Narrow Results

This study examines the impact of reinforcement type and distribution on the natural frequency, deflection, equivalent stress, and Specific Energy Absorption (SEA) of copper thick truncated cones reinforced with Graphene Platelets (GPLs) or Graphene Origami (GOri). The cone comprises $N_L$ layers with Functionally Graded (FG) distributions (X, O, V, UD patterns). Using 2D axisymmetric elasticity theory and the quadratic finite element method, free vibration and static problems are solved. The impact of the GOri and GPLs’ mass fraction and distribution pattern, folding degree of GOri, different boundary conditions and cone angle on the natural frequencies, displacement, equivalent stress and SEA have been investigated and compared. Results show that increasing GPL mass fraction raises natural frequency, while GOri exhibits a folding degree–dependent relationship, with higher folding degrees reducing frequencies. Stress distribution varies by pattern and reinforcement; GOri increases maximum stress in UD and V-patterns but decreases it in X and O-patterns at higher folding degrees. Maximum stress is 8.23 MPa (UD, 100% folding) and minimum 4.25MPa (X-pattern). SEA decreases with mass fraction; GOri enhances SEA at 100% folding and below 2.5% mass fraction but reduces it at higher fractions. GPL-reinforced cones show the lowest SEA below 2.5% mass fraction.

Environmental assessment (EA) systems in the countries-in-transition (CITs) in Central and Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia have been significantly reformed over the last decade. Considerable research efforts have focused on the degree to which EA in this region conforms to best international practice, functions well and results in environmental and democratic improvements. This article examines the evolution of such research and proposes to expand its agenda and methodology to include a policy-systems approach that would more accurately take account of the complexity of EA systems, especially in the constantly changing and institutionally volatile environment of the CITs.

This article discusses recent developments in integrated planning for the national road infrastructure in the Netherlands. It lays emphasis on project definition as a "missing link" between strategic planning and operational planning.

Road development projects may have considerable negative impacts. Projects, however, are often too narrowly focused on road (re)construction alternatives and pay too less attention to the relationships with other spatial developments. As a consequence, the scope of project Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) is too narrow and opportunities are missed to enhance the spatial and environmental quality of the regions concerned. These problems are best tackled early in the planning process when the "degrees of freedom" in shaping the project are relatively large.

Using the case of the A27 motorway a new guideline for explorative studies is introduced. The instrument described (called "reconnaissance study") aims to connect the planning arenas of Strategic Environmental Assessment and EIA, thus achieving more sustainable planning. It focuses on the early stage of project development in which the scope of projects is defined by "zooming in" from the national to a regional setting and translation of abstract policy goals to a "real world" situation. Key elements are a transparent process in which problem analysis and development of solutions are seperated, involvement of external parties and a broad study scope.

This paper provides an overview of the way biodiversity issues are dealt with in strategic environmental assessment (SEA) for spatial plans in the Netherlands. Spatial plans are selected as subject of study because 50 percent of all SEA studies executed in the Netherlands are carried out for spatial plans. Secondly, these plans provide an overarching framework for multiple interventions with potential impacts on biodiversity. It is, therefore, important to pay particular attention to biodiversity at the strategic level of a spatial plan. The evaluation is based on five spatial plans that have been subject to SEA, two national plans, two provincial plans and one local plan. Based on these assessments a number of conclusions are presented on the assessment of biodiversity in SEA for spatial plans in the Netherlands. The evaluation of case studies on which this paper is based was undertaken to produce a submission to the Convention on Biological Diversity for the drafting of international guidelines on biodiversity in SEA.

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) has been identified as an important tool for helping to ensure that development is planned and implemented for the benefit of biodiversity by the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Ramsar Convention and the Convention for Migratory Species. SEA is seen as a way to overcome many limitations of project-level environmental impact assessment by allowing consideration of biodiversity at higher tiers of decision-making and planning.

This paper identifies some important principles that should be taken into account to ensure that biodiversity considerations are appropriately addressed in SEA, so that the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity are pursued as fundamental objectives of strategic decision-making. The paper also sets out key considerations to take into account at different stages in the SEA process. The principles explored in this paper should be applicable in any country where SEA is practiced, even though legislation, methodologies and procedures vary widely.

This paper argues that in order for strategic environmental assessment (SEA) to be effectively applied in transport policy, plan and programme making, the existence of certain context elements is essential. However, currently, these are only partly in place. Elements revolve around formal requirements and clear provisions for SEA, the existence of transparent and consistent value frames, the consideration of traditional decision making approaches, systematic tiering, a willingness to cooperate, an acknowledgement of uncertainties and appropriate funding, time as well as support. Focusing on transport case studies from the Netherlands, Finland, Germany and the U.K., the paper provides some empirical evidence for the importance of these context elements.

