Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management

The integration of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Environmental Management Systems (EMS) has been approached several times in recent years. This article reviews existing conceptual frameworks and specific issues regarding the EIA-EMS integration, and recommends a new conceptual framework which is based on an alternating sequence of EMS and EIA. It also proposes adaptations in key documents of both processes. The recommendations are adaptable to the varied practice of EIA across the globe, and conform to the ISO14001-compliant EMS protocol.

While participation in environmental decision-making is widely recognised and valued in democratic countries as beneficial, its format and scope have not always been the source of agreement. The use of environmental systems assessment (ESA) offers the opportunity for structuring knowledge and decision-making systematically and appropriately to decision makers' concerns, to enable lay publics to participate in development of policy and implementation in public sector initiatives. In order to perform participatory ESA, effective means of involving lay people are required. This paper describes the development and testing of an innovative interactive multimedia package (WOMBLE), written for non-experts to enable them to use the expert tool WISARD, a quantitative life cycle assessment package, to enable involvement in developing and assessing options for management of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). It was shown that this combination of tools can reduce the time needed to achieve effective communication, learning and active engagement.

Integrated assessment is rapidly developing in the scientific as well as policy community. Different methods, techniques and procedures (i.e., tools) are used in these assessments. Often, the choice for using certain tools in an assessment is not well founded. This paper presents a framework that scientifically underpins the role of, and thus choice for, tools within an integrated assessment. The framework identifies four phases in an integrated assessment, which are derived from the complementarities between various forms of integrated assessments. Tasks have to be done within each of the four phases. Seven types of tools with similar characteristics are matched to those tasks. The tool framework is a theoretical construct, developed whilst keeping in mind perceptions and suggestions from eventual users. It is a first step in the development of an overarching framework for finding appropriate tools for different tasks in an assessment, and justifying the use of those tools.

The need for empirical research and systematic performance evaluation of SEA, to advance theoretical understandings as well as practice, has been widely expressed. To promote such research any performance evaluation has to ensure that it is conceptually justified, methodologically sound, practically viable and tailored to the local context. This paper describes a SEA quality and effectiveness review protocol for application within the South African context. Based on international perspectives and debates it provides a description of the conceptual thinking underpinning the structure of the protocol in terms of its approach and framework as well as methodological justification on how the review areas and indicators were designed. Finally a critical evaluation of its application to selected case studies is presented. It concludes that the conceptual framework and methodology could be applied in any context although the contents in terms of review areas and indicators needs to be adapted to accommodate different understandings and perspectives on SEA.

Most SEA practice and research has focused on the pre-decision stages, whereas post-decision follow-up stages such as monitoring, evaluation, and management have been given far less attention. These stages, referred to as SEA follow-up, are integral to making SEA effective and learning-oriented. This paper takes the first step towards a framework for conducting SEA follow-up, by analysing the requirements for ex post activities according to the European SEA Directive (2001/42/EC), reviewing existing experiences and literature on how to perform SEA follow-up, and exploring lessons to be learnt from the adjacent fields of EIA follow-up and policy evaluation. The directive, along with most mainstream applications of SEA, is based on EIA follow-up concepts. However, SEA follow-up displays a number of critical differences, including: an enhanced risk of implementation gaps; a focus on performance rather than compliance; and less direct linkages between decisions and impacts. The paper argues that the SEA Directive is seriously constrained and that a more ambitious interpretation of SEA follow-up is necessary to enable strategic decision making and learning. Lessons from the policy/programme evaluation literature could strengthen SEA follow-up by giving it analytical rigour in relation to establishing causality and providing insights into the use and acceptance of SEA follow-up among decision makers and stakeholders. Further explorations into policy evaluation toolkits, and practical experiences in applying them, are needed to enhance the potential of SEA follow-up in supporting strategic decision making.