Journal
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REVIEW
Volume 27, Issue 7, Pages 585-606Publisher
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2007.05.003
Keywords
SEA; lines of argumentation; purpose; role; approach; strategic
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
In spite of almost two decades of experience, Strategic Environmental Assessment's (SEA) foundations remain unclear to the point that the case for needing an instrument called 'SEA' could be questioned. The aim is to ask: what problems was SEA meant to solve, and what needs was it meant to address, by reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of SEA thinking to date. I do so by organising the reasons and arguments offered by scholars and practitioners under three 'lines of argumentation' related to the strategic dimension of SEA, its methods and purpose. I explore how each line of argumentation affects the concept of (the purpose and role) and approach to (the procedures, methods and tools) SEA. The problematisation of these arguments and their evolution makes a case for the urgent acknowledgment of misleading simplifications. From this analysis I propose a number of promising fields of inquiry that could help respond to the growing expectations attached to SEA and strengthen its 'strategic' dimension: revisiting the concept of assessment in SEA, promoting strategies for the introduction of SEA, and strengthening the contribution of theory to SEA practice. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available