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) was initially introduced as an advocacy instrument for the biophysical environment in project decision-making. Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) evolved with a similar mission for strategic level proposals. However, recent trends towards more integration, particularly in the context of sustainability assessment (SA) mean that social and economic aspects are now frequently considered on a par with the environment in impact assessment processes. There are indications that this development will ultimately favour trade-offs towards socio-economic benefits, causing adverse environmental impacts. In this paper, we discuss problems connected with these types of integrated assessments. Based on observations of SA processes are actually environmentally unsustainable, we argue that the need for environment focussed EIA and true SEA in planning processes is now greater than ever. We suggest that until power relationships develop in a way that will allow integration in an environmentally sustainable manner, practitioners should not give up the benefits that have arisen from 35 years of EIA practice. We conclude that in our current world, there is nothing wrong with environmental advocacy — let's continue to use EIA and SEA effectively to protect the environment!

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is the process through which the impacts of plans and programmes on the environment are assessed. Objectives, targets and indicators are the tools through which these environmental impacts can be measured. The same objectives, targets and indicators may be used for all planning levels but it is also necessary to identify additional plan specific ones. We used a workshop based approach to provide an interface between planners and environmental scientists and to give examples of objectives, targets and indicators for biodiversity, water, air and climatic factors, which could be used in SEA for national, regional and local plans. In addition, we highlight the need for careful consideration during the selection process of these variables which will result in a more rigorous and robust SEA. This is a challenging process but once completed will maximise resources and reduce the workload later in the SEA process.

The broadening out of environmental assessment to also consider social and economic dimensions poses some unique challenges, not the least of which is understanding exactly what such a process might entail. This paper outlines the spectrum of possibilities and explores the issue of when and how environmental, social and economic considerations can be integrated in sustainability assessment. The integration issue is also relevant to the practice of strategic environmental assessments (SEA). A new way of conceptualising these types of assessment is put forward based on: (i) what is being assessed — the "question" that is being asked; and (ii) what approach is being used — the type of assessment selected from the spectrum of possibilities. The latter ranges from impact minimisation for each of the three sustainability pillars through to sustainability considered as an integrated concept. The combination of the question and assessment approach determines the level, extent and timing of integration of environmental, social and economic considerations that can be achieved. Additional thought needs to be given to who is performing the integration role as well as the nature of a particular proposal or its setting. This approach to thinking about SEA and sustainability assessment is illustrated with examples from Australia and the United Kingdom.

After the Law of the People's Republic of China on Environmental Impact Assessment (the EIA Law) came into effect in China (mainland) in September 2003, and notably in 2006, the Chinese government released a series of laws and regulations to strengthen strategic environmental assessment (SEA) application in China. SEA is acknowledged by the Chinese central government as a tool to help achieve sustainable development, and it is employed as an instrument to emphasise environmental protection and "scientific outlook of development" during the course of the current rapid industrial and urban development, to build a "harmonious society", and ultimately to achieve sustainable development. This paper compares the Chinese (mainland) SEA system, its legal requirements, institutional structure and procedural framework with the UK and the Canadian systems, to provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of the institutional and governance arrangements of the Chinese SEA system. The conclusions point to some possible explanations for less than optimum implementation of SEA in China, and suggestions for ways to improve the Chinese SEA system in the future.

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) has often been identified as a key tool to contribute to sustainable development. This special issue of the Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management focuses on European SEA practice between 2003 and 2010 to critically evaluate SEA links to sustainable development and similar, difficult to define, high-level policy objectives: democratisation, good governance, agri-environmental objectives, and environmental justice. The papers centre upon the three main topics covered by the different research: SEA outcomes being directly related to policy goals; an analysis of the absence of SEA applied to "positive" policy objectives; and the realism of associating SEA with high-level policy objectives. In particular, this paper calls for greater critical engagement with this latter topic, identifying a need to examine why associations are made between SEA and policy goals.

This paper investigates the potential of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) to contribute to the high-level policy objective of fostering democratisation in spatial planning. Democratic SEA is conceptualised by discussing environmental citizenship, public control over policy making, and participants' empowerment. The empirical investigation is based on the analysis of SEA documents produced during 25 municipal spatial planning processes in Italy between 2004 and 2010. The study found that advances are more evident in the creation of cross-sectoral governance networks than in the involvement of citizens and civil-society organisations. SEA seems to be increasing transparency and expanding the scope of democratic control over spatial planning decisions, though the boundaries between experts, decision makers and citizens are clearly demarcated. To strengthen democratisation processes, the paper argues that all participants should consider themselves equally responsible within SEA networks, and be ready to question alternative environmental value systems that underpin spatial planning processes.

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been associated with "good governance" by bodies at national and international levels including the World Bank, OECD, and UK and Scottish Governments. Typically involving components such as transparency, accountability, public participation and partnership working, this SEA/good governance nexus has been promoted in Scotland where the government sees SEA as central to its sustainable development aspirations. Using a governmentality lens to view SEA as a technique seeking to instil environmentally-focused governance, the paper examines the operation of the SEA/good governance nexus in the SEA process of one Scottish case study, a road corridor development framework undertaken between 2006 and 2008. The paper exposes instances of resistance to both the democratising elements of good governance and to SEA itself as the public and statutory Consultation Authorities find their efforts to constructively engage with the SEA process thwarted. This reveals that, in the case studied, the SEA/good governance nexus, as a high-level policy objective, is more aspiration than reality.

