Learning How to Deal with Values, Frames and Governance in Sustainability Appraisal

Bond A. J., Dockerty T., Lovett A., Riche A. B., Haughton A. J., Bohan D. A., Sage R. B., Shield I. F., Finch J. W., Turner M. M. and Karp A. Learning how to deal with values, frames and governance in Sustainability Appraisal, Regional Studies. The effectiveness of Sustainability Appraisal is highly contested because of the value-based nature of the assumed goal (sustainable development), because effectiveness itself can be determined through different theoretical framings, and because good governance does not guarantee sustainable outcomes. Drawing on learning derived from the literature and a case study examining biomass crop planting on a regional scale in England, an approach for managing the Sustainability Appraisal development and application process is proposed. This incorporates analytic–deliberative techniques as the basis for more pluralism, combined with constraints mapping. Such an approach, it is suggested, can better accommodate multiple framings. Bond A. J., Dockerty T., Lovett A., Riche A. B., Haughton A. J., Bohan D. A., Sage R. B., Shield I. F., Finch J. W., Turner M. M. et Karp A. Apprendre comment traiter les valeurs, les cadres et la gouvernance dans une évaluation du Développement durable, Regional Studies. L'efficacité de l'évaluation du Développement durable est très discutée à cause des caractéristiques du prétendu objectif (à savoir le développement durable) qui sont basés sur les valeurs, parce que l'on peut déterminer l'efficacité elle-même à partir de différents cadres théoriques, et car la bonne gouvernance n'assure pas de résultats durables. Puisant dans l'apprentissage qui provient de la documentation et dans une étude de cas qui examine la plantation de cultures biomasses sur le plan régional en Angleterre, on propose une façon de gérer le processus de mise au point et de mise en oeuvre du Développement durable. Cela comprend des techniques analytico-délibératives comme la base d'un pluralisme augmenté, conjointement avec une élaboration des contraintes. On suggère qu'une telle façon peut mieux s'adapter aux cadres multiples. Evaluation du Développement durable Cultures biomasses Elaboration des contraintes Apprentissage Analytico-délibératif Pluralisme Bond A. J., Dockerty T., Lovett A., Riche A. B., Haughton A. J., Bohan D. A., Sage R. B., Shield I. F., Finch J. W., Turner M. M. und Karp A. Erlernen des Umgangs mit Werten, Rahmen und Steuerung bei der Nachhaltigkeitsprüfung, Regional Studies. Die Wirksamkeit einer Überprüfung der Nachhaltigkeit ist stark umstritten, weil das angenommene Ziel (nachhaltige Entwicklung) eine wertbasierte Natur aufweist, weil sich die Wirksamkeit selbst in verschiedenen theoretischen Rahmen ermitteln lässt und weil eine gute Steuerung kein Garant für nachhaltige Ergebnisse ist. Aufbauend auf den Ergebnissen der Literatur und einer Fallstudie, bei der der Anbau von Biomassepflanzen in regionalem Maßstab in England untersucht wird, wird ein Ansatz für die Leitung der Entwicklung und Anwendung einer Nachhaltigkeitsprüfung vorgeschlagen. Hierbei kommen analytisch-deliberative Techniken als Grundlage für mehr Pluralismus sowie eine Kartierung der Einschränkungen zum Einsatz. Durch einen solchen Ansatz lassen sich unserer These zufolge verschiedenartige Rahmen besser miteinander vereinbaren. Nachhaltigkeitsprüfung Biomassepflanzen Kartierung von Einschränkungen Lernen Analytisch-deliberativ Pluralismus Bond A. J., Dockerty T., Lovett A., Riche A. B., Haughton A. J., Bohan D. A., Sage R. B., Shield I. F., Finch J. W., Turner M. M. y Karp A. Aprender cómo tratar los valores, las estructuras y la gobernanza en la valoración de la sostenibilidad, Regional Studies. La eficacia de la valoración de la sostenibilidad se cuestiona en gran medida debido a la naturaleza basada en los valores del objetivo supuesto (desarrollo sostenible), a que la misma eficacia puede determinarse a través de diferentes estructuras teóricas y a que la buena gobernanza no garantiza resultados sostenibles. Basándonos en el aprendizaje derivado de la literatura y un estudio de caso en el que se examina la plantación de biomasa a escala regional en Inglaterra, proponemos un planteamiento para gestionar el desarrollo y la puesta en práctica de la valoración de la sostenibilidad. Añadimos técnicas analíticas deliberativas como base para más pluralismo, combinado con un examen de las restricciones. Sugerimos que un planteamiento de este tipo puede adaptarse mejor a las diferentes estructuras. Valoración de la sostenibilidad Cultivos de biomasa Examen de las restricciones Aprendizaje Analítico deliberativo Pluralismo

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

[2]  Robert B. Gibson,et al.  Governance for sustainable development: moving from theory to practice , 2005 .

[3]  David Pearce,et al.  The economics of sustainable development , 1994 .

[4]  Ciaran O'Faircheallaigh,et al.  Effectiveness in social impact assessment: Aboriginal peoples and resource development in Australia , 2009 .

[5]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[6]  F. Retief.  EFFECTIVENESS OF STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (SEA) IN SOUTH AFRICA , 2007 .

[7]  Alan Bond.  Let's not be rational about this: response to Benson , 2003 .

[8]  A. Bond,et al.  Sustainability appraisal: jack of all trades, master of none? , 2009 .

[9]  Robert B. Gibson.  Beyond The Pillars: Sustainability Assessment As A Framework For Effective Integration Of Social, Economic And Ecological Considerations In Significant Decision-Making , 2006 .

[10]  Tim Oxley,et al.  INDICATORS OF SOCIO-NATURAL CHANGE: SCIENTIFIC MEANING AND CONTEXTUAL INTERPRETATION , 2003 .

[11]  E. Leknes,et al.  The roles of EIA in the decision-making process , 2001 .

[12]  Judith Petts,et al.  Barriers to Deliberative Participation in EIA: Learning from Waste Policies, Plans and Projects , 2003 .

[13]  C. Barrett,et al.  A Holistic Approach to Sustainability Based on Pluralistic Stewardship , 1999 .

[14]  Kim Putters,et al.  Exploring the relation between evidence and decision-making A political-administrative approach to health impact assessment , 2004 .

[15]  David Alan Grier,et al.  The Common Future , 2012, Computer.

[16]  Mats Eklund,et al.  Environmental impact assessment—a tool for sustainable development?: A case study of biofuelled energy plants in Sweden , 2002 .

[17]  Jouni Paavola,et al.  Governance for Sustainability: Towards a ‘Thick’ Analysis of Environmental Decisionmaking , 2003 .

[18]  H. E. Dresser.  Society for the Protection of Birds , 1896 .

[19]  Tim Richardson,et al.  Environmental assessment and planning theory: four short stories about power, multiple rationality, and ethics , 2005 .

[20]  Clive George,et al.  Testing for sustainable development through environmental assessment , 1999 .

[21]  Derk Loorbach,et al.  Governance for sustainability , 2007 .

[22]  David P. Lawrence,et al.  Planning theories and environmental impact assessment , 2000 .

[23]  Sigrid Stagl,et al.  Learning from Doing Participatory Rural Research: Lessons from the Peak District National Park , 2006, Journal of Agricultural Economics.

[24]  Robert V. Bartlett,et al.  The Theory of Environmental Impact Assessment: Implicit models of policy making , 1999 .

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

[26]  Susan Taljaard,et al.  From impact assessment to effective management plans: learning from the Great Brak Estuary in South Africa , 2005 .

[27]  T. Fischer,et al.  Towards Sustainability: Is Integrated Appraisal a Step in the Right Direction? , 2007 .

[28]  A. Lovett,et al.  Land Use Implications of Increased Biomass Production Identified by GIS-Based Suitability and Yield Mapping for Miscanthus in England , 2009, BioEnergy Research.

[29]  P. Healey.  Collaborative Planning in Perspective , 2003 .

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

[31]  Riki Therivel,et al.  Sustainability-focused impact assessment: English experiences , 2009 .

[32]  Governance for a sustainable future. , 2006, Public health.

[33]  A. John Sinclair,et al.  Conceptualizing learning for sustainability through environmental assessment: critical reflections on 15 years of research , 2008 .

[34]  Lieselotte Feldmann,et al.  The EU's SEA Directive: status and links to integration and sustainable development , 2001 .

[35]  Angus Morrison-Saunders,et al.  Learning from experience: emerging trends in environmental impact assessment follow-up , 2005 .

[36]  Lynton K. Caldwell,et al.  ANALYSIS-ASSESSMENT-DECISION: THE ANATOMY OF RATIONAL POLICYMAKING , 1991 .

[37]  Jason Chilvers,et al.  Towards Analytic‐deliberative Forms of Risk Governance in the UK? Reflecting on Learning in Radioactive Waste , 2007 .

[38]  P. Gazzola,et al.  Effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment - the significance of learning , 2009 .

[39]  David P. Lawrence,et al.  Environmental Impact Assessment: Practical Solutions to Recurrent Problems , 2003 .

[40]  D. P. Lawrence.  EIA — DO WE KNOW WHERE WE ARE GOING? , 1997 .

[41]  W. Wende,et al.  Evaluation of the effectiveness and quality of environmental impact assessment in the Federal Republic of Germany , 2002 .

[42]  S. Bell,et al.  Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable? , 1999 .

[43]  Dale S. Rothman,et al.  Discursive biases of the environmental research framework DPSIR , 2008 .

[44]  David A. Bohan,et al.  A novel, integrated approach to assessing social, economic and environmental implications of changing rural land-use: A case study of perennial biomass crops , 2009 .

[45]  Alan Bond,et al.  The interminable issue of effectiveness: substantive purposes, outcomes and research challenges in the advancement of environmental impact assessment theory , 2004 .

[46]  A. Shepherd,et al.  Strategic environmental assessment for sustainable urban development , 1996 .

[47]  R. D. Groot,et al.  A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services , 2002 .

[48]  Sigrid Stagl,et al.  SDRN Rapid Research and Evidence Review on Emerging Methods for Sustainability Valuation and Appraisal , 2007 .

[49]  R. Corry,et al.  Using normative scenarios in landscape ecology , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[50]  Peter Guthrie,et al.  A framework for clarifying the meaning of Triple Bottom-Line, Integrated, and Sustainability Assessment , 2008 .

[51]  V. James,et al.  Environmental impact assessment, a comparative review , 1996 .

[52]  Maite Cabeza Gutés.  The concept of weak sustainability , 1996 .

[53]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness , 1974 .

[54]  B. Flyvbjerg.  RATIONALITY AND POWER: DEMOCRACY IN PRACTICE , 1999 .

[55]  Douglas Baker,et al.  Evaluating the effectiveness of British Columbia's environmental assessment process for first nations' participation in mining development , 2003 .

[56]  O. Bina,et al.  New Agendas for Appraisal: Reflections on Theory, Practice, and Research , 2004 .

[57]  Philip Cooper,et al.  Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions , 2003 .

[58]  J. F. Benson,et al.  What is the alternative? Impact assessment tools and sustainable planning , 2003 .

[59]  Suzan Dagg,et al.  Sustainability Assessment of Future Scenarios: Methodology and Application to Mountain Areas of Europe , 2008, Environmental management.

[60]  Andrew Stirling,et al.  Deliberative mapping: a novel analytic-deliberative methodology to support contested science-policy decisions , 2007 .

[61]  Tomás B. Ramos,et al.  Environmental indicator frameworks to design and assess environmental monitoring programs , 2004 .

[62]  Rudolf de Groot,et al.  Critical natural capital: a socio-cultural perspective , 2003 .

[63]  Thomas Fischer,et al.  What is Wrong with EIA and SEA anyway , 2006 .

[64]  Riki Therivel,et al.  The strategic environmental assessment directive in the UK: 1year onwards , 2006 .

[65]  Jean-Michel Lasry,et al.  The Economics of Sustainable Development , 2010 .

[66]  Matthew Asa Cashmore,et al.  The role of science in environmental impact assessment: process and procedure versus purpose in the development of theory , 2004 .

[67]  Dennis Anderson,et al.  Sustainable Biofuels: Prospects and Challenges , 2008 .

[68]  D. Lawlor,et al.  Indicators of socioeconomic position (part 1) , 2005, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[69]  S. Butler,et al.  Farmland Biodiversity and the Footprint of Agriculture , 2007, Science.

[70]  Angus Morrison-Saunders,et al.  Effectiveness of environmental offsets in environmental impact assessment: practitioner perspectives from Western Australia , 2007 .

[71]  Hans Wiklund,et al.  In search of arenas for democratic deliberation: a Habermasian review of environmental assessment , 2005 .