Confronting sea with real planning: The case of follow-up in regional plans and programmes in Sweden

Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 229-250

  Wallgren, Oskar ^a   Nilsson, Måns ^a   Jonsson, Daniel K ^b   Wiklund, Hans ^c  

^a STOCKHOLM ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^b ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^c Ministry of Health and Social Affairs Government Offices of Sweden   (Sweden)

Author keywords

evaluation; follow up; institutions; monitoring; Strategic environmental assessment

Indexed keywords

BOTTOM-UP APPROACH; CONFERENCE PROCEEDING; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; PLANNING PRACTICE; PLANNING PROCESS; REGIONAL PLANNING; STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT;

SWEDEN;

EID: 79960441394     PISSN: 14643332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1142/S1464333211003869     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (51)

1. Brooks, I (2009). Organisational Behaviour: Individuals, Groups and Organisation. Harlow, FT: Prentice Hall.
2. Cashmore, M, A Bond and B Sadler (2009). Introduction: The effectiveness of impact assessment instruments. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27, 91-93.
3. Cashmore, M, R Gwilliam, R Morgan, D Cobb and A Bond (2004). The interminable issue of effectiveness: Substantive purposes, outcomes and research challenges in the advancement of environmental impact assessment theory. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22, 295-310. (Pubitemid 40234349)
4. Cherp, A (2005). Key approaches to SEA follow up. Special Thematic Meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment. International Association for Impact Assessment. Prague.
5. Fernandez, E, B Junquera and M Ordiz (2003). Organizational culture and human resources in the environmental issue: A review of the literature. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14, 634-656. (Pubitemid 37496947)
6. Fischer, F, G Miller and MS Sidney (2007). Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods, Boca Raton. FL: Taylor and Francis.
7. Fischer, TB (2002). Strategic Environmental Assessment in Transport and Land Use Planning, London: Earthscan.
8. Gachechiladze, M, BF Noble and BW Bitter (2009). Following-up in strategic environmental assessment: A case study of 20-year forest management planning in Saskatchewan, Canada Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27, 45-56.
9. Gov. Bill 2001/02:4 (2001). En politik för tillv€axt och livskraft i hela landet.
10. Hanusch, M and J Glasson (2008). Much ado about SEA/SA monitoring: The performance of English regional spatial strategies, and some German comparisons. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28, 601-617.
11. Hildén, M, E Furman and M Kaljonen (2004). Views on planning and expectations of SEA: The case of transport planning. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, 519-536. (Pubitemid 38527212)
12. Hilding-Rydevik, T and H Bjarnadóttir (2007). Context awareness and sensitivity in SEA implementation. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27, 666-684. (Pubitemid 47302161)
13. Hjern, B (1982). Implementation research: The link gone missing. Journal of Public Policy, 2, 301-308.
14. Hudson, C (2005). Regional development partnerships in Sweden: Putting the government back in governance? Regional and Federal Studies, 15, 311-327. (Pubitemid 41184003)
15. Jha-Thakur, U, P Gazzola, D Peel, TB Fischer and S Kidd (2009). Effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment - the significance of learning. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27, 133-144.
16. João, E (2007). A research agenda for data and scale issues in Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27, 479-491. (Pubitemid 46824110)
17. Knoepfel, P, C Larrue, F Varone and M Hill (2007). Public Policy Analysis, University of Bristol: The Policy Press.
18. Kok, MTJ and HC De Coninck (2007). Widening the scope of policies to address climate change: Directions for mainstreaming. Environmental Science and Policy, 10, 587-599.
19. Kvale, S (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, London: Sage Publications.
20. Marshall, R, J Arts and A Morrison-Saunders (2005). International principles for best practice EIA follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 23, 175-181. (Pubitemid 41568907)
21. Miles, MS and AM Huberman (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
22. Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communications (2003). Riktlinjer för arbetet med regionala tillv€axtprogram, Stockholm.
23. Morrison-Saunders, A and J Arts (2004). Assessing Impact: Handbook of EIA and SEA Follow-Up, London: Earthscan.
24. Nilsson, M and K Eckerberg (2007). Environmental Policy Integration in Practice: Shaping Institutions for Learning, London: Earthscan.
