Comparing legislative mechanisms for SEA screening and decision-making: Austrian and Australian experiences

Austrian and Australian approaches to strategic environmental assessment (SEA) are compared with particular emphasis upon the legal basis for the initial phase of agreement/screening and the final stage of SEA decision-making and implementation. In Austrian SEA, screening is compulsory and the outcome leads only to recommendations, meaning that the SEA results have to be considered, but are not binding for the approval decision. In Australia engagement in SEA is largely voluntary but the process results in legally binding conditions of approval that can be applied to relevant actions arising from an assessed policy, plan or programme; the incentive for proponents to participate voluntarily is that subsequent project level activities may be exempt from further assessment processes. Compulsory SEA in Australia also provides a legally certain outcome, a factor of benefit to proponents. Examples of SEAs are provided to demonstrate the operation of the respective stages in the two countries. In Austria compulsory screening results in a lot of energy being spent avoiding triggering a full SEA. Although Australian proponents have been somewhat cautious in volunteering for SEA of their activities, there are signs that this is changing. We argue that the regulatory framework characteristics are a key determinant of the behaviour of proponents and the competent authority in practice and subsequently of SEA potential and outcomes. Consideration of the construct of the regulatory framework for SEA screening and decision-making provides a useful point of reflection for practitioners attempting to understand the effectiveness of SEA processes in a given jurisdiction

Designing an effective sustainability assessment process

At this stage of the book it should be clear that sustainability assessment is very complex and sustainability assessment needs careful design if it is to help to achieve sustainable development. Chapters 3 and 8 have set the scene for considering what matters in sustainability assessment, while chapters 9-12 provided examples of some existing practice which is summarised in this chapter in order to highlight the critical areas which need to be addressed if practice is to be considered effective (judged by our own evaluation framework). Chapters 13 and 14 dealt specifically with the issues of pluralism and knowledge and learning and we recognise that these are critical to effective Sustainability Assessment, and have provided some insights on the best ways forward. This chapter aims to help future practitioners navigate through the sustainability assessment design process. We argue that it is not (necessarily) appropriate to pick an off-the-shelf process, but that it is necessary to gain an understanding of the ways in which sustainability assessment will influence outcomes, values and perceptions so that it is designed to be fit-for-purpose. Indeed, the practice chapters have made it clear that in some countries, whilst the approaches taken have a sustainability remit, this in no way relies on formal or legal process requirements. In designing sustainability assessment, our argument is that an effective assessment process seeks to achieve the six imperatives of sustainability (as set out in Chapter 1 by Gibson), which must always be considered as criteria against which the process will be tested, through achieving effectiveness in all aspects of the evaluation framework. If efforts are not made to achieve effectiveness in all aspects, there will be a gap between the aspiration of the assessment process and the goals which are achieved