategic environmental assessment: towards a more systematic approach 2007, Earthscan Publications Ltd, London, UK.
22. Regional environmental effects assessment and strategic land use planning in British Columbia. Report prepared for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Research and Development Program 2001, Gryzbowski & Associates, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Hull, Quebec.
23. GSH SAC, Great Sand Hills Scientific Advisory Committee. The Great Sand Hills Regional Environmental Study 2007, Saskatchewan, Canada, Saskatchewan, Canada.
24. Gunn, J, Noble, B. A conceptual basis and methodological framework for regional strategic environmental assessment (R-SEA). Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 2009; 27(4). doi:10.3152/146155109X479440.
25. Harriman J., Noble B. Characterizing project and strategic approaches to regional cumulative effects assessment in Canada. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy & Management 2008, 10(1):25-50.
26. Harriman, J, Noble, B. Integrating cumulative effects in regional strategic environmental assessment frameworks: lessons from practice. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy & Management 2009, in press.
27. Hegmann, G, Cocklin, C, Creasey, R, Dupuis, S, Kennedy, A, Kingsley, L. Cumulative Effects Assessment Practitioners Guide. Ottawa: AXYS Environmental Consulting and CEA Working Group for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 1999;11(3):267-90.
28. Hirsch A. Regulatory context for cumulative impact research. Environmental Management 1988, 12(5):715-723.
29. Kennett S. Towards a new paradigm for cumulative effects management. CIRL Occasional Paper #8 2000, Canadian Institute of Resources Law, Calgary, Canada.
30. Kennett S. Lessons from Cheviot: redefining government's role in cumulative effects assessment. Cumulative environmental effects management: tools and approaches 2000, Alberta Society of Professional Biologists, Calgary, Canada. A. Kennedy (Ed.).
31. Kennett S. Lessons from Cheviot: Redefining government's role in cumulative effects assessment. Cumulative Effects Assessment in Canada: From Concept to Practice 2002, Alberta Society of Professional Biologists, Calgary, AB. A. Kennedy (Ed.).
32. Noble B. Strategic approaches to regional cumulative effects assessment: a case study of the Great Sand Hills. Canada. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 2008, 26(2):78-90.
33. Noble B. Promise and dismay: the state of strategic environmental assessment systems and practices in Canada. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2009, 29(1):66-75.
34. Noble BF., Storey K. Towards a structured approach to Strategic Environmental Assessment. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy & Management 2001, 3(4):483-508.
35. Partidário M. Strategic environmental assessment: key issues emerging from recent practice. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 1996, 16:31-55.
36. Partidário M. Elements of an SEA framework - improving the added value of SEA. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2000, 20:647-663.
37. Quinn, M, Greenway, G, Duke, D, and Lee, T. A collaborative approach to assessing regional cumulative effects in the transboundary Crown of the Continent. Research report prepared on behalf of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency for the Research and Development Monograph Series, 2004.
38. Retief F. A performance evaluation of strategic environmental assessment processes within the South African context. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2007, 27(1):84-100.
39. Sadler B., Verheem R. SEA: status, challenges, and future directions. Report 53 of the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment 1996, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, The Hague, Netherlands.
40. Seabrook L., McAlpine C., Fensham R. Cattle, crops and clearing: regional drivers of landscape change in the Brigalow Belt, Queensland, Australia, 1840-2004. Landscape and Urban Planning 2006, 78:373-385.
41. Smit H., Spaling H. Environmental impact assessment review. H. Methods for cumulative effects assessment 1995, 15:81-106.
42. Spaling H., Zwier J., Ross W., Creasy R. Managing regional cumulative effects of oil sands development in Alberta, Canada. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 2000, 2(4):501-528.
43. Stinchcombe K., Gibson R. Strategic environmental assessment as a means of pursuing sustainability: ten advantages and ten challenges. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 2001, 3(3):343-372.
44. Thérivel R. Strategic environmental assessment in action 2004, Earthscan Publications Limited, London, UK.
45. Thérivel R., Partidário M. The Practice of Strategic Environmental Assessment 1996, Earthscan Publications Limited, London, UK.
46. Thérivel R., Ross B. Cumulative effects assessment: does scale matter?. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2007, 27:365-385.
47. Thorhallsdottir T. Strategic planning at the national level: evaluating and ranking energy projects by environmental impact. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2007, 27:545-568.
48. United States Department of the Interior. Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Grid 4. Evaluation of Kerr-McGee Oil and Gas Corporation's Development Operations Coordination Document, N-7045. Nansen Project, East Breaks, Blocks 602 and 646. New Orleans: Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region; 2001.
49. Verheem R., Tonk J. Strategic environmental assessment: one concept, multiple forms. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 2000, 19(3):177-182.