practical guidelines on strategic environmental …...practical guidelines on strategic...

REPORT 6383 • SEPTEMBER 2010

Practical guidelines on strategic environmental

assessment of plansand programmes

��

Screening

Survey of

conditions

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Significant

environmental

effects?

��

��

��

SEA

report

SEA report (work elements at th

e various stages)

• Alternatives

• Significant environmental

effects

• Protection measures

• Impact assessmentt

• Consultation report

• Prerequisites

• Zero alternative

• Consultation

• Summary of plan/programme

• Summary of process

• Measures for m

onitoring/supervision

• Consultation report

SEA process

Special synopsis (document)

• How environmental aspects

• How the SEA report/c

onsultation views taken into

consideration

• Reasons for adoption/measures

monitoring/supervision

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Draft SEA

report

(inc. consultation)

Draft plan/

programme

(possible formal

process/

consultation)

Practical guidelines on strategic environmental assessment of plans

and programmes

SWEDISH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Orders Order tel.: +46 (0)8-505 933 40 Order fax: +46 (0)8-505 933 99

E-mail: [email protected] Postal address: CM Gruppen AB, Box 110 93, 161 11 Bromma

Internet: www.naturvardsverket.se/bokhandeln

Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Tel: +46 (0)8-698 10 00, fax: +46 (0)8-20 29 25

E-mail: [email protected] Postal address: Naturvårdsverket, SE-106 48 Stockholm

Internet: www.naturvardsverket.se

ISBN 978-91-620-6383-2 ISSN 0282-7298

© Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2010

Digital publication

3

SWEDISH ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REPORT 6383

Practical guidelines on strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes

Foreword to the English edition Since 21 July 2004, Swedish law has contained provisions (chapter 6 of the Swedish Environmental Code) stating that certain plans and programmes drawn up or amended by government agencies and municipal authorities should be subject to strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Supplementary provisions were introduced on 1 July 2005 in the Ordinance (1998:905) on Environmental Impact Statements and SEA reports. The Swedish provisions are based on the EU Directive 2001/42/EC “on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment”. This is a so-called “minimum directive” whose provisions must be observed by all EU member states. However, member states can introduce more stringent provisions in their own legislation if they so wish. Sweden has chosen, in principle, not to go further than is strictly required. The Protocol on strategic environmental assessment to the Espoo convention on environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context also forms a basis for the Swedish provisions. The Swedish edition of this manual was issued in January 2009. This English edition is a translation of the Swedish manual, though with appendixes and subject indexes omitted. The appendixes omitted consist of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s general guidelines on SEAs of plans and programmes (to chapter 6 of the Environmental Code and the Ordinance (1998:905) on EISs and SEA reports) and a review of the associated EU legislation and Swedish legislation. In principle, the current text contains citations and references to all the text in the general guidelines. The review of the associated EU legislation in the Swedish edition is taken from ”Implementation of Directive 2001/42 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment” (European Commission 2004 pp 47-53). Some clarifications of the text have also been included in this edition. We are aware that several of the references given are in Swedish and may be difficult to access, but we have decided that it is better to retain them than remove them. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency has overall responsibility for interpreting the provisions of the Environmental Code and providing guidance on them. The Agency provides government agencies at national, regional and municipal level with guidance on how strategic environmental assessments can, should and must be carried out. The county administrative board is also entrusted with providing guidance at municipal level. The National Board of Housing, Building and Planning [Boverket] has particular responsibility for providing guidance on strategic environmental assessments relating to municipal comprehensive physical plans [översiktsplaner] and detailed development plans [detaljplaner]. This English edition has been published due to the fact that the Swedish edition was extremely well received and was one of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s best-selling and most downloaded publications in 2009. Also, on several occasions during visits by delegations from other countries, we have been asked questions on how we deal with strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes in Sweden. We trust that this edition will be of use both to people who wish to gain a general insight into how strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes can be carried out and to people who require specific information on how the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, as a national government agency

3



responsible for providing guidance, considers that strategic environmental assessment can, should and must be carried out on the basis of Swedish provisions. Stockholm, September 2010 The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Martin Eriksson Head of Department The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency

4



Foreword Since 21 July 2004, chapter 6 of the Swedish Environmental Code [miljöbalken] has contained provisions stating that certain plans and programmes drawn up or amended by government agencies and municipal authorities should be subject to strategic environmental assessment (SEA). This manual, which contains general guidelines on strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes, aims to provide guidance on how government agencies and municipal authorities must, should and can act in order to comply with the provisions of the Environmental Code [miljöbalk (1998:808)]and the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports [förordning (1998:905) om miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar]. This guidance applies to all plans and programmes which may be appropriate for strategic environmental assessment. A manual issued by the Swedish National board of Housing, Building and Planning [Boverket] is also available for plans linked to the Swedish Planning and Building Act (Swedish National board of Housing, Building and Planning 2006). The manual provides guidance on such matters as the plans and programmes covered by the provisions, how to decide whether a SEA is required, the stages included in the SEA process, when those stages should be implemented and how they may be implemented. The manual is aimed primarily at officials at municipal authorities and government agencies and consultants who are to take part in a strategic environmental assessment or who will decide whether a strategic environmental assessment is required. The work of compiling the manual was carried out in the form of a project. The working group included people from the Climate Change Department and the Implementation and Enforcement Department of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency [Naturvårdsverket]. A reference group made up of representatives from government agencies, municipal authorities, consultants and researchers provided support in the work of preparing the manual and the general guidelines. Extracts from the manual and general guidelines were sent to almost 100 referral bodies for their opinions. Those opinions have been collected and taken into consideration.

The main author and project leader was Mikael Johannesson. Anna Wahlström was involved in preparing the manual and also wrote part of the text. Jenny Liökel, Jan-Ola Olofsson and Ann Åkerskog contributed texts, graphics or layout. Egon Enocksson was responsible for the final preparation of the general guidelines on strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes.

5



The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency would like to thank everyone who contributed supporting information and opinions during the preparation of the manual and general guidelines. Stockholm, January 2009 The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Martin Eriksson Head of Department The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency

6



Contents SUMMARY 9

1 INTRODUCTION 13 1.1 Aim, background and some definitions 13 1.2 Other impact assessments 16 1.3 Notes on the text 17

2 THE PROCESS 19

3 GENERAL ISSUES 24 3.1 Working methods for good quality 24 3.2 Working methods leading to poor quality 26 3.3 Other parties’ participation in the process 27 3.4 Integration of the planning process and the SEA 28 3.5 Coordination between different impact assessments 32

4 SCREENING 34 4.1 Basic criteria and exceptions 34 4.2 Plans and programmes which fulfil the first two basic criteria 36 4.3 Important concepts and aspects involved in screening 40 4.4 Screening without appendix 4 47 4.5 Screening with appendix 4 47

5 CONSULTATION 61 5.1 The aim of consultation 61 5.2 When, on what and with whom consultation should take place 62 5.3 Performance of consultations 71

6 DEFINING THE SCOPE OF THE SEA REPORT 78 6.1 The aim of defining the scope 78 6.2 Defining the scope of the contents of the SEA report 78 6.3 Defining the scope of the contents and level of detail of the SEA report 80 6.4 Different stages in defining the scope of the SEA report 84

7 ALTERNATIVES 87 7.1 The aim of producing alternatives 87 7.2 Reasonable alternatives 87 7.3 Alternatives at a strategic level 89 7.4 Generation of alternatives 90 7.5 Processing of various alternatives 91

8 SEA REPORTS 97 8.1 The aim of the SEA report 97 8.2 The quality of the SEA report 97

7



8.3 Different kinds of measures 99 8.4 Management of uncertainty 101 8.5 The various stages of the SEA report 102 8.6 The contents of the SEA report 107 8.7 Methods and tools 115

9 THE ADOPTION OF THE PLAN OR PROGRAMME 119 9.1 Decision on adoption 119 9.2 Information that the plan or programme has been adopted 119

10 SPECIAL SYNOPSIS 121 10.1 The aim of the synopsis 121 10.2 The contents of the synopsis 121

11 MONITORING 123 11.1 The aim of monitoring 123 11.2 Responsibility for monitoring and duration of monitoring 123 11.3 What monitoring should cover 124 11.4 How monitoring can be carried out 126 11.5 Information on monitoring and information from monitoring 127 11.6 Results and measures 127

12 IF THE RULES ARE NOT OBEYED 130

REFERENCES AND WEBSITES 134

8



Summary Since 21 July 2004, chapter 6 of the Environmental Code [miljöbalken] has contained provisions stating that certain plans and programmes should be subject to environmental assessment. Supplementary provisions are contained in the Ordinance (1998:905) on environmental impact statements and strategic environmental assessment reports [förordning (1998:905) om miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar]. A strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is a process involving a number of stages which government agencies and municipal authorities should carry out when they draw up or amend certain plans or programmes whose implementation may be supposed to entail significant environmental effects. Within the framework of a SEA, a SEA report should be drawn up in which the positive and negative significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be supposed to entail should be identified, described and assessed. Reasonable alternatives relating to the aim and geographical scope of the plan or programme should also be identified, described and assessed. This manual, which contains general guidelines on strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes, aims to provide guidance on how government agencies and municipal authorities must, should and can act in order to comply with the provisions of the Environmental Code and the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. This guidance applies to all plans and programmes which may be appropriate for strategic environmental assessment. The manual is aimed primarily at officials at municipal authorities and government agencies and consultants who are to take part in a strategic environmental assessment or who will decide whether a strategic environmental assessment is required. The aim of a strategic environmental assessment is to “integrate environmental aspects into the plan or programme so as to promote sustainable development” (chapter 6, section 12 of the Environmental Code). In order for this to be possible, the work on the strategic environmental assessment must be integrated with the work on the plan or programme. Continuous feedback should therefore occur between the strategic environmental assessment process and the plan or programme process so that, for example, the various alternatives arising out of the process can be developed or discarded on the basis of analyses of their environmental impact. In order to decide whether a strategic environmental assessment is required, the government agency or municipal authority should first carry out what is referred to as screening. It is important that the government agency and municipal authority should comply with the provisions of the Environmental Code and the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, particularly when deciding whether a strategic environmental assessment is required. If a strategic environmental assessment that should have been carried out

9



is not carried out, a plan or programme could under certain circumstances be appealed, which could lead to the cancellation of the plan or programme. The figure below shows the different stages included in the process, from screening to a strategic environmental assessment and monitoring of the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment actually causes. Even though some stages must be carried out in a particular prescribed order, as a rule it is appropriate, and sometimes even necessary, to go back and supplement certain stages in the process. The way in which the work is organised and carried out is important in determining whether both the aim of the plan or programme and the aim of the strategic environmental assessment can be achieved.

10



The following points give a general overview of a suitable way of organising and carrying out the work.

• Begin the strategic environmental assessment process and the work on the SEA report as early as possible, in other words as soon as the work on the plan or programme begins.

• As far as possible clarify the conditions for the work on the strategic environmental assessment and the plan or programme at an early stage in the process.

• Integrate the work on the strategic environmental assessment with the preparation of the plan or programme with the aid of a clearly-defined process so that the design of the plan or programme can be modified during the plan or programme process.

• Focus on the aim of the strategic environmental assessment and the plan or programme throughout the process.

• Focus the work on the strategic environmental assessment on the significant positive and negative environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be supposed to cause.

• Ensure that the work is carried out by a working group containing both planning and environmental skills as well as other skills and experience which are relevant to the plan or programme to be drawn up or amended.

• First make use of existing knowledge and experience in society, but supplement this with new knowledge as required.

• Create an open, cooperative process with the aid of effective consultation. A communication plan can facilitate such a process.

• Begin developing and assessing reasonable alternatives at an early stage to form a possible basis for strategic decisions, actions and solutions which can help to achieve the aim of both the plan or programme and the strategic environmental assessment. Present and describe them in such a way as to make the differences clear.

• Create a process with continuous feedback between the development of alternatives in the work on the plan or programme and the assessment of the environmental effects of those alternatives within the framework of the preparation of the SEA report.

• Coordinate the work on the strategic environmental assessment with work on any other impact assessments.

• If possible, make use of knowledge and conclusions from previous stages in the process. Make use, for example, of the results of screening when defining the scope of the SEA report and use the results of the scoping when performing the SEA report.

• Ensure that ample opportunity is given and a reasonable length of time is allowed for submitting opinions during the consultations.

• Continuously document the strategic environmental assessment process and the way in which opinions and proposals submitted during the drafting

11



of the SEA report and the consultations have been taken into consideration and environmental aspects have been integrated into the plan or programme.

• Be constantly prepared to re-do or supplement stages already carried out and to reassess previous standpoints.

• Continuously document the choices made and the standpoints adopted and the reasons for them.

• Continuously document the way in which assessments are carried out, the methods and tools used, the assumptions made and the way in which uncertainties are assessed and dealt with.

• As far as possible use the terminology of the Environmental Code in order to facilitate communication and avoid uncertainties during the consultations.

• Be careful to comply with the provisions contained in chapter 6 of the Environmental Code and the Ordinance (1998:905) on environmental impact statements and strategic environmental assessment reports.

12



1 Introduction 1.1 Aim, background and some definitions This manual, which contains general guidelines, aims to provide guidance on how government agencies and municipal authorities must, should and can act in order to comply with the provisions of chapter 6 of the Environmental Code [miljöbalken] and Ordinance (1998:905) on environmental impact statements and strategic environmental assessment reports [förordning (1998:905) om miljökonsekvens-beskrivningar]. These guidelines apply to all kinds of plans and programmes for which a strategic environmental assessment is or may be required. A manual issued by the Swedish National board of Housing, Building and Planning [Boverket] (Swedish National board of Housing, Building and Planning 2006) is also available for plans linked to the Swedish Planning and Building Act (comprehensive physical plans and detailed development plans). These manuals supplement each other. Strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes is a process involving a number of stages which government agencies and municipal authorities should carry out when they draw up or amend certain plans or programmes whose implementation may be supposed to entail significant environmental effects. Within the framework of the strategic environmental assessment, the positive and negative significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme may be supposed to entail should be identified, described and assessed (chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 39). A strategic environmental assessment involves, among other things:

• defining what the SEA report is to contain • drawing up a SEA report, including alternatives • carrying out different kinds of consultation • taking into consideration the SEA report and the results of the consultation

before making a decision on the assumptions of the plan or programme • drawing up a special synopsis which includes information on the decision

and the grounds for the decision (chapter 6, sections 11–16 Environmental Code; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 39). See chapter 2.

The strategic environmental assessment is preceded by screening. A decision is made as to whether a strategic environmental assessment is required when screening is carried out. See chapter 4. After the strategic environmental assessment is complete, the significant environmental impact actually brought about by the implementation of the plan or programme should also be monitored so that any negative significant environmental effect which was not previously identified can be remedied (chapter 6, section 18 Environmental Code).

13



A SEA report is a document in which the significant positive and negative environmental effects that the implementation of a plan, programme or amendment may be supposed to entail should be identified, described and assessed. The concept of “environmental effects” has been given a wide definition in the context of strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes and includes, for example, the impact on populations, human health, material assets, buildings and ancient and cultural monuments (chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 Environmental Code; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 39; European Commission 2004 page 29). The provisions concerning SEA and SEA reports are contained in chapter 6 of the Environmental Code (Environmental Code [1998:808]) and in the Ordinance (1998:905) on environmental impact statements and strategic environmental assessment reports (the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). A document which is not designated as a plan or programme may also be subject to the rules on strategic environmental assessment. The determining factor is whether the document fulfils the most important criteria for plans or programmes. The guidelines on the EU Directive on which the Swedish legislation is based state that, “It may be that the terms should be taken to cover any formal statement which goes beyond aspiration and sets out an intended course of future action.” (European Commission 2004, pages 5–6; EU Directive 2001/42/EC). See also section 4.1 and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s general guidelines on strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009). According to the Environmental Code, the aim of strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes is to “integrate environmental aspects into the plan or programme so as to promote sustainable development” (chapter 6, section 11 Environmental Code). According to the EU Directive referred to above, the aim is also to generally provide for a high level of protection of the environment. The Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessments in a Transboundary Context1 states that the aim is “to contribute to the integration of environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans and programmes” (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 24; EU Directive 2001/42/EC, article 1; UNECE2 2003, article 1). It may also be considered from the point of view that the role of strategic environmental assessments is to make the decision-making process more preventive, more strategic, more sustainable and less political (Therivel 2004, page 110). In the government’s view, the rules on strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes will lead to improvements in the basis of both decisions on plans and programmes and activities and measures (projects). It is also anticipated that decisions will be better established and that administration and decision-making will be more

1 The Convention is normally referred to as the Espoo Convention. It was ratified by Sweden in 1992 and entered into force in 1997 (UNECE 1991). The Protocol was ratified by Sweden on 30 March 2006 and passed by the EU on 12 November 2008. However, it has not yet entered into force (21/01/2010). 2 UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe)

14



effective when assessing permits for activities and measures. The government’s assessment is that, overall, less rather than more time will be taken up in social planning and subsequent permit processes as a consequence of the new rules and efficiency measures, even though administration time may be expected to increase for certain plans and programmes (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 58–62). The provisions of chapter 6 of the Environmental Code which state that certain plans and programmes should be made subject to environmental assessment (Environmental Code [1998:808]) entered into force on 21 July 2004. At that time, amendments were also made to the Act on Planning and Building and the Act on Municipal Energy Planning pursuant to the Environmental Code (Act [1987:10] on Planning and Building; Act [1977:439] on Municipal Energy Planning). Supplementary provisions were introduced through amendments to the Ordinance (1998:905) on Environmental Impact Statements and Strategic Environmental Assessment Reports. Those amendments entered into force on 1 July 2005. The amendments in Swedish legislation are a consequence of the EU Directive “on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment” and the Protocol on “Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context” (EU Directive 2001/42; UNECE 2003).

Some fundamental concepts Screening: The process whereby a decision is made as to whether a strategic environmental assessment is required. Strategic environmental assessment (SEA): Strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes is a process involving a number of stages which government agencies and municipal authorities should carry out when they draw up or amend certain plans or programmes whose implementation may be supposed to entail significant environmental effects (chapter 6 of the Environmental Code). Strategic environmental assessment report: A SEA report is a written report in which such matters as the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be supposed to entail should be identified, described and assessed. Reasonable alternatives with regard to the aim and geographical scope of the plan or programme should also be identified, described and assessed. In the case of assessment of the environmental effects of activities and measures (projects), the corresponding document is referred to as an environmental impact statement (EIS) (chapter 6 of the Environmental Code). Environmental effects: Besides matters normally associated with the term “environment”, in this document the concept of environmental effects also includes such things as effects on populations, human health, material assets, buildings and ancient and cultural monuments (chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 of the Environmental Code). The term refers to both positive and negative effects.

15



1.2 Other impact assessments There are a number of different types of impact assessments which can be used to assess the impact, effects and consequences of different proposals and whether a proposal contributes to the overall goal of national policy, i.e. sustainable development. The use of some impact assessments is regulated by a law or other statute, while others are of a voluntary nature. The various types of impact assessments have different focuses, but may at the same time have points in common with strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes as far as procedures or contents are concerned. Because different impact assessments often overlap, it may often be appropriate to coordinate work on impact assessments in terms of both time and contents. See also section 3.5.

Some examples of impact assessments other than strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes are given below:

An environmental impact assessment (EIA) is required for certain activities and measures (projects) and the process corresponds to strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes. The provisions on EIA, like the provisions on SEA, are contained in chapter 6 of the Environmental Code and in the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. The framework of an environmental impact assessment should for example include consultations and an environmental impact statement should also be produced. However, there are no requirements for monitoring as in SEAs. Another important difference is that the concept of “environment” as used in strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes is more precisely formulated and can be interpreted more widely. There are several important advantages with producing SEA reports at plan and programme level as opposed to produce environmental impact statements at project level. At a more overall or strategic level, there are, for example, greater opportunities for managing issues from a system perspective, producing and managing different alternative solutions and taking cumulative effects into consideration. See also chapter 7 and section 8.6.

Health impact assessments correspond to the environmental impact assessments carried out for some projects, but focus on parts of the social dimension of sustainable development. Health impact assessments can also be carried out at programme and plan level and are then duly integrated into the strategic environmental assessment. Within the framework of a strategic environmental assessment, the performance of a health impact assessment can in some cases be a suitable means of identifying, describing and assessing the significant impact on the population and human health that the implementation of a plan or a programme may be supposed to entail (see chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 Environmental Code). The context in which health impact assessments should be carried out or how they should be carried out is not governed in a law or an ordinance. The Swedish National Institute of Public Health [Statens folkhälsoinstitut] has produced guidelines for health impact assessments (Swedish National Institute of Public Health 2005). The guidelines for

16



health impact assessments and a number of case studies are available on the Swedish National Institute of Public Health website (www.fhi.se).

A social and economic impact analysis is a process which includes identifying, assessing and reporting the advantages and disadvantages of a proposed measure for society as a whole. The social and economic benefits of measures and their consequences are weighed against the social and economic cost and are normally expressed wholly or partly in economic terms. A social and economic impact analysis should as far as possible include all significant consequences for all groups in society (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2003a).

A sustainability assessment assesses the consequences of different proposals for all three dimensions of sustainable development (the environmental, social and economic dimensions). The European Commission has been carrying out sustainability assessments on some of its proposals since 2003 (see also in the References and websites section). Strategies for sustainable development exist at national and international level (see, for example, Swedish Government 2004, Swedish government 2006, Swedish Government 2007 and “Sustainability assessments; EU” in the References and websites section of this report). 1.3 Notes on the text References are included between chapters and sections in order to avoid repetition in the text and to facilitate matters for the reader. To enable the reader to locate further information on a specific area more easily, we have chosen to include references throughout the text and in some cases we have also included suggestions for further reading or other sources of information. Occasionally, intentional use is made of terms or modes of expression which may be perceived as unnecessarily bureaucratic. This applies, for example, to the terms “beakta” [take into consideration] and ”skälig tid” [reasonable time], which are used in the Environmental Code and the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. They are also used in this document to remove any doubt on the part of the reader that the same meaning is intended. The manual aims to consistently differentiate between what must be done (a requirement according to a law or ordinance), what should be done and what can be done or is considered appropriate. The term should is used in the manual mainly for expressions taken from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines. It is clear from the context when such is not the case. The boundaries are not always stated but we have aimed to use must, should and can in this manual in the manner described above. The references in the text also provide information on any support for the various expressions used in the manual. Chapter 1 is an introductory chapter which, besides these notes on the text, includes a description of the aim of the manual and strategic environmental assessments, defines certain fundamental concepts, provides a background to strategic environmental

17



assessment and compares strategic environmental assessments to other kinds of impact assessments. Chapter 2 contains a summary of the various stages in the process from the decision that a strategic environmental assessment is required (screening) to the environmental assessment process and follow up. Chapter 3 deals with certain overall issues in the process such as factors and working methods which are of significance for the quality of the strategic environmental assessment, integration between strategic environmental assessment and planning and coordination between different impact assessments. Chapters 4–11 deal at greater length with the various stages in the process, from screening to monitoring the environmental effects that the plan or programme actually entails. With the exception of chapter 5, the description follows the same order as the process. Chapter 5 deals with consultation and contains information on all kinds of consultations which must be carried out and which may be of immediate importance in strategic environmental assessment. Chapters 4–11 all begin with an abstract of the contents of the chapter. There then follows a description of the aim of the stage or stages described in the chapter3. Chapters 3–11 end with a box containing a number of bullet points summarising the most important considerations in the implementation of each stage.

Chapter 12 describes the possible consequences of a failure to comply with the rules on strategic environmental assessment. Chapter 13 contains references, often with links to references in PDF format, and a list of websites where further information can be obtained.

3 There are no abstracts for chapters 3 and 9 because the aim of each of these chapters is self-explanatory.

18



2 The process This chapter summarises the process from the decision on whether a strategic environmental assessment is required (screening) to the strategic environmental assessment itself and monitoring of the significant environmental effects that the implementation of a plan, a programme or an amendment actually entails. Figure 1 below shows all the stages included in the entire process when a strategic environmental assessment is required.

19



There follows a brief description of the various stages included in the process, from screening to the strategic environmental assessment process and monitoring of the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment actually entails. The various stages of the strategic environmental assessment should be integrated with the preparation of the plan or programme. Even though certain stages must be implemented in a certain prescribed order, as a rule it is appropriate, and sometimes even necessary, to go back and re-do or supplement earlier stages in the process. This may, for example, become necessary when analysing new alternatives or if new knowledge comes to hand during the work or the consultations. Furthermore, in order for the work to be effective, it is often appropriate to work with more than one stage at a time (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009; European Commission 2004, pages 32, 34).

Below, set out first in bold face, there is an overall description of what must be done at each stage, with reference to provisions of the Environmental Code and the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. There is also a description of what should be done in accordance with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines on strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009). This is followed by a more detailed description of what is required or what should be done. The following summary of each stage is necessarily incomplete. It does not, for example, describe the aim of each stage or how it must, should or can be implemented. More comprehensive descriptions of the various stages in the process are provided in chapters 4-11 below. Screening Decide whether or not the plan or programme should be subject to an environmental assessment (chapter 6, section 11 Environmental Code; sections 4–5, 7 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). An environmental assessment should be carried out on plans and programmes drawn up or amended by a government agency or municipal authority which are required in a law or other statute and whose implementation may be supposed to entail significant environmental effects. The government agency or municipal authority which draws up the plan or programme is responsible for screening. Plans and programmes which are prepared for the sectors and areas listed in section 4 f of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports and which state the conditions for future permits for the activities and measures contemplated in section 3 or in appendix 3 to the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports will automatically be supposed to entail a significant environmental effect. For plans and programmes which belong to this group but which only relate to detailed development plans, small areas at local level or minor amendments, a decision will be made as to whether a significant environmental effect is involved (for which a strategic environmental assessment is required), taking into account the criteria set out in appendix 4 to the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. Plans and programmes which are prepared for sectors and areas other than those listed in section 4 f of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports will also be subject to an SEA if they state the conditions for future permits for activities which “may have an environmental effect” and the government agency or municipal authority, after taking into consideration the criteria set out in appendix 4 to the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, finds that implementation may be considered to entail significant environmental effects. All plans or programmes which include activities or measures which may have a significant environmental impact in a Natura 2000 area will always be considered to entail significant environmental effects. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency must be informed if another country is affected by significant environmental effects. See also “Consultation on significant environmental effects in an another country” below. See also chapter 4.

20



Consultation on screening Carry out consultation on screening in cases in which screening takes into consideration the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports (section 6 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009). Screening should be carried out as soon as possible on the basis of the work on the plan or programme. It should take place no later than during any consultation on the definition of the scope or at least prior to consultation on the plan or programme. The county administrative boards, municipal authorities and government agencies concerned must be given an opportunity to issue opinions. For plans and programmes at a national level, consultation must instead take place with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and other central government agencies involved. The assessment of whether a plan or programme may be considered to entail significant environmental effects must be reported in the case concerning the plan or programme and must be made available to the general public. The results of the assessment and the reasons for it should be reported as soon as possible. This consultation should, whenever appropriate, be coordinated with the consultation on definition of the scope. See also chapter 5, particularly section 5.2.3.

Consultation on significant environmental effects in another country Decide whether the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be supposed to entail any significant environmental effects in another country (chapter 6, section 15 Environmental Code; sections 9-11 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009). If the implementation may be supposed to entail significant environmental effects in another country, use the same assessment method as for the assessment of a significant environmental effects which may be supposed to occur within Sweden’s borders. State agencies which become aware that the implementation of a plan, a programme or an amendment of a plan or programme may be supposed to entail significant environmental effects in another country must notify the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Information should be submitted to the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency as soon as the State agency becomes aware of it, i.e. no later than when the scope of the SEA report is defined. See also chapter 5, particularly section 5.2.6.

Definition of the scope of the SEA report Define the scope of the contents of the SEA report (chapter 6, sections 12–13 of the Environmental Code). What the SEA report must contain is governed in chapter 6, section 12 of the Environmental Code, while the scope and level of detail of the contents is governed in chapter 6, section 13 of the Environmental Code. The scope and level of detail of the SEA report must be reasonable in relation to 1. assessment methods and current knowledge 2. the contents and level of detail of the plan or programme 3. the public interest 4. the fact that certain matters can be better assessed in other contexts. See also chapter 6 and section 8.6.

Consultation on definition of the scope of the SEA report Carry out consultation on the contents, scope and level of detail of the SEA report (chapter 6, sections 12–13 Environmental Code; Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009). The government agency or municipal authority must carry out consultations on the definition of the scope of the SEA report with the municipal authority or authorities or county administrative board or boards affected by the plan or programme before the decision is made. For plans and programmes at

21



a national level, consultation must instead take place with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and other central government agencies involved. This consultation should, whenever appropriate, be coordinated with the consultation on screening. Even if there is no requirement for wider consultation when defining the scope of the SEA report, there may be reason to invite in organisations with a particular interest and the general public, for example. See also chapter 5, particularly section 5.2.4.

An SEA report, including alternatives Draw up an SEA report (chapter 6, sections 11–12 Environmental Code). Begin the work on the SEA report, including drawing up reasonable alternatives, as early as possible. Begin the work no later than when defining the scope of the SEA report. Integrate the work on the SEA report with the work on the plan or programme. Chapter 6, section 12 of the Environmental Code sets out what the SEA report must contain. Go through all items. Report and give reasons if parts of those items or entire items are not considered relevant to the plan or programme in question. Draw up reasonable strategic alternatives and focus on the significant positive and negative environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be supposed to entail. Subsequently adjust the alternatives as new knowledge arises from the work on the SEA report. Make use of any relevant knowledge and methods available in society. Supplement with new knowledge on the existing situation in the environment, as required. Describe and give reasons for alternatives and standpoints adopted. See also chapter 7–8.

Consultation on plans or programmes and SEA report Carry out consultations on the SEA report and the proposal for a plan or programme (chapter 6, sections 13-16 Environmental Code; section 8 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009). The SEA report and the proposal for a plan or programme must be made available to the government agencies and municipal authorities involved and the general public. Information on the consultation should be available on the website and notice board of the government agency or municipal authority at the very least. The period for opinions on the SEA report must be reasonable and should be at least as long as the consultation period for the plan or programme. The minimum duration is 3 weeks. Information may emerge during the consultation which makes it desirable or even necessary to supplement or re-do a stage of the strategic environmental assessment process. Take into consideration opinions received and the SEA report before the plan or programme is adopted or used as a basis for regulation. See also the adoption of a plan or programme below. Document the opinions and proposals emerging during the preparation of the SEA report and during the consultation and the way in which they have been taken into consideration, as well as any choices made and standpoints taken up and the reasons for them. Documentation should be produced on a continuous basis in the form of written notes. See also chapter 5, particularly section 5.2.5.

Adoption of a plan or programme4

Adopt the plan or programme (chapter 6, section 16 Environmental Code). The SEA report is included as part of the supporting documentation when a decision is made on the plan or programme. In the case of municipal plans or programmes, it is appropriate for a decision on adoption to be made by the municipal council or by the committee which was responsible for drawing up the plan or programme. In the case of plans or programmes drawn up by government agencies, it

4 The adoption of a plan or programme does not really form part of the environmental impact assessment process itself, but it is assumed that it will occur.

22



is appropriate for the decision to be made by the management of the government agency. In certain cases, provisions exist on what body must adopt the plan or programme. Take the SEA report and opinions received into consideration before the plan or programme is adopted or used as a basis for regulation. The persons who took part in the consultation on the plan or programme with the associated SEA report must be informed of whether the plan or programme has been adopted. See also chapter 9.

Reporting in a special synopsis Report certain information in a special synopsis (chapter 6, section 16 Environmental Code) The government agency or municipality which adopted the plan or programme must report certain information in a special synopsis. The following must be reported in the synopsis: ”1. the way in which environmental aspects have been integrated in the plan or programme. 2. the way in which the SEA report and opinions from consultations have been taken into consideration. 3. the reasons for adopting the plan or programme rather than the alternatives considered, and 4. the measures considered for monitoring and supervising the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme entails” (chapter 6, section 16, second paragraph of the Environmental Code). The synopsis must be made available to the persons consulted. See also chapter 10.

Monitoring Monitor the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme entails (chapter 6, section 18 Environmental Code). The government agency or municipality must acquire knowledge of the significant environmental effects that implementation actually entails so that appropriate measures may be adopted to enable any significant environmental effects that was not previously identified to be remedied at an early stage. Use existing supervision programmes and planning cycles and supplement them as required. See also chapter 11.

23



3 General issues This chapter deals with general issues which are important in the strategic environmental assessment process itself but which are not associated with any specific stage of that process. These issues are important for the quality of the strategic environmental assessment and for the ability to achieve the aims of both the strategic environmental assessment and the plan or programme. 3.1 Working methods for good quality A “good quality strategic environmental assessment” means a process which can help achieve the aim of the strategic environmental assessment and the stages included in it and ensure that the rules for strategic environmental assessment are obeyed. Naturally this also applies to screening and monitoring. A checklist from the UNECE guidelines on the protocol on “strategic environmental assessments” is included below. The checklist contains key terms and working methods which are important for ensuring that the process is of good quality (UNECE 2007, page 182). See also section 8.2. The significant environmental effects, both positive and adverse, to which the implementation of a plan or programme can give rise should be identified, described and assessed (chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code). Defining a significant environmental effect and placing it in context requires information, even if the effect in question is not significant. However, the focus should at all times be on the significant environmental effect and the aim of the strategic environmental assessment and the plan or programme. See also sections 4.3.1. and 4.3.2. The UNECE guidelines also state that a good quality process informs plan and programme makers, decision-makers and the public concerned of the significance of strategic decisions for sustainable development. Furthermore, a good quality strategic environmental assessment facilities the search for the best alternative and ensures a democratic decision-making process. This enhances the credibility of decisions and leads to more cost- and time-effective environmental impact assessments at project level (UNECE 2007, page 182). A communication plan for work on the programme and plan can support the democratic process. It can provide support for strategic environmental assessment work in general and consultation work in particular. A communication plan should be drawn up at the introductory stage of the plan or programme. The communication plan should state, among other things, how, to whom and when you intend to communicate the plan or programme and the SEA report. The communication plan should be continually revised to enable new requirements for communication measures to be incorporated and adopted (de Laval 1999).

24



Checklist for a good quality SEA

A good quality strategic environmental assessment process is: Integrated

• Ensures appropriate environmental assessment of all strategic decisions relevant for the achievement of sustainable development.

• Addresses the inter-relationships of biophysical, social and economic aspects. • Is tiered to policies in relevant sectors and regions and, where appropriate, to

project EIAs and decision-making Sustainability-led

• Facilitates identification of development options and alternative proposals that are more sustainable.

Focused

• Provides sufficient, reliable and usable information for development planning and decision-making.

• Concentrates on key issues of sustainable development. • Is customised to the characteristics of the decision-making process. • Is cost- and time-effective.

Accountable

• The government agencies responsible for ensuring that the strategic decision is made are responsible for the strategic environmental assessment.

• Is carried out with professionalism, rigour, fairness, impartiality and strikes a reasonable balance between the various issues and interests.

• Is subject to independent checks and verification. • Documents and justifies how sustainability issues were taken into consideration

in decision-making. Participative

• Informs and involves the interested and affected public, government bodies and municipal authorities throughout the process.

• Explicitly addresses the views and interests of the public and government bodies and municipal authorities in documentation and decision-making.

• Has clear, easily-understood information requirements and ensures satisfactory access to all relevant information.

Is iterative

• Ensures the availability of the results of the various assessments early enough in the environmental assessment process to influence the plan or programme.

• Provides sufficient information on the actual effects that implementing a strategic decision may be considered to have in order to judge whether there is a need to amend the proposed decision.

(Checklist from UNECE 2007, page 182, somewhat modified)

25



The way in which the responsible government agency or municipal authority chooses to work can be of great significance for the final result. It is important to clarify all the conditions at an early stage of the process. Focus initially on the aim of the plan or programme, the problems to be solved or the goals to be achieved. The design of the plan or programme and which alternatives and actions are reasonable should not be established from the beginning. Instead, they should develop during the strategic environmental assessment process. See sections 6.2. and 7.2. The project organisation and cooperation of any kind with managing groups, reference groups, working groups, timetables, budgets and inventories of available supporting material, goals for plan and programme work and other relevant goals, etc. are established in the preparatory work for the plan or programme. It is also important during the preparatory work to inspect the strengths and weaknesses of your organisation in an objective manner. It is important to ask the following questions at the beginning of the process:

• What functions and skills need to be involved in the process and at what stage?

• Is there any need to amend the existing organisation or traditional roles to enable environmental aspects to be effectively integrated in the plan or programme work?

• Do available staff resources need to be supplemented by external skills, either temporarily or permanently?

• How should and how can decision-makers be involved in the process at an early stage and throughout the process?

• How should the strategic environmental assessment be integrated with the plan or programme work itself?

• To what extent should the work be carried out by the organisation’s own staff or by consultants?

The aim of the strategic environmental assessment – to integrate environmental aspects in the plan or programme – requires more integration of plan or programme work with the SEA report than is the case with strategic environmental assessments on activities and measures.

3.2 Working methods leading to poor quality In the same way as certain working methods are important for achieving good quality strategic environmental assessments, some working methods are likely to lead to poor quality assessments. Some examples are given below of how considerable resources can be expended on strategic environmental assessments which are of little or no use or, in the worst case, which are detrimental to planning and to the environment. The following text, which may be considered somewhat provocative but which may also serve as an eye-opener, is from Therivel 2004.

26



Checklist for avoiding a good quality SEA

1. Find out that you need an SEA when the strategic action is almost completed; alternatively “forget” that you need an SEA until then. Decide that none of your staff can do the SEA because they are too busy putting final touches on the strategic action.

2. Hire the cheapest consultant you can find, who happens to live far away and be unfamiliar with the area: justify this by saying that you need ’independent’ assessment of strategic action. Alternatively, get your most junior planner to do the SEA: explain that this will be “a good introduction to our strategic action”.

3. Put the consultant/junior planner into a room with the strategic action and some blank tables on a computer. Give them detailed rules for filling out the tables, eg ”++ is totally different from +?+, and ++/? has a completely different meaning again. When adding the assessment symbols up, subtract 0.5 for each ‘?’ which comes after a ‘+’ but multiply the total of +s by 0.667 where the ‘?’ comes before”. Forget about them for three weeks while you put further finishing touches on the strategic action. Rebuff attempts to involve you or any other member of your team in the SEA process.

4. When the bleary-eyed consultant/planner has filled in all the tables, pay the consultant lots of money. Expect the planner to either quit at the first opportunity (with consequent costs in terms of hiring someone new), ore else press in an annoying manner for changes to the strategic action that simply cannot be accommodated before it is due at the printer’s (wasting their own time and that of the other planners).

5. Print out the SEA tables, wrap them in a handsome cover that says ”SEA report”,

and place this on a prominent shelf. When the strategic action is put out to consultation and people ask where the SEA report is, let them look at the report only at limited and variables times, and provide only the corner of a cramped desk for them to do so

(Therivel 2004 s. 190-191)

3.3 Other parties’ participation in the process There are a number of different parties who must or should be involved in the entire process, from screening to follow-up. The government agency or municipal authority that draws up or amends the plan or programme always has the final responsibility for the various stages of the strategic environmental assessment, including screening and follow-up (chapter 6, section 11 Environmental Code). Nevertheless, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency has special responsibility in cases where it may be considered that a significant environmental effect will occur in “another country” and it is necessary to consult the State or States involved (section 9 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). See also section 5.2.6.

27



The government agency or municipal authority that draws up or amends the plan or programme may obtain advice, support and opinions from other government agencies and municipal authorities and also from a range of organisations and the public. In the main, it is most appropriate for this to take place through the various consultations to be held. See also chapter 5 below. Different government agencies have different roles in the process, depending on their areas of responsibility and the type of plan or programme on which a strategic environmental assessment is to be carried out. For example, the county administrative board has special responsibility for collecting research studies, programmes and other supporting materials for planning kept at State agencies which are important for management of land and water in the county. The county administrative board will also provide guidance and, when so required, will supply existing materials for municipal plans which can serve as a basis when an SEA report is drawn up and at other stages in the process (chapter 6, section 20 Environmental Code). Other government agencies which must also apply the provisions of the Environmental Code must ensure that support materials for planning which are important for management land and water, for example, are available (chapter 6, section 19 Environmental Code). See also section 8.5.2.

When carrying out SEAs on plans and programmes, it is more important and more natural to involve decision-makers at an early stage in the process than when drawing up EIAs for projects. This is because strategic environmental assessments normally deal with more wide-ranging targets and visions, i.e. more strategic issues and issues associated with politics. There may, on the other hand, be less need for and less access to help from external consultants than in the case of EIAs on projects. Environmental impact assessments on projects often deal with specific, complicated technical issues, whereas SEAs of plans and programmes are of a more wide-ranging, complex nature. If consultants are involved in the strategic environmental assessment, it is important that they should also participate in working groups in ordinary planning work to ensure that their work is integrated with the government agency or municipal authority’s work on the plan or programme and the remaining work within the framework of the strategic environmental assessment.

3.4 Integration of the planning process and the

SEA The work on the strategic environmental assessment must be integrated with the work on the plan or programme to enable environmental aspects to be integrated in the plan or programme so as to promote sustainable development. Integration of the strategic environmental assessment process with the plan or programme work therefore forms the basis to enable the aim of the strategic environmental assessment itself to be achieved (chapter 6, section 11 Environmental Code). Integration can take slightly different forms depending on the plan or programme in question.

Effective, close cooperation in the work on the plan or programme and the work on the strategic environmental assessment means that the design of the plan or

28



programme is continually amended on the basis of new knowledge emerging during the strategic environmental assessment process. In the same way, amendments to the plan or programme should affect the contents, scope and level of detail of the SEA report. It is considerably more difficult to make amendments to a plan or programme if environmental issues are taken into consideration at the end of the plan or programme process. Those responsible for the plan or programme, who have expended a great deal of time and trouble on its preparation, may then consider that in principle everything is complete, as least as far as the strategic choices are concerned, and may therefore be unwilling to make any changes other than the merely cosmetic. Nevertheless, close integration also involves certain risks. If environmental issues and the people representing them occupy a weak position in the organisation, close integration means that there is a greater risk of the environmental issues “disappearing in the processing” and not being ascribed their due importance in the design of the plan or programme. Objectivity, external inspection and responsibility issues are issues that risk being treated unfairly. Awareness of this and good documentation of, e.g., meetings, decisions and reservations on decisions are important tools in ensuring that environmental issues are ascribed their due importance when drawing up plans and programmes on which a strategic environmental assessment is to be carried out.

The integration of the work on strategic environmental assessment with the plan or programme work should be characterised by the following features, among others:

• A coherent, combined process for the work on strategic environmental assessment and the plan or programme work.

• Management of the coherent process which makes strikes a balance between the aim of the plan or programme and the aim of the strategic environmental assessment.

• Close cooperation among the various parties involved throughout the process. See also section 3.3. This means, for example, that planners and environmental experts should go through material together and meet, discuss and listen to different proposals in an unbiased manner, regardless of who puts forward the proposal.

• A process with continuous feedback between the development of alternatives in the work on the plan or programme and the assessment of the environmental effects of those alternatives within the framework of the preparation of the SEA report.

• The SEA report and the proposed plan or programme are developed in an integrated way throughout the process, which means that they are ready for consultation at the same time. Consultation on the SEA report is coordinated with consultation on the plan or programme.

• Effective consultation in which views and ideas are used or responded to. The processing of views and ideas is accurately documented. See also chapter 5.

• A gradual decision-making process with many small and some large decisions on different choices and approvals throughout the process.

29



• The entire process is continually documented so it can be reported in the SEA report and the special synopsis. The special synopsis should report on matters such as how environmental aspects have been integrated in the plan or programme (chapter 6, section 16 Environmental Code). See also chapters 8 and 10.

• Continual documentation and regular information, particularly with regard to all decisive choices and approvals. This contributes to an effective iterative process with rapid feedback between the work on the SEA report and the plan or programme. Such documentation and information is also necessary to make the process transparent, open and easy to participate in for the public and the various interest groups.

The above applies regardless of whether or not there is a formal plan or programme process. If there is no clear plan or programme process, a strategic environmental assessment may serve as a support for such a process. In the case of detailed plans, for example, the plan should be founded on a “programme” which sets out the starting points and targets, unless such is considered unnecessary (chapter 5, section 18, first paragraph of the Act on Planning and Building).

Figure 2 illustrates how the planning and strategic environmental assessment processes follow each other and interact. Note the links between the plan or programme process and the strategic environmental assessment process, particularly the part dealing with the generation of alternatives for the plan or programme and the definition of the scope of the strategic environmental assessment report. Ideas and proposals are tested in this part. Some are rejected whereas others are developed in a recurring iterative process. The number of alternatives gradually falls and the remaining alternatives become clearer and are also researched and surveyed in more detail. Finally, the planning work and the work on the SEA report has progressed to a point where it is possible to formulate one or more alternatives as plan or programme proposals with an accompanying SEA report. See also chapters 7 and 8.

The starting point for the plan or programme work may vary. It may be a question of a problem which has been identified and which needs to be solved. It may also be a question of a vision or a goal that the government agency or municipal authority wishes to realise or achieve. Sometimes it forms part of the regular work of the government agency or municipal authority. In some cases, the work is initiated by trade and industry or other interest groups. See also section 7.4. Regardless of whether or not there is a formal plan or programme process, in practice the work begins by researching the conditions and compiling supporting material. That applies to both the plan and programme work and the strategic environmental assess-ment, which should already be integrated at this stage. Planning is often creative and visionary in the earlier stages. The strategic environmental assessment itself is preceded by screening which can contribute important supporting material for later stages of the strategic environmental assessment process, particularly if screening is

30



carried out pursuant to appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. See also section 4.5.

31



3.5 Coordination between different impact

assessments It is often appropriate to coordinate the work on a strategic environmental assessment, in terms of both time and contents, with work on any other impact assessments such as, for example, those referred to in section 1.25. A strategic environmental assessment and other types of impact assessment are sometimes required for certain plans and programmes. This applies, for example, when drawing up a programme of actions in accordance with chapter 5 of the Environmental Code in order to comply with environmental quality standards. As a rule, both an impact assessment in accordance with chapter 5 of the Environmental Code and a SEA in accordance with chapter 6 of the Environmental Code are required (Government Bill 2003/2004:116, pages 28–33). Detailed plans which mean that the plan area can be requisitioned for certain activities listed in chapter 5, section 18 of the Act on Planning and Building are subject to a requirement for both a SEA and an EIA if their implementation may be considered to give rise to significant environmental effects. For more information on this and the connection between plans of the Act on Planning and Building Act, planning instruments and assessments for permits to carry out activities under the Environmental Code see the manual of the Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning entitled “Miljöbedömningar för planer och program enligt plan- och bygglagen” [Strategic environmental assessments for plans and programmes under the Act on Planning and Building] (National Board of Housing, Building and Planning 2006, pages 37–40). Government agencies and municipal authorities must endeavour to coordinate work on EIAs and SEAs (Chapter 6, section 22 Environmental Code; Government Bill 2003/2004:116, pages 28–29, 33, 61). The general guidelines state that “Supporting material produced during the strategic environmental assessment of a plan or programme should also be used, where appropriate, in the work on the environmental impact assessment for an activity or measure within the area covered by the plan or programme. In the same way, supporting data produced in connection with an environmental impact assessment for an activity or measure should be used in the strategic environmental assessment for a plan or programme when the plan or programme includes that activity or measure.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

5 For a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of coordinating other impact assessments with a strategic environmental assessment, see, for example, Therivel 2004, pages 61–68.

32



Particular points to consider during the process • Begin the SEA process and the work on the SEA report as early as possible, in other

words as soon as the work on the plan or programme begins. • As far as possible, clarify the conditions for the work on the strategic environmental

assessment and the plan or programme at an early stage in the process. • Integrate the work on the strategic environmental assessment with the preparation of

the plan or programme using a clearly-defined process so that the design of the plan or programme can be modified during the plan or programme process.

• Focus on the aim of the strategic environmental assessment and the aim of the plan or programme throughout the process.

• Focus the work on the strategic environmental assessment on the significant positive and adverse environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to bring about.

• Ensure that the work is carried out by a working group containing both planning and environmental skills as well as other skills and experience which are relevant to the plan or programme to be drawn up or amended.

• First make use of existing knowledge and experience in society, but supplement this with new knowledge as required.

• Create an open, cooperative process with the aid of effective consultation. A communication plan can facilitate such a process.

• Begin developing and assessing reasonable alternatives at an early stage to form a possible basis for strategic decisions, actions and solutions which can help to achieve the aim of both the plan or programme and the strategic environmental assessment. Present and describe them in such a way as to make the differences clear.

• Create a process involving continuous feedback between the development of alternatives in the work on the plan or programme and the assessment of the environmental effects of those alternatives within the framework of the preparation of the SEA report.

• Coordinate work on the strategic environmental assessment with work on any other impact assessments.

• If possible, make use of knowledge and conclusions from previous stages in the process. For example, make use of the results from screening when defining the scope of the SEA report and the results from the work on defining the scope in the preparation of the SEA report.

• Ensure that ample opportunity is given and a reasonable length of time is allowed for submitting views during consultations.

• Continuously document the strategic environmental assessment process and the way in which views and proposals submitted during the drafting of the SEA report and the consultations have been taken into consideration and the way in which environmental aspects have been integrated into the plan or programme.

• Be constantly prepared to re-do or supplement stages already completed and to reassess previous standpoints.

• Continuously document the choices made and the standpoints adopted and the reasons for them.

• Continuously document the way in which assessments are carried out, the methods and tools used, the assumptions made and the way in which uncertainties are assessed and dealt with.

• As far as possible use the terminology of the Environmental Code to facilitate communication and avoid uncertainties during consultations.

• Be careful to comply with the provisions contained in chapter 6 of the Environmental Code and the Ordinance (1998:905) on EISs and SEA reports.

33



4 Screening This chapter deals with how you decide whether a strategic environmental assessment is required. The concept of screening is used for the process for deciding whether or not a strategic environmental assessment should be carried out on a plan or programme. For information regarding consultations on screening, see section 5.2.3.

4.1 Basic criteria and exceptions All plans and programmes which are being considered for strategic environmental assessment must first be screened. There are three basic criteria, all of which must always be fulfilled in order for a strategic environmental assessment to be required (chapter 6, section 11 of the Environmental Code):

1. The plan or programme must be drawn up or amended by a government

agency or municipal authority. 2. The plan or programme must be required in a law or another statute6. 3. It must be possible to consider that the implementation of the plan,

programme or amendment will bring about significant environmental effects.

The first stage in screening is to decide whether the first two basic criteria have been fulfilled and whether the plan or programme is included in any of the exceptions for which a strategic environmental assessment is never required. Plans and programmes drawn up by organisations other than municipal authorities and government agencies do not require strategic environmental assessment. Plans or programmes drawn up voluntarily by government agencies or municipal authorities also do not require strategic environmental assessment. Furthermore, plans and programmes which relate only to Swedish national defence or rescue services are exempt from the requirement for strategic environmental assessment, along with financial plans, budget plans and budget programmes (section 7 of the Ordinance [1998:905] on EISs and SEA reports]).

At the second stage, a decision is made as to whether the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may bring about significant environmental effects. This must be decided either with or without taking into consideration the criteria set out in appendix 4 to the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. See also sections 4.4. and 4.5. The effect brought about by the plan, programme or amendment must be compared with the so-called zero alternative. See also sections 4.3.1., 7.5.2. and 7.5.3. Documents which fulfil all the criteria for plans and programmes set out in the Environmental Code and the Directive may be referred to in a number of other ways. A document does not need to be referred to as a plan or programme in order to be subject to the rules. A designation as being of national interest is a document of the

6 The term “statute” also refers to ordinances and regulations issued by government agencies.

34



type which, in the opinion of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, should be screened even if the document is not referred to as a plan or programme. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines on strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes state that, “During this assessment [screening], documents other than those referred to as plans and programmes should also be covered by the rules for strategic environmental assessment” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009, European Commission 2004, pages 5–6). See also section 1.1 above. In the opinion of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, plans and programmes that a government agency is obliged to draw up only if certain conditions have been fulfilled are covered by the requirement for strategic environmental assessment as soon as the remaining conditions for strategic environmental assessment have been fulfilled. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “A screening [...] should be carried out as soon as possible based on the work on the plan or programme. It should take place no later than during consultation on the definition of the scope or at least prior to consultation on the plan or programme. […] Even though screening showed that no strategic environmental assessment is required, the screening should be repeated in certain cases. It may, for example, be appropriate when new knowledge has been acquired which is of significance for an assessment as to whether the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to bring about significant environmental effects.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines also state that, “The strategic environmental assessment of a plan or programme should begin as soon as screening is complete if the conclusion of the screening is that the plan or programme may be considered to bring about a significant environmental effect.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) It may be valuable for environmental and democratic reasons, among others, to also carry out strategic environmental assessments on plans and programmes for which no such assessment is required in a law or other statute. The government has stated that it is important that “assessments of environmental impacts are systematically taken into account in the political process at an early stage”. According to the government, this should include not only work on plans and programmes, but also on policy in important sectors of society. The government also writes that, “Descriptions of environmental impacts must, as a general rule, be included in government bills and other proposals for overall decisions of a strategic nature.” (Government Bill 1997/98:45, page 299)

35



Sweden has also ratified the protocol on “Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context”7. Article 13 of that protocol states that, “Each party shall endeavour to ensure that environmental, including health, concerns are considered and integrated to the extent appropriate in the preparation of its proposals for policies and legislation that are likely to have significant effects on the environment, including health (UNECE 2003 article 13). 4.2 Plans and programmes which fulfil the first

two basic criteria Table 1 below shows examples of plans and programmes drawn up or amended by a government agency or municipal authority which are required in a law or other statute and which are not included in the exemptions. They therefore fulfil the first two basic criteria for strategic environmental assessment. The table divides the plans and programmes into two groups. Group 2 includes plans, programmes and amendments for which a decision must be made as to whether their implementation can be considered to bring about significant environmental effects in accordance with the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. Group 1 includes all other plans, programmes and amendments which fulfil the two basic criteria. A strategic environmental assessment must be carried out on them if they state the conditions for future permits for activities or measures contemplated in section 3 or appendix 3 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. It should be noted that all plans, programmes and amendments which may be considered to include activities or measures which may “have a significant effect on the environment” in a Natura 2000 area require a permit. Such plans and programmes must automatically be considered to entail significant environmental effects and a strategic environmental assessment must therefore be carried out on them (Chapter 7, section 28a Environmental Code; section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

7 The Convention was ratified by Sweden in 1992 and entered into force in 1997. The Protocol was ratified by Sweden on 30 March 2006 and was passed by the EU on 12 November 2008. However, it has not yet entered into force (21/01/2010).

36



Table 1. Plans and programmes on which a strategic environmental assessment must be carried out if their implementation may be considered to bring about significant environmental effects8

Group 1 Strategic environmental assessments must be carried out on plans and programmes and amendments to those plans and programmes if they state the conditions for future permits for the activities and measures contemplated in section 3 or appendix 3 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports.

Group 2 Plans and programmes whose implementation or amendment must be screened pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on on EISs and SEA reports18).

A strategic environmental assessment is, in principle, always required for the plans and programmes listed below. Municipal waste plans1)

Municipal energy plans2)

County transport plans3)

Action programmes4)

Municipal comprehensive physical plans 5)

National plan for transport infrastructure6) EU structural fund programmes 7)

A strategic environmental assessment may be required for the plans and programmes listed below. Contingency plans based on the Epizootic Diseases Ordinance8)

Housing support programmes9)

Plans of action for emergency services10)

Rural area programmes11)

Plans to combat wild oats12)

Programmes for detailed development plans13)

Regional development programmes14)

Management plans for national parks and natural and cultural reservations15)

Traffic support plans16)

Designations as being of national interest17)

Other plans and programmes in the sectors and areas listed in section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports.

Detailed development plans19) (section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). Plans and programmes subject to a requirement for strategic environmental assessment in accordance with section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports (group 1 in this table), when their use only relates to small areas at local level or minor amendments (section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). Plans and programmes belonging in group 1 but which do not state the conditions for future permits for the activities and measures contemplated in section 3 or appendix 3 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, though they do state the conditions for future permits for other activities and measures that may have an impact on the environment (section 5 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). Other plans and programmes which state the conditions for other activities and measures that may have an impact on the environment (section 5 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

References to statutes containing requirements relating to the preparation of the plans and programmes referred to above:

1) Chapter 15 of the Environmental Code (1998:808). 2) Act (1997:439) on municipal energy planning. 3) Ordinance (1997:263) on county plans for regional infrastructure. 4) Chapter 5 of the Environmental Code (1998:808). 5) Chapter 4 of the Act (1987:10) on Planning and Building. 6) Ordinance (2009:236) on a national plan for transport infrastructure. 7) Ordinance (2007:14) on management of EU structural funds, Swedish Government Decision 29/06/2006. EU Regulations 1080/2006 and 1083/2006. 8) Ordinance (1999:659) on Epizootic Diseases. 9) Act (2000:1383) on the municipalities’ responsibilities for housing maintenance. 10) Act (2003:778) on protection against accidents9. 11) Ordinance (2007:481) on support for rural development measures. 12) Act (1970:299) on protection against wild oats. 13) Chapter 5, section 18 of the Act (1987:10) on Planning and Building. 14) Ordinance (2007:713) on regional growth work. 15) The National Parks Ordinance (1987:938) and Ordinance (1998:1252) on protection of areas under the Environmental Code, etc. 16) Act (1997:734) on responsibility for some public passenger transport.

8 This table is not a complete list of all plans and programmes which are required in accordance with a law or other statute and which are drawn up by a municipal authority or government agency. However, all such plans and programmes should be screened and possibly made subject to a strategic environmental assessment unless they are included in any assessment (see section 4.1). 9 These programmes are not considered to be included in the exempt plans and programmes in accordance with section 7 of the EIA Ordinance (Preamble to Ordinance 2005:2, page 31).

37



17) Ordinance (1998:896) on Land and Water Management, etc.10. 18) The criteria set out in appendix 2 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports must also be applied to detailed development plans which make possible the purposes listed in chapter 5, section 18 of the Act on Planning and Building (section 12 of the Ordinance [1987:383] on Planning and Building. National Board of Housing, Building and Planning 2006, pages 53–57). 19) Chapter 5 of the Act (1987:10) on Planning and Building.

For plans, programmes or amendments fulfilling the first two criteria, there are four different types of cases when the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects. In these cases, a strategic environmental assessment must be carried out unless any of the plans and programmes are included in the exceptions contemplated in section 7 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. In the following four cases, a strategic environmental assessment must be carried out.

1. If the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to include an activity or measure which requires a permit in accordance with chapter 7, section 28a Environmental Code (Natura 2000 areas) (section 4, first paragraph, item 1 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). See also section 4.4.

2. If the plan, programme or amendment states the conditions for future permits for the activities or measures contemplated in section 3 or appendix 3 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports and relates to the sectors or areas11 contemplated in section 4, first paragraph, item2 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. See also section 4.4 below. If it is a question of small areas at local level, see point 3 below.

3. If the conditions are the same as those contemplated in section 2 above, but they only relate to small areas at local level or minor amendments, screening will be carried out pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. If, during this screening, it is found that implementation may be considered to entail significant environmental effects, a strategic environmental assessment must be carried out. Detailed development plans are always considered to cover small areas at local level (section 4, second paragraph of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). See also sections 4.3.6. and 4.5 below.

4. If the plan, programme or amendment in question states the conditions for future permits for activities or measures which may affect the environment and the government agency or municipal authority, taking into account the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, finds that implementation may be considered to entail

10 The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency considers that an indication of being of national interest is to be regarded as a plan or programme within the meaning of the Act and should therefore be made subject to a strategic environmental assessment. See also sections 1.1. and 4.1. 11 The sectors and areas contemplated are set out in the upper panel in figure 3.

38



significant environmental effects (section 5 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). See also sections 4.3.7. and 4.5 below.

Figure 3 shows a flow chart for assessing whether the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects. Cases 2–4 above have been marked with their respective numbers in the figure. See also the concept of significant environmental effects in section 4.3.1.

39



4.3 Important concepts and aspects involved in

screening 4.3.1 Significant environmental effects This, as stated above, is only for plans and programmes or amendments of plans and programmes whose implementation may be considered to give rise to “significant environmental effects” as required in a strategic environmental assessment. Nevertheless, neither legislation nor preparatory materials unequivocally define how large the effect must be in order to be considered significant. See also section 4.3.2. The legislator has probably avoided attempting to do this because whether or not the environmental effect is significant depends both on the extent of the strain and the extent to which the biotopes, species, cultural heritage, landscapes, etc. exposed to the strain are sensitive and worthy of protection. Therefore, it is generally not possible to state, for example, how large an emission of a certain pollutant or how extensive land exploitation must be in order for it to be considered that it gives rise to a significant environmental effect. The assessment must be place- and situation-specific as far as effects of this type are concerned. It is therefore best if an assessment is carried out on a case-by-case basis by persons with extensive knowledge of what may be considered to be affected during the implementation of a plan or programme. Nevertheless, it is possible to obtain some guidance from legislation and experience from the county administrative board’s assessments of significant environmental effects when preparing EIAs on activities and measures. The county administrative board assesses what constitute significant environmental effects when it decides on the size of the circle of parties to be consulted and the scope of the environmental impact statement. Municipal authorities which carry out screening in accordance with the criteria set out in appendix 4 must consult the county administrative board on the need for a SEA, whereupon the county administrative board’s experience of assessments of significant environmental effects when preparing environmental impact assessments can be used. Plans and programmes which belong to certain sectors and areas and which state the conditions for future permits for the activities and measures contemplated in section 3 or appendix 3 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports will always be considered to entail significant environmental effects (section 4, first paragraph of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). This provides a certain understanding of the type and size of the effects in question. Furthermore, other advisory materials in the form of, for example, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency manuals provide guidance on the issue of significant environmental effects. See also section 8.5.2. In the event of any uncertainty as to whether the implementation or amendment of a plan or programme may be considered to give rise to significant environmental

40



effects, one should firstly attempt to reduce the degree of uncertainty by obtaining more information on possible effects, etc. If any uncertainty remains, it is appropriate to carry out or at least begin the work on a strategic environmental assessment (European Commission 2004, page 15). See also section 4.3.4. When assessing significant environmental effects, the focus is on the difference between the environmental effects brought about by the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment and the environmental effects which will occur if the plan, programme or amendment is not implemented. The effect of the plan, programme or amendment must be compared with the so-called zero alternative. It is naturally also important to carry out comparisons with current environmental effects to ensure that we are approaching the environmental objective and that environmental effects are decreasing in absolute terms and not just in relative terms. See also section 7.5. 4.3.2 Positive and adverse significant environmental effects When assessing whether an effect is so great that it may be considered to be significant, one should take into consideration the environmental effect in absolute terms, i.e. both the positive and the adverse effects. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “positive and adverse environmental effects should not be offset against each other” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009). Based on the provisions and preparatory materials, it is not completely clear whether positive environmental effects are to be taken into consideration in screening carried out in accordance with the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports or whether only adverse environmental effects are to be taken into consideration. Nevertheless, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency is of the opinion that positive environmental effects must also be taken into consideration in screening. Nevertheless, the preparatory materials to the Swedish provisions clearly state that both positive and adverse significant environmental effects must be included in the work on SEA reports and during monitoring (Government Bill 2003/2004:116 pages 65, 68; European Commission 2004 pages 28–30, 44). The European Commission guidelines on the implementation of the Directive support the opinion of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency that both positive and adverse significant environmental effects must be taken into consideration during screening. Page 20 states that when it is necessary to decide, in accordance with the criteria introduced by Sweden in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, whether the implementation of a plan or programme may be considered to entail significant environmental effects “the objects of those effects should be included in the screening”. The objects referred to are listed in chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 Environmental Code. Furthermore, assessment of the effects in accordance with the European Commission includes secondary, cumulative, synergistic, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects in the short, medium and long-term (European Commission 2004, pages 18–19).

41



The fact that nowhere does it say that positive environmental effects must not be taken into consideration in screening also supports the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s interpretation. It would be natural to state that the concept has another, more restricted meaning when it comes to screening if that were actually the case. Even the fact that programmes of measures whose main aim is to improve the environment are included in the group of plans and programmes for which, in principle, strategic environmental assessments must always be carried out supports this interpretation (see table 1). Overall, the opinion of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency is that the arguments in favour of taking the positive environmental effects into consideration during screening are stronger than those against. Therefore, strategic environmental assessments should even be carried out on plans and programmes whose environmental effects are only considered to be positive from an environmental point of view if their effects are significant.

There will probably be relatively few plans and programmes for which strategic environmental assessments must be carried out solely on the grounds of their significant positive environmental effects. Activities or measures which bring about a positive environmental effect on the basis of a particular environmental aspect can often have an adverse effect in terms of another environmental aspect. Within the framework of a programme of measures it is possible, for example, to suggest rerouting traffic by building a new road in order to reduce the content of air pollutants in a densely populated area. This can help reduce the concentration of air pollutants in the densely populated area, but at the same time it can lead to adverse environmental effects in the form of exploitation of land. The greater accessibility provided by a new road can also lead to an increased traffic, so-called induced traffic, and to an overall increase in emissions of air pollutants (Ewing & Lichtenstein 2002). Conflicts of objectives, between environmental objectives and between environmental objectives and other social objectives, are relatively common (Wandén 2007). One example of the latter situation is when an objective relating to regional enlargement leads to an increase in transport which in turn leads to higher emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants by the transport sector, among other things. In this context, one should also take into account the aim of strategic environmental assessments: “to integrate environmental aspects into the plan or programme so as to promote sustainable development” (chapter 6, section 11 Environmental Code). The current rate of development is scarcely sustainable and 9 of the 16 environmental quality objectives established by the Swedish Parliament are judged to be extremely difficult to achieve within the prescribed time-frame even if further measures are implemented (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2008, chapter 5). It is therefore not enough to prevent the occurrence of an adverse environmental effect as a consequence of the implementation of new plans and programmes; it is also necessary to plan and implement improvements in the current conditions in the environment. It is therefore important to avoid any adverse environmental effects from plans and programmes and ensure that the plan and programme can help to actually improve the

42



situation in the environment. It is therefore valuable from an environmental point of view if strategic environmental assessments were carried out on all plans and programmes whose implementation may be considered to have significant effects on the environment regardless of whether their effects are positive, adverse or both positive and adverse. 4.3.3 Conditions for future permits An assessment as to whether the plan, programme or amendment states “the conditions for future permits” must be made in screening both with and without taking into consideration the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports (sections 4-5 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). See also sections 4.4. and 4.5. To “state the conditions for future permits” means that the plan or programme in some way restricts the scope of future permits for activities. The plan or programme establishes criteria for conditions which provide guidance for the government agency responsible for granting permits when it must subsequently make a decision on a permit. A plan or programme can, for example, establish restrictions on the development permitted within a certain area or establish criteria establishing what development may take place. The restrictions do not need to be binding in order for it to be considered that they state the conditions for future permits. Even firm guidelines can be considered to establish frameworks for future permits. The function of the plan or programme is to manage the possibilities for obtaining future permits which are significant in this context (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 37). The concept of permit should not be interpreted narrowly in this context. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s general guidelines on SEAs state that, “The term permit should include all permits, regardless of the level at which the permit requirement was prescribed, e.g. permits prescribed by the municipal authority pursuant to chapter 9 Environmental Code are also included. The term “permit” should also include building permits, land permits and dispensations i.e. documents equivalent to permits even though they do not contain the word ‘permit’.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

4.3.4 Discontinuing a strategic environmental assessment It can be difficult to ascertain at an early stage what activities and measures will be affected by a plan or programme and whether the plan or the programme will state the conditions for future permits for any of those activities or measures. In the case of, for example, the preparation of a programme of measures against air pollutants in accordance with chapter 5 Environmental Code, the final choice of measure may be made relatively late in the process. If that is the case, one must also attempt to carry out an assessment to ascertain which activities and measures this may apply to and what is the probability of their being carried out. Even in cases of screening pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 to the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports it can be difficult to decide whether the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment

43



can be considered to entail significant environmental effects. It may, for example, become apparent at a later stage that a factor which formed the basis for a decision that a strategic environmental assessment was required is no longer relevant. In cases of uncertainty as to whether a strategic environmental assessment is required, as a rule it is better to begin the work on a strategic environmental assessment at an early stage and discontinue it if it later becomes apparent that a strategic environmental assessment is not required, rather than the other way round. To discover that a strategic environmental assessment is required at a late stage can mean both increased costs and delay in the plan or programme if it proves necessary to re-do a stage in the process to enable the strategic environmental assessment to be integrated in the plan or programme work. According to the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines, it should be possible to discontinue a strategic environmental assessment, “if the circumstances have changed or new knowledge has been acquired which is of significance for an assessment as to whether the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects. Consultation on screening should be carried out before a strategic environmental assessment is discontinued. If a strategic environmental assessment is discontinued, the municipal authority or the government agency in question should inform the persons who took part in any earlier consultation and publish the decision at least on the municipal authority or government agency’s website and notice board.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) The introduction of protection measures is not in itself sufficient reason for discontinuing a strategic environmental assessment. The foregoing applies to both plans and programmes screened pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports and those that can be screened without taking appendix 4 into consideration. Nevertheless, please note that for the latter category of plans, programmes or amendments it is necessary, if they “state the conditions for future permits for activities or measures which may affect the environment”, to first carry out screening pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports before discounting the possibility that a strategic environmental assessment may be required (section 5 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

4.3.5 Amendment of a plan or programme As stated above, the requirement for strategic environmental assessment applies not only to new plans and programmes but also to amendments to existing plans and programmes, provided that the three basic criteria for strategic environmental assessment have been fulfilled and no exception is applicable (see section 4.1). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “If part of a plan or programme is amended and that amendment means that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to give rise to significant environmental

44



effects, a strategic environmental assessment should be carried out on the part or parts of the plan or programme which are directly or indirectly affected by the amendment. If large parts of the plan or programme or parts which are significant for the entire plan or programme are affected by the amendment, a strategic environmental assessment should be carried out on the entire plan or programme. The amendments accumulated over time should be taken into consideration if the plan or programme is amended on more than one occasion.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) Status reports which do not involve any amendment of the plan or programme do not give rise to any requirement for strategic environmental assessment. Nevertheless, amendments, like plans and programmes, must always be screened, unless they consist of an amendment to a plan or programme which is exempt and will never be made subject to strategic environmental assessment. For minor amendments to plans and programmes, see also section 4.3.6 below. 4.3.6 Small areas at local level and minor amendments Section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports clearly states that screening will be carried out pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the said Ordinance for plans and programmes which are contemplated in the first paragraph of section 4 but which only involve small areas at local level or minor amendments. A strategic environmental assessment is only required if such screening shows that the implementation of the plan or programme or amendments may be considered to give rise significant environmental effects. The meaning of “small areas at local level” and “minor amendments” is not unequivocally stated in the statute or preparatory materials. The European Commission guidelines on the implementation of the Directive state that, “The meaning of ‘small’ in the phrase ‘small areas at local level’ must be defined so as to take account of the differences between Member States and it will probably be necessary to decide it case by case.” Furthermore, the Commission writes that, “The kind of plan or programme envisaged might be a building plan which, for a particular, limited area, outlines details of how buildings must be constructed, determining, for example, their height, width or design.” In the preamble to the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, the government writes that “It is considered that, due to the design of detailed development plans, it is already practically unmanageable to allow detailed development plan areas to extend over large acreages. In view of the requirements and exceptions contained in the Directive, detailed development plans may generally be considered to relate to the use of small areas at local level”. (European Commission 2004, page 12; Preamble to Ordinance 2005:2, pages 18, 32) An amendment which affects a large part of the area or several of the areas included in the plan or programme may hardly be regarded as a minor amendment. Neither may an amendment which affects parts which are of central importance for the plan or programme be regarded as a minor amendment even, for example, it affects a smaller

45



part of the geographical scope of the plan. Nevertheless, the most important factor is not the size of the area covered by a plan or programme or the size of the amendment, but whether or not there is a risk of significant environmental effects. If implementation is judged to entail significant environmental effects, a strategic environmental assessment should be carried out even if it only applies to a small area and regardless of the extent of the amendment (European Commission 2004 page 13, Preamble to Ordinance 2005:2 page 32). See also section 4.3.5 above. The European Court of Justice found that Ireland had not implemented the EU’s EIA Directive correctly in its legislation when Irish legislation for certain projects used only a size limit as a criterion for what was considered as a significant environmental effect, without taking into consideration the nature and location of the effect. Even small projects can bring about significant environmental effects if other criteria such as the sensitivity of the environment in question are also taken into consideration (European Court of Justice 1999). 4.3.7 May affect the environment The concept of “may affect the environment” must reasonably be given a much wider interpretation than “significant environmental effects” because a decision as to whether the effect is significant will be made in a possible next step (section 5 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). Furthermore, the concept contains the word “may”, which should be interpreted in such a way as to include even uncertain effects. At the same time, there is no term which establishes how small the effect needs to be in order to trigger the requirement for screening pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “Activities or measures which may affect the environment should be considered to mean all activities and measures that may give rise to environmental effects, even insignificant environmental effects.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) 4.3.8 Definition of geographical scope when screening The description of the significant environmental effects that the implementation of a plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail should include all significant environmental effects and should not be limited to the geographical scope of the plan or programme. Neither do any such restrictions apply during screening. On the contrary, an assessment must also be carried out as to whether implementation may be considered to entail significant environmental effects in other countries. If that is the case, the Strategic Environmental Assessment report should naturally also include the significant environmental effects in the countries affected (chapter 6, section 15 of the Environmental Code). Consequently, when assessing which activities and measures state the conditions for future permits, you should also take into consideration activities and measures located outside the geographical scope of the plan. This means, for example, that for a waste plan whereby waste is transported from one municipality to another for burning which

46



states the conditions for a future permit for an existing or new facility, the requirement for strategic environmental assessment is thus fulfilled. See also the Preamble to Ordinance 2005:2, page 22. Significant environmental effects and the requirement for strategic environmental assessment can also arise as a consequence of activities or measures located outside the plan or programme area. If, for example, as part of a municipal structure plan, there are plans to build a housing area in a district where the people living in the planned housing areas will be exposed to noise or disturbance of other kinds which already exists at the planning stage, the implementation of such a plan may give rise to significant environmental effects even if the reason for the disturbance is located outside the area of the plan. The source of the significant environmental effect may also be located outside municipal boundaries. See also section 4.5.2, criterion 2e on “the size and physical scope of the effect”. 4.4 Screening without appendix 4 As section 4.2 clearly states, in many cases it is possible to verify that implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to give rise to significant environmental effects without taking into consideration the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports (section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; figure 3, section 4.2, table 1 group 1). This applies to the types of cases included in sections 1 and 2 in section 4.2 above. In figure 3, case 2 has been marked as number 2. In these two cases, the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment will automatically be assumed to give rise to significant environmental effects. If you can verify that the preparation or amendment of the plan or programme in question is not included in cases 1 or 2, you should continue screening and investigate whether cases 3 or case 4 in section 4.2 may apply. They are marked as number 3 and number 4 in figure 3. See also section 4.5 below. As shown in table 1 above, group 1 contains a number of plans and programmes for which a strategic environmental assessment is in principle always required. These plans and programmes almost always state the conditions for future permits for activities or measures contemplated in section 3 or appendix 3 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. The first five plans and programmes in the list for which a strategic environmental assessment is in principle always required are referred to specifically by the government in section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports.

4.5 Screening with appendix 4 4.5.1 Plans, programmes and conditions affected For certain plans and programmes, stage two of the screening (when a decision is made as to whether the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be

47



considered to entail significant environmental effects) will be carried out pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports (sections 4–5 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; see also figure 3 in section 4.2, table 1 group 2 above). Screening pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance (1998:905) on EISs and SEA reports will apply to the following plans and programmes, unless any exception applies: 1. Plans and programmes subject to the requirement for strategic environmental

assessment in accordance with section 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports when their use only relates to small areas at local level or minor amendments (section 4, second paragraph Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; see also sections 4.3.5 and 4.3.6 above).

2. Plans, programmes and amendments which state the conditions for future permits

for activities or measures which may affect the environment. This includes plans, programmes and amendments included in the sectors and areas listed in section 4, first paragraph, item 2 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports but which do not state the conditions for the activities and measures contemplated in section 3 or appendix 3 of the aforesaid Ordinance (group 1 table 1). All other plans and programmes which are not exempt but which may affect the environment and which are drawn up or amended by a government agency or a municipal authority and which are required in law or a statute are also included (section 5 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; see section 4.3.7 above).

Detailed development plans are the most common type of plan or programme which in principle should always be screened pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports (section 4, second paragraph of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). Detailed development plans are considered to relate to small areas at local level and almost always state the conditions for future permits for the activities and measures contemplated in section 3 or appendix 3 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports or for activities or measures which may affect the environment12 (see 4.3.6). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “Well-executed, documented screening [pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports] can serve as a satisfactory starting point for work and consultation on the definition of the scope of a possible SEA report. Screening of detailed development plans is valuable for the work on the description of the plan regardless of whether or not the implementation of the plan is judged to entail significant environmental effects”. (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

12 For the detailed development plans which facilitate the purposes listed in chapter 5, section 18 of the Act [19897:10] on planning- and building, the criteria set out in appendix 2 of the EIA Ordinance should also be used when carrying out the strategic environmental assessment (section 12 of the Planning and Building Ordinance [1987:383], see also the National Board of Housing, Building and Planning, page 53–57).

48



In order to assess which criteria are relevant to the plan, programme or amendment, one must first review all the criteria. Help from experts in the field may be valuable when assessing the relevant criteria to be applied to the plan or programme. If, during screening, there is uncertainty as to whether a strategic environmental assessment is required, despite the fact that attempts have been made to avoid uncertainty, the work on a strategic environmental assessment should be carried out or at least begun. See also section 4.3.4. Recording supporting data and assessments in text format makes the assessment transparent and possible to verify. It is important to make a note of and describe uncertainties in the assessments. Uncertainties may consist of lack of supporting data, difficulty or impossibility of producing supporting data or the fact that supporting data consists of analyses or forecasts which presupposed simplifications or approvals. See section 8.4. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When taking into consideration the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, it should be sufficient for one of the criteria to show that the plan or programme may be considered to entail significant environmental effects in order for it to be considered that the plan or programme may entail significant environmental effects. Nevertheless, a full review of the criteria should be carried out at an early stage to clarify the grounds on which the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects. This full review may be valuable if it later transpires that the criterion first identified can no longer be supposed to entail significant environmental effects or is no longer valid. Well-executed, documented screening can serve as a satisfactory starting point for work and consultation on the definition of scope of a possible SEA report.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) One reason for reviewing all criteria when screening is, therefore, that it may transpire later in the process that an assessment that a certain criterion had been met was incorrect, whereupon the question of whether a strategic environmental assessment is required can be updated once more. If one has gone through all criteria from the beginning, it is easier to carry out a new assessment if it becomes apparent that one criterion is no longer being met. For plans and programmes to be screened pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, the government agency or municipal authority that is drawing up or amending the plan or programme should carry out consultation as to whether a strategic environmental assessment is required. See also chapter 5, particularly section 5.2.3. Besides the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code can also be used as support when screening, even if it contains no express reference to the criteria (European Commission 2004, page 15). Section 12, second paragraph, items 5 and 6 in particular should be usable.

49



Because appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports has been designed using appendix 2 of the same Ordinance as a pattern, appendix 2 may be used, albeit with some care, to obtain a more detailed picture of each criterion. It is possible to use grounds for assessment in order to analyse the criteria and assess whether an effect on the environment is significant. See also section 8.5.4. and tables 2 and 6. In principle one can decide on the degree of significant environmental effect by establishing qualitative criteria or threshold values based on the relevant criteria for significant environmental effect (European Commission 2004 page 15; see also 4.3.1 above and 4.5.2 below). 4.5.2 The criteria set out in appendix 4. Appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports consists of two parts. The first part deals with the characteristic properties of the plan or programme including, among other things, the extent to which the plan or programme states the conditions for activities and measures and the extent to which it is significant for other plans and programmes’ environmental effects. The characteristic properties of the plan or programme are decisive in determining the probability that the environmental effect will be significant for the plan or programme and constitute the basis for the second part where the type of effect and scope of the effect, duration, result, etc. of the plan will be assessed. One suitable way to proceed is to design a template for screening which includes all the criteria and then systematically go through the various criteria one by one. In order to do this and arrive at a comprehensive assessment of when a significant environ-mental effect may occur, the assessment should include the object of the effect. The aspects listed in chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 Environmental Code form a suitable starting point. Please note that other aspects may also be important (European Commission 2004, pages 18–19, 30–31). The environmental quality objectives should also be taken into account in this context (chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 5 of the Environmental Code). Table 2 shows an example of a structure for systematic review of the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports and the aspects listed in chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 Environmental Code. If it emerges that a strategic environmental assessment is required, this systematic review may be developed and used later in the strategic environmental assessment process, e.g. when defining the scope and preparing the Strategic Environmental Assessment report.

50



Criteria relating to the characteristic properties of the plan or programme:

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the extent to which the plan or programme states the conditions for activities or measures by determining their location, type, size and operational circumstances or by allocating resources” (appendix 4, item 1a of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that when taking the above into consideration, “particular attention should be paid to” the following:

• The detail in which the conditions are specified. • Whether the plan or programme is legally binding, which indicates how

stringent the plan is for future implementation and therefore for the likely environmental effect the plan or programme may be supposed to have.

• Whether the plan’s may aim is to state conditions for activities or measures.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

The more precisely the conditions are stated in the plan, the more the plan or programme will affect a future decision on activities and measures and the more likely it is that a strategic environmental assessment will be required, i.e. that significant environmental effects will occur. The same applies if the plan is legally binding or otherwise has a strong normative effect (European Commission 2004, page 16). Describe how the plan or programme states the conditions for activities or measures in terms of location, type (nature) of measure, size, operating circumstances, as applicable, and whether the plan or programme states the conditions for activities or measures by allocating resources.

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, how important the plan or programme is for the environmental effects of other plans or programmes” (appendix 4, item 1b of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).


• The normative effect of the plan or programme or its effect on existing and future plans or programmes. Factors which both strengthen and counteract the environmental effects of other plans or programmes should be taken particularly into consideration here.

• Whether the plans or programmes may give rise to cumulative effects”. (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

51



The greater the effect a plan or programme has on other plans or programmes, the greater the probability of more far-reaching or profound environmental effects (positive and adverse). A plan or a programme at a more comprehensive level may, for example, affect a plan at a more detailed level in which objectives, overall visions and directions from the comprehensive level will possibly be specified. The effect may even take place from a more detailed level to a more comprehensive level. If the plan or programme is binding or cannot be of decisive importance (European Commission 2004, pages 16–17).

52



Table 2. Example of a summary of criteria and environmental aspects

Bio

dive

rsity

Pop

ulat

ion

Hum

an h

ealth

Ani

mal

life

Pla

nt li

fe

Land

Wat

er

Air

Clim

atic

fact

ors

Tang

ible

ass

ets

Land

scap

e

Bui

ldin

gs

Anc

ient

/cul

tura

l rem

ains

Oth

er c

ultu

ral h

erita

ge

Oth

er a

spec

ts/ e

nviro

n-m

enta

l obj

ectiv

es

Likely effect

Lasting effect

Frequent effect

Transboundary effect

Risks to health or the environment

Size of the effect

Physical scope of the effect

Effect on areas with protected status

Importance of the area

Vulnerability of the area

Secondary effects

Cumulative effects

Combined effects

Permanent effects

Temporary effects

Positive effects – short term

Positive effects – medium term

Positive effects – long term

Adverse effects – short term

Adverse effects – medium term

Adverse effects – long term

Total result of the effect

Assess and describe to what extent the plan or programme can affect existing plans and programmes and assess whether the plan or programme has a strong or weak normative effect. Survey, describe and assess whether the plan or programme gives rise to any cumulative effects (see 8.6.4). A strong normative effect and a significant effect on other plans and programmes, like cumulative effects, increases the probability that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to entail significant environmental effects.

53



“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the importance of the plan or programme for the integration of environmental aspects, particularly to promote sustainable development” (appendix 4, item 1c of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).


• Whether the plan or programme is of such importance or has the potential to be of such importance, e.g. by bringing about an obvious improvement in the environment. The term sustainable development has the same meaning here as in chapter 1, section 1 Environmental Code.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

The greater the importance or potential importance of the plan or programme for bringing about an obvious effect on the environment, the greater the probability that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects. By presenting different alternatives, a strategic environmental assessment plan can, for example, help to reduce the cost of measures to protect the environment while enabling other objectives to be met (European Commission 2004, page 17). Survey, describe and assess the importance of the plan for the promotion of sustainable development. If the plan or programme is important for the integration of environmental aspects, there is a greater probability that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects.

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the extent to which the plan or programme involves environmental problems that are relevant for the plan or programme” (appendix 4, item 1d of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).13

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that when taking the above into consideration, “particular attention should be paid to the following:

• The environmental problems, both anticipated and possible, that the implementation of the plan or programme may cause or aggravate.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

13 This was formulated differently in the Directive: ”The characteristics of plans and programmes, having regard, in particular, to environmental problems relevant to the plan or programme” (EU Directive 2001/42).

54



Plans and programmes can cause and aggravate environmental problems and also help to resolve, reduce and avoid environmental problems. It is also possible that an environmental problem can have the effect of restricting the plan or programme. You should always attempt to establish the type and degree of seriousness of the environmental problems that are significant for the plan or programme in question in the various cases (European Commission 2004, page 17).

The more anticipated or possible environmental problems the implementation of the plan or programme may cause or aggravate, the greater the probability that the plan or programme will entail significant environmental effects. It may be appropriate to base the assessment on the environmental aspects listed in chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 in particular but also item 5, Environmental Code. Assess the anticipated and possible environmental effects associated with the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment in question.

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the extent to which the plan or programme is important for the implementation of Community environmental legislation” (appendix 4, item 1e of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that when taking the above into consideration, “particular attention should be paid to the following:

• If the plan or programme facilitates or obstructed implementation of the EU’s environmental legislation in Sweden or in Swedish law.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

The greater the importance of the plan or programme for the implementation of EU environmental legislation, the greater the probability that the plan or programme will entail significant environmental effects. Note that the word “importance” means importance in both the positive and the negative sense. It is important for all EU environmental legislation to be taken into consideration (European Commission 2004, pages 17–18). Relevant legislation may include, for example, legislation relating to waste management or water protection. Carry out a review of which legislation may be relevant then describe, for each relevant section in the legislation, whether the plan or programme obstructs, facilitates or has no effect on the implementation of EU legislation. If the plan or programme facilitates or obstructs that implementation there is a greater probability that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to entail significant environmental effects.

55



The criteria relating to the type of effect that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail and the area that may be considered to be affected: The second part of appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports deals with the type of effect that the implementation of a plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail. It discusses, for example, the probability, duration and frequency of the effect and the possibility of remedying it (appendix 4, item 2a of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). The more complex the effect, for example due to a combined effect and an accumulation of effects, the more extensive or serious it is and the more likely it is to be significant (European Commission 2004, page 18). The second part also deals with the area affected by the plan or programme and whether it is vulnerable or particularly worthy of protection, for example (appendix 4, items 2f and g of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). Table 2 above shows an example of a structured review of the criteria and the various aspects (European Commission 2004, pages 18–19).

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the probability, duration and frequency of the effect and the possibility of remedying” (appendix 4, item 2a of of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

This concerns an assessment of whether the effect will occur or could occur (probability), how long it will last if so (duration) and how often it will occur (frequency). Review, describe and assess these three criteria for different relevant environmental aspects or factors. The greater the probability, the longer the duration and the higher the frequency, the greater the probability that the implementation of the plan or programme may entail significant environmental effects.

”The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the overall result of the effect” (appendix 4, item 2b of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When taking the overall result of the effect into consideration, particular attention should be paid to the following:

• That positive and adverse environmental effects are not offset against each other.

• Secondary, cumulative, combined, permanent and temporary effects in the short, medium and long term.

• What may be considered to be affected by the environmental effects and in what way. The effects should be assessed one by one and all together. Examples of what may be affected are given in chapter 6, section 12, second

56



paragraph, items 5–6 Environmental Code, i.e. relevant environmental quality objectives, biodiversity, population, human health, animal life, plant life, land, water, air, climatic factors, tangible assets, landscape, buildings, ancient and cultural remains and other cultural heritage and the mutual relationship between these environmental aspects." (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

Each environmental effect should be examined, described and assessed one by one in accordance with table 2 above. If possible, make use of earlier SEAs, EIAs, EISs and SEA reports. Note that both positive and adverse effects should be considered and that they cannot be offset against each other. It is also important to survey and describe any secondary, cumulative and combined effects which may occasionally involve a much greater effect than the effect to which each aspect may give rise in itself. The overall result of the effect is then compiled (see further sections 4.3.2 and 8.6.4; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 65).

The following questions, for example, may provide support for assessing the overall result of the effect:

• To what extent can the plan or programme help to achieve the various

environmental quality objectives? • Does the plan or programme lead to:

- changes in the requisitioning of land or other natural resources or an increase or reduction or redistribution of resources?

- changes in transport patterns, an increase or reduction in transport or a redistribution of kinds of transport?

- changes in consumption and production patterns, an increase or reduction in consumption or production or new substances in the ecocycle?

- changes in energy use or an increase or reduction or redistribution of types of energy?

- changes in patterns of emissions, an increase or reduction or new substances being introduced?

- changes in generation of waste, an increase or reduction or new substances being introduced?

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the transboundary nature of the effect” (appendix 4, item 2c of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When assessing the transboundary nature of the effect:

• The possible environmental effects outside Sweden’s borders that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to entail should

57



be taken into consideration.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

Survey and describe whether the nature of the effect means that the area of the effect also includes other countries. See also section 5.2.6 on consultation in the case of transboundary effects).

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the risks to human health or the environment” (appendix 4, item 2d of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When assessing the risks to human health or to the environment:

• The probability of different effects on human health or on the environment is assessed, along with the consequences of any such effects. High probability in combination with serious consequences, as well as low probability and serious consequences and high probability and moderate consequences should also be highly valued.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

Survey and describe the risks to human health and the environment.

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the size and physical scope of the effect” (appendix 4, item 2e of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When assessing the size and physical scope of the effect:

• It should be noted that the plan or programme may have effects on areas other than the geographical scope of the plan or programme.

• The effect that the implementation of the plan may bring about, depending on circumstances outside the plan in question, should be noted. There may, for example, be effects on human health for people who will be staying in the area of the plan in question with the effects coming from surrounding areas.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

Survey and describe the risks and consequences of the environmental effect. Previous stages of the screening are available as supporting data.

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the importance and vulnerability of the area affected due to intensive land use, contravened environmental quality standards, cultural heritage or particular natural characteristics” (appendix 4, item 2f of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

58



The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When assessing the importance and vulnerability of the area affected due to intensive land use, contravened environmental quality standards, cultural heritage or particular natural characteristics:

• It is necessary to take into consideration whether the plan or programme may affect areas or interests which are valuable or sensitive but which are not formally protected in the legislation.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

Survey and describe the area affected by the plan in relation to the environmental value and vulnerability of the area in terms of intensive land use, contravened environmental quality standards, cultural heritage or particular natural characteristics. Note that not only areas already protected should be taken into consideration; other affected areas can also result in significant environmental effects. Even a proportionately small effect can be significant if it involves particularly valuable or vulnerable environmental aspects. If the effect is irreversible, there is a greater probability that it is significant (European Commission 2004, page 18).

“The assessment must take into consideration, in particular, the effect on areas or natural habitats which hold recognised national, Community or international protected status” (appendix 4, item 2g of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When assessing the effect on areas or natural habitats which hold recognised national, Community or international protected status:

• Interests and areas which are afforded protection through legislation, such as areas of national interest in accordance with chapters 3 and 4 Environmental Code, for example, areas protected in accordance with chapter 7 Environmental Code and areas protected in accordance with the Act on Ancient Monuments and Finds (1988:950), should be taken into consideration” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

Survey and describe objects with officially protected status and how they may be affected by the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment.

59



Particular points to consider during the process

• Carry out screening as early as possible, i.e. as soon as the plan or programme work has begun.

• Involve planners in the screening. • Review all screening criteria in a systematic, comprehensive way. • Combine the review of the criteria with a review of the aspects and factors set out in

chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code. • Survey and describe the conditions, give reasons for and document all views and

important approvals. • Well-executed screening can be used as a basis in the definition of scope and

preparation of the strategic environmental assessment report. • Summarise the result in a matrix so the assessment is clearly set out and easily

comprehensible.

60



5 Consultation This chapter deals with the aim of consultation and when and how consultation must, should and may be carried out. 5.1 The aim of consultation The aim of consultation is to provide partners with access to information and the opportunity to express their views to ensure that the supporting material for decisions on plans and programmes is as good as possible. Consultation with municipal authorities, government agencies, organisations and the public raises the quality of the SEA and the SEA report and, at the same time, ensures that decisions on plans or programmes find more support within society (European Commission 2004, page 34, Government Bill 2003/04:116 pages 52, 58). Consultation therefore involves both quality aspects and democratic aspects. One prerequisite for achieving the above objective is that views emerging from a consultation should be taken into consideration during the strategic environmental assessment; e.g. views on the SEA report and views expressed in a consultation must be taken into consideration before the plan or programme is adopted or used as a basis for regulation (chapter 6, section 16 Environmental Code; Government Bill 2003/04:116 page 43).

Government agencies, municipal authorities, organisations and individuals participating in consultations often have much to contribute in terms of both knowledge and values. A study carried out at the request of Miljöbalkskommittén [the Environmental Code Committee] provides one example of what environmental organisations can contribute to consultations. According to that study, most representatives of environmental courts, county administrative boards and municipal authorities interviewed considered that the views expressed by environmental organisations are valuable. Several assessment bodies stated that, through their expert knowledge, environmental organisations helped improve the supporting materials for decisions or achieve more precise environmental assessment in environmental cases (SOU [Statens offentliga utredningar – Swedish Government Official Reports] 2005:59, page 189). It may also be expected that consultation with government agencies, organisations and the public concerned may help achieve a more open, participative process and obtain more support for decisions on plans and programmes among different groups within society. Effective consultation can also help resolve conflicts and reduce the risk of delays in the implementation of the plan or programme (Therivel 2004, pages 71–72; de Laval 1999, page 7).

New knowledge emerging during consultation can make it desirable or even necessary to revise a proposal for definition of the scope of a SEA report, the SEA report itself or a draft plan or programme, for example. The consultation itself may even need to be redone in the light of new knowledge (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009: European Commission 2004, page 34).

61



5.2 When, on what and with whom consultation should take place

5.2.1 When consultation should take place In general, it is important for consultation to take place as early as possible in the plan or programme process. While consultation should take place as early as possible, it is also necessary for the supporting material for that consultation to be sufficiently detailed to provide a clear indication of what is being suggested and how the government agency or municipal authority has arrived at the proposal in question. This is the case regardless of whether the consultation applies to screening, definition of scope or the SEA report (see figure 1 in chapter 2 above).

If a draft plan or programme requires consultation in accordance with chapter 6, section 14 of the Environmental Code and other statutes, the municipal authority or government agency which is drawing up or amending the plan or programme should endeavour to carry out consultation in context (section 8 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 48). This may apply, for example, in cases where consultation also takes place on the plan or programme itself. Within the framework of a strategic environmental assessment, the government agency or municipal authority which is drawing up or amending a plan or a programme and is considering carrying out a strategic environmental assessment should also, where appropriate, coordinate consultation on screening and definition of scope (see Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009).

Consultation should take place:

1. During screening, when it takes place pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports and a decision is to be made as to whether the implementation of a plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects (see sections 4.5 and 5.2.3).

2. During definition of the scope of the SEA report when the contents, scope and level of detail is to be decided (see section 5.2.4 and chapter 6).

3. As soon as there is a draft plan or programme with an associated SEA report (section 5.2.5 and chapter 8).

4. In cases where it is considered that the implementation of the plan or programme may give rise to significant environmental effects in another country, consultation on the transboundary environmental effects must take place if the State in question so requests. The State in question should be informed as early as possible in the process (see section 5.2.6 below).

5.2.2 On what and with whom consultation should take place The parties who should participate in the consultation, in accordance with the Environmental Code and the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, vary according to

62



the type of consultation concerned. Participation by the public in decision-making processes and the right to information on plans and programmes is also governed in the so-called Aarhus Convention which has been ratified by Sweden. Article 7 of that Convention states that the public must be provided with necessary information and provision must be made for “the public to participate during the preparation of plans and programmes relating to the environment within a transparent and fair framework” (UNECE 1998 articles 6–7)14.

Table 3 below provides a summary of the various types of consultation that may take place in Sweden during strategic environmental assessment and the parties to be consulted. For consultation on significant effects in another country, see section 4.2.6. Table 3. The parties to be consulted in different types of consultation in Sweden.

Type of consultation Parties to be consulted1)

Consultation on the screening of a plan or programme at local or regional level pursuant to appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports.

County administrative boards, municipal authorities and other government agencies affected by the plan or programme. Information supplied to the public (section 6 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

Consultation on the screening of a plan or programme at national level pursuant to appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports.

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and other central management bodies affected. Information supplied to the public (section 6 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

Consultation on definition of the scope of a SEA report for plans or programmes at local and regional level.

Municipal authorities and county administrative boards affected by the plan or programme (chapter 6, section 13 Environmental Code). See also the continuous text below regarding participation by the public.

Consultation on definition of the scope of a SEA report for plans or programmes at national level.

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and other central management bodies affected (chapter 6, section 13 Environmental Code). See also the continuous text below regarding participation by the public.

Consultation on the SEA report and draft plan or programme.

Municipalities and government agencies and the public and other interested parties (chapter 6, section 14 of the Environmental Code; section 8 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports).

1) It may occasionally be appropriate to widen the circle for consultation beyond what is required in a law or statute. See also section 5.2.2. and under the heading for each type of consultation.

Consultation during screening pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports for plans or programmes at local or regional level must involve the county administrative boards, municipal authorities and other 14 EC Directive 2003/35 governs the application of the Aarhus Convention to certain plans and programmes which are not covered by the Directive on strategic environmental assessments on certain plans and programmes (2001/42/EC).

63



government agencies affected by the plan or programme. For plans and programmes at a national level, consultation must “instead take place” with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and other central government agencies involved. The phrase “instead take place” should not be perceived to mean that a government agency or municipal authority is prohibited from consulting local and regional and national authorities when appropriate (section 6 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). The municipal authority or authorities and county administrative board or boards affected by a plan or programme should be consulted on the definition of the scope of the SEA report. It is also stated that, during the definition of scope, consultation on plans and programmes at a national level must “instead take place” with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and other central management bodies affected (chapter 6, section 13 of the Environmental Code). The provisions and preparatory materials for the legislation contain no clear, unequivocal statement of what is meant by the term “national level”. Nevertheless, the government writes that, “The term national level means a geographical delimitation rather than that the plan or programme is, in itself, decided on by a government agency acting at national level.” (Government Bill 2003/04:116 page 66) The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “Plans and programmes at national level should be considered to mean plans and programmes which affect all or significant parts of the country in geographical terms or which are of national interest for other reasons”. In the presumably relatively few cases in which there is any doubt as to whether or not a plan is to be regarded as national, it is reasonable to give both the central government agencies and the other public agencies involved the opportunity to express their views on matters concerning screening or definition of scope. In certain cases it may be appropriate as early as the screening stage to issue invitations to a wider consultation which includes non-governmental organisations and the public, for example, and which makes use of hearings or reference groups for support in forming an opinion as to whether a significant environmental effect may be considered to come about. This may be particularly appropriate if there is any uncertainty as to whether the implementation or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects and the plan or programme is judged to be of substantial interest to the public. During consultations on definition of scope there may also be reasons to widen the circle of consultation beyond what is required in a law or statute and give other government agencies affected and the public, including non-governmental organisations, the opportunity to express their views on the definition of scope. One reason for this is the fact that environmental organisations and local folklore societies may have specialist knowledge which can be used during the definition of scope. Widening the circle of parties to be consulted during the definition of scope also

64



reduces the risk of the need arising at a later stage, for example during consultation on the SEA report, to ascertain whether the definition of scope needs to be redone and whether the SEA report resulting from it must be redrafted. In the case of a significant environmental effect in another country, it may be appropriate, for the same reason, to give government agencies in the country in question the opportunity to express their views on the definition of the scope of the SEA report (European Commission 2004, pages 39–40; UNECE 1998, article 7; Therivel 2004, page 71). See also sections 4.1 and 4.3.4 above. Article 6 of the protocol on “strategic environmental assessments under the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessments in a Transboundary Context” states that, “To the extent appropriate, each Party shall endeavour to provide opportunities for the participation of the public concerned when determining the relevant information to be included in the environmental report”15. Article 6 of the so-called Aarhus Convention states that, ”Each Party shall provide for early public participation, when all options are open and effective public participation can take place”. Allowing the public to participate in a consultation on the definition of scope at the same time enables an understanding to be gained of “the interests of the public” in the plan or programme, which information should be taken into consideration when defining the scope of the SEA report (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 52; UNECE 2003 article 6; UNECE 1998 article 6). See also section 5.2.4 and chapter 6. Consultation on the SEA report and the plan or programme should include consultation with the municipalities and government agencies affected and the public and other interested parties (chapter 6, section 14 of the Environmental Code; section 8 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). See also section 5.2.5 below. The term “the public” conforms to the definition in the Aarhus Convention and includes those who are affected or may be supposed to be affected or to have any interest in the decision. The term “the public” also includes non-governmental organisations such as environmental organisations and local folklore societies. In principle, there is therefore no restriction on the circle of parties to be consulted in this case. Instead, it includes all parties with an interest in taking part in the consultation. Note that the circle of parties to be consulted here it is wider than in the Swedish Act on Planning and Building of which states that, “The government agencies and the associations and individuals in general with a material interest [our italics] in the proposal should be given the opportunity to take part in consultation.” The foregoing also includes the public of a country exposed to transboundary effects if the exposed State has given notice that it wishes to carry out consultation (section 8 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 26; European Commission 2004, pages 35, 38; chapter 4, section 3 of the Act [1987:10] on Planning and Building).

15 The requirements of the Convention and the Protocol have been incorporated in Swedish law through, inter alia, amendments to chapter 6 of the Environmental Code and the Ordinance on EIS’ and SEA reports.

65



5.2.3 Consultation on screening Consultation should take place when an assessment is carried out pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports as to whether the implementation of a plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects (see section 6 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). The plans and programmes involved are listed in the sections 4.2 and 4.5. The supporting documents for a consultation on screening should clearly state the view of the government agency or municipal authority as to whether or not the plan or programme in question requires strategic environmental assessment and the grounds for adopting that view. It is particularly important to document the supporting materials used and the reasoning put forward in the case of an assessment that no strategic environmental assessment is required. This applies in particular to plans and programmes for which a strategic environmental assessment is in principle always required (see table 1 in section 4.2). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “A government agency or municipal authority which draws up or amends a plan or programme should give the county administrative boards, municipal authorities and other government agencies involved reasonable time, normally at least three weeks, to express their views on whether a plan or programme may be considered to entail significant environmental effects. The scope and complexity of the case relating to the plan or programme should be taken into consideration when deciding on the deadline for submitting views. If a request is received for an extension of the period in which to submit views, that request should be complied with if it cannot be considered to be unreasonable. In the same way, the period for submitting views may be shortened if the municipal authorities, county administrative boards and government agencies involved so agree. When appropriate, consultation on screening should take place at the same time as consultation on the definition of the scope of the SEA report in accordance with chapter 6, section 13, second paragraph, Environmental Code.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) An assessment by a government agency or municipal authority pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports as to whether a strategic environmental assessment should be carried out on a plan or programme must be reported in the case relating to the plan or programme and must be made available to the public (chapter 6 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When a government agency or a municipal authority reports its assessment as to whether a plan or programme may be considered to entail significant environmental effects, it should state both the result of the assessment and the reason for the assessment. This applies both when the government agency or municipal authority considers that a strategic environmental assessment is required and when it considers that such an assessment is not required. The government agency or municipal authority should make this report available to the public as soon as possible.” (Swedish Environmental

66



Protection Agency 2009) The government agency or municipal authority should also report, in the same way as stated above, on the fact that a strategic environmental assessment is required and the grounds on which it is required for plans and programmes covered by section 4, first paragraph, of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports which are found to require strategic environmental assessment during screening. The way in which the result of the screening is to be made public may be decided on a case-by-case basis. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “It should at least be made available to the public on the government agency or municipal authority’s website or notice board.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) The result of the screening should be reported as soon as possible after the screening has been carried out. The government agencies and municipal authorities that took part in the consultation should also be specifically informed of the conclusions from the screening (section 6 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). Furthermore, the report should clearly state the opinion of all the parties in the consultation as to whether or not a strategic environmental assessment is required. This is particularly important if the consultation parties were not in unanimous agreement.

5.2.4 Consultation on definition of the scope of the SEA report The government agency or municipal authority that is preparing or amending a plan or programme should carry out consultation on what the SEA report should contain and on the scope and level of detail of the SEA report (chapter 6, sections 12–13 Environmental Code). With regard to how the scope may be defined and with whom consultation is to take place, see also chapter 6 and section 5.2.2. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines on SEA state that, “The government agency or municipal authority’s proposal for the definition of the scope of the SEA report should be clearly stated in the supporting materials for the consultation on definition of the scope. The reasons behind the proposal for definition of the scope and the reasoning by the government agency or municipal authority pursuant to the contents of chapter 6, sections 12–13 Environmental Code should also be clearly stated.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) Furthermore, the guidelines also state that, “Whenever appropriate, the consultation on the definition of the scope should take place at the same time as the consultation on screening in accordance with section 6 of the Ordinance (1998:905) on EISs and SEA reports.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) Chapter 6, section 12 of the Environmental Code clearly sets out what the SEA report must contain. The significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to entail should be identified, described and assessed in the SEA report. Reasonable alternatives to the aim and geographical scope of the plan or programme should also be identified, described and assessed. See also sections 6.2. and 7.2. When assessing what the SEA report should contain, chapter 6,

67



section 12, second paragraph, item 6 of the Environmental Code in particular should be taken into consideration because the significant environmental effects to which the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to give rise are identified, described and assessed in terms of the aspects listed in that provision. Furthermore, the question of alternatives is of central importance when defining the scope because the choice of alternatives can determine what significant environmental effects the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail. Also, to enable you to focus on the most important aspects from an environmental point of view and to enable resources to be used cost-effectively, the scope and level of detail of the SEA report needs to be restricted. Chapter 6, section 13 Environmental Code should be taken into consideration during this process. That section clearly states that the content may be restricted to information that is reasonable in view of the number of items listed. See also section 6.3. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state as follows with regard to the period for consultation on the definition of the scope: “The municipal authority or government agency that is carrying out a strategic environmental assessment should provide a reasonable period of time for consultation on the definition of the scope of the SEA report. That period should be at least three weeks. Depending on the type of plan or programme in question, the definition of the scope and the consultation on definition of the scope may require a longer or shorter period. The scope and complexity of the case relating to the plan or programme should be taken into consideration when deciding on the deadline for submitting views. If a request is received for an extension of the period in which to submit views, that request should be complied with if it cannot be considered to be unreasonable. In the same way, the period in which to submit views may be shortened if the municipal authorities, county administrative boards and government agencies involved so agree.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) Depending on the type of plan or programme in question, the definition of the scope and the consultation on definition of the scope may need to be longer or shorter. It is mainly during consultations on plans and programmes of a more strategic and comprehensive nature that the period for consultation may need to be extended. For smaller and more specific plans and programmes there are generally fewer alternatives and the scope of those alternatives is easier to define. In some cases it may also be easier to define what questions of fact are relevant rather than what alternatives are reasonable even if, as stated above, there is a link between reasonable alternatives and what matters may be considered to give rise to significant environmental effects. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “If the definition of the scope of the SEA report is changed, the consultation parties should be informed. In the case of significant changes in the definition of the scope, the consultation should be redone.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

68



The definition of the scope of the SEA report is an extremely important part of the strategic environmental assessment process because it is then that a decision is made on what is to be described and assessed. A definition which is too narrow can mean that alternative designs of a plan or programme are excluded in advance. On the other hand, a definition which is too wide can mean that there is insufficient focus on the factors giving rise to significant environmental effects and that resources are dedicated to studying matters which are of little or no relevance in the context (European Commission 2004, pages 39–40). See also sections 6.3 and 7.2. 5.2.5 Consultation on a plan or programme and an associated SEA

report Consultation should also take place when there is a completed draft plan or programme with an associated SEA report. The government agency or municipal authority which has prepared a SEA report should issue information on how the government agencies and municipal authorities affected and the public and other interested parties can access the SEA report and the draft plan or programme to allow them to take part in the consultation. Information should also be issued on how opinions may be submitted and within what timeframe. Furthermore, those who wish to submit an opinion should be given a reasonable period in which to do so (chapter 6, section 14 Environmental Code; section 8 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 26, 42). See also sections 5.2.2. and 5.3.1. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “The period for submitting opinions on a SEA report which has been prepared should be at least as long as the consultation period for the plan or programme. The minimum duration should be three weeks. The more extensive and complex the case relating to the plan or programme is, the longer the period for submitting opinions on the SEA report should be. Particular circumstances such as Christmas and summer holidays should be taken into consideration when establishing the period for submitting opinions. If a request is received for an extension of the period in which to submit an opinion, that request should be complied with if it cannot be considered to be unreasonable”. In particular, small organisations and non-profit organisations with low or uneven staffing may find it difficult to participate in the consultation at those times of year (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009; European Commission 2004, page 36). The SEA report and the views expressed in the consultation must be taken into consideration before the plan or programme is adopted or used as a basis for regulation (chapter 6, section 16, first paragraph of the Environmental Code). This also applies to any views that emerge from consultation with another State. “Taken into consideration” means that the views will be taken into account. The government agency or municipal authority which is drawing up the plan or programme must report on how the views have been taken into consideration in a special synopsis. The municipal authority or government agency should also report on, among other things, how the assessment was carried out and the reasons behind the choice of the various

69



alternatives. Nevertheless, there is no requirement that states that a government agency or municipal authority must act in accordance with those views or choose the best alternative from an environmental point of view (European Commission 2004, pages 23, 34–35, 41, 52; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 68). See also chapters 7–8 and 10 below. 5.2.6 Consultation on significant environmental effects in another

country The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency is the responsible authority when it comes to consultations on transboundary significant environmental effects of activities and measures and of plans and programmes (chapter 6, section 6 and 15 Environmental Code)16. When a government agency or municipal authority draws up a plan or a programme which may be considered to give rise to a significant environmental effect in another country, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency must inform the responsible authority in the country in question of the contents of the plan and the SEA report17. If the State in question requests consultation with regard to the transboundary environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to bring about and the measures planned to prevent, impede or counteract the significant adverse environmental effects. That consultation should begin as soon as the SEA report has been completed (chapter 6, section 15 Environmental Code; sections 9 and 10 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; European Commission, pages 40–41; UNECE 2003 article 10). County administrative boards and other government agencies that become aware that a plan or programme contemplated in chapter 6, section 11 Environmental Code may be considered to give rise to significant environmental effects in another country must notify the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (section 11 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports). In accordance with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines, this should take place “as soon as possible and no later than during consultation on the definition of the scope, so that the State in question may be informed by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency prior to or at least at the moment when the draft plan or programme is made available to the public in accordance with chapter 6, section 14 Environmental Code”. (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) The requirement for consultation with other countries applies primarily to draft plans or programmes with an associated SEA report (see section 5.2.5 above). It may be appropriate to provide the government agencies of the country in question with the

16 The government can decide, in response to a report from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, that the tasks regarding environmental impact statements and SEA reports in a transboundary context in a particular case should be carried out by another government agency (section 9 of the Ordinance on EIS’ and SEA reports). 17 Article 3 of the Convention on environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context (the Espoo Convention) states that consultation should take place in the case of activities that may be considered to cause significant harmful transboundary effects (our italics) (UNECE 1991).

70



same conditions for taking part in the consultation on definition of the scope as the Swedish government agencies involved. If consultation is requested, the countries should agree on more detailed arrangements for the consultation in order to ensure that the designated government agencies and the public in the country in question are informed and are given an opportunity and reasonable time in which to express their views (section 10 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 26; European Commission 2004, pages 40–41; UNECE 2003). See also section 5.2.2 above. What constitutes a “reasonable” period for the individual consultation should be agreed with the country in question. Note that it is generally more time-consuming when the consultation also involves consultation with government agencies, organisations and the public in another country. The government agencies or municipal authorities drawing up or amending the plan or programme should therefore allow additional time for this international consultation. Furthermore, municipal authorities that are drawing up or amending plans or programmes whose implementation may be considered to entail significant environmental effects in another country should inform the county administrative board as soon as possible. In accordance with the protocol on strategic environmental assessments, ”the Party of origin shall as early as possible before the adoption of the plan or programme notify the affected Party” that a plan or programme may be considered to entail significant transboundary environmental effects (section 10 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports; European Commission 2004, page 41; UNECE 2003 article 10). The government agency or municipal authority drawing up a plan or programme or making an amendment which may be considered to entail significant environmental effects in another country and which may therefore be subject to consultation with another State may contact the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency to discuss the requirements and the scope of the supporting materials for that consultation. In certain cases, the documents may need to be translated. Any such translation is commissioned in consultation with the State in question.

5.3 Performance of consultations 5.3.1 Responsibility for and information on consultations The government agency or municipal authority drawing up or amending a plan or programme is responsible for ensuring that a consultation takes place. This applies to all types of consultation, except for consultations on effects in another country (see section 5.2.6). That responsibility includes informing, producing supporting materials, implementing, documenting and drawing conclusions from the consultation and the supporting materials for the consultation. By arranging for expert knowledge and supporting materials, regional and central government agencies can provide support

71



for the various consultations included in the strategic environmental assessment process (see sections 3.3 and 8.5.2). Chapter 6, section 14 of the Environmental Code states that the government agency or municipal authority that drew up a SEA report should make that statement and the draft plan or programme “available”. The fact that the documents are provided on request means that they are available, but in order for any requirement regarding availability to be meaningful, persons who may conceivably wish to participate in the consultation must naturally be informed of the consultation and the draft. Information on the consultation on the SEA report should thus be coordinated with information on the plan or programme (Government Bill 2003/04 pages 42–43). The general guidelines state that, “The way in which the SEA report and the draft plan or programme is to be made available may be decided on a case-by-case basis, taking the aim of the consultation into consideration. It is often best to announce the consultation in the media. Information on the consultation should at least be provided through the municipal authority or government agency’s website and notice board.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) When it is considered that a small, clearly defined group may be interested in a plan or programme, it is probably easier to reach those who may be interested in taking part in the consultation. It may be appropriate to provide the public and the non-governmental organisations that are considered to be particularly affected by or interested in the plan or programme with information on the consultation directly by mail, e-mail or telephone. When so required, information on the consultation may also be provided through, for example, local newspapers, local radio, leaflets, posters, etc. Information on a consultation may even be provided with the aid of a public notification procedure. When the potential consultation group is large or widely dispersed, such as in regional and national plans and programmes, it is of course considerably more difficult to provide everyone with information on the consultation. At the same time, it is also more difficult to carry out consultations in the form of meetings, for example. Information, discussion and the ability to submit views through a website is a possibility in this type of plan and programme and is a method used by the European Commission, for example. It can occasionally be difficult to interest the public in taking part in a consultation when plans and programmes of a more strategic nature are produced. That type of plan and programme may be perceived to be too far removed from everyday issues or too abstract and too far in the future to interest anyone other than a limited, non-representative sector of the public. It may therefore be appropriate to attempt to identify at an early stage in the process the public’s role in the case in question, possible representatives and interest groups, how the public may be involved in the

72



process and what expectations there are of the public’s participation in the case (Therivel 2004, pages 72–73; de Laval 2002). It is important that those taking part in the consultation should be aware of the conditions and rules applying to the consultation. Participants need to be aware of how the consultation fits into the plan or programme process and the aim of the consultation, etc. Participants in consultations generally have little knowledge of the structure of the plan or programme process. Those responsible for the consultation may therefore need to duly explain the structure of the process and the ways in which those taking part in the consultation are able influence the plan or programme (de Laval 2002). In order for the consultation to be effective, information relating to it should contain details of:

• the aim of the consultation and its role in the plan or programme process • the subject-matter of the consultation, including the draft decision by the

government agency or municipal authority • how and when it is possible to participate in the consultation • how to gain access to supporting materials18 • the length of the period for submitting views18.

5.3.2 How to carry out a consultation There are no detailed provisions on how consultations should be carried out although, as stated above, consultations have an important role to play, which is why they should be carried out in a systematic, responsible manner. The time and resources devoted to planning and implementing a consultation is proportional to the size and complexity of the case and the interest in participating in the consultation. In the same way as time and effort is spent planning and implementing the more technical parts of the plan or programme process, care should also be taken with planning and implementing the consultation. One way to carry out a consultation is with the aid of a process leader or dialogue coordinator. This is a person who leads the consultation work and who is able to work completely independently from the parties. The dialogue coordinator is therefore able to lead the consultation, support all parties and compile the results in an impartial manner. A communication plan for the plan and programme work can support the consultation process (de Laval 2002). See also section 3.1 on communication plans. The best method for carrying out a consultation varies according to the type of plan or programme and the type of consultation. The design of the consultation should therefore be suited to the individual case in question. In many cases, it may be

18 How government agencies and municipal authorities and the public concerned can access supporting materials and how and within what timeframe views can be submitted should always be stated in the case of a consultation on the SEA report and the draft plan or programme (section 8 of the EIA Ordinance).

73



advantageous to combine the various consultation methods. Table 4 below shows a synopsis of various methods/tools for consultation and their strong and weak points (European Commission 2004 pages 39, 41; UNECE 2007 page 11719). As shown in table 4 below, the use of these methods/tools facilitates all aspects from pure information to joint problem solving. How the various methods and tools are implemented and used is naturally the decisive factor in how they can help and how much they cost, etc.. The table below is intended to provide an indication of those aspects under normal circumstances. Based on the public’s participation and influence, a classification may be drawn up as in table 5 below (International Association for Public Participation www.iap2.org). Consultation on plans and programmes has a great deal in common with consultation on projects, but it is important to note that plans and programmes are often more strategic and visionary and aim to manage complex connections, whereas the description of a project is often considerably more specific and detailed.

19 A more detailed description of the tools and their strong and weak points is contained in UNECE 2007, pages 197–206.

74



Table 4. Different ways of carrying out consultations – advantages and disadvantages

Facilitates... Key factors

Method of carrying out consultations with the public

Ava

ilabi

lity

of in

form

atio

n

Com

pila

tion

of o

bser

vatio

ns

Join

t pro

blem

-sol

ving

Ord

inar

y co

st o

f im

plem

enta

tion

Abi

lity

to s

olve

pro

blem

s

Eas

y to

sub

mit

obse

rvat

ions

Printed matter issuing an invitation to submit observations $ Exhibitions $ Manned exhibitions $$ ☺ Information by telephone $ ☺ Internet/web-based consultation $ Guided tours $$ ☺ Questionnaires/polls $$ ☺ Research/surveys $$ ☺ Large public meetings $ Working group meetings/workshops $ ☺ Advisory committees, e.g. expert committees $ ☺ Table modified according to UNECE 2007 page 117. Key to symbols: Area of use, $ Low implementation cost, $$ High implementation cost, Low problem-solving ability, High problem-solving ability, Moderately easy to submit observations, ☺ Easy to submit observations. To enable views submitted in the consultation to be taken into consideration, etc., it is extremely important to document those views properly. The following aspects, among others, should therefore be documented on a continuous basis:

• the method for issuing information on the consultation • the supporting materials for the consultation • how the consultation itself was carried out • how views, suggestions and alternatives expressed during the consultation

were managed and assessed • the reasons why some alternatives were chosen rather than others.

75



Table 5. Different degrees of influence and different consultation methods

Greater influence by the public Inform Consult Make participate Cooperate Authorise Objective: To provide the public with impartial information to facilitate understanding of problems, alternatives, opportunities and/or solutions.

Objective: To obtain the public’s views on analyses, alternatives and/or decisions.

Objective: To work directly with the public throughout the process to ensure that the public’s interests and wishes are clarified and taken into consideration.

Objective: To produce each alternative and make each decision in collaboration with the public.

Objective: To delegate the decision to the public.

Promise to the public: We provide you with information.

Promise to the public: We provide you with information, listen to your interests and wishes and provide feedback on how the public’s views influenced the decision.

Promise to the public: We will work alongside you to ensure that the public’s interests and wishes influence the development of alternatives and we will report on how cooperation by the public influenced the decision.

Promise to the public: We will come to you for direct advice and ideas when formulating solutions and we will as far as possible incorporate your advice and recommendations in the decision.

Promise to the public: We will implement what you decide.

Example of methods: Fact sheets Websites Open houses/Exhibitions

Example of methods: Focus groups Research/surveys Large public meetings

Example of methods: Workshops Advisory voting

Example of methods: Advisory committees Creation of consensus Communal decision-making

Example of methods: Different types of voting procedures with the public making the decision.

Table based on the International Association for Public Participation, www.iap2.org

76



Particular points to consider during a consultation

• Consultations should take place as part of an open, participative process and they should help ensure that plans and programmes are of good quality and have the full support of the various groups in society.

• The government agency or municipal authority that draws up or amends the plan or programme is responsible for the consultation. This applies to all consultations except for consultations on environmental effects in another country.

• Carry out the consultation as early as possible and before solutions to different alternatives have been found.

• Ensure that supporting materials for the consultation clearly state what is being proposed and set out the reasoning behind the proposal and the choice of alternatives.

• Ensure that the parties involved in the consultation in question receive information on the consultation. Observe the broad definition of “the public”.

• Document the consultation process and the results and conclusions emerging from the consultation.

• New knowledge arising during the consultation can make it appropriate or even necessary to re-do a stage in the strategic environmental assessment, e.g. a consultation.

• Use the consultation methods which are appropriate to the type of consultation and the plan or programme in question and the composition of the circle of parties to be consulted.

• Ensure that a reasonable period is provided for submitting opinions. • Consider the possibility of coordinating different consultations, e.g. a consultation

on screening with a consultation on definition of scope and a consultation in accordance with the Environmental Code with a consultation in accordance with other legislation.

• A consultation on the definition of the scope of the SEA report may require a longer or shorter period.

• Municipal authorities must inform the county administrative board and the county administrative board must inform the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency if the plan or programme may be considered to give rise to significant environmental effects in another country. This should take place as early as possible in the process, though no later than during consultation on the definition of the scope.

77



6 Defining the scope of the SEA report

This chapter deals with the aim of defining the scope of the SEA report and how it must, should and may be carried out. For information on consultations on the definition of scope of SEA reports, see section 5.2.4. 6.1 The aim of defining the scope The government agency or municipal authority that is preparing or amending a plan or programme on which a strategic environmental assessment is to be carried out should also define the contents, scope and level of detail of the SEA report. One of the aims of defining the scope of the SEA report is to ensure that the work carried out on the SEA report is focused on the environmental issues which are most relevant to the plan or programme in question. Defining the scope makes the SEA report more accessible and avoids unnecessary work. The focus must be on the positive and adverse significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail (chapter 6, sections 12–13 Environmental Code; European Commission 2004, pages 26–27; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 26). With an excessively extensive, sprawling SEA report there is a risk that it may become confused, that it may consume resources unnecessarily and that it may make the performance of effective consultation more difficult (European Commission 2004, page 27; UNECE 2007, pages 68–69). It will therefore also be more difficult to achieve the aim of the SEA report: to form a basis for decisions on the plan or programme. On the other hand, a well-focused, well-structured SEA report increases the transparency of the process, makes planning more effective and affords greater legitimacy to the plan or programme. 6.2 Defining the scope of the contents of the

SEA report Defining the scope of the SEA report deals with:

1. what the SEA report is to contain 2. how extensive and detailed it must be (chapter 6, sections 12–13

Environmental Code). The contents of the SEA report are governed in chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code. See also section 8.6. That section clearly states that the SEA report must identify and assess the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail. Reasonable alternatives to the aim and geographical scope of the plan or programme should also be identified, described and assessed.

78



The reasonable alternatives affect the significant environmental effect that may be considered to come about. If the aim of the plan or programme can be achieved through a reasonable alternative which is relatively satisfactory from an environmental point of view and is not considered to entail other obvious adverse consequences, other alternatives which are worse from an environmental point of view may be excluded. This in turn may mean a reduction in the anticipated significant environmental effects which may lead to a restriction in the contents, scope and the level of detail of the SEA report. See also chapter 7. The items listed in chapter 6, section 12 of the Environmental Code may only be excluded if they are not relevant to the plan or programme or if there is no significant environmental effect. Nevertheless, the reasons for excluding them should be stated. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “A report should be issued on the assessment of whether or not the aspects contemplated in chapter 6, second paragraph, item 6 are relevant to the plan or programme and whether there is a significant environmental effect and the reasons for that assessment should be stated. Nevertheless, it should be possible to issue an abbreviated report if the aspect or area has not been included in the SEA report for obvious reasons.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) It is reasonable to be particularly careful when reporting on areas and aspects which are not considered relevant or to entail any significant environmental effect. Chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, items 5 and 6 of the Environmental Code clearly state that the contents of the SEA report must include the following (see also section 5.2.4 above and section 8.6 below):

• “a description of how relevant environmental quality objectives and other environmental considerations have been taken into account in the plan or programme” (item 5)

• “a description of the significant environmental effects that may be considered

to occur in terms of biological diversity, population, human health, animal life, plant life, land, water, air, climatic factors, tangible assets, landscape, buildings, ancient and cultural remains and other cultural heritage and the mutual relationship between these environmental aspects.” (item 6)

As stated above, the SEA report must focus on the significant environmental effects that the implementation of a plan or programme or an amendment of a plan or programme may be considered to bring about. Nevertheless, at the early stages of planning it can be difficult to decide what may be considered to entail significant environmental effects (see section 4.3.1). If that is the case, you should attempt in the first instance to remove the uncertainty by obtaining more information. If the uncertainty remains, that in itself is a reason for including those issues in the SEA report. You may eventually narrow down the definition of the scope and remove some

79



of the questions from the SEA report at a later stage when you have more knowledge. See also section 4.3.4). 6.3 Defining the scope of the contents and level

of detail of the SEA report Besides deciding what the SEA report should contain, the scope and level of detail of the contents should also be defined on the basis of what is reasonable in terms of a number of different aspects. It is important to emphasise that the information in the SEA report should be reasonable. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the person preparing the SEA report can choose to exclude some or any of the items contained in chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code. Issues and aspects may only be excluded if it can be shown that they are not relevant or have nothing to do with the significant environmental effects (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 41). In accordance with chapter 6, section 13 Environmental Code, the SEA report should “contain reasonable information with regard to

1. assessment methods and current knowledge, 2. the contents and level of detail of the plan or programme, 3. the public interest, and 4. the fact that certain issues may be assessed better when other plans and

programmes are being examined or when activities or measures are being assessed for the purpose of granting permits”.

The above four items are reviewed below. 6.3.1 Reasonable information with regard to assessment methods and

current knowledge The SEA report should contain reasonable information with regard to assessment methods and current knowledge (chapter 6, section 13 first paragraph item 1 Environmental Code). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “The tools and methods deemed most appropriate for the purpose” should be used to define the scope of the SEA report (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009). This may apply, for example, to definitions of scope relating to input data, the assessment method to be used to establish what significant effects are (e.g. scale and grounds for assessment), methods for future investigations, methods for how the assessment itself is carried out and methods for weighing alternatives against each other. The more delimiting factors one succeeds in identifying and communicating in the consultation, the clearer the process becomes and the smoother it will run. Existing methods and tools should be used in the first instance. Nevertheless, a certain amount of adaptation to the specific SEA report is often required. If there is a lack of appropriate methods, it is important to mention that in the consultation in order to clarify that such is the case and discuss how the situation is to be dealt with.

80



The general guidelines state that, “Current knowledge should mean the collected knowledge existing in society in a particular area. It should be possible for the municipal authority or government agency to make use of all existing relevant knowledge in the work on the SEA report, including knowledge produced for other purposes.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) It is reasonable to interpret the term “knowledge” broadly and include both factual knowledge of individual details and collected knowledge on a wider area which can be put into practice. In the first instance, use the compiled knowledge which already exists in society, e.g. at county administrative boards, municipal authorities, professional and industrial organisations, universities and colleges, the public and in the collected literature. Nevertheless, existing knowledge may need to be summarised and adapted to make it more usable for the SEA report. When important information is lacking or is not up to date, existing knowledge needs to be supplemented with new knowledge in the form of, for example, research studies of various kinds such as inventories of flora and fauna, information on noise levels, particle contents, human health or distinctive cultural or historical features. Nevertheless, existing knowledge should be used in the first instance (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 26, 39, 53; European Commission 2004, pages 26, 44). 6.3.2 Reasonable information with regard to the contents and level of

detail of the plan or programme Information produced within the framework of a SEA report should be reasonable as far as the contents and level of detail of the plan or programme are concerned (chapter 6, section 13, first paragraph, item 2 Environmental Code). If a SEA report relates to a more comprehensive plan or programme, for example a regional development programme or a regional growth programme, it should not and cannot be drawn up with the same level of detail as for plans or programmes which are more restrictive both in geographical terms and in terms of their subject-matter, such as detailed development plans, energy plans and waste plans. The hierarchical level not only affects how detailed the SEA report is and should be, but also the kind of issues that it should deal with. SEA reports relating to plans and programmes at a general level often deal with the effects of large structures and systems whereas that is neither possible nor appropriate in detailed development plans, for example (Government Bill 2003/04:116 pages 26, 65; European Commission 2004, pages 21–22, 26–27). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “The consequences of a plan or programme should be described with the degree of precision permitted by the plan or programme. The more detailed the plan or programme is, the more precise the SEA report may be. Imprecise plans and programmes which, for example, permit a large number of possible courses of action may, depending on the uncertainties in the results to which they give rise, require a more extensive SEA report in order to assess the results of their implementation. In

81



the case of such plans and programmes, an SEA report may, for example, need to be based on comparative alternatives which are founded on alternative forecasts or scenarios.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) It may be particularly appropriate for plans and programmes of that type to describe possible environmental effects with the aid of scenario techniques, for example, and for them to describe any uncertainty in assessments and approvals with the aid of uncertainty analyses, risk analyses and sensitivity analyses, for example. See also sections 8.4. and 8.7. 6.3.3 Reasonable information with regard to the interests of the public The SEA report should contain reasonable information with regard to the interests of the public (chapter 6, section 13, first paragraph item 3 Environmental Code). Article 7 of the protocol on “Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention20 on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context”, which has been ratified by Sweden, states that the environmental report shall contain such information as may reasonably required taking into account “The interests of the public and the information needs of the decision-making body” (UNECE 2003 article 7; UNECE 2007, pages 67–68). EU Directive 2001/42 lacks any reference to “the interests of the public” and “the information needs of the decision-making body” (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 53). The “public” does not just mean the public affected or which may be affected by the plan or programme, but all parties who may have an interest in the plan or programme, including non-governmental organisations (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 26). See also section 5.2.2 above. Some plans and programmes do not give rise to any particularly great interest among the public. That may be because they are extremely comprehensive in nature or they only affect a few people. Other plans and programmes affect large numbers of people or are controversial. A plan or programme may affect the public by making demands on the individual, e.g. a waste plan. A detailed development plan may be invasive or entail a large-scale change for the individual. To enable the public to participate fully in the consultation, there should be proper analysis of the assessment of issues of importance for the public and the results presented in the SEA report should be understandable by the public. Issues should also be illustrated from the public’s perspective and according to the public’s interests. Because the SEA report should contain information which is “reasonable” with regard to the interest of the public, the government agency or municipal authority should attempt to assess what interest the public may have in the plan or programme (UNECE 2007, pages 79, 87–93; chapter 6, section 13, first paragraph item 3 Environmental Code).

20 The Convention is normally referred to as the Espoo Convention and the Protocol is normally referred to as the SEA Protocol.

82



In the event of any uncertainty regarding the interest of the public, you should make use of experience of the public’s interest in and reactions to the production of similar plans and programmes at your government agency or municipal authority and, if necessary, the experience of other municipal authorities or government agencies. Another possible way to attempt to gauge the interest of the public is to consult a range of interest groups about their possible interest in the plan or programme in question. If the government agency or municipal authority informs the public that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail significant environmental effects and a strategic environmental assessment is to be carried out, that also provides the public with an opportunity to show their interest. The interest of the public in a particular plan or programme should be investigated at an early stage in the process and no later than during consultation on the definition of the scope to enable it to be taken into consideration when the SEA report is drawn up. One possible way to gauge the interest of the public is to issue an invitation to a wide consultation when defining the scope of the SEA report and then also include the public, even though the legislation contains no such requirement (see above, chapter 5, particularly sections 5.2.2 and 5.2.4). 6.3.4 Reasonable information with regard to the fact that some issues

are easier to assess when assessing something else When defining the contents, scope and level of detail of the SEA report, it is also necessary to take into consideration the fact that some issues are easier to assess when carrying out assessments on other plans and programmes or when carrying out assessments on activities or measures for the purposes of permits (chapter 6, section 13 first paragraph, item 4 Environmental Code). Some issues are dealt with in more than one plan or programme and these may differ in terms of their level of detail, aim and geographical scope. When possible, one should make use of results from work carried out on SEAs and EIAs for other plans, programmes or projects and coordinate assessment work between different plans, programmes and projects. In order for information and results from earlier SEAs and EIAs to be usable, the information must naturally be up-to-date, accurate and relevant and it must be placed in the context of the strategic environmental assessment in question (chapter 6, section 22 Environmental Code; European Commission 2004, pages 22, 26–27). Making use of results from earlier work on EISs, SEA reports and taking into consideration the fact that some issues are easier to assess when carrying out assessments on other plans and programmes or when carrying out assessments on activities or measures for the purposes of permits can serve to avoid duplicating work and ensure that the work is carried out in the appropriate context and at the most suitable hierarchical level (chapter 6, section 22 Environmental Code; Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 25–26, 46, 66, 69; European Commission 2004, pages 21–22, 26–27).

83



The aim of avoiding duplicated work should not be interpreted in such a way as to mean that relevant issues in a plan may be excluded simply because they are also dealt with in another plan. Instead, the statement that some issues are easier to assess when another plan or programme is being assessed should be interpreted to mean that some issues, due to their level of detail, are best managed at an overall level, whereas other issues are best managed at a more detailed level. It is important that this should not be applied in such a way that essential matters are pushed down the hierarchy and dealt with at a detailed level at which the overall structures which caused the problems cannot be changed. There are generally more deadlocks and fewer alternatives at a lower hierarchical level. Therefore you must not, for example, refrain from carrying out a thorough SEA report on parts of a municipal comprehensive plan whenever it is possible to do so simply because you intend to carry out detailed plans on those areas (see sections 1.2 and 7.3). There is also a link here to section 6.3.2 above, which discusses the level of detail of the SEA report at different hierarchical levels. Placing the plan or programme in context makes it easier for anyone reading the SEA report to understand the context in which the plan operates and therefore also its scope. When the scope is defined according to this aspect, it may also be appropriate to describe both how the plan or programme affects other plans and programmes and how other plans and programmes affect the plan or programme in question (Government Bill 2003/04:116 pages 65–66; European Commission 2004, pages 22, 26–27). . 6.4 Different stages in defining the scope of the

SEA report The definition of the scope and the consultation on the definition of the scope may need to be longer or shorter, depending on the type of plan or programme in question. See also section 5.2.4. on consultation on the definition of scope. The scoping of the SEA report may be divided into four different stages. The description of the definition of scope as a process consisting of four different steps or stages should be regarded as a tool providing support on how to view the definition of scope and work with it. The divisions should therefore not be interpreted as meaning that you must complete one stage before beginning work on the next. In practice, it will often prove appropriate or necessary to go back and complete an earlier stage in the process in order to progress with a later stage and it may prove useful to work on more than one stage at the same time. The definition of the scope may be divided into the following stages:

1. collection and compilation of relevant background information 2. assessment of what reasonable alternatives are available for the plan or

programme 3. assessment of what the SEA report should contain 4. assessment of the scope and level of detail of the SEA report.

84



At a first stage, it may be appropriate to collect and compile information relevant to the plan or programme and the definition of the scope of the SEA report. Information which may be relevant includes, for example, information on the environmental situation in the area in question and what circumstances in the environment are particularly sensitive to the effects. Plans or programmes already drawn up, including plans or programmes relating to other areas or sectors or to another level in the decision-making hierarchy can sometimes provide information which is usable when defining the scope. See also tables 6 and 7. In the case of plans for which screening was carried out pursuant to appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, supporting materials already exist and these can be used when defining the scope (see section 4.5). If no such screening has been carried out, it is particularly important that the definition of the scope should begin as early as possible in the process. See also section 8.6.2. At a second stage of the work on defining the scope, it may be appropriate to assess what reasonable alternatives are available for the plan or programme. It is important to carry out such an assessment because the choice of reasonable alternatives affects the scope of the significant environmental effects which may be expected to occur as a consequence of the implementation of the plan or programme. See also chapter 7 on alternatives. At a third stage, it may be appropriate to assess what the SEA report should contain. It is a question, in the first instance, of identifying the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail. The significant environmental effects should be assessed on the basis of the effect on the environmental quality objectives and other environmental considerations and in terms of the aspects listed in chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 Environmental Code. It may be appropriate to produce a checklist for reviewing and assessing each environmental quality objective, other environmental considerations and all aspects set out in item 6 (see sections 4.5.2 and 6.2). At a fourth stage, the scope of the SEA report should be defined in terms of the scope and level of detail of its contents. The scope is defined according to what is reasonable in terms of the aspects set out in chapter 6, section 13, paragraph 1, Environmental Code (see section 6.3).

85



Particular points to consider when defining the scope of the SEA report

• Important aims of the definition of the scope include avoiding unnecessary work, focusing on the positive and adverse significant environmental effects and ensuring that the SEA report can serve as a complete supporting document for decisions.

• Begin the work on defining the scope early and integrate the work with planning. • Collect and compile relevant information. • Use existing knowledge and existing methods and supplement them as required. • Assess what reasonable alternatives are appropriate for the plan or programme

and how they affect the significant environmental effects that may be considered to occur.

• Chapter 6, section 12 of the Environmental Code sets out what the SEA report must contain.

• Assess what the SEA report must contain pursuant to chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph Environmental Code – item 6 in particular but also item 5.

• Chapter 6, section 13 Environmental Code states that the scope and level of detail of the contents of the SEA report should be defined according to what is reasonable.

• Assess the scope and level of detail of the SEA report with the aid of chapter 6, section 13, items 1–4 of the Environmental Code.

• The criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports may be used support when defining the scope.

• It may be necessary to review the definition of the scope several times during the planning process.

• The definition of the scope and the consultation on the definition of the scope may require a longer or shorter period.

• The definition of the scope may be divided into four different steps or stages in order to facilitate the work of defining the scope.

• It may be easier to adopt a broader definition of the scope from the beginning and then narrow it down at a later stage, rather than the other way round.

• You should carry out consultation on the definition of the scope.

86



7 Alternatives This chapter deals with the aim of producing different alternatives, what alternatives may be considered as reasonable and how they can be developed and managed in the strategic environmental assessment process. 7.1 The aim of producing alternatives One aim of producing alternatives within the framework of a strategic environmental assessment is to enable strategic choices to be made and justified at an early stage, before a decision is made at project level (Government Bill 2003/04:116 page 58). Besides the aim of facilitating strategic choices, there are also aims connected with the environment and democracy. By producing alternatives, it is possible to find ways of reducing or avoiding the occurrence of significant adverse environmental effects as a consequence of the implementation of plans and programmes. The production of alternatives also makes it possible to identify ways to strengthen the positive environmental effects of implementation. The identification/development, description and assessment of alternatives may be described as the very core of the SEA report which, in turn, is the core of the strategic environmental assessment. The work on alternatives is therefore an important factor in the achievement of the aim of strategic environmental assessment itself (European Commission 2004, pages 25–26; see section 1.1 above). Alternative plans and programmes and alternatives within a plan or programme also provide the decision-makers and those who wish to participate in the process with examples of various possibilities for achieving the aim of the plan or programme. Alternatives therefore serve as important supporting materials for consultation and participation in and influence over in the plan or programme process. Well-executed management of alternatives means a kind of assurance for decision-makers that no significantly better alternative has been overlooked. 7.2 Reasonable alternatives “Reasonable alternatives” regarding the aim and geographical scope of the plan or programme should also be identified, described and assessed in the SEA report (chapter 6 section 12, first paragraph Environmental Code). In this context, “reasonable alternatives” means “different alternative ways to achieve the aim of the plan or programme” (Government Bill 2003/04:116 page 64). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “Alternatives which prevent the aim of the plan or programme from being achieved cannot be considered to be reasonable.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) Furthermore, in accordance with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines, “reasonable alternatives” means “both alternative plans and programmes and different alternatives within the framework of a plan or programme” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009).

87



In accordance with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines, the aim of the plan, programme or amendment of the plan or programme should not be “so narrowly formulated that there is only one reasonable alternative or the possibility of developing alternatives is greatly limited” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009), otherwise the possibility of making a strategic choice is lost or restricted. Such a narrow definition of the aim of the plan or programme would also mean that the possibility of achieving the aim of the strategic environmental assessment, that of “integrating environmental aspects in the plan or programme in order to promote sustainable development”, would be greatly limited. In general, any assessment of how extensive the environmental effects resulting from the implementation of a plan, programme or amendment will be is surrounded by uncertainty. It is an advantage if the differences between the anticipated environmental effects of the various alternatives are greater than the uncertainty surrounding the assessment of the anticipated environmental effects. The general guidelines state that, “The reasonable alternatives produced should demonstrate sufficient differences in the implementation and the solutions for achieving the aim of the plan or programme to enable meaningful comparisons to be made between alternatives.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) When producing alternatives, conflicts may often arise between different objectives and interests, e.g. between environmental interests and operational interests (see section 4.3.2). One should endeavour to find alternatives whose implementation does not entail any significant environmental effects, but which enable the aim of the plan or programme to be achieved. The balance which often needs to be struck between different interests in any case (within the framework of what is permissible in current legislation) is primarily a political question which is best decided at a political level and not by civil servants. Designing and presenting alternatives in such a way as to make clear the advantages and disadvantages for different interests strengthens the democratic decision-making process. Alternatives which are worse from an environmental point of view and which lack any other obvious advantages can hardly be considered as reasonable alternatives. Neither can alternatives which are produced with the aim of showing how the main proposal is preferable compared to other alternatives (European Commission 2004, page 26). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When producing reasonable alternatives, the aim of the strategic environmental assessment of plans and programmes, i.e. to integrate environmental aspects into the plan or programme so as to promote sustainable development, should be specially observed.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009, chapter 6, section 11 Environmental Code) To enable alternatives to be produced which best fulfil both the aim of the plan or programme and the aim of the strategic environmental assessment, it is often necessary for government agencies with responsibility for different experts areas and geographical areas to act in close cooperation. This applies, for example, in

88



the area of transport, where it is necessary to discuss planning of roads, railways, housing and workplaces. The alternatives produced must also be implementable and should therefore preferably fall within the legal and geographical authority of the government agency or municipal authority concerned (European Commission 2004, page 26). In some cases, however, the best or even the only reasonable alternative may be a solution which lies outside the authority of the government agency or municipal authority concerned. Such alternatives should therefore not be excluded, particularly if the alternatives falling within the legal or geographical authority of a government agency or municipal authority contain important defects. 7.3 Alternatives at a strategic level One of the biggest advantages of preparing a SEA report at a strategic level, as in the production of plans and programmes, compared to preparing an EIS at project level is that it is possible to discuss what kind of alternatives and measures are appropriate, rather than merely how they are to be designed. Instead of merely discussing, for example, how and where a road is to be built, what capacity it should have, whether it may be permitted, etc., as often occurs at project level, one can discuss whether there are any alternative solutions to an identified problem. If it is a question, for example, of a desire for greater accessibility, one reasonable alternative may be to adopt measures that help reduce the demand for transport instead of increasing accessibility by extending capacity. The emphasis on alternatives is greater in the case of SEA reports than in EISs (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 40). At strategic level, it is possible to work more on visions and long-term sustainable alternatives, whereas at project level alternatives are often about solving a more or less urgent problem. There are fewer alternatives at project level and they are also often defined in more political terms (Therievel 2004, page 110). Alternatives can be divided into four hierarchical levels. It may be appropriate to conform to this hierarchical division when devising an alternative, (Therievel 2004, pages 110–118, see also the Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2000, pages 17–28).

1. First investigate whether or why anything new is actually needed or required. Is it possible to reduce the demand for energy, transport, housing, waste facilities, etc. by using different control methods? Do we need, for example, to increase the supply of energy or can we instead reduce demand through saving and greater efficiency? Do we need to build a new road or can we instead reassign transport to railways, public transport and bicycles.

2. When alternatives for reducing demand have been investigated and exhausted, the next step is to decide which alternative is to be adopted to meet the demand/requirements. Are there any alternative solutions that can meet the

89



need with fewer environmental effects and in a more sustainable way than the “obvious”, traditional methods?

3. When you have clearly established the kind of measures and the size of the demand/requirements that need to be met, you can then decide where the development is to take place and the extent of the measures adopted. This is the level at which you discuss where a new railway or road is to be built.

4. The final level deals with how the measures are to be designed and implemented.

In the case of SEAs, the focus is on hierarchical levels 1 and 2 above, whereas in the case of EIAs, the focus is on levels 3 and 4. 7.4 Generation of alternatives Producing, developing, assessing and choosing an alternative is often an iterative process involving a large number of sub-decisions. in such a process, it may be appropriate, among other things, to consider alternatives on the basis of the hierarchical levels set out in section 7.3 above. See also figure 2 and section 3.4 on integration of planning and strategic environmental assessment work. Sometimes, planning work is based on a problem to be solved and sometimes it is based on an overall objective or an overall vision. It can also form part of the regular work of the government agency or municipal authority. In some cases, planning work is initiated by trade and industry or other interest groups. Existing plans and programmes naturally serve as a starting point when a new plan or a new programme and a range of alternatives are to be produced. One suitable starting point could be to describe and develop the zero alternative, i.e. describe the environmental circumstances and the likely state of development of the environment at a given future time if no new plan or new programme is implemented. Even if you do not adopt any new plan or any new programme, you can expect measures to be adopted in the plan or programme area. A change in environmental circumstances can also generally be expected, either as a consequence of the aforesaid measures or as a consequence of external effects or due to the fact that the situation in the environment can change over time even if the strain on the environment is the same. See also sections 7.5.2. and 8.6.2. Even if existing plans or programmes serve as a natural starting point and often provide effective support when drawing up new plans, programmes and alternatives, there is also a risk that old plans and programmes will give rise to solutions involving old ways of thinking. It is important to stimulate creativity and be able to think in new ways so that environmental issues are truly integrated and the plan or programme can contribute to sustainable development.

90



Two ways to stimulate new ways of thinking and creativity are:

• to involve a large number of people, preferably with a wide range of different skills and experience, when drawing up alternatives

• to use methods that emphasise creativity and new ways of thinking, such as, methods for analysing the surrounding environment and for future analysis. Working with scenarios, for example, can be extremely useful in some cases. See also section 8.7.

If the municipal authority or the government agency that is drawing up a plan or a programme has no old plans or programmes of its own to serve as a basis, other government agencies’ plans or programmes can provide inspiration and ideas. Other agencies’ plans and programmes can naturally provide good ideas and inspiration even if the government agency or municipal authority does have old plans of its own to serve as a basis. Plans and programmes in areas other than the area in question can also provide guidance, inspiration and ideas. That applies particularly to experiences of different methods used to produce earlier plans and programmes. Another natural starting point when producing a new plan or a new programme is the factor that led to the need for a new plan or a new programme. If the work arose due to a problem that needs solving or an objective that one wishes to achieve, there are often different possible solutions or courses of action that can form a basis for the development of reasonable alternatives. In the case of plans for land use, for example, obvious alternatives may consist of areas partitioned off for activities or purposes of a particular kind being used for other purposes and alternative areas being selected for the original activities and purposes. The alternative may therefore consist of an alternative location for the kind of activity you are planning (Government Bill 2004/04:116, page 64). The alternatives for detailed development plans are always more limited than for comprehensive plans. It is therefore important for a range of alternatives to be thoroughly investigated in comprehensive plans and for knowledge of different alternatives to be used in future locations of activities and measures. 7.5 Processing of various alternatives 7.5.1 Definition of the scope of alternatives The freedom and ability to produce alternatives for plans and programmes leads to opportunities as well as presenting a considerable challenge. To ensure that the work on alternatives is not insurmountable or does not consume resources to an unreasonable extent, the scope should be defined in terms of both the number of plan- or programme-alternatives drawn up and the alternatives within a particular plan or programme alternative. When drawing up alternatives, you should also strike a balance between the level of detail of the various alternatives and the number of

91



alternatives drawn up. Three fundamental factors to be taken into consideration when defining the scope are:

• the aim of the plan or programme • the aim of the strategic environmental assessment • the significant environmental effects

Chapter 6, on the definition of the scope of the SEA report, and chapter 8, on the SEA report, may be of help when defining the scope of the alternatives. 7.5.2 Zero alternatives and other alternatives The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “When producing reasonable alternatives, the aim relating to the strategic environmental assessment of plans ... should be specially observed.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) From the point of view of strategic environmental assessment, the ideal final draft of a plan or programme is a draft which brings about as few adverse environmental effects and as many positive environmental effects as possible and which therefore helps to fulfil the aim of the strategic environmental assessment as far as possible (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009; European Commission 2004, pages 25–26). It may therefore be appropriate to produce an alternative to a plan, a programme or an amendment which is so good from an environmental point of view that it can obviously help achieve the environmental quality objectives laid down by the Swedish Parliament in cases where the objective depends on the plan or programme. Nevertheless, in this context is should be pointed out that the concept of “environment” used in connection with strategic environmental assessments is broader than in the environmental quality objectives and that all the aspects contemplated in chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 Environmental Code should be taken into consideration when drawing up alternatives. See also sections 6.2. and 8.6.4. In addition to at least one alternative for investigation , one so-called zero alternative must also be provided. The zero alternative should describe the environmental circumstances and the likely development of the environment if the plan, programme or amendment is not implemented (chapter 6 section 12, second paragraph, item 2 Environmental Code). The zero alternative is therefore not a description of current circumstances and neither is it only a projection of current circumstances when no measures are adopted; instead it includes the measures and changes that may be expected to be implemented even if no new plan or new programme is adopted. Under normal circumstances it is reasonable to provide at least a further two alternatives for investigation in addition to the zero alternative. If the integration of the work on the draft plan or programme and the strategic environmental assessment has been extremely effective and the knowledge and information which has come to light during the strategic environmental assessment

92



has been taken fully into consideration in the performance of the plan or programme work, it may sometimes be difficult in the final stages to think up a number of reasonable alternative plans or programmes. In some cases, there may finally be only one reasonable draft of a plan, a programme or an amendment that has been so well adapted in environmental terms that its implementation is no longer considered to entail significant adverse environmental effects. Within the framework of such a plan or programme it may be possible in any case to find alternatives which are able to contribute even more to achieving the aim of the strategic environmental assessment. It may be a question of alternatives that further reduce the adverse effects or alternatives that further reinforce the positive effects. It may, for example, be a question of alternatives which involve restoring the environment or adopting compensation measures or alternatives that reduce the likelihood of adverse environmental effects. Nevertheless, there is no requirement that states that a government agency or municipal authority must choose the best alternative from an environmental point of view (Government Bill 2003/04:116 page 68). See also sections 8.1 and 8.3 below. 7.5.3 Assessment and reporting alternatives There are no different requirements for assessment as far as reasonable alternatives are concerned. The requirements relating to the contents, scope and level of detail of the SEA report are therefore the same and are mainly set out in chapter 6, sections 12–13 Environmental Code. Furthermore, the SEA report must contain an account of why those particular alternatives were chosen for analysis (chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 8 Environmental Code). See also section 8.6.6. To enable comparisons to be made, it is important that the significant environmental affects that the plan or programme and alternative may be considered to entail should be described and assessed in an equivalent manner and that they should to relate to the same aspects and periods of time. It is also important to report why one particular alternative is considered to be better than another and the aspects on which that judgement is made (European Commission 2004, page 25). The positive and adverse environmental effects of the various reasonable alternatives should be compared with the environmental effects of the so-called zero alternative at the moment when the environmental effects of the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment have come to light. See figure 4 below and section 7.5.2. In order to explain the differences between the various alternatives, it may also be appropriate or necessary to carry out specific comparisons between all alternatives. This may be necessary if the differences in the environmental effects of the various alternatives are relatively small, whereas the difference between the zero alternative and the other alternatives is large. When comparing different alternatives it may be appropriate to also include an assessment of the extent to which the alternative in question helps achieve the aim of the plan or programme.

93



A comparison should also be carried out taking the current situation as a starting point. Otherwise, there is a risk that other factors which give rise to greater environmental effects and which are wholly or partly independent of the plan or programme will not be noticed. If, for example, an anticipated increase in traffic is a fundamental premise in all the alternatives, it may mean that the strain on the environment resulting from traffic will increase in all the alternatives compared to current levels, though this will not come to light if you only compare the alternatives with one another. Different types of comparisons provide different types of information. Several types of comparison are required in order to provide comprehensive supporting data (see figure 4 below).

Figure 4 The environmental effects of different alternatives

Figure 4 shows a hypothetical case with the environmental effects of different alternatives (A, the zero alternative, B and C) compared with the current situation and the environmental objectives and at a moment when the plan, programme or amendment has been implemented and the environmental effects may have come to light (the ends of the curves). Note that alternative B is better than the zero alternative from an environmental point of view, but involves a worse situation compared to the current situation, which involves moving further away from a hypothetical environmental objective.

It is often desirable to quantify the changes that may be supposed to result if different alternatives are implemented. Nevertheless, this can be difficult and, moreover, is not always necessary. If it is not possible or not required, you can instead carry out a qualitative assessment of the effects. You can assess whether various aspects of the effects are positive, negative or unchanged in proportion to the zero alternative and relative to the current situation. See also sections 8.4. and 8.7.1. To make it easier to compare different alternatives, you can, for example, draw up a table showing an assessment of how the various plan and programme alternatives differ in terms of their environmental effects and in terms of the extent to which they

94



fulfil the aims and objectives of the plan or programme. In any such comparison it is appropriate to include the environmental effects on the relevant areas and aspects which are listed in chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 of the Environmental Code,. The comparison should also include the effect on the environmental quality objectives and other environmental considerations relating to the plan or programme (chapter 6 section 12, second paragraph, item 5 Environmental Code). The report on the environmental effects of the different alternatives and their fulfilment of the aims and objectives of the plan or programme forms a suitable basis for the report on the reasons for the choice of various alternatives which should be included in the SEA report in accordance with chapter 6 section 12, second paragraph, item 8 Environmental Code. When you carry out an analysis of the environmental effects of the plan or programme, the analysis is generally built on a series of premises and is, for a number of reasons, more or less uncertain. For that reason it is also appropriate to assess and state how certain you consider the analysis to be and how sensitive it is to changes in circumstances through, for example, sensitivity analyses and uncertainty analyses. See also sections 8.4. and 8.7. In addition, after the plan or programme has been adopted, the reasons for adopting that plan or programme as opposed to the alternatives should be reported in a special synopsis (chapter 6 sections 12, 16 Environmental Code; European Commission 2004, pages 26, 30 ). It is therefore best to document throughout the process which alternatives are being updated and how they have been managed. See also sections 3.4, 8.6.6 and chapter 10. In order to facilitate communication regarding the various alternatives with other parties, including those wishing to participate in a consultation and decision makers, it is often best to name the alternatives according to some individual characteristic. If you draw up variations on the various alternatives, they should also be identified by a tag stating a characteristic of the variation in question.

95



Particular points to consider during identification, description and assessment of alternatives

• Reasonable alternatives should be identified, described and assessed. • Alternatives should relate to both alternative plans and programmes and

alternatives within the framework of a plan or programme. • Particular attention should be paid to the aims of the strategic environmental

assessment of plans and programmes when producing alternatives. • The aim of the plan or programme should not be so narrowly formulated that only

one alternative exists or the possibility of developing alternatives is severely limited.

• Production and development of alternatives has a central role to play in helping to achieve the aims of the strategic environmental assessment.

• It should be possible for the alternative to serve as a basis for strategic decisions, actions and solutions which can help achieve the aim of both the strategic environmental assessment and the plan or programme.

• An alternative can both contribute to positive environmental effects and help avoid or reduce adverse environmental effects.

• When preparing a range of alternatives, it may be appropriate to use a hierarchical division in which the different levels in the hierarchy respond to different matters as a basis.

• Adopt measures and use methods which allow greater creativity when producing alternatives.

• The environmental effects and the environmental circumstances that it is considered will result from choosing the so-called zero alternative should be described.

• Compare the environmental effects of the various alternatives at a moment when the plan, programme or amendment is considered to be fully implemented and the environmental effect has come to light. Also carry out a comparison with existing environmental effects and existing environmental circumstances.

• The differences in the environmental effects should be made clear in the comparisons between all the alternatives, including the so-called zero alternative.

• Comparisons between alternatives should clearly show any differences in the extent to which the goals of the plan or programme are fulfilled.

• Describe any uncertainties associated with the assessment of the environmental effects of different alternatives and how those uncertainties have been managed.

96



8 SEA reports This chapter deals with the SEA report, what that document must, should and can contain and how SEA reports can be drawn up. For information on consultations regarding SEA reports, see section 5.2.5. 8.1 The aim of the SEA report The aim of the SEA report is to serve, along with the plan or programme, as a basis for a decision when the plan or programme is adopted or used as a basis for regulation. It is also the most important supporting material for monitoring and supervising the significant environmental effects to which the plan or programme actually gives rise. The SEA report must identify, describe and assess the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail. Reasonable alternatives regarding the aim and geographical scope of the plan or programme should also be identified, described and assessed (chapter 6, sections 12, 13, 16 Environmental Code; European Commission 2004, pages 24, 26). See also chapter 7 on alternatives and chapter 11 on monitoring. In order for the aim of the strategic environmental assessment to be achieved and the design of the plan or programme to be influenced, the strategic environmental assessment and the work on the SEA report should begin as soon as possible and should be integrated into the plan or programme process. It may be appropriate to establish the basis for the SEA report as soon as screening begins (European Commission 2004, page 24). The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that “A SEA report should either consist of a separate document or else it should be included as a clearly distinguishable, integrated part of the plan or programme document.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) 8.2 The quality of the SEA report The government agency or municipal authority which decides whether a plan or programme should be adopted also decides whether or not the SEA report is of satisfactory quality. In some cases, different bodies may be responsible for the preparation of the SEA report and for deciding on the adoption of a plan or programme. If the SEA report does not conform to the requirements established in the Environmental Code, the government agency or municipal authority making the decision may require the party that drew up the SEA report to supplement or amend it. A deficient SEA report can mean that the validity of all later decisions, even the adoption of the plan or programme, may be questioned and possibly annulled (European Commission 2004, page 32). See also chapter 12 below. The European Commission guidelines state that the information in the SEA report should be “complete and reliable”. According to the Directive, Member States should

97



ensure that environmental reports are of “sufficient quality”, i.e., of sufficiently high quality to comply with the requirements in the EU Directive. Member States must inform the Commission of all measures they adopt with regard to the quality of these reports, In Government Bill 2003/04:116, which preceded the introduction of the provisions on strategic environmental assessments in the Environmental Code, the government states that “It is assumed that government agencies and municipal authorities loyally apply the laws. This, along with the role of the central supervisory authorities and the open process which makes observation possible, is sufficient to fulfil the quality control requirements contained in the Directive.” (European Commission 2004, page 32; article 12 EU Directive 2001/42, Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 41) In order for an SEA report to be considered to be of satisfactory quality, the work on it must lead to environmental aspects being integrated in the plan or programme so as to promote sustainable development. Because that is the aim of the strategic environmental assessment, it also forms the starting point for a well-executed SEA report. The contents of chapter 3 regarding the quality of the strategic environmental assessment process are also largely applicable to the work on the SEA report. A good-quality SEA report is characterised by the following features, among others:

• It has a clear, well thought-out structure. • It gives a clear account of the definition of scope. • It contains all the parts that it must contain in accordance with chapter 6,

section 12 Environmental Code in terms of what is reasonable (chapter 6, section 13 Environmental Code) and in terms of the aim and geographical scope of the plan or programme. This means, for example, that basic data is supplemented if necessary.

• It focuses on the significant environmental effects and reports how and on what grounds the assessment of what constitutes a significant environmental effect was carried out.

• It describes the environmental effects of the various alternatives compared to the zero alternative and compared to current environmental effects in a way which is comprehensible and clear for the layman.

• It uses the legal terms existing in the Environmental Code and in other statutes in such a way as to make their meaning clear.

• It is built on reliable supporting data of sufficiently high quality. • It reports on how the work on producing the SEA report was carried out,

including the methods used and the persons involved, stating their responsibilities and the nature of their involvement.

• It reports on alternatives and measures considered and gives the reasons why the relevant alternatives and measures were selected.

98



• It reports on the premises defined and any uncertainties and deficiencies in supporting materials and assessments.

• It contains sensitivity analyses and uncertainty analyses on decisive assessments.

The SEA report should include a plan for implementation, the aim of which is to ensure that strategic decisions relating to the plan or programme are made in the intended manner (Therivel 2004, page 177). Any such implementation plan may identify the following, for example:

• Any strategic objectives and decisions that may conflict with the objectives of the plan or programme and any decisions which may possibly need to be amended or adjusted.

• What other decisions must be made in order, for example, to help those responsible for public transport to provide more frequent services or persuade a neighbouring municipality to change its parking policy.

• What other guidelines need to be produced, e.g. guidelines for the implementation of energy efficiency or for the adaptation of land development projects to the landscape.

• What needs to be monitored. • Who is responsible for each activity and when it is to be carried out. • How to verify or monitor that the activity has been carried out and whether it

was effective. • What is to be done if the activity is not carried out or does not prove to be

effective. 8.3 Different kinds of measures It is important to develop alternatives which mean that the implementation of the plan or programme does not give rise to any significant adverse environmental effects. However, it is also important that the implementation of the plan or programme should be able to contribute to favourable development from an environmental point of view. The aim of a strategic environmental assessment is to integrate environmental aspects into the plan or programme so as to promote sustainable development. (See also sections 4.3.1. and 4.3.2). It is possible to refer to four types of measures:

• protection measures or preventive measures • recovery measures • compensation measures • measures adopted to reinforce a positive environmental effect.

Generally speaking, a measure that enables an adverse environmental effect to be avoided is preferable to a measure that merely reduces an adverse effect. However, a

99



measure that reduces an adverse effect is preferable to a measure adopted in order to restore the situation in the environment to the situation prior to an adverse effect. Preventive measures which merely reduce the adverse effect should be supplemented by recovery measures. Finally, a recovery measure is preferable to a compensation measure. Compensation measures are appropriate for supplementing the other types of measures when they are judged to be insufficient. In the same way as with the choice of various alternatives, it is an advantage if the measure in question falls within the area of responsibility of the government agency or municipal authority and consists of something on which the government agency or municipal authority is able to make a decision (see section 7.2 above). Protection measures or preventive measures are normally adopted as preliminary measures in order to prevent or reduce adverse environmental effects in the case of development work of different kinds. A protection measure may, for example, consist of building a noise barrier to reduce noise disruption from a road being planned. See also section 8.6.5 on preventive measures. One example of a recovery measure would be raising the water level in drained wetland to its “original” level and thereby recovering parts of the environmental value which were lost when the area was drained.

Compensation measures may be classified as either countervailing measures, which aim to recover lost environmental functions in the same place as the lost functions, or replacement measures, which aim to recover lost environmental functions in a different place or in the same place but with functions other than those which were lost (see also Skärbäck and Rundcrantz 2007, pages 295–305). Compensation measures may apply to recreational values, natural values and ecological values. in Sweden, compensation has primarily been used to preserve and develop biodiversity. Requirements for compensation measures may be established in connection with a permit for activities and measures which may have a significant effect on certain specially protected areas (chapter 7, sections 27–29a Environmental Code). One famous example of compensation measures were those adopted by Banverket [the National Rail Administration] when building the Bothnia Line through a Natura 2000 area in the Umeälven delta. Even though compensation measures may be a positive element in planning, such measures should not be used as an alibi for planning that entails adverse environmental effects. Significant adverse environmental effects should be avoided in the first instance either by adopting protection measures or by avoiding the activities considered to give rise to significant environmental effects. However, in some cases it can be practically impossible or unreasonable, for example for financial reasons, to avoid significant environmental effects. Measures adopted to reinforce a situation that is already favourable from an environmental point of view may, for example, consist of reinforcing existing

100



measures to protect human health and the environment. Existing values may also be reinforced by increasing public access to open-air recreation areas or increasing biodiversity by clearing brushwood or through grazing or harvesting. 8.4 Management of uncertainty Uncertainties arise when carrying out assessments and analyses on the environmental effects that different alternatives may be considered to bring about. Attempts should be made in the first instance to remedy large-scale uncertainties in essential areas with the aid of supplementary supporting data for decisions, more detailed analyses, the use of different analysis methods, etc. However, due to the complex, unknown connections between measures, effects and consequences both in nature and in society and other effects which cannot be controlled, assessments will always be associated with a certain degree of uncertainty.

Assessments of the effects of plans and programmes are generally more uncertain than assessments of the effects of projects. Nevertheless, the alternatives are not all of equal importance when it comes to attempting to find alternative remedies or managing uncertainties in a different way. In order to make a strategic choice it may, for example, be sufficient to be sure that one alternative is better than another or that a particular measure entails a significant improvement over the situation were the measure not adopted (see sections 7.5.3 and 8.7). Nevertheless, uncertainties and deficiencies in supporting data and assessments should always be clarified. The same applies to the assumptions and definitions of scope which are necessary in analyses and assessments of this type. Justify and describe how the scope was defined (see chapter 6). Do not include only what is considered most likely, but also include unlikely events whose occurrence may lead to serious consequences. See also section 4.5.2 and the comments on criteria contained in section item 2d of appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports. It may be appropriate to attempt to assess and report on the degree of certainty or uncertainty of the assessments with the aid of uncertainty analyses and an attempt to establish the uncertainty interval. The UN climate research panel, the IPCC, has produced a guide for managing uncertainty in the climatic sphere (IPCC 2005). According to the IPCC, you should describe how sensitive the assessments are for the data and methods used, including any assumptions that have been made. One way of describing uncertainty is with the aid of sensitivity analyses. Uncertainty can also be managed with the aid of a scenario technique, which can be used to describe how other factors can develop in different ways, which is, in turn, important for the environmental effects of a plan or programme. Strategies can then be developed on the basis of these scenarios to aid management of other possible effects in future. See also section 8.7. on methods and tools.

101



8.5 The various stages of the SEA report 8.5.1 Introduction The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “The work on the SEA report and the integration with plan and programme work should begin as soon as possible.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009) The work is best begun by drawing up a plan for how the work is to be carried out, who is responsible for what and how the work is to be integrated with the plan or programme, etc. See also sections 3.4. and 8.2. The central element of the SEA report is to, “identify, describe and assess” the significant positive and adverse environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to entail. These three main elements each consist of several sub-elements (chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code). The work on identifying, describing and assessing is an iterative process in which the need for amendments and supplements comes to light as the alternatives for the plan or programme take shape. At an introductory stage, the emphasis is on identifying and describing, whereas later in the process the emphasis is on assessing and analysing the supporting material that has been compiled. The elements of identification, description and assessment each contain sub-elements that must be taken into consideration. There follows a short review of the various sub-elements. See sections 3.4. and 8.5.2–8.5.4. If screening is carried out pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, it is appropriate to use the information and knowledge that emerges from that screening in the work on the SEA report. See also section 4.5. Different kinds of supporting data are assembled and analysed in order to decide whether a strategic environmental assessment is required. It is also important to identify any need for further supporting data. These analyses and supporting data should serve as the primary basis for the SEA report and are then supplemented as the plan or programme work progresses. If screening can be carried out without taking into consideration the criteria set out in appendix 4 of the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports it does not generally give rise to much supporting data that can be used in the work on the SEA report. Instead, the work on the SEA report then begins with the definition of the scope of the SEA report. However, note that the plan and programme work also begins with the collection and assembly of supporting material. The work on the SEA report and the work on the plan or programme can therefore begin to be integrated as soon as the supporting material has been collected and assembled. See also section 3.4. 8.5.2 Identify and assemble At the introductory stage of the work on the SEA report, it is appropriate to identify and compile the knowledge required. The following are suitable questions to ask:

102



• What supporting data is required in view of the contents, scope and level of detail of the SEA report? See also chapter 6.

• What supporting data is required in order to decide what the significant environmental effects are and what other supporting materials are required for the SEA report? See also chapter 4.

• What supporting materials in the form of, for example, investigations and inventories is available and what possible supplements are required?

• What information and knowledge is not required for a plan or programme of this kind?

Begin the work of collecting and compiling existing supporting material as early as possible and assess the need for any supplementary material. It takes time to produce supplementary material in the form of inventories, for example. Focus on the significant environmental effects and do not allow access to supporting materials to determine the contents of the SEA report. Data and information that could contribute to raising the quality of the SEA report but which is not available or which requires unreasonable dedication of resources to produce may be left out. Nevertheless, the fact that the scope has been thus defined should be reported in the SEA report (chapter 6, sections 12–13 Environmental Code). The county administrative board has a specific responsibility and must collect any investigations, programmes and other investigatory materials of importance for management of land and water in the county existing in the files of State bodies. The county administrative board is obliged to supply such materials on request to the government agency or municipal authority which is to draw up an SEA report (chapter 6, section 20 Environmental Code). See also section 3.3 above. National government agencies also have different types of guidelines and information materials that can be used when drawing up SEA reports and alternatives and, for example, when assessing what is to be classified as a significant environmental effect. Examples of materials that may be usable include the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s manuals “Natura 2000 i Sverige” [Natura 2000 in Sweden] and “Riksintresse för naturvård och friluftsliv” [National interest for nature conservation and outdoor life] and the Riksantikvarieämbetet [Swedish National Heritage Board] booklet “Kulturmiljön som resurs” [The cultural environment as a resource] (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2003b and 2005, Swedish National Heritage Board 2007). Table 6 below contains examples of some sources of information at regional and national level. Valuable information is also available at municipal level. Municipal authorities’ comprehensive plans and detailed development plans are examples of sources of information that may be valuable in this context.

103



8.5.3 Describe The current environmental situation is described on the basis of collected and compiled supporting data. The description may need to be supplemented with new supporting material which is produced at an introductory stage or later, depending on how the work on the plan or programme progresses. It is important to retain focus on the particular plan or programme in question to ensure that the descriptions are relevant to both the current planning level and the effects that the plan or programme may be considered to bring about. It is easy to lose perspective and, for example, allow the scope and aim of the description of a current environmental situation to be determined by the fact that there is an abundance of easily-accessible material available on one particular aspect. It is important to avoid such a situation in order to prevent the aspects most relevant to the plan or programme in question disappearing in the body of the text and in order to save resources. It is important to provide the planning group with frequent updates on the description of the current environmental situation. This serves as important supporting material in the work on alternatives and is used as supporting data for comparing the current environmental situation with the situation that the implementation of a range of alternatives, including the zero alternative, is expected to bring about (see chapter 7).

104



Table 6. Examples of national and regional supervisory systems and sources of information

Source Responsibilities and duties

Institutet för miljömedicin (IMM) [the Institute of Environmental Medicine]

IMM is a data host for health-related environmental supervision at the request of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Data is collected on both national and regional environmental monitoring. www.imm.ki.se/Datavard

Lantmäteriet [the Swedish Mapping, Cadastral and Land Registration Authority]

The Swedish Mapping, Cadastral and Land Registration Authority is responsible for geographical information, classification of property, etc. For example, the digital archives of the Swedish Mapping, Cadastral and Land Registration Authority contain cadastral documents, i.e. maps and documents describing the classification of property in Sweden. www.lantmateriet.se/epidefault.aspx?id=55&lang=EN

Miljömålsportalen [the Environmental Objective Portal]

Miljömålsportalen is a portal for monitoring environmental objectives. It provides links to central government agencies with responsibility for environmental objectives and to regional environmental objective monitoring (RUS [regionalt uppföljningssystem - regional monitoring system], see below). http://www.miljomal.nu/Environmental-Objectives-Portal/

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency national environmental monitoring system. This provides links to data on air, fresh water, the coast and the sea, agricultural land, wetlands, environmental poisons, health-related environmental monitoring and bathing areas. It also contains information on basic data for assessing environmental quality in order to interpret environmental data. http://www.naturvardsverket.se/en/In-English/Menu/State-of-the-environment/

Riksantikvarieämbetet (RAÄ) [the Swedish National Heritage Board]

The Swedish National Heritage Board has information on ancient monuments and valuable buildings. Fornsök [The Archaeological Sites and Monuments database] contains information on ancient burial sites, settlements and working sites, both on land and under water, and information on rune stones, rock carvings, mines and many other aspects. Bebyggelseregistret [the Culture Heritage Management Buildings Database] contains material from older inventories and information on churches and historic buildings, along with information from Antikvarisktopografiska arkivet [the antiquarian topographical archive]. (only in Swedish) www.raa.se/cms/extern/soktjanster/soktjanster.html

RUS (regional monitoring system)

RUS is responsible for communal county administrative board information and support and coordination of monitoring of environmental objectives by the county administrative boards. That primarily involves management and further development of indicators at county level, supporting the county administrative boards in the work on the Miljömålsportalen county pages, reviewing regional objectives and coordinating with central government agencies and municipal authorities. (only in Swedish) www.rus.lst.se

Statistiska Centralbyrån (SCB) Statistics Sweden

Collections of a range of environmental statistics from various government agencies. (in Swedish) www.scb.se/Pages/SubjectArea____12459.aspx

Svenska Miljöinstitutet (IVL) [the Swedish Environmental Research Institute]

The IVL, at the request of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, is a data host for the results of national environmental monitoring in air and precipitation-borne chemicals in the background environment, air quality in densely populated areas, measurements of tree crown depositions and of environmental poisons and metals content in biomaterials. http://www.ivl.se/english/ivlstartpage/leftmenu/environmentaldata.4.360a0d56117c51a2d30800064209.html

105

http://www.imm.ki.se/Datavard

http://www.lantmateriet.se/epidefault.aspx?id=55&lang=EN

http://www.miljomal.nu/Environmental-Objectives-Portal/

http://www.naturvardsverket.se/en/In-English/Menu/State-of-the-environment/

http://www.naturvardsverket.se/en/In-English/Menu/State-of-the-environment/

http://www.raa.se/cms/extern/soktjanster/soktjanster.html

http://www.rus.lst.se/

http://www.scb.se/Pages/SubjectArea____12459.aspx

http://www.ivl.se/english/ivlstartpage/leftmenu/environmentaldata.4.360a0d56117c51a2d30800064209.html

http://www.ivl.se/english/ivlstartpage/leftmenu/environmentaldata.4.360a0d56117c51a2d30800064209.html



Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet (SLU) [the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences]

The SLU carries out observations and takes samples throughout the country, often at the request of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental monitoring in the areas of forestry, agricultural landscape, lakes and watercourses, eutrophication, acidification, risk substances and metals, biodiversity, game. http://www.slu.se/?id=158

Swedish county maps (GISdata)

Swedish county maps is a joint mapping service for Sweden’s county administrative boards. It contains maps showing general information on all counties, municipalities and densely populated areas. Each county administrative board is given the opportunity to add descriptions of these objects. Furthermore, it contains information from the county administrative boards’ areas of responsibility, illustrating items of national interest, protected natural areas and activities detrimental to the environment. Swedish county maps also contains a selection of the county’s sights. (in Swedish) www.gis.lst.se/lanskartor

8.5.4 Assess During the first stage of the analysis of the material, it is appropriate to assess what aspects of the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to give rise to environmental effects and whether the environmental effects in question could be significant. The next stage is to specify the environmental effects further on the basis of various alternatives to the plan or programme. A constant exchange of information and knowledge should take place between the work on analysis and assessment of different alternatives and the work on development of alternatives so that the assessment of alternatives can influence the design of the plan or programme (see sections 3.4 and 4.5 and chapters 6 and 7). The clearer and better defined the alternatives are, the more detailed the analysis and assessment of the environmental effects of the alternatives can be. Assessments are just assessments and it is important that they are carried out as consistently, objectively and impartially as possible. Furthermore, it should be easy for the general public and other interest groups to obtain information on the grounds for the assessments and how they were carried out. One way to do this is to make use of defined bases for assessment and set these out clearly in the SEA report. Examples of questions to ask in order to create a framework for reference are as follows:

• What scale is to be used? What is large and what is small? • What is to be classified as a significant effect in this context? How is it related

to the scope, duration and frequency of the effect? • In what way is the effect linked to results and consequences? • Where and on what will the results occur and what will the consequences be?

What is to be classified as a large-scale result and consequence and what is to be classified as small-scale?

• What is to be classified as long, medium and short duration? • What is the probability of different results and consequences and what is to be

classified as large and small probability? The use of bases for assessment means that the assessment will be more consistent and transparent. You should carry out a consultation regarding the basis for assessment

106

http://www.slu.se/?id=158

http://www.gis.lst.se/lanskartor



you intend to use during the consultation on the definition of scope. See also sections 4.5.2., 5.2.4 and chapter 6. One decisive factor for the ability to carry out a sufficiently precise assessment of the results and consequences of different alternatives and measures is that they should be carefully described and specified. The person who is to assess them must therefore request explanations if a strategic measure to be assessed is not clearly described. 8.6 The contents of the SEA report What the SEA report is to contain is governed in chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code, whereas the scope and level of detail of the SEA report is governed in chapter 6, section 13 Environmental Code. The definition of the scope of the SEA report is dealt with in chapter 6 of this manual. Chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, Environmental Code contains 10 items that the SEA report must contain (see below). Several of these items are extremely wide-ranging. Nevertheless, the information that the SEA report is required to contain is limited by what may be considered to be “reasonable” in terms of a number of aspects and in terms of the fact that it is primarily the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to entail that must be identified, described and assessed (chapter 6, sections 12 and 13 Environmental Code). Chapter 6 above contains more information on defining the scope of the SEA report. An excessively extensive SEA report also risks taking up necessary resources and making it more difficult for decision-makers and others to distinguish the most important results of the assessments and analyses carried out within the framework of the SEA report (European Commission 2004, pages 24, 26–27).

107



The Environmental Code, chapter 6, section 12 “Within the framework of a strategic environmental assessment in accordance with section 11, the government agency or municipal authority shall draw up a SEA report in which the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme may be considered to entail are identified, described and assessed. Reasonable alternatives with regard to the aim and geographical scope of the plan or programme shall also be identified, described and assessed. The SEA report shall contain.

1. a summary of the contents of the plan or programme, its main aim and its relationship to other relevant plans and programmes,

2. a description of the environmental circumstances and the likely development of the environment if the plan, programme or amendment is not implemented,

3. a description of the environmental circumstances in the area that may be considered to be significantly affected,

4. a description of relevant existing environmental problems connected with a natural area of those contemplated in chapter 7 or a number of areas of particular significance for the environment,

5. a description of how relevant environmental quality objectives and other environmental considerations have been taken into consideration in the plan or programme,

6. a description of the significant environmental effects that may be considered to arise in terms of biological diversity, population, human health, animal life, plant life, land, water, air, climatic factors, tangible assets, landscape, buildings, ancient and cultural remains and other cultural heritage and the mutual relationship between those environmental aspects,

7. a description of the measures planned to forestall, prevent or counteract significant adverse environmental effects,

8. a comprehensive report on how the assessment was carried out, the reasons behind the choice of different alternatives and any problems encountered when compiling the data,

9. a report on the measures planned for monitoring and supervising the significant environmental effects brought about by the implementation of the plan or programme, and

10. a non-technical summary of the information contemplated in sections 1–9.”

There follows a description of what the SEA report should contain on the basis of the 10 items quoted in the box above, which are based on chapter 6, section 12 Environmental Code.

8.6.1 Summary of the plan or programme (item 1) In order to clarify what the strategic environmental assessment relates to, the SEA report must contain a summary of the contents of the plan or programme and the alternatives. That summary must also clearly state the aim of the plan or programme and its relationship to other relevant plans and programmes. It may relate to both plans or programmes at another hierarchical levels and plans and programmes in other sectors. For example, a waste plan should relate to the comprehensive plan in the

108



municipality in question, to a possible municipal vision and possibly also to detailed development plans and an energy plan, depending on the contents of the waste plan. The waste plan may perhaps also be seen in the light of adjacent municipalities’ waste plans in order to clarify the context in which the plan applies (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 64; European Commission 2004, pages 26–27).

8.6.2 Description of existing environmental circumstances and how

they are likely to develop without a plan or programme (items 2–4)

The provisions contained in items 2–4 are mutually connected and to some extent overlap. They relate to different aspects of the environmental circumstances in the geographical area subject to the plan or programme which may be significantly affected. Items 2 and 3 include reporting on environmental problems and environmental values, environmental assets and satisfactory situations in the environment, whereas item 4 deals with requirements for reporting on existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programme. In several cases it may be appropriate to deal with items 2–4 in a single context, provided that all necessary information is supplied (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 64–65; European Commission 2004, pages 27–29). Item 2 relates to a report on the existing situation in the environment throughout the area that may be considered to be significantly affected by the implementation of the plan or programme. Circumstances in the environment which are important for the occurrence of significant environmental effects should be reported. That includes both positive and negative factors. The description of the existing situation in the environment serves as an important frame of reference for assessing how alternative draft plans and programmes may affect the area in question. A description of how the environment has reached its current situation also serves as valuable supporting material for assessing the future development of the environmental situation and should therefore be included in the statement. The consequences of other plans or programmes and decisions that could affect the area should also be taken into consideration (European Commission 2004, pages 27–28). Even the so-called zero alternative, which describes how the area is likely to develop if the plan or programme is not implemented, should be reported on. A description of the zero alternative should be included in order to facilitate comparison of the various reasonable alternatives investigated (European Commission 2004, page 28). See also section 7.5 on reporting on zero alternatives and other alternatives. Item 3 emphasises that a description of the environmental circumstances in areas that may be significantly affected should be drawn up. These may consist, for example, of areas that are particularly sensitive to acidification or that are particularly valuable from a botanical point of view. However, they may also consist of areas that are particularly densely populated, where changes would affect large numbers of people. It is important to remember that many sensitive areas may be disrupted by activities

109



which take place outside the sensitive area indicated. See also section 4.3.8. For example, noise and pollutants are spread over large areas, even across national boundaries (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 64–65, European Commission 2004, pages 28–29). It may also be a question of structures and environments that are particularly sensitive or valuable such as environments of cultural and historical value, for example. Item 4, emphasises the importance of reporting on existing environmental problems which affect particularly valuable areas such as Natura 2000 areas and other areas protected by European or Swedish laws or statutes (see also chapter 7 Environmental Code). Nevertheless, in cases where significant environmental effects occur, all areas and all the aspects listed in item 6, as a minimum, should be reported on (see the box above). A report should be prepared on all existing environmental problems of significance for the plan or programme. The aim of such a report is to enable an assessment to be carried out on how the problem will be affected by the plan or programme or whether the plan or programme may be considered to increase, reduce or otherwise affect the problem. Note, for example, that an insignificant effect on the plan or programme may be significant in combination with existing problems (European Commission 2004, page 29). Together, the descriptions to be drawn up in accordance with items 2–4 form a basis for the reasonable alternatives to be identified, described and assessed in the SEA report. A large part of this information may need to be already available during the consultation on the definition of the scope of the SEA report.

8.6.3 Consideration of environmental objectives and other

environmental circumstances (item 5) The SEA report should also describe how relevant environmental quality objectives and other environmental considerations are taken into consideration in the plan or programme. “Relevant environmental quality objectives” refers to the objectives to protect the environment at international, national and EU level which are relevant to the plan or programme. If objectives at international or EU level are included in objectives at national, regional or local level, it is sufficient to report on how these objectives have been taken into consideration in the plan or programme. Swedish environmental quality objectives at national and regional level and occasionally at local level which are of significance for the plan or programme should be taken into consideration (Government Bill 2003/04, page 65). 8.6.4 Description of significant environmental effects (item 6) The significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail should be identified, described and assessed. Note that the significant environmental effects to be identified, described and assessed include both positive and adverse environmental effects. This is clearly and unequivocally stated by, inter alia, the preparatory materials for the Swedish provisions (Government Bill 2003/2004:116, page 65; European Commission 2004,

110



pages 28–30). Promoting sustainable development not only means preventing adverse environmental effects but also implementing measures which bring about positive environmental effects. See also sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 above. The SEA report should contain a description of the significant environmental effects that may be considered to arise in terms of biological diversity, population, human health, animal life, plant life, land, water, air, climatic factors, tangible assets, landscape, buildings, ancient and cultural remains and other items of cultural heritage (chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 of the Environmental Code). However, according to the European Commission, that list is not exhaustive. Issues and aspects other than those listed can therefore also be of significance and worth taking into consideration (European Commission 2004, pages 29–30). Furthermore, any significant environmental effects that may arise with regard to the mutual relationship between those environmental aspects should be described. It is important to describe the connection between the aspects listed because it may bring to light other more serious effects than are revealed by a study of just individual aspects. The report should include secondary, cumulative, combined, permanent and temporary positive and negative effects in the short, medium and long term (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 65; European Commission 2004, page 29). See also sections 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.5, 8.6.3 and 8.7 on describing and assessing environmental effects.

It is easier to observe and manage those mutual relationships and results when carrying out strategic environmental assessments for plans and programmes than it is when drawing up SEA reports for individual projects. At a more general or strategic level, there are more opportunities for managing issues according to a systematic perspective and for producing and managing different alternative solutions. One example of a connection and mutual relationship between the aspects that should be described is when a significant effect on air and climate have a significant effect, in turn, on biodiversity and human health. Guidelines for how biodiversity should be taken into consideration in SEA reports have been adopted within the framework of the Biodiversity Convention (European Commission 2004, pages 29–30, UN 1993). As far as biodiversity is concerned, see also “More information on the Internet” in the section below entitled “References and websites”. Several serious environmental problems are largely caused by multiple sources of pollution which together give rise to a significant adverse environmental effect. This is the case, for example, with climate change caused by human activities, eutrophication, acidification and health problems deriving from noise and air-borne pollutants. Another example of a small, repeated strain caused by an environmental aspect that can lead to significant environmental effects is overfishing and repeated minor exploitation of land. Often the effects involved are indirect rather than direct. Cumulative effects and indirect effects are very difficult to manage at project level because SEA reports at that level are included in social planning at too late a stage,

111



their time perspective is too short and they are too limited in scope and too detailed. Particular attention should therefore be paid to cumulative effects and indirect effects when carrying out strategic environmental assessments on plans and programmes. See also the fact box on indirect and cumulative effects below. The effect on a system or an environmental aspect may have a linear connection with the result of that effect, which means that the connection between the effect and the result is constant. The connection may also be non-linear and may, for example, be exponential. For non-linear connections, it is generally much more difficult to assess how great the results or consequences of a certain effect will be. So-called threshold effects can also mean that it is difficult to assess the connection between the effect and the result. Threshold effects mean that a proportionally small additional effect can suddenly give rise to a large effect when a threshold is passed. When assessing what environmental effects can be anticipated, it is important to also attempt to assess whether non-linear connections and threshold effects may be present.

Indirect and cumulative effects Effects can arise from an individual activity or a number of activities. The SEA report should include a report on secondary, cumulative, combined, permanent, temporary, positive and negative effects in the short, medium and long term (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 65). Secondary effects means effects that may arise as an indirect consequence of a planned activity or measure. If, for example, a road is moved to a new location, there is a change in approach with regard to the location of the trade and industry which derives an advantage from its proximity to large traffic flows. At a first stage, there is a relocation of, for example, petrol stations and other services linked to infrastructure. At the next stage, day-to-day commerce involving goods which are adapted to the traffic flows is relocated. Roads also provide more access to the landscape and therefore cause disruption to animal life, e.g. by increasing access for outdoor leisure activities and tourism. Cumulative effects can be additive, which means that each effect can be added to a result (1+1 = 2). Another type of cumulative effect is a synergistic or reinforcing effect, which means that the effect of more than one activity is greater than the sum of the effects of each individual activity (1+1 > 2). A third type of cumulative effect is a counteractive or antagonistic effect, which means that the effect of more than one activity is less than the sum of the effects of each individual activity (1+1 < 2). One example of a cumulative effect is damage to trees or crops caused by a combination of air-borne pollutants, drought and noxious insects. A common type of cumulative effect in a planning context is when the value of a recreation area close to a densely populated area is reduced through recurring small-scale exploitation. The greenhouse effect itself is a cumulative effect caused by the burning of fossil fuels from multiple emission sources, among other things. The effects of climate change in Sweden are expected to include the spread of new illnesses and serious heatwaves which will particularly affect those whose resistance is already lower due to age or illness, i.e. it will give rise to indirect effects. See also Hyder 1999 and Therivel 2004, pages 142–146).

112



It can often be of decisive importance to allow the environmental effects to be assessed in a wider perspective. A planned road, if it is built, can affect many small areas without each separate effect entailing a significant environmental effect. Nevertheless, the combined effect of the entire stretch of the road or the road network can be classified as a significant environmental effect. In many cases it is therefore easier to draw up a more detailed comprehensive plan in an area that to draw up several detailed plans. By dividing the assessment of the environmental effect into several smaller parts using the “salami method”, one risks missing significant environmental effects which are easier to detect if a combined assessment of the environmental effect is carried out. This situation should therefore be avoided. Reports should, as stated above, include results in the short, medium and long term. The meaning of this can vary depending on the result in question. How the division is carried out is a matter for assessment. It is not of excessive importance since results will be reported in terms of all time aspects. What is important to note is that there is no limit to how far forward in time you should attempt to survey. There is naturally good reason to pay particular attention to permanent or so-called irreversible effects. That applies even if those effects are relatively minor. 8.6.5 A description of measures to forestall, prevent or counteract

significant environmental effects (item 7) “Measures planned to forestall, prevent or counteract significant adverse environmental effects” should be described (chapter 6 section 12, second paragraph, item 7 of the Environmental Code). The aim is to ensure that the SEA report deals with the issue of how any significant adverse environmental effects that the plan or programme may be considered to entail are to be counteracted. The measures contemplated are not specified in any more detail in the text of the law, but it may be referring to measures planned or referred to in the plan or programme (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 65; European Commission 2004, page 30). It is important to assess and describe how certain it is that the proposed measures to forestall, prevent or counteract the environmental effects will be implemented. Furthermore, the difference in the environmental effects if the measures are implemented or if they are not implemented is assessed and described for all alternatives investigated. If different protection measures with different effects apply to the alternatives to be compared, that information is necessary to allow the differences in the environmental effects of the alternatives to be assessed. In order to be completely certain that a measure will be implemented, in some cases it may be both possible and appropriate to implement a measure while planning is in progress. Nevertheless this only applies if the measure is relevant for all alternatives being investigated. Otherwise, an investment of that kind may affect the final choice of alternatives. It is also appropriate to distinguish measures which are controlled by the government agency or municipal authority deciding on the plan from measures decided on by others. Naturally, it is easier to ensure that the measures controlled by

113



the government agency or municipal authority itself will be implemented. See section 7.2 on reasonable alternatives controlled by the government agency or municipal authority. See also section 8.3 on different types of measures to prevent or counteract adverse environmental effects and reinforce positive environmental effects. 8.6.6 Summary report (item 8) The SEA report must contain a summary report on how the assessment of different alternatives and the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail has been carried out and the reasons for the choice of the various alternatives. Furthermore, a description of any problems identified when producing and compiling the information should be included in the report. Those problems may consist of technical deficiencies or lack of knowledge, for example (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 65). However, even unclear decision-making processes, shortage of time or other factors which were of significance for the SEA report and the integration between plan or programme processes or the strategic environmental assessment should be documented. See also section 8.4 on management of uncertainty, etc. A description of the assessment methods used and the difficulties experienced when carrying out the assessments is required in order to assess the quality and reliability of the information and conclusions presented. Furthermore, the management of those difficulties needs to be described (European Commission 2004, page 30). This report is important to enable people who were not directly involved in the preparation of the SEA report to understand what was considered, how the choice of alternatives was made and why the alternatives reported were considered to be reasonable, etc. The summary report, along with such documents as the report on monitoring, may serve as supporting material for the special synopsis to be drawn up when the plan or programme has been adopted. See chapters 9 and 10 and chapter 6, section 16 Environmental Code. Detailed notes should be taken throughout the strategic environmental assessment process in order to create a basis for the summary report. All strategic choices, important assumptions, the grounds for them, uncertainties and problems etc. should be documented throughout the strategic environmental assessment process. See also sections 3.4, 8.2 and 8.4.

8.6.7 Measures and monitoring (item 9) The SEA report should contain a report on the measures planned for monitoring and supervising the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme entails. If the aim is to make use of existing monitoring systems, a statement should be made to that effect. Nevertheless, it may be difficult, unsuitable or even impossible to establish at this early stage exactly how monitoring should be carried out. The design and contents of the plan or programme have naturally not been determined at this stage. The arrangements for monitoring may also need to be adjusted subsequently as the plan or programme is implemented (Government Bill

114



2003/04:116, page 65; European Commission 2004, pages 30–31). See also chapter 11 on monitoring. Nevertheless, the report on the planned monitoring measures should be as detailed as circumstances allow. If any uncertainty exists with regard to certain measures or methods for monitoring, these should not be left out of the description of future monitoring. It is better that they should be included with a comment that they may need to be adjusted.

8.6.8 Non-technical summary (item 10) In order to make it easier for decision-makers and the public to identify the most important elements and conclusions in the SEA report, it should contain a non-technical summary of the information contemplated in chapter 6, second paragraph, items 1–9 Environmental Code. That summary should be easy to understand for non-experts. A comprehensive table in which different alternatives are compared with the zero alternative and with current environmental effects could form part of the clear communication of the most important results of the strategic environmental assessment. If the SEA report is extremely extensive, there may be reason to print the summary separately in order to make it easier to distribute and more accessible for the public (chapter 6 section 12, second paragraph, item 10 Environmental Code; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 65; European Commission 2004, page 31).

8.7 Methods and tools 8.7.1 Choosing methods and tools There is no single method or tool that is most suitable in all situations for identifying, describing and assessing all types of significant environmental effects to which the implementation of a plan, programme or amendment may give rise. That also applies to methods and tools for developing and managing alternatives and for identifying measures that are able to reinforce positive environmental effects and remedy or reduce adverse environmental effects. Methods and tools should therefore be selected on the basis of their intended use in each individual case (see, for example, Moberg et al. 1999, pages 58–61).

There is a risk of losing focus and devoting unnecessary resources to identifying, describing and assessing effects, alternatives and measures. It is easy to assign the most resources to areas where supporting data is most extensive and where there is perhaps most knowledge and this may be an example of incorrect focus. The level of detail of supporting material for decisions should not be higher than it needs to be for the decisions to be made. Higher levels of detail in general require more resources than lower levels of detail. A suitable balance should be struck between consumption of resources and the required level of detail for the decisions to be made. In general, it may be stated that a lower level of detail is required at a more strategic plan and programme level than at project level (Therivel, page 135).

115



Significant environmental effects should be identified, described and assessed, but it may be inappropriate to weigh different types of environmental effects and the results or consequences of the effects against each other in the SEA report. Assessments and considerations such as that a certain adverse effect may be acceptable because a simultaneous positive effect is obtained should be referred to decision-makers. On the other hand, one should seek alternatives within the framework of the strategic environmental assessment which enable conflicts of goals to be avoided. The aim of the strategic environmental assessment is to inform on a range of alternatives for decisions, not to make the decision (Moberg et al. 1999, page 61; Therivel 2004, pages 135, 159–162). Some suitable starting points for the selection of methods and tools are set out below.

• Select methods and tools that do not require more work than necessary or that are more costly or complicated than necessary.

• Select methods and tools on the basis that something is to be identified, described or assessed and on the basis of what is to be identified, described and assessed.

• Identify the decisions to be made and what supporting material is required for the decisions and select methods and tools on that basis.

• Select methods and tools according to the level of detail required for the decisions to be made. Is quantitative supporting material for decisions required or is qualitative material sufficient? Note that a result may appear to be more precise than qualitative material, even though it is not.

• Select methods and tools that are intelligible to decision-makers and those taking part in consultation. For example, complicated models with “black boxes” which are only comprehensible to the people who developed the model should be avoided if possible.

• Select methods and tools that are sufficiently fast to enable integration, with constant feedback, between the plan or programme work and the work on the SEA report to take place.

It may be suitable to begin with cheap, fast methods and tools to first identify key issues, including possible significant environmental effects. If screening has been carried out pursuant to the criteria set out in appendix 4 to the Ordinance on EISs and SEA reports, there is supporting data to serve as a basis (see section 4.5). At the next stage, more costly, time-consuming methods and tools may be used to manage the key issues identified. 8.7.2 Example of methods and tools In the case of politically sensitive issues and matters which are difficult to judge, it is often appropriate to research the issue using several methods and tools and to compare results, since results can vary according to which method or tool is used. Results can

116



also vary according to how methods and tools are implemented and used, which is why it is always important to report this clearly. Table 7. Examples of methods and tools for identifying, describing and assessing

Usable for... Key factors Methods and tools

Iden

tifyi

ng e

nviro

nmen

tal

effe

cts

Des

crib

ing

the

exis

ting

situ

atio

n in

the

envi

ronm

ent

Dev

elop

ing

alte

rnat

ives

A

sses

sing

env

ironm

enta

l ef

fect

s C

ompa

ring

alte

rnat

ive

deci

sion

s R

equi

rem

ents

for

supp

ortin

g da

ta

Cos

t and

tim

e

Acc

essi

bilit

y by

the

publ

ic

Can

man

age

unce

rtain

ty

Cap

acity

for m

anag

ing

heal

th m

atte

rs

Review of existing materials on the environment, policy, laws and rules $ xx

SWOT analyses $ xxChecklists $ X

Templates for reports $ ☺ X

Cause/effect analyses, decision tree analyses $ ☺ xx

Geographical information system (GIS) $$ ☺ x Trend analyses, extrapolation $ ☺ x Expert assessments $ xxModelling $$ x Scenario techniques $$ ☺ xxLife cycle analyses $$ Cost/use analyses $$ Multi-criteria analyses $$ x Vulnerability analyses $$ xxRisk assessments, risk analyses $$ xxEcological footprint $$ ☺ Consultation $ ☺ x Table modified according to UNECE 2007, page 115 and Therivel 2004, page 160. The differences shown between methods and tools, e.g. with regard to cost and requirements for supporting information, are general and do not apply in each individual case. The requirement for quality and precision, for example, determines the cost. Key to symbols: Usable for, Requires less supporting data, Requires more supporting data, $ Low cost and time consumption, $$ High cost and time consumption, Low accessibility by the public (difficult to follow and understand), Moderate accessibility by the public, ☺ High accessibility by the public, Can manage uncertainty, x Lower capacity for managing health matters, xx Higher capacity for managing health matters. Note that the table only indicates usability, cost etc. under normal circumstances.

117



Table 7 above gives examples of methods and tools which can be used for, among other things, identifying, describing and assessing the environmental effects, results and consequences of different measures and alternatives drawn up during the plan or programme work. They can also be used to develop measures and alternatives to remedy adverse environmental effects and reinforce positive environmental effects. Read more on different methods and tools, their purpose and use in UNECE 2007, pages 107–115,184–196; Therivel 2004, pages 134–174, 239–261; Moberg et al. 1999.

Particular points to consider during the work on the SEA report

• Chapter 6, section 12 of the Environmental Code clearly sets out what the SEA report must contain. The scope and level of detail is governed in chapter 6, section 13 Environmental Code.

• Begin the work on the SEA report as early as possible in the planning process. • Also begin the integration of the work on the SEA report with the work on the plan

or programme as early as possible. • Carry out a survey of what supporting material exists and what supplementary

material may be needed at an early stage. Information on environmental circumstances serves as important supporting material at an early stage of the planning process and forms a good basis for the SEA report.

• Fill in information in the document throughout the process so that the document is always up to date.

• Document uncertainties and deficiencies in supporting material on a continuous basis and, when so required, remedy or manage those uncertainties with the aid of uncertainty analyses, sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses, for example.

• Document and state the reasons for all strategic choices made during the process.

• Select methods and tools on the basis of what is appropriate in each individual case.

• Select methods and tools that make it as easy as possible for decision-makers and the public to follow and understand the process, the choices made and the conclusions drawn.

• Retain focus on significant environmental effects (positive and adverse) and avoid making more extensive and specific assessments than necessary for the decisions to be made.

• It is perfectly possible to use grounds for assessment as support in order to make assessments as consistent, impartial and objective as possible.

• Go through all the aspects listed in chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 6 Environmental Code and assess whether a significant environmental effect may exist.

• Report on how relevant environmental quality objectives have been taken into consideration in the plan or programme.

• Take into consideration secondary, cumulative, combined, permanent, temporary, positive and adverse effects in the short, medium and long term.

• Take into consideration any possible measures that may remedy, reduce, restore and compensate for adverse environmental effects. Also take into consideration measures that are able to reinforce positive environmental effects.

118



9 The adoption of the plan or programme

This chapter deals which what will and what should happen before and after a decision on the adoption of a plan or programme. The adoption itself does not form part of the strategic environmental assessment.

9.1 Decision on adoption The SEA report and the views expressed in the consultation on the SEA report shall be taken into consideration before the plan or programme “is adopted or used as a basis for regulation” (chapter 6, section 16, first paragraph, Environmental Code). There is no requirement that states that a government agency or municipal authority must act in accordance with those views or choose the best alternative from an environmental point of view (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 67–68). In practice, proposals, alternatives and views will also be taken into consideration during the strategic environmental assessment and the preparation of the plan or programme. When a proposal, alternative, etc. is taken into consideration, it should be on the basis of the aim of the strategic environmental assessment, the preamble to the Environmental Code and the aim of the plan or programme. See chapter 1, section 1 and chapter 6, section 11 Environmental Code. The aim of the SEA report is to serve as supporting material for the adoption of the plan or programme In the case of municipal plans or programmes, it is appropriate for a decision on adoption to be made by the municipal council or by the committee responsible for making decisions on the plan or programme. In the case of plans or programmes drawn up by government agencies, it is appropriate for the decision to be made by the management of the government agency. In certain cases, provisions exist which specify what body must adopt the plan or programme. 9.2 Information that the plan or programme has

been adopted When a plan or programme has been adopted, the plan or programme and the special synopsis on matters such as how views expressed in the consultation have been taken into account, is made available to those who took part in the consultation (chapter 6, section 16, third paragraph Environmental Code). See also chapter 10 this manual. “Available” means the same as in chapter 6, section 14 Environmental Code. Information should be available at least on the government agency or municipal authority’s website and notice board (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 68). See also section 5.3.1. Furthermore, it may be appropriate to state that monitoring will take place at the moment when the plan or programme is adopted. Chapter 6, section 16, third paragraph, Environmental Code contains a requirement that the government agency or municipal authority must inform those who have taken

119



part in the consultation that the plan or programme has been adopted. It also contains a requirement for an active procedure to provide those who have taken part in the consultation on the plan or programme with the associated SEA report with information on the decision (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 68). It is the government agency or municipal authority which has adopted the plan or programme that should be responsible for ensuring that information on the plan or programme is available, not the government agency or municipal authority that drew up a SEA report if another government agency or municipal authority was responsible (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 43).

The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency general guidelines state that, “In the case of plans or programmes where consultation took place with another State, the decision and the supporting data for the decision on the adoption of the plan or programme should be sent to the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, which must inform the State in question of the decision.” (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2009)

Particular points to consider during the adoption of a plan or programme

• Take into consideration the SEA report and opinions expressed during consultation before the plan or programme is adopted or used as a basis for regulation.

• Make the plan or programme and the special synopsis available to those who took part in the consultation after the plan or programme has been adopted

• Inform those who took part in the consultation that the plan or programme has been adopted.

120



10 Special synopsis This chapter deals with what must, should and can be included in the special synopsis to be prepared after the plan or programme has been adopted. 10.1 The aim of the synopsis One aim of the special synopsis is to make the result of the assessment procedure available to the public and those who took part in the process through consultation, etc. The public is given an insight into the process because the synopsis should also report on the matters considered and why and how different views and proposals were taken into consideration (European Commission 2004, pages 41–42). 10.2 The contents of the synopsis Chapter 6, section 16, second paragraph, Environmental Code states that, “When the plan or programme has been adopted, the government agency or municipal authority making the decision issue a special synopsis on the following matters:

1. the way in which the environmental aspects were integrated in the plan or

programme, 2. the way in which the SEA report and opinions expressed in consultations

were taken into consideration, 3. the reasons for adopting the plan or programme rather than the alternatives

considered, and 4. the measures considered for monitoring and supervising the significant

environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme entail.”

The summary and the plan or programme should be made available to those who took part in the consultation on the SEA report and the plan or programme, who should also be informed that the plan or programme has been adopted (chapter 6, section 16, third paragraph, Environmental Code). “Available” means the same as in chapter 6, section 14 Environmental Code. Information should be available at least on the government agency or municipal authority’s website and notice board (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 68). As far as information on the adoption of the plan or programme is concerned, see section 9.2. In order to facilitate the work on the special synopsis, it may be appropriate for the party engaged in the strategic environmental assessment process to keep a diary of the various stages of that process, the views and proposals put forward or which otherwise emerged during the process, how they were dealt with and what choices were made and why. It will then be easier later to report on such matters as how different environmental aspects were actually integrated in the plan or programme and how the strategic environmental assessment has been able to steer the plan or programme in a more environmentally friendly direction.

121



It may be appropriate to produce a printout of the special synopsis during the consultation on the SEA report and the plan or programme.21 This can then serve as part of the supporting material for the decision. Those taking part in the consultation are thus given an opportunity to be party to the preliminary view of the government agency making the decision on how the environmental aspects have been integrated into the plan or programme up to this stage in the process. The people responsible for producing the special synopsis may also benefit from giving those taking part in the consultation the opportunity to submit their views on the printout. In accordance with chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 8 Environmental Code, the SEA report should contain, “a comprehensive report on how the assessment was carried out, the reasons behind the choice of different alternatives and any problems in connection with the compilation of the data”. It should also contain, “a report on the measures planned for monitoring and supervising the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme entail” (chapter 6 section 12, second paragraph, item 9 Environmental Code). The contents of these two items largely coincide with what the special synopsis should contain in accordance with items 3 and 4 above and may therefore be used as supporting material when producing the special synopsis. See also sections 8.6.6, 8.6.7, 8.6.8 and chapter 10.

Particular points to consider during the production of the special synopsis

• Make use of information to be contained in the SEA report as supporting material during preparation of the special synopsis.

• Make use of documentation on the various elements of the strategic environmental assessment which is duly produced on a continuous basis throughout the process as supporting material for the preparation of the special synopsis.

• Consider whether it is appropriate to produce a printout of the special synopsis for the consultation on the SEA report and the plan or programme.

21 That print out will necessarily be incomplete and may not, for example, contain information on how views from the consultation on the EIS have been taken into consideration.

122



11 Monitoring This chapter deals with the aim of monitoring and supervising the actual significant environmental effects of the plan or programme, what monitoring should cover and how it may be carried out. 11.1 The aim of monitoring The aim of the monitoring requirement is to enable the government agency or municipal authority adopting the plan or programme to acquire knowledge on the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme actually entails at an early stage of the process. Its aim is that, “The government agency or municipal authority shall obtain knowledge at an early stage on any significant environmental effects not previously identified to enable appropriate measures to remedy them to be adopted” (chapter 6, section 18 Environmental Code). “Measures to remedy them” naturally relates only to adverse environmental effects. It is naturally also important to monitor the negative environmental effects which were identified as being likely or possible when the SEA report was produced to enable new measures to be adopted as necessary or to allow measures already adopted to be strengthened and thereby avoid or reduce the significant adverse environmental effects. (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 68). See also sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 on significant environmental effects. Even though it is not an express aim, monitoring can also help identify opportunities for reducing adverse environmental effects which are not significant or for further reinforcing any positive environmental effects to which implementation gives rise. Furthermore, monitoring can improve knowledge on the connection between measures, results and consequences and the effectiveness of different protection measures. Monitoring and supervision can provide information on defects in the quality of SEA reports which could be used to improve their quality (European Commission 2004, page 46). With the support of the results of the monitoring, the government agency or municipal authority can also provide due information on the significant environmental effects that the implementation of a plan or programme actually entails. 11.2 Responsibility for monitoring and duration

of monitoring The government agency or municipal authority which adopted the plan or programme has final responsibility for monitoring (chapter 6, section 18 Environmental Code; Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 44). That also includes financial responsibility for monitoring and for any measures adopted. Nevertheless, the monitoring itself can be carried out wholly or in part by a consultant or an operator, for example.

123



It is important for the government agency or municipal authority to ensure, by means of a contract or otherwise, that effective, long-term monitoring with regular reporting can be guaranteed because significant environmental effects may only occur several years after implementation. One example of this is when several years of minor environmental strain can suddenly result in a threshold being passed, whereupon a further minor strain gives rise to a major adverse environmental effect, which means that significant environmental effects occur without any change in the size of the strain. It is therefore not possible to state in general terms how long monitoring should continue. It should carry on for as long as there is a risk that significant environmental effects will occur as a consequence of the implementation of a plan or programme. 11.3 What monitoring should cover All plans and programmes on which strategic environmental assessments are to be carried out must also be monitored. Concerning what is to be monitored, the government states in Government Bill 2003/04 that “Monitoring and supervision shall cover all significant environmental effects, i.e. in principle positive, adverse, foreseen and unforeseen consequences”22 (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 68). In the main, monitoring should deal with the effects that the implementation of the plan, programme or amendment may be considered to entail in accordance with the SEA report and the results of the planned remedial measures (European Commission 2004, pages 43–46; Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 68–69). The adoption of appropriate remedial measures to avoid or reduce significant adverse environmental effects does not entail any requirement to amend the plan or programme itself. The remedial measures referred to are contained in existing legislation, e.g. within the framework of supervisory activities (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 68–69). To avoid duplicating work and to keep down costs, monitoring can coincide with the ordinary supervision of a plan or programme. Furthermore, existing supervision and monitoring systems should be used where appropriate. There is therefore no requirement to devise new monitoring systems if existing systems fulfil the aim and serve the purpose. Nevertheless, existing supervision and monitoring systems should be supplemented when so required to ensure that the aim of the monitoring can be achieved: “The government agency or municipal authority shall obtain knowledge at an early stage of any significant environmental effects not previously identified to enable appropriate measures to remedy them to be adopted” (chapter 6, section 18 of the Environmental Code). The need to supplement existing environmental monitoring systems can vary according to how extensive the existing environmental monitoring system is, what it focuses on and the purpose of the plan or programme. Existing

22 “As far as unforeseen consequences are concerned, it is hardly possible to devise an instrument for monitoring completely unforeseen effects. Unforeseen adverse effects are more likely to be due to incorrect assumptions in the EIS, for example on the strength of the environmental effect, or unforeseen effects as a consequence of changes in circumstances which means that assessments made in the statement are no longer correct” (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 68-69).

124



monitoring systems may, for example, need to be supplemented by additional aspects, measuring points, more frequent measurement, etc. (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 61, 68–69; European Commission 2004, pages 45–46, 60). Neither is there any requirement for an individual monitoring programme to exist per plan or programme. The cumulative effects of plans and programmes may, for example, be easier to verify in some cases if monitoring and supervision covers several plans and programmes (European Commission 2004, page 44). See also section 8.6.4. on cumulative effects. It is only when a specific activity or measure is carried out that a direct effect is obtained in the environment. If it is a case of measures or activities for which a plan or programme has stated conditions, any significant environmental effects may be linked to the implementation of the plan or programme and should then be monitored. How extensive and detailed the monitoring needs to be depends, among other things, on how disruptive for the environment a plan or programme may be considered to be (European Commission 2004, pages 43–44). There is generally less need for monitoring with a plan whose environmental effects are minimised through the design of the plan or programme or through the adoption of a range of measures to reduce the environmental effects than with a corresponding plan or programme which has not been adapted to the same extent to avoid environmental effects. If no significant environmental effects are considered to arise from the final draft of a plan or programme, monitoring may be restricted to the unforeseen significant environmental effects to which the plan or programme may give rise. The need for monitoring may change over time. On the one hand, monitoring may need to be extended if a previously unidentified significant environmental effect is detected. That may involve a need for more detailed monitoring in the area. On the other hand, there are effects that, if they arise, should appear relatively quickly and can thus be quickly identified. If effects of a particular type have not occurred after a certain period, the monitoring for those effects may be reduced or completely discontinued. If the plan or programme is not implemented as planned, that fact may come to light during monitoring. The fact that a plan or programme is not implemented as planned should be noticed because it can lead to the occurrence a significant environmental effect that would not otherwise have occurred. A significant environmental effect can take place as a consequence of both the non-implementation of an activity and the implementation of an unplanned activity. Deviations from the plan or programme should update the need for review or amendment of the plan or programme, which in turn may update the need for strategic environmental assessment. See also sections 4.3.5 and 4.3.6.

125



11.4 How monitoring can be carried out There are no more detailed provisions on how monitoring is to be carried out in terms of such aspects as time, regularity or method (Government Bill 2003/04:116, pages 44, 68; European Commission 2004, pages 43–44). The table below shows an example of a structure for monitoring and supervising the environmental effects of the implementation of a plan or programme. See also table 2, section 4.5.2. It may be used as a starting point when monitoring a range of aspects. Table 8. Example of a monitoring structure

Type of issues and aspects to monitor

Examples of what may be monitored

What monitoring systems exist?1)

How often is monitoring to take place? 2)

When should measures be adopted? 3)

What possible measures exist and how can they be implemented?

Areas worthy of protection and the situation in the environment for the plan or programme in question.

Chemical, physical and biological parameters.

Vulnerable environments and situation in the environment for the plan or programme in question.

See above

Anticipated and possible significant environmental effects according to the SEA report.

Major or minor effect?

Effects of planned remedial measures.

As anticipated? Reduced environmental strain?

Effects of planned positive measures.

As anticipated?

1) What systems exist for monitoring direct and indirect environmental consequences and results in the environment? What data, indicators, etc. are required and what are available? Does information exist on strain factors such as emissions of pollutants or use of resources? Do existing monitoring systems need to be supplemented? 2) Note that both collection and evaluation of compiled data is required. 3) How great should changes in the environmental situation or deviations from planned changes be in order for measures to be adopted? You should begin to consider how to carry out monitoring as soon as the significant environmental effects that a plan or programme may be considered to entail have been

126



identified. Planning of how to carry out monitoring should take place when preparing the SEA report for a specific plan or programme (chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 9 Environmental Code). The basis of the monitoring is the environmental effect, the results and the consequences that the implementation of the plan or programme in question is considered to entail in accordance with the SEA report. As stated above, the monitoring and supervision of other plans and programmes that relate to the same area or part of the same area or the same matters may be coordinated if the government agency or municipal authority sees fit. If such is not considered appropriate, the results from other relevant monitoring should at least be taken into consideration to facilitate the detection of any cumulative effects. Monitoring, when appropriate, should also be integrated with supervision of existing plans or programmes (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 68; European Commission 2004, pages 43–45, 57, 59–61). Table 6 in chapter 8 provides examples of existing monitoring systems and sources of information that may be of use during monitoring. Other more local and more specific environmental monitoring systems and sources of information also exist. 11.5 Information on monitoring and information

from monitoring The measures that you are planning to adopt for monitoring and supervising the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan or programme is considered to entail should be reported in both the SEA report and the special synopsis produced when the plan or programme has been adopted (chapter 6, section 12, second paragraph, item 9 and section 16 Environmental Code). The preliminary scope and focus and the times and time intervals for monitoring should be reported in the SEA report (European Commission 2004, pages 30–31). EU Directive 2003/4, which deals with the public’s access to information, contains general rules on dissemination of information on the environment which is stored at government agencies, e.g. plans and programmes relating to the environment. Environmental information collected after 14 February 2005 should become “progressively available in electronic databases which are easily accessible to the public through public telecommunication networks” (article 7 EU Directive 2003/4). 11.6 Results and measures If monitoring leads to the discovery that the implementation of the plan or programme results in significant environmental effects which had not previously been identified and which in turn lead to the amendment of the plan or programme, a new strategic environmental assessment may be required. Amendments of plans and programmes should, as stated in chapter 4 above, be screened and in some cases made subject to a strategic environmental assessment. See also sections 4.3.5 and 4.5. Nevertheless, one of the conditions for a requirement for a new strategic environmental assessment is

127



that the amendment should be considered to entail significant environmental effects. Nevertheless, there is no requirement that measures must be adopted or that a plan or programme must be amended as a consequence of the results of monitoring and supervision (European Commission 2004, pages 45, 61). As a result of monitoring, measures may be relevant both in and outside a plan or programme area in the same way as with the effects of implementation, which are assessed both in and outside the area covered by a plan or programme. Responsibility for the costs of the measures may be judged on the basis of current legislation and is not specifically governed in chapter 6 of the Environmental Code. See also section 11.3 above. It can be difficult to decide whether an environmental effect identified during monitoring is actually caused by the implementation of a particular plan or programme. It is perhaps considered to be equally likely that other factors, e.g. economic development or other outside circumstances, are of equal or greater significance for the adverse environmental effect occurring. Nevertheless, the need for measures is independent of the cause of the environmental effect. Even if the causal connection is unclear, it is appropriate for the government agency or municipal authority deciding on the plan or programme to adopt any measures available to it to ensure that the significant environmental effect can be avoided as far as possible.

128



Reading matter on how monitoring and supervision can be carried out Barth, R., and Fuder, A.: 2002. European Commission: 2004, Appendix I.

Particular points to consider during monitoring

• All plans and programmes to be made subject to strategic environmental assessment should also be monitored.

• The government agency or municipal authority that decides on the plan or programme is responsible for monitoring and adopting any measures.

• Plan for monitoring as early as during the work on the SEA report. • Provide information on planned monitoring measures in the SEA report and the

special synopsis. • Monitor all significant environmental effects: positive, adverse, foreseen,

unforeseen and transboundary. • Focus on the significant environmental effects that the implementation of the plan

or programme may bring about according to the SEA report and the results of the measures adopted to reduce the effects.

• Use relevant parts of existing supervision programmes and planning cycles and supplement them as required.

• Establish goals that can be monitored and make use of indicators when appropriate.

• Carry on monitoring as long as there is a risk of a significant environmental risk occurring.

• If possible, adopt measures to reduce or eliminate verified adverse significant environmental effects.

• If the plan or programme is amended as a consequence of the result of monitoring, a new strategic environmental assessment may be required.

• Ensure that the result of monitoring is made available to the government agencies concerned and the public.

• Make use of experience from monitoring to develop and improve the quality of future strategic environmental assessments and SEA reports.

129



12 If the rules are not obeyed Quality control: In order to reduce the risk that the SEA reports may be incomplete or may not have been drawn up in the correct way, article 12.2 of the EU Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment contains a requirement that Member States should ensure that SEA reports are of satisfactory quality. “It is presumed that government agencies and municipal authorities loyally apply the laws. This, along with the role of the central supervisory authorities and the open process which makes observation possible” is sufficient, in the government’s view, to fulfil the quality control requirements contained in the Directive (Government Bill 2003/04:116, page 41). Complaint to the European Commission: If a Swedish government agency fails to comply with current EU law, an individual (either a physical or a juridical person) can complain directly to the European Commission. The Commission may then file a claim against Sweden and the European Court of Justice decides whether or not Sweden has broken the rules. The person who filed the complaint does not need to show that he or she has a legitimate interest in putting the matter to the test or is directly or essentially affected by the infringement reported. Appeal against a plan or programme: In general, it should probably be possible to appeal against a decision on a plan or programme regardless of whether the decision was made by a government agency or a municipal authority. Nevertheless, if there are special rules, they will apply in the first instance. When there are no special rules, one must judge whether the decision may be considered as appealable in accordance with case law. One requirement established in case law is that the decision should have legal or actual consequences for individuals. Furthermore, in accordance with section 22 of the Administrative Procedure Act, the person to whom the decision relates is the person entitled to appeal if it decision has gone against him. These questions must ultimately be judged by a court (Act [1986:223] on Administrative Procedure). If the plan or programme is decided on by a municipal authority, it should probably be possible for the plan or programme decision itself to made subject to an appeal against legality in accordance with chapter 10 of the Act (1991:900) on local government [kommunallagen (1991:900)], which may be lodged by any citizen of a municipality. Special rules may exist in other legislation and, if that is the case, they will apply instead. Chapter 13 of the Act (1987:10) on Planning and Building, for example, contains special rules of that kind. Chapter 10, section 8 Act (1991:900) on local government states that decisions appealed against should be annulled if they have not come about according to the regulations prescribed by law. If a plan or programme should have been made subject to strategic environmental assessment but was not, that could probably serve as a suitable ground for any annulment of the decision. Nevertheless, one must take into consideration chapter, section 9 Act (1991:900) on

130



local government, which states that if an error is not significant for the outcome of the case, the decision need not be annulled (Act [1991:099] on local government).

To sum up, this means that if the prerequisites for an appeal are met, failure to carry out a strategic environmental assessment or the performance of a defective strategic environmental assessment can mean that the validity of all later decisions and measures in the case may be questioned and possibly annulled.

Appeals against screening: As far as the screening itself is concerned (i.e. the assessment of whether strategic environmental assessment of the plan or programme is required) it is likely that the result of such an assessment cannot be appealed. The legislation contains no express requirement for the government agency to make a formal decision with regard to screening in connection with plans and programmes. The government agency or municipal authority should carry out an assessment of whether a plan or programme may be considered to entail significant environmental effects. This may be compared with the provisions contained in chapter 6, section 5 Environmental Code concerning whether an activity or measure may be considered to entail significant environmental effects, where it states instead that the county administrative board should decide on the matter. This provision also establishes that such a decision may not be specifically appealed. Neither should it probably be possible, therefore, to specifically appeal against the result of screening. However, the question of whether or not screening is a decision that may be appealed is ultimately a matter for the courts to decide. If defective screening results in failure to carry out a strategic environmental assessment or if a strategic environmental assessment is not carried out in the correct way, it should probably be possible to appeal the plan or programme itself (see above). From the point of view of a municipal authority or other government agency, it is therefore important to carry out correct screening because the lack of a strategic environmental assessment can lead, on appeal, to annulment of the plan or programme if it proves that a strategic environmental assessment was required. Judicial review of government decisions, etc.: It may also be possible to carry out a judicial review in accordance with Act (2006:304) on judicial review of certain government decisions. An individual (either a physical or a juridical person) has the right to apply for judicial review of government decisions, which includes of a review of the individual’s civil rights and obligations. Examples of decisions to which judicial review could apply include decisions on detailed development plans which were examined by the government after appeal. Decisions on programmes of measures on which the government is authorised to make decisions in accordance with chapter 5, section 5 Environmental Code could probably be made subject to judicial review in the event of failure to comply with the rules on strategic environmental assessment. Decisions made by managing authorities which may be subject to judicial review in

131



accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights23 will instead be appealed in the ordinary way before the general administrative courts. Were a special statute to contain a prohibition on appeals it would be possible in any case, in the case of decisions affecting civil rights and obligations, to appeal the decision before the general administrative courts pursuant to the European Convention on Human Rights and sections 3 and 22a of the Act (1986:223) on Administrative Procedure Act. The European Convention on Human Rights has been transposed into Swedish law since 1995 (Act [2006:304] on judicial review of certain government decisions; Act [1994:1219] on the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms). In certain earlier cases , the Supreme Administrative Court has annulled a decision by the government, after judicial review, in cases concerning detailed development plans as a consequence of failure to draw up a SEA report or of a defective SEA report. In a decision of 21 December 2006 in case no. 4253-05, the Supreme Administrative Court found that the supporting material that formed the basis for the assessment that a detailed development plan could not give rise to significant environmental effects on a Natura 2000 area was insufficient and that an SEA report should have been drawn up. In a decision of 8 February 2005 in case no. 7694-03, the Supreme Administrative Court declared that, since protected species unquestionably existed in the planning area, the SEA report drawn up was also required to illustrate the consequences of the development for those species. The supporting material for the decision on the detailed development plan was therefore defective and the decision was annulled. Report to the Swedish Parliamentary Ombudsman: State and municipal authorities, public officials at those authorities and others who are entrusted with the exercise of public authority are under the supervision of the JO [justitie-ombudsmannen – Swedish Parliamentary Ombudsman]. However, that does not apply, for example, to the government or members of the Swedish Parliament or municipal and county councils. Supervision by the JO is based on complaints from the public and on observations during inspections. A JO case could possibly arise if laws and ordinances are not complied with when plans and programmes are prepared. the JO has the right to institute disciplinary procedures against a public official for misconduct. However, a JO normally issues statements offering criticism, guidance or advice in connection with his inspection activities. A JO does not revise the contents of judgments or decisions. Instead his supervision is primarily aimed at procedures in courts and government agencies. A JO can also bring proceedings as a special prosecutor against a public official for breach of duty or other professional misconduct. However, criminal liability requires that a person, while exercising public authority, should have neglected his duties through an act or omission as a result of fraud or negligence. Acts carried out by a

23 The European Convention of 4 November 1950 on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

132



person in his or her capacity as a member of a State or municipal assembly are not subject to liability for misconduct.

133



References and websites Act (1970:299) on protection against wild oats [Lag (1970:299) om skydd mot flyghavre]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19700299.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (1977:439) on municipal energy planning [Lag (1977:439) om kommunal energiplanering]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19770439.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (1986:223) on administration procedure [Förvaltningslag (1986:223). (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19860223.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (1987:10) on planning and building [Plan- och bygglag (1987:10)]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19870010.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (1988:950) on ancient monuments and finds [Lag (1988:950) om kulturminnen mm.]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19880950.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (1991:900) on local government [Kommunallag (1991:900)]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19910900.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (1994:1219) on the European Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms [Lag (1994:1219) om den europeiska konventionen angående skydd för de mänskliga rättigheterna och de grundläggande friheterna]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19941219.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (1997:734) on responsibility for some collective passenger transport [Lag (1997:734) om ansvar för viss kollektiv persontrafik]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19970734.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (2000:1383) on the municipalities’ housing maintenance responsibilities [Lag (2000:1383) om kommunernas bostadsförsörjningsansvar]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/20001383.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (2003:778) on protection against accidents [Lag (2003:778) om skydd mot olyckor]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/20030778.htm) (in Swedish)

Act (2006:304) on judicial review of certain government decisions [Lag (2006:304) om rättsprövning av vissa regeringsbeslut]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/20060304.htm) (in Swedish)

Barth, R. and Fuder, A. (2002). Implementing article 10 of the SEA directive 2001/42/EC: IMPEL project. Institute for applied ecology, Darmstadt. (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/sea-support.htm)

de Laval, S. (1999). En idébok för den som ska arrangera någon form av dialog [A book of ideas for those who entrusted with arranging some form of dialogue]. Swedish National Road Administration, Stockholm region. (in Swedish)

de Laval, S. (2002). Samråd och dialog i planeringen [Consultation and dialogue in planning]. Väg och vattenbyggaren 2002 (1) 21–23. (in Swedish)

134



Environmental Code (1998:808) [Miljöbalk (1998:808)]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19980808.HTM#KAP6) (in Swedish)

EU Directive 2001/42. Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2001:197:0030:0037:EN:PDF)

EU Directive 2003/4. Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:041:0026:0032:EN:PDF

EU Directive 2003/35. Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment and amending with regard to public participation and access to justice. Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:156:0017:0024:EN:PDF

EU Regulation 1080/2006. Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European Regional Development Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1783/1999. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:210:0001:0001:EN:PDF

EU Regulation 1083/2006. Council Regulation (EC) 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:210:0025:0025:EN:PDF

European Commission (2004). Implementation of directive 2001/42 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment. Directorate General – Environment 2004, Luxemburg, Office for the official publications of the European Union, ISBN 92-894-6545-X. (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/pdf/030923_sea_guidance.pdf)

European Court of Justice (1999). Case C-392/96. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=en&numdoc=61996J0392

Ewing, R. and Lichtenstein, A. (2002): Induced traffic and induced development, A literature review. Allan M. Voorhees Transportation Center, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers University.

Government Bill 1997/98:45, Miljöbalk [Regeringens proposition 1997/98:45, The Environmental Code]. (www.regeringen.se/sb/d/108/a/1352) (in Swedish)

Government Bill 2003/04:116 [Regeringens proposition 2003/04:116]. Miljöbedömningar av planer och program [Strategic environmental assessments of

135



plans and programmes]. (http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/02/27/14/a7df045d.pdf) (in Swedish)

Hyder (1999). Guidelines for the assessment of indirect and cumulative impacts as well as impact interactions, report prepared for the European Commission DG XI, Brussels. (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/eia-studies-and-reports/guidel.pdf)

International Association for Public Participation (2007). Downloaded from www.iap2.org (www.iap2.org/associations/4748/files/Spectrum.pdf)

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2005). Guidance notes for lead authors of the IPCC fourth assessment report on addressing uncertainties. (http://www.ipcc-wg1.unibe.ch/publications/supportingmaterial/uncertainty-guidance-note.pdf)

Moberg, Å., Finnveden, G., Johansson, J. and Steen, P. (1999). Miljösystemanalytiska verktyg – en introduktion med koppling till beslutssituationer [Tools for analysing environmental systems – an introduction with links to decision situations]. AFR report 251, AFN and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. (www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer/afr-r-251-se.pdf) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (1987:383) on planning and building [Plan- och byggförordning (1987:383)]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19870383.htm) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (1987:938) on national parks [Nationalparksförordning (1987:938)]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19870938.htm) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (1997:263) on county plans for regional transport infrastructure [Förordning (1997:263) om länsplaner för regional transportinfrastruktur]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19970263.htm) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (1998:1252) on protection of areas under the Environmental Code, etc. [Förordning (1998:1252) om områdesskydd enligt miljöbalken m.m.]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19981252.htm) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (1998:896) on land and water management, etc. [Förordning (1998:896) om hushållning med mark- och vattenområden m.m.]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19980896.htm) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (1998:905) on environmental impact statements and strategic environmental assessment reports [Förordning (1998:905) om miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19980905.htm) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (1999:659) on epizootic diseases [Epizootiförordning (1999:659)]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19990659.HTM) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (2007:14) on management of EU structural funds [Förordning (2007:14) om förvaltning av EG:s strukturfonder]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/20070014.htm) (in Swedish)

136



Ordinance (2007:481) on support for rural development measures [Förordning (2007:481) om stöd för landsbygdsutvecklingsåtgärder]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/20070481.htm) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (2007:713) on regional growth work [Förordning (2007:713) om regionalt tillväxtarbete]. (www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/20070713.htm) (in Swedish)

Ordinance (2009:236) on a national plan for transport infrastructure [Förordning (2009:236) om en nationell plan för transportinfrastruktur]. (http://www.notisum.se/Pub/Doc.aspx?url=/rnp/sls/lag/20090236.htm) (in Swedish)

Preamble to Ordinance 2005:2 (2005). Ordinance amending Ordinance (1998:905) on environmental impact statements and strategic environmental assessment reports [Förordningsmotiv 2005:2 (2005). Förordning om ändring i förordningen (1998:905) om miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar]. (http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/07/19/68/862a508f.pdf) (in Swedish)

Skärbäck, E. and Rundcrantz, K. (2007). Kompensationsåtgärder [Compensatory measures]. In Wallentinus, H.–G. edited. MKB: perspektiv på miljökonsekvens-beskrivning [EIA: Perspectives on environmental impact assessment]. Studentlitteratur. (in Swedish)

SOU [Statens offentliga utredningar – Swedish Government Official Reports] 2005:59. Miljöbalken; miljökvalitetsnormer, miljöorganisationerna i miljöprocessen och avgifter [The Environmental Code: environmental quality standards, the environmental organisations in the environmental process and charges]. The Environment Code Committee. (www.regeringen.se/sb/d/108/a/47092) (in Swedish)

Swedish Environmental Protection Agency [Naturvårdsverket] (2003a). Konsekvensanalyser steg för steg: handledning i samhällsekonomisk konsekvensanalys för Naturvårdsverket [Consequence analyses step by step: instructions on social and economic consequence analysis for the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency]. (www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer/620-5314-0.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish Environmental Protection Agency [Naturvårdsverket] (2003b). Natura 2000 i Sverige: handbok med allmänna råd. Handbok 2003:9 [Natura 2000 in Sweden: a manual containing general advice. Manual 2003:9]. (www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer/620-0131-0.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish Environmental Protection Agency [Naturvårdsverket] (2005). Riksintresse för naturvård och friluftsliv: handbok med allmänna råd för tillämpningen av 3 kap. 6 § andra stycket, miljöbalken.Handbok 2005:5 [National interest for environmental protection and outdoor activities: a manual with general advice on the application of chapter 3, section 6, second paragraph of the Environmental Code. Manual 2005:5]. (www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer/620-0140-X.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish Environmental Protection Agency [Naturvårdsverket] (2008). Sweden’s environmental objectives – no time to lose. An evaluation by the Swedish

137



environmental objective council. Stockholm. (http://www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer/978-91-620-1266-3.pdf)

Swedish Environmental Protection Agency [Naturvårdsverket] (2009). Naturvårdsverkets allmänna råd om miljöbedömningar av planer och program till 6 kap. miljöbalken samt förordningen (1998:905) om miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar. NFS 2009:1 [The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s general guidelines on strategic environmental assessments of plans and programmes to chapter 6 of the Environmental Code and the Ordinance (1998:905) on environmental impact statements and strategic environmental assessment reports. NFS 2009:1]. (www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/foreskrifter/nfs2009/nfs_2009_01.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish Government (2004). En svensk strategi för hållbar utveckling – ekonomisk, social och miljömässig. Regeringens skrivelse 2003/04:129. [A Swedish strategy for sustainable development – economic, social and environmental. Official Government Communication 2003/04:129]. (www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/01/76/42/cb1f06c1.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish Government (2006). Strategiska utmaningar – En utveckling av svensk strategi för hållbar utveckling. Regeringens skrivelse 2005/06:126. [Strategic challenges – A development of a Swedish strategy for sustainable development. Official Government Communication 2005/06:126]. (www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/06/06/92/5ff0d494.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish Government (2007). Genomförandet av EU:s strategi för hållbar utveckling: Sveriges rapport till Europeiska kommissionen, juni 2007 [The implementation of the EU strategy for sustainable development. Sweden’s report to the European Commission, June 2007]. (www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/08/53/53/8e5f8048.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish Government Decision 29/06/2006. Direktiv för framtagandet av förslag till regionala strukturfondsprogram för regional konkurrenskraft och sysselsättning [Directive for putting forward proposals to the regional structural funds programme for regional competitiveness and employment]. (in Swedish)

Swedish National Board of Housing Building and Planning [Boverket] (2006). Miljöbedömningar för planer enligt plan- och bygglagen – en vägledning [Strategic environmental assessments of plans in accordance with the Planning and Building Act – guidelines]. (http://www.boverket.se/Global/Webbokhandel/Dokument/2006/miljobedomningar_for_planer_enligt_plan-%20och_bygglagen.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish National Board of Housing Building and Planning [Boverket] and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency [Naturvårdsverket] (2000). SMB och översiktlig fysisk planering [Strategic environmental assessment and overall physical planning]. (in Swedish)

Swedish National Heritage Board [Riksantikvarieämbetet] (2007). Kulturmiljön som resurs: hur kulturmiljön på ett ändamålsenligt sätt kan behandlas i miljöbedömningar

138



och miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar [The cultural environment as a resource: how the cultural environment can be suitably dealt with in strategic environmental assessments and environmental impact assessments]. (www.raa.se/publicerat/9789172094727.pdf) (in Swedish)

Swedish National Institute of Public Health [Statens folkhälsoinstitut] (2005). Vägledning för hälsokonsekvensbedömningar: med fokus på social och miljömässig hållbarhet [Guidelines on health impact assessments: with the focus on social and environmental sustainability]. (http://www.fhi.se/PageFiles/3329/r200539vhkbsvensk0511.pdf) (in Swedish)

Therivel, R. (2004). Strategic environmental assessment in action. ISBN 1-84407-042-5, Earthscan.

UN (United Nation) (1993). Convention on biological diversity, No 30619. Concluded at Rio de Janeiro 5 June 1992. (www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-un-en.pdf)

UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) (1991). Convention on environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context, “The Espoo (EIA) convention”. (www.unece.org/env/eia)

UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) (1998). Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters, “The Aarhus convention”. (www.unece.org/env/pp/treatytext.htm)

UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) (2003). Protocol on strategic environmental assessment to the convention on environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context. (www.unece.org/env/sea)

UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) (2007). Protocol on SEA, resource manual to support application of the UNECE protocol on strategic environmental assessment, draft final April 2007. (www.unece.org/env/eia/sea_manual/documents/SEAmanualDraftFinalApril2007.pdf

Wandén, S. (2007). Miljömål och andra önskemål, en studie av synergier och konflikter [Environmental objectives and other requirements, a study of synergies and conflicts]. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency report 5747. (www.naturvardsverket.se/Documents/publikationer/620-5747-2.pdf) (in Swedish)

More information on the Internet:

Biodiversity and strategic environmental assessment. (www.cbd.int/decisions/?lg=0&m=cop-06&d=07)

Cultural aspects and strategic environmental assessments, Swedish National Heritage Board. (www.raa.se), search for “miljöbedömning” [strategic environmental assessment]). (in Swedish)

139



General information on impact assessments. IAIA (the International Association of Impact Assessment). (http://www.iaia.org)

Health impact assessments and health in environmental impact statements, the Swedish National Institute of Public Health [Folkhälsoinstitutet] and the National Board of Health and Welfare [Socialstyrelsen] www.fhi.se, www.socialstyrelsen.se, search for “HKB” [Hälsokonsekvensbedömningar – health impact assessments], “hälsokonsekvensbedömning” [health impact assessments], and “MKB” [environmental impact statement]. (in Swedish)

MKB-centrum [the Swedish EIA centre]. (http://mkb.slu.se/eiacentre/)

Municipal comprehensive physical plans, detailed development plans and strategic environmental assessments, National Board of Housing, Building and Planning [Boverket]. (www.boverket.se, search for “miljöbedömning” [strategic environmental assessment]) (in Swedish)

Risk and environmental impact statements, Myndigheten för samhällskydd och beredskap [The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency]. (http://www.msb.se/, search for “mkb” [miljökonsekvensbeskrivningar – EISs and SEA reports] and “miljöbedömning” [strategic environmental assessment]) (in Swedish)

Strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) and environmental impact assessments (EIAs), EU. (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/home.htm)

Strategic environmental assessments (SEA), Environmental Impact Assessmnets (EIAs) Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. This manual in PDF format, general guidelines, literature that may be of use when carrying out strategic environmental assessments, etc. (www.naturvardsverket.se/miljobedomningar) (in Swedish, except for this manual)

Sustainability assessments, EU. (http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/index_en.htm)

Sustainable development, EU. (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/)

140

Naturvårdsverket 106 48 Stockholm. Besöksadress: Stockholm - Valhallavägen 195, Östersund - Forskarens väg 5 hus Ub, Kiruna - Kaserngatan 14. Tel: +46 8-698 10 00, fax: +46 8-20 29 25, e-post: [email protected] Internet: www.naturvardsverket.se Beställningar Ordertel: +46 8-505 933 40, orderfax: +46 8-505 933 99, e-post: [email protected] Postadress: CM-Gruppen, Box 110 93, 161 11 Bromma. Internet: www.naturvardsverket.se/bokhandeln

Practical guidelines on strategic environmental assessment of plansand programmes

This is a translation of the Swedish Environmental Pro-

tection Agency practical guidelines on strategic environ-

mental assessment of plans and programmes which was

issued in January 2009.

The manual provides guidance on how a strate-

gic environmental assessment (SEA) can, should and

must be carried out in accordance with Swedish law.

The Swedish provisions are based on and conform to

the provisions contained in EU Directive 2001/42/EC

“on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and

programmes on the environment” and the Protocol

on strategic environmental assessment to the Espoo

convention on environmental impact assessment in a

transboundary context.

The manual describes, among other things, how to

decide whether a strategic environmental assessment is

required, what stages are included in the SEA process

and how they can be implemented. This English edi-

tion is intended for people who wish to gain a general

insight into how strategic environmental assessments

of plans and programmes can be carried out and, in

particular, for people who require information on how

a strategic environmental assessment can, should and

must be carried out on the basis of the provisions con-

tained in Swedish law and the EU Directive on SEA.

REPORT 6383

NATURVÅRDSVERKET

ISBN 978-91-620-6383-2

ISSN 0282-7298