The challenge for implementing an ecosystems approach to environmental decision-making processes, such as spatial planning, is to understand the range, nature and amount of ecosystem services currently provided and the potential for such service provision in the future. The ability to spatially represent ecosystems services is a critical element of the evidence base on which to make decisions about how physical space is used most effectively and sustainably, and the way people and activities are distributed at different spatial scales. This paper reports on the outcomes of a research project originally undertaken for the UK Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which developed a methodology for mapping ecosystem services using GIS and readily available, existing land use/land cover datasets. Critical components of the methodology, in order to determine which datasets are appropriate for which services, are network analysis and stakeholder engagement techniques, to define the relevant typology of ecosystem services and their relationship to land use/land cover types. The methodology was developed and tested successfully in the context of green grid (green infrastructure) networks in a major UK regeneration area, the Thames Gateway, to the east of London, and its potential use in impact assessment further explored through a number of case studies.

This paper reports the findings of a survey in 2009 of European practitioners who face problems related to accessing and using spatial data when preparing reports for Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs). The survey was designed to be comparable to the one undertaken in 2002–03 and reported by Vanderhaegen and Muro (2005). The 2009 survey showed that problems persist and additional costs to practitioners due to data access problems were at least €150 million p.a. in Europe, providing evidence for the need for ongoing investment in the INSPIRE Directive, which aims to support spatial and environmental data-sharing for EIA/SEA studies as well as other environmental policies. The survey also indicated that although EIA and SEA reports now take less time and are, on average, cheaper to prepare, the variability of their quality is still of concern.

SEA was introduced in China in 2003 by the EIA Law. However, most Chinese provinces were slow to establish their own SEA systems. This paper reviews the Chinese SEA institutional arrangements, regulations and documents, both, at national and at provincial levels. The paper concludes that the slow establishment of the provincial SEA systems has been caused by the nature of Chinese SEA institutional arrangements, regulations and documents at national level. For example, lack of willingness to carry out SEAs; failure to strengthen Environmental Protection Bureaus (EPBs) at all levels; and the narrow range of plans requiring SEA. Suggestions are made for improving the SEA institutional arrangements and regulations. This paper provides a specific perspective by reviewing the Chinese SEA system through linking the establishment of provincial SEA systems to the national SEA institutional arrangements and regulations. Suggestions are made for further research.

Welcome to this special JEAPM issue on impact assessment (IA) research, which — besides this introductory paper — includes 16 short papers contributed by a wide range of leading IA researchers from around the world. These papers provide for an overview of achievements, gaps and future directions for IA research. The collection of papers is the outcome of a targeted call to researchers representing a wide range of IA areas and regions. This has resulted in what we believe is an impressive compilation of contributions on environmental impact assessment (EIA), strategic environmental assessment (SEA), health impact assessment (HIA) and social impact assessment (SIA) as well as theoretical, applied and normative aspects of IA, with a particular focus on sustainable development from European, North and South American, Asian, African and Australian authors.

This statement aims at giving an overview of the research on impact assessment in Sweden. It takes a point of departure at the introduction of impact assessment in 1991 describing the Swedish research until today. Since the introduction of EIA in the Swedish legislation in the 1990s, a large number of PhD dissertations have been dealing with various aspects of impact assessment. An estimation based on the literature search is that about 20 PhD theses, in which the core of the research is related to EIA or SEA, have been produced since 1990. The research follows four main themes: (i) EIA and SEA as a tool for integration of environmental and sustainability aspects in planning and development, (ii) EIA and SEA as a tool for integration of ecological aspects in planning, (iii) research on the basic concepts of EIA and SEA, and (iv) the relationship with other assessment tools for sustainable development.

This paper is a "statement" for the March special issue of JEAPM on "Impact Assessment Research: Achievements, Gaps and Future Directions".

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) research have been performed in a wide range of topics over 40 years in Japan. The study underlying this paper reviewed the achievement of Japanese EIA research through the academic database survey and identified which areas would be required for future EIA research. As a result, whilst there are only 30–50 EIAs conducted per year under EIA Act and genuine SEA is currently not practiced, there is a noticeable research interest with over 30 associated research papers published in the professional Japanese literature every year on average. Most of EIA articles could be classified into five groups; (a) systems and laws, (b) methods, (c) Theme-oriented Studies, (d) Sector-oriented Studies and (e) Case Studies. The following three main areas were identified for future EIA research; (1) studies on pro-active sound decision making for sustainability; (2) effectiveness of EIA from a proponent's viewpoint, leading to enhance public acceptance, for example; and (3) substantive and methodological aspects, including the use of both quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods.