Abstract
This article presents a methodological framework for strategic environmental assessment (SEA) application. The overall objective is to demonstrate SEA as a systematic and structured policy, plan, and program (PPP) decision support tool. In order to accomplish this objective, a stakeholder-based SEA application to greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation policy options in Canadian agriculture is presented. Using a mail-out impact assessment exercise, agricultural producers and nonproducers from across the Canadian prairie region were asked to evaluate five competing GHG mitigation options against 13 valued environmental components (VECs). Data were analyzed using multi-criteria and exploratory analytical techniques. The results suggest considerable variation in perceived impacts and GHG mitigation policy preferences, suggesting that a blanket policy approach to GHG mitigation will create gainers and losers based on soil type and associate cropping and on-farm management practices. It is possible to identify a series of regional greenhouse gas mitigation programs that are robust, socially meaningful, and operationally relevant to both agricultural producers and policy decision makers. The assessment demonstrates the ability of SEA to address, in an operational sense, environmental problems that are characterized by conflicting interests and competing objectives and alternatives. A structured and systematic SEA methodology provides the necessary decision support framework for the consideration of impacts, and allows for PPPs to be assessed based on a much broader set of properties, objectives, criteria, and constraints whereas maintaining rigor and accountability in the assessment process.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AAFCCT Agriculture and Agri-Food Climate Change Table. (2000) Options report: reducing greenhouse gas emissions from Canadian agriculture. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. (2001) Opportunities for reduced non-renewable energy use in Canadian Prairie agricultural production systems. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Research and Analysis Directorate, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Alberta Sustainable Agriculture Council. (2002) Greenhouse Gas Emissions of the Agriculture and Agri-Food Industry. http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/cl3009. Last accessed 12 March 2007
Alton C (2005) Case study: successful tiering of policy level SEA to project EIA. Paper presented for the conference on SEA by the International Association for Impact Assessment, Prague
Auditor General. (2004) Assessing the environmental impact of policies, plans, and programs. Report of the Commissioner of Environment and Sustainable Development. Office of the Auditor General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Bailey J, Dixon JE (1999) Policy environmental assessment. Chapter 13 in J. Petts (ed.) Handbook of environmental impact assessment, vol. 1. Blackwell, Oxford, UK
Boardman J, Poesen J, Evans R (2003) Socioeconomic factors in soil erosion and conservation. Environmental Science and Policy 6:1–6
Bodini A, Giavelli G (1992) Multicriteria analysis as a tool to investigate compatibility between conservation and development on Salina Island, Aeolian Archipelago, Italy. Environmental Management 16(5):633–652
Carver SJ (1991) Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with geographical information systems. International Journal of Geographical Information Sciences 5(3):321–339
CEAA, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, (2000) Agenda for research and development. Workshop background paper. Discussion draft for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s stakeholder consultation, 27 March, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Dalal-Clayton B, Sadler B (2005) Strategic environmental assessment: a sourcebook and reference guide to international experience. Earthscan, London, England
Desjardins RL, Kulshreshtha SN, Junkins B, Smith W, Grant B, Boehm M (2001) Canadian greenhouse gas mitigation options in agriculture. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 60:317–326
Desjardings RL, Riznek R (2000) Agricultural greenhouse gas budget. In McRae T, Smith C, Gregorich L (eds.) Environmental sustainability of Canadian agriculture: report of the Agri-Environmental Indicator project. Catalogue No. A22–201/2000E. Agriculture and Agrifood Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Pages 133–142
Duffy P (2004) Agriculture, forestry and fisheries: the orphans of environmental impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 22(3):175–176
Fischer T (2006) Strategic environmental assessment and transport planning: towards a generic framework for evaluating practice and developing guidance. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 24(3):183–197
Fischer T (2003) Strategic environmental assessment in post-modern times. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 23:155–170
Harris C, Nielsen EA, McLaughlin WJ, Becker DR (2003) Community-based social impact assessment: the case of salmon-recovery on the lower Snake River. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 21(2):109–118
Hazell S, Benevides H (2000) Toward a legal framework for SEA in Canada. in Partidário M, Clark R (eds.) Perspectives on strategic environmental assessment. Lewis Publishers, New York, Pages 47–67
Herath G, Prato T (2006) Using multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management. Ashgate, Hampshire, England
Janssen R (1996) In Van den Bergh J (ed.), Ecological economics and sustainable development: theory, methods and applications. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Pages 231–242
Kørnøv L, Thissen WAH (2001) Rationality in decision and policy making: implications for strategic environmental assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 18(3):191–200
Kulshreshtha SN, Gill R, Junkins B, Desjardens R, Boehm M, Bonneau M (2002) Canadian economic and emissions model for agriculture (CEEEA 2.0): technical documentation. CSALE Working Paper # 12, University of Saskatchewan, Agricultural Economics, Saskatchewan, Canada
Marshal R, Fischer T. (2006) Regional electricity transmission planning and SEA: The case of the electricity company ScottishPower. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 49(2):279–299
Massam B (1988) Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques in planning. Progress in Planning 30, Part 1
Nilsson M, Dalkman H (2001) Decision making and strategic environmental assessment. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 3(3):305–327
Nitz T, Brown L (2001) SEA must learn how policy making works. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 3(3):329–342
Noble BF (2005) Regional cumulative effects assessment: toward a strategic framework. Research report prepared for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Research and Development Program. CEAA, Ottawa, ON
Noble BF (2003) Auditing strategic environmental assessment practice in Canada. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 5(2):127–147
Noble BF (2002) Strategic environmental assessment of Canadian energy policy. mpact Assessment and Project Appraisal 20(3):177–188
Noble BF, Storey K (2001) Towards a structured approach to strategic environmental assessment. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 3(4):483–508
Noble BF (2000) Strategic environmental assessment: what is it and what makes it strategic? Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 2:203–224
Partidário MR (2005) The contribution of strategic impact assessment to planning evaluation. In Miller D, Patassini D (eds.) Accounting for non-market values in planning evaluation. Ashgate, London, England
Partidário M (2000) Elements of an SEA framework – improving the added value of SEA. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 20:647–663
Petts J (1999) (ed.) Handbook of environmental impact assessment, vol. 1. Blackwell, Oxford, UