Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management

Approaches based on the concept of ecosystem services need analyses of the sets of spatially correlated services (i.e. bundles) and of the external factors that modify the ecosystem service supply (i.e. drivers of change). At present, appropriate methods to analyse bundles and drivers of change are still under development. This study proposes a method based on a combination of spatial and statistical analyses to define bundles and to explain the drivers of change of 24 ecosystem services in Trentino, an Alpine region of Italy. Results show that multiple services can be grouped in a few number of bundles with a complex shape. When mapping multiple services across the territory, the spatial units of representation are a combination of the intrinsic units of representation of single ecosystem services and land use classes. Land use management was found as the external factor that causes the greatest variability of the ecosystem services distribution across the region.

Environmental cost–benefit analysis is increasingly used to support the formulation of European air quality policies. In these analyses, typically around three-quarters of the societal benefits of cleaner air are related to monetised increases in statistical life expectancy. However, the literature presents widely diverging estimates for the value of a statistical life year (a ‘VOLY’). This paper presents a review of studies aimed at establishing a VOLY as used in European air quality policies and it examines the factors that cause the variations in VOLY estimates. We discuss the implications of our findings for European air quality policies and also present a novel approach to analyse the VOLY. We have labelled our approach the ‘maximum societal revenue VOLY’ (MSR-VOLY), and postulate that this approach may be particularly useful in the context of natural capital accounting.

According to the published literature, for Strategic environment assessment (SEA) to make a meaningful difference, it should be integrated into planning processes. Yet, in situations and contexts where the two processes appear to be disjointed, SEA could be applied upon conclusion of the plan-making process justifying decisions already made, or just before a decision can be made to comply with existing legal requirements. Where this is the case, then what is SEA really for? This paper aims to reflect on the usefulness of SEA, and explore whether a shift of focus from actual effectiveness to perceived effectiveness could help further legitimise the need for SEA. This is done by looking at SEA practice in Italy as a case study, as the country’s diverse regional setup presents situations in which SEA may appear to be avoided because being perceived as not very useful or where SEA may appear to be functioning and actually effective.

Environmental reports are important documents within strategic environmental assessment (SEA). They identify, describe and evaluate the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing a plan or programme, playing, therefore, a key role for communication during the consultation and public participation processes. For similar decision-making contexts, environmental reports for the same types of plans should be consistent in terminology to assure a clear understanding by stakeholders of the aims and problems dealt with by SEA. This paper assesses to what extent SEA reports prepared for a similar type of plan and under similar regulations are comparable and how their contents are consistent in terms of structure, methodological approaches, critical sustainability factors and terminology used. To pursue this task an analytical framework is developed to compare a set of SEA reports. The SEA reports used as case study are the nine river basin management plans (RBMPs) prepared in Portugal for the first planning cycle of the Water Framework Directive. These plans must be subject to SEA, following the Portuguese regulations implementing the SEA Directive. The results show a significant similarity in the reports inside the same hydrographic region but relevant diversities among regions. The major differences are related to the methodological approaches and to the SEA terminology used. These differences resulted not from the features of the regions or of the plans, but from the different consulting teams involved in the assessment process. For an exercise undertaken by similar state agencies, under similar planning decision-making contexts and with broadly similar objectives, the disparities in SEA reports may threaten the consistency of the inherent communication process, disturb the credibility of the technical exercise and hinder the overall understanding of SEA by the stakeholders.

The seriousness of e-waste problem is down to three realities: exponential increase in total amount, environmental degradation and health complications. A call for sustainable e-waste management is no longer a utopian ambition but an absolute necessity. In accordance to that, this study aims to evaluate e-waste management practices in three Asian countries: Japan, Taiwan, and Malaysia, and consequently propose recommendations and insights for Malaysia on how to manage e-waste in a sustainable manner. The comparative analysis is conducted based on three central aspects comprising governance, infrastructure, and stakeholders’ participation. The outcome of this study indicates that e-waste management needs to be initiated by comprehensive regulations that are focussed on proper e-waste handling and stakeholders’ accountability. Besides, it has to be accompanied by robust infrastructure where appropriate mechanisms and effective enforcement are taking place. Finally, active participation from relevant stakeholders through involvement, support and compliance is crucial. On the whole, developing a sustainable e-waste management system is not an easy endeavour; it requires sufficient effort, capital, and time while complemented with continuous improvement.

The aim of this paper is to assess the main impacts of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) in the development of Portuguese fisheries. CFP has introduced a wide range of regulatory instruments, such as the annual total allowable catches (TACs), restrictions on the permissible number of fishing days, fleet reductions and limits on the size and engine power of fishing vessels, alongside with some technical measures to regulate gear usage and where and when fishermen can fish. We analyse the trend evidenced by some of the most relevant structural dimensions of the Portuguese fishing fleet using data surveyed from the Statistics Portugal database for a 21 year period (1994–2014). The results suggest that CFP, namely its conservation measures, has failed so far to achieve its fundamental objective of matching fishing effort and living resources through the coupling of biologic objectives with the ones related to the social and economic aspects of fisheries.