Doug Hickman
Environmental specialist, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Mr. Hickman, why is it important to integrate strategic environmental assessment (SEA) into economic development programs and strategic plans?
It is important because the Government of Ukraine has ratified the SEA Protocol to the Espoo Convention, which means that the Government of Ukraine now needs to see strategic assessment done. But beyond that, what is really important is that we need to make sure that economic development is undertaken in ways that are compatible with our environment. This ensures that environment resources are protected. It raises the quality of life for people. It also has very important benefits in improved public health and through the creation of, what we can say, “green economy” by identifying economic opportunities that are driven by good quality of environment, for example, green tourism.
How SEA can be taken?
Basically it is a fairly simple process. What we are trying to achieve is a fairly simple objective. We simply want to understand what are the environment issues today in a particular community, what is proposed for local economic development and from that we want to understand whether and how there might be additional environmental implications as a result of that economic development and if there will be, what we can do to minimize environmental effects. And that is really what we are trying to do. It is simply about trying to align the way we develop our economy with what is compatible for our environment. We are not trying to stop the development, and we certainly recognize that people need jobs, they need incomes, everyone is trying to raise a family and simply live. We are trying to find a way to integrate economy and environment from that perspective.
Who participates in SEA?
This is absolutely an important component. When we have plans, or programs, we are talking about things that a community wants to undertake. But that, in turn, can have an impact on other people. So we need to ensure that those people have the chance to comment on the proposal in terms of how the proposal might affect them – positively or negatively. And we need to talk about what can be done to minimize any negative impact in order to ensure that only impacts are not that serious. It is also very important to address the issues of timing. We know there is going to be certain development over a certain length of time, and the communities need time to adjust to that, and that measures need to be taken to limit impacts over time. Again, when we have public involvement and stakeholders’ involvement, we can understand how these proposals will affect different people and different communities, and what can be done to minimize any negative impact.
In Canada, do you always include SEA into local economic development plans and programs? Is it common practice?
It is common practice, but how it is done is not necessarily the same everywhere. In Europe, there is what is known as the Espoo Convention, but that is the convention which has been signed only by European countries. It does not extend beyond Europe, and it was actually negotiated by the UN Economic Commission for Europe, which is a Europe-wide thing. Canada may choose to join in the future but has not yet. There is a SEA process in Canada, but it is very often defined at the provincial level, not the national level. And the way it is implemented varies in different parts of Canada.
As regards the cost of SEA, the World Bank has done analysis of the cost of SEA and concluded that, generally speaking, SEA costs somewhat in the order of 1% of a complete investment program. So, as you can see, the cost is very small relative to assessment, but the benefits can be very great. And, in some cases, it can be documented that public health benefits associated with SEA can be measured in hundreds of millions of dollars per project, because the project can be designed as a result of SEA. The project can be designed in such a way as to minimize the environmental health impact on the communities, and that minimizes public health costs. Just an example: in other instances, an SEA shows whether there can be an opportunity to develop a green component of the economy, which, in turn, generates jobs and revenues, which otherwise would have not been developed. I can give you one specific example from Canada: One of the things that we talk about both in the economic development and environment sector is decoupling economic growth from environment impact. What does decoupling mean? It is often assumed that when we have economic growth we necessarily have increased environmental impact. In other words, these things are coupled. When we decouple these two things, we are saying that we can have economic growth, but we can also have reduced environmental impact. Where I come from in Canada (Nova Scotia, eastern part of Canada), we actually reduced the amount of waste that we dispose of by over 50% percent in 15 years. The economy is growing at about 2% per year, but the amount of waste is now only 50% of what it was 15 years ago. And this is one example of how economic growth can be decoupled from environmental impact. We can have decreasing environmental impact and increasing growth. But we need an SEA process to inform how that can happen.
Is SEA part of sustainable development strategy?
It is at the heart of it. If we look at our economies in any country, of course, we need to analyze what we have at the moment. But when we look to the future, we are making economic development plans. And when we undertake an SEA, we are developing what is really an environmental plan linked to that economic plan. In other words, our environmental plan is to minimize the negative environmental impacts of that economic plan.