Environmental assessment in The Netherlands: Effectively governing environmental protection? A discourse analysis

Environmental assessment (EA) aims to enhance environmental awareness and to ensure that environmental values are fully considered in decision-making. In the EA arena, different discourses exist on what EA should aim for and how it functions. We hypothesise that these discourses influence its application in practice as well as its effectiveness in terms of achieving the above goals. For instance, actors who consider EA as a hindrance to fast implementation of their projects will probably apply it as a mandatory checklist, whereas actors who believe that EA can help to develop more environmentally sound decisions will use EIA as a tool to design their initiatives. In this paper we explore discourses on EA in The Netherlands and elaborate on their implications for EA effectiveness. Based on an innovative research design comprising an online survey with 443 respondents and 20 supplementary semi-structured interviews we conclude that the dominant discourse is that EA is mainly a legal requirement; EAs are conducted because they have to be conducted, not because actors choose to do so. EA effectiveness however seems reasonably high, as a majority of respondents perceive that it enhances environmental awareness and contributes to environmental protection. However, the ‘legal requirement’ discourse also results in decision-makers seldom going beyond what is prescribed by EA and environmental law. Despite its mandatory character, the predominant attitude towards EA is quite positive. For most respondents, EA is instrumental in providing transparency of decision-making and in minimising the legal risks of not complying with environmental laws. Differences in discourses seldom reflect extreme opposites. The ‘common ground’ regarding EA provides a good basis for working with EA in terms of meeting legal requirements but at the same time does not stimulate creativity in decision-making or optimisation of environmental values. In countries characterised by less consensual political cultures we may expect more extreme discourses on EA, the consequences of which are reflected upon in this paper.

[1]  Helena Valve.  Frame conflicts and the formulation of alternatives: Environmental assessment of an infrastructure plan , 1999 .

[2]  L. Jinlong.  Contextualizing Forestry Discourses and Normative Frameworks Towards Sustainable Forest Management in Contemporary China , 2007 .

[3]  Paola Gazzola,et al.  SEA effectiveness criteria—equally valid in all countries? The case of Italy , 2006 .

[4]  Paul A. Sabatier,et al.  Themes and Variations: Taking Stock of the Advocacy Coalition Framework , 2009 .

[5]  W. Thissen,et al.  Rationality in decision- and policy-making: implications for strategic environmental assessment , 2000 .

[6]  Ernst ten Heuvelhof,et al.  The effects of environmental impact assessment in the Netherlands , 1997 .

[7]  Christopher M. Weible,et al.  The advocacy coalition framework , 2012 .

[8]  E. Arts,et al.  EIA-follow up: on the role of ex post evaluation in environmental impact assessment , 1998 .

[9]  M. Hajer.  Coalitions, Practices, and Meaning in Environmental Politics: From Acid Rain to BSE , 2005 .

[10]  Hens Runhaar,et al.  What makes strategic environmental assessment successful environmental assessment? The role of context in the contribution of SEA to decision-making , 2007 .

[11]  Aleh Cherp,et al.  EA legislation and practice in Central and Eastern Europe and the former USSR: A comparative analysis , 2001 .

[12]  Marie-Anne Germaine.  Apport de l'analyse de discours pour renseigner les représentations paysagères et les demandes d'environnement. Exemple des vallées du nord-ouest de la France , 2011 .

[13]  Minna Kaljonen,et al.  Views on planning and expectations of SEA: the case of transport planning , 2004 .

[14]  P. Runhaar,et al.  Food for thought: Conditions for discourse reflection in the light of environmental assessment , 2010 .

[15]  Patsy Healey,et al.  An institutionalist approach to spatial planning , 1997 .

[16]  T. Richardson,et al.  Reflections on Foucauldian discourse analysis in planning and environmental policy research , 2001 .

[17]  Alexandra Georgakopoulou,et al.  Discourse Analysis: An Introduction , 1997 .

[18]  Tuija Hilding-Rydevik,et al.  A clear case of ‘doublespeak’: the Swedish governmental SEA implementation discourse , 2011 .

[19]  Tim Richardson,et al.  Power, knowledge and environmental assessment: the World Bank’s pursuit of ‘good governance’ , 2011 .

[20]  D. Bitondo,et al.  Contextual phases in the institutionalization of the environmental assessment of road development in Cameroon , 2007 .

[21]  Maarten A. Hajer,et al.  The Politics of Environmental Discourse , 1997 .

[22]  M. Jørgensen,et al.  Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method , 2002 .

[23]  C. Weible,et al.  The Advocacy Coalition Framework , 2012, Theories of the Policy Process.

[24]  P. Cloke,et al.  Exploring Ethos? Discourses of ‘Charity’ in the Provision of Emergency Services for Homeless People , 2005 .

[25]  Tuija Hilding-Rydevik,et al.  Context awareness and sensitivity in SEA implementation , 2007 .

[26]  Hens Runhaar,et al.  Putting SEA in context: A discourse perspective on how SEA contributes to decision-making , 2009 .

[27]  Aat Barendregt,et al.  Evaluating the Role of Participation in Modeling Studies for Environmental Planning , 2011 .

[29]  Dan Durning,et al.  The transition from traditional to postpositivist policy analysis: A role for Q‐methodology , 1999 .

[30]  Angus Morrison-Saunders,et al.  Assessing Impact, Handbook of EIA and SEA Follow-up , 2004 .

[31]  Alan Bond,et al.  The Contribution of Environmental Assessment to Sustainable Development: Toward a Richer Empirical Understanding , 2007, Environmental management.

[32]  Carys Jones,et al.  The Effect of Environmental Assessment on UK Local Planning Authority Decisions , 1997 .

[33]  Paola Gazzola,et al.  Learning through EC Directive based SEA in spatial planning? Evidence from the Brunswick Region in Germany , 2009 .

[34]  Catherine Liston-Heyes,et al.  Corporate discourse and environmental performance in Argentina , 2008 .

[35]  Christopher Wood,et al.  Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review , 1995 .

[36]  Christopher Wood,et al.  Environmental impact assessment: Retrospect and prospect , 2007 .

[37]  M. V. Eeten.  Recasting Intractable Policy Issues: The Wider Implications of The Netherlands Civil Aviation Controversy , 2001 .