25. Nilsson, M and L Emmelin (2009). Myths about policy and planning and how they limit SEA - Towards principles for a new institutional design. Paper presented at IAIA '09 Conference - Impact Assessment and Human Well-Being. Accra, Ghana, 18-22 May 2009.
26. Nilsson, M, H Wiklund, G Finnveden, K Lundberg, S Tyskeng, DK Jonsson and O Wallgren (2009). Analytical framework and tool kit for SEA follow-up. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29, 186-199.
27. Noble, BF (2003). Auditing strategic environmental impact assessment practice in Canada. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 5, 127-148.
28. Noble, BF (2009). Promise and dismay: The state of strategic environmental assessment systems and practices in Canada. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29, 66-75.
29. North, DC (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30. ODPM (2005). Regional Spatial Strategy Monitoring: A Good Practice Guide, London, UK: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
31. Ott, JS (1989). The Organizational Culture Perspective, Pacific Grove, Calif.: Brooks/ Cole Publishing Company.
32. Partidário, MR (2000). Elements of an SEA framework - Improving the added-value of SEA. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20, 647-663.
33. Partidário, MR and J Arts (2005). Exploring the concept of strategic environmental assessment follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 23, 246-257. (Pubitemid 41568917)
34. Partidário, MR and TB Fischer (2004). Follow-up in current SEA understanding. In Morrison-Saunder, A and J Arts (eds.) Assessing Impact: Handbook of EIA and SEA Follow-Up. London: Earthscan 224-247.
35. Persson, Å and M Nilsson (2007). Towards a framework for sea follow-up: Theoretical issues and lessons from policy evaluation. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 9, 473-496. (Pubitemid 351266898)
36. Peters, BG and J Pierre (2006). Handbook of Public Policy, London: SAGE.
37. Pettersson, O (1998). Statsbyggnad: den offentliga maktens organisation, Stockholm, SNS (Studieförbundet Näringsliv och Samhälle).
38. Retief, F, C Jones and S Jay (2008). The emperor's new clothes-Reflections on strategic environmental assessment (SEA) practice in South Africa. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 28, 504-514.
39. Risse, N, M Crowley, P Vincke and J-P Waaub (2003). Implementing the Europeam SEA Directive: The member states' margin of discretion. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 23, 453-470. (Pubitemid 36639704)
40. Runhaar, H and PPJ Driessen (2007). What makes strategic environmental assessment successful environmental assessment? The role of context in the contribution of SEA to decision-making. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 25, 2-14. (Pubitemid 46585021)
41. Sabatier, P (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6, 21-48.
42. Sadler, B (1996). Environmental assessment in a changing world: Evaluating practice to improve performance. International Study of the Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment. Ottawa: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and IAIA.
43. Sadler, B and R Verheem (1996). Strategic Impact Assessment: Status, Challenges and Future Direction, Netherlands: Department of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment
44. SALAR (2010). Levels of Local Democracy in Sweden Stockholm: Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions. Available from http://english.skl.se/web/Publications andreports.aspx.
45. Sheate, W, S Dagg, J Richardson, R Acshemann, J Palerm and U Steen (2001). SEA and Integration of the Environment in Strategic Decision-Making. Final Report to EU, Contract Number B4-3040/99/136634/MAR/B4.
46. Stoeglehner, G, AL Brown, Rn and LBV (2009). SEA and planning: 'Ownership' of strategic environmental assessment by the planners is the key to its effectiveness. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27, 111-120.
47. Theophilou, V, A Bond and M Cashmore (2010). Application of the SEA directive to EU structural funds: Perspectives on effectiveness. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30, 136-144.
48. Thérivel, R (1996). SEA methodology in practice. In Thérivel, R and M R Partidario (eds.) The Practice of Stratetgic Environmental Assessment. London: Earthscan.
49. Thérivel, R, P Caratti, R Maria Do, Partidário, Á Theodórsdóttir, Hlökk and D Tyldesley (2004). Writing strategic environmental assessment guidance. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22, 259-270. (Pubitemid 40234346)
50. Thérivel, R and MR Partidario (1996). The Practice of Stratetgic Environmental Assessment, London: Earthscan.
51. Thérivel, R, E Wilson, S Thompson, D Heaney and D Pritchard (1992). Strategic Environmental Assessment, London: Earthscan.