Sustainability Appraisal
Introduction
The British Government’s Consultation Document ‘Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks’ (ODPM, September 2004, p.16, para 1.2.3), states that Sustainability Appraisal (SA) should:
- Take a long-term view of whether and how the area covered by the plan is expected to develop, taking account of the social, environmental, and economic effects of the proposed plan;
- Provide a mechanism for ensuring that sustainability objectives are translated into sustainable planning policies;
- Reflect global, national, regional and local concerns;
- Provide an audit trail of how the plan has been revised to take into account the findings of the SA;
- Form an integral part of all stages of plan preparation, and
- Incorporate the requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive.
The problem with trying to plan Sustainable Development is
that it is difficult to predict what will prove to be sustainable i.e. ‘to
ensure that humanity meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ (Bundtland Report, 1987,
‘Overview’). If, however, the techniques of statistically based scientific
method (‘A statistical test begins by supposing for the sake of argument that
the effect we seek is not present’ –
This approach can be used to identify projects and proposals that should be considered for inclusion in Local Development Frameworks (LDF) and Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) by using a combination of qualitative and quantitive methods of measurement to ‘screen out’ clearly established unsustainable features in the areas of economy, ecology and accountability that could be present whether proposals and projects are classed as being economic, social or environmental. What is required to pass this test is a positive answer to each of the numbered questions (given below, following a more detailed description of the reasoning behind the three principal components) supported by measurable evidence derived from answering the supplementary questions listed. Although such lists cannot be exhaustive and should be reviewed and improved in the light of experience, this method should provide a useful heuristic for Officials applying SA, decision making bodies, such as Strategic Partnerships, and Inspectors moderating their work and, if applied over time, a key element of the audit trail referred to above.
The Economy, Ecology & Accountability (EEA) Method – Sustainability Appraisal by elimination
Since the introduction of Selective Financial Assistance, following the Industry Act 1972, a considerable amount of casework experience has been gained in developing techniques to identify projects that are likely to contribute to economic development and constitute good value for public money and these can be applied to the process of SA in all cases.
However, it is sometimes forgotten that the human economy
relies on the resources of this planet. This, deficiency can be accounted for
by including ecology, which ‘investigates the manner in which the parts of
systems interact and the impact of external forces on them’ (Maunter Ed., 1999,
p. 159), within the process of SA. Recent adverse climatic events should remind
us that we need to ‘turn the present economic system into a 21st
century economy as if people and the Earth matter’ (Robertson, 1998, p.10).
Therefore by including questions relating to resource depletion and climate
change, in particular, it becomes possible for SA to also meet the objective of
the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive, which is:
“to provide for a high level of protection of the environment and to contribute to the integration of environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans. . . with a view to promoting sustainable development”. (Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effect of certain plans and programmes on the environment – Stafford Borough, October 2004, p.1)
Practical experience shows that without the controls imposed by accountability projects are likely to loose their focus or fail. A recent British Government Consultation Paper concerning the conduct of Local Government Employees states that ‘an employee must be accountable to the authority for his actions’ (ODPM, August 2004, p.10). Therefore it seems reasonable to expect that proposals seeking inclusion in an LDF should demonstrate that systems of accountability are in place because of the potential commitment of public resources.
Qualitative SA – Part 1 of EEA Method
A. Economy
1. Need - Is the project wanted?
a. Will the public or significant elements of the potential market use it?
b. Does it meet a policy objective stated in the LDF/RSS
2. Additionality - Does the project add value?
a. Does it provide a service or facility that is not already available or significantly improve what is currently available?
b. Will it have a negative effect on existing services in the area covered by the plan (e.g. will there be a net loss of jobs)?
3. Viability – Does the project have access to all the resources required?
a. Are the resources required to deliver the project (e.g. money, materials or competent people) readily available locally?
b. Will there be a sufficient flow of resources to keep it running?
B. Ecology
4. Global Capital – How will the project affect the Earth’s resources?
a. Will it deplete or ‘lock-up’ resources either locally or globally?
b. What impact will the project have on biodiversity?
c. What effect will it have on recycling targets?
5. Environmental Change – How will the project affect the climate?
a. What are the emissions produced by the project and what significance will they have locally or globally?
b. What are the sources of energy used (e.g. are they fossil or renewable)?
C. Accountability
6. Responsibility – Will the project be well managed?
a. Is there a clearly identified management structure both to deliver the project and to maintain its operation thereafter?
b. Is there provision for independent scrutiny of the project (e.g. a Board of Directors, Management Committee or Trustees)?
c. Do the procedures for appointments of staff or scrutineers meet both legal and local requirements (e.g. LDF Community Involvement policy)?
7.
Measurement
– Are there tools to record and account for the project’s progress?
a. Are the objectives of the project measurable?
b. Will the resources used by the project (e.g. money, materials or people) be measured?
c. Will the economic and environmental effects of the project (both positive and negative) be measured throughout its life
d. Will all relevant measurements be made available those responsible for the LDF/RSS?
Quantitive SA – Part 2 of EEA Method
Although it should be possible for those championing proposals to provide answers to the questions listed above, the nature of the quantitive data available and the benchmarks against which they should be tested is likely to be different for economic, social and environmental projects. However, the method of calculation outlined below is an example of what could be used to provide relevant statistical information towards SA of economic projects. It has been derived from discussions with Officials of Stafford Borough Council about feasibility and scrutinised by the Economic Task Group of Stafford Borough Partnership (a District level LSP). The first two elements are significant for economic development, the second two measure ecological targets that already have legislative recognition and the final element is something that has social as well as economic and environmental impacts and reflects the duties imposed on Local Authorities by the Traffic Management Act 2004. By relating the ‘score’ under each heading to current local economic and environmental data (which should be included in the ‘baseline data’ collected during SA), it should be possible to decide whether the probable outcomes are positive or negative and thus produce a quick indication of how significant a project is likely to be for future local prosperity and quality of life. This technique is known as ‘Decision Aiding’ and was suggested within a report produced by members of ETSU for the European Commission in 1996 (Newman, 2000, p.43).
Net effect of new economic project on Stafford Borough:
n capital stock
n employment
n recycling
n carbon emissions
n road traffic
Unit of measurement = %+/- current level across Borough
Conclusion
This approach is suggested to help make the process of SA feasible by providing indicators that are practical, given current knowledge of the problems faced, and have scope for further development. It is designed to complement the framework outlined in ODPM’s Consultation Paper.
Paul Newman, MA (Sustainable Development), DMS, MCMI, MEI
Member,
Member, Swynnerton Parish
Council
Member, Staffordshire Parish
Council’s Association Executive
Vice Chair, Sustainable
Staffordshire
Bibliography
Brundtland, G-H. (Chair) (1987) Our Common Future: Report
of the World Commission on Environment and Development,
European Commission (1996) The Environmental
Acceptability of Renewables - Phase 1 Report,
Mautner, T. (ed.) (1999) Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy, Harmondsworth, Penguin Books
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, A Model Code of
Conduct for Local Government Employees,
Newman, P. (2000), Appraising sustainable investment in renewable energy, Staffordshire, The Renewable Way
Office
of the Deputy Prime Minister, Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial
Strategies and Local Development Frameworks, ODPM Publications, Wetherby,
September 2004, Product Code: 04PD02541
Robertson, J. (1998), Transforming Economic Life: A Millennial Challenge: Schumacher Briefings 1, Totnes, Green Books
Stafford
Borough Local Development Framework, Planning for our Future: Sustainability
Appraisal Scoping Report for the Core Strategy DPD, Stafford Borough
Council,
Front Page | Home
Page for individuals
| Business Services Index |
Site contents & internal links |
Email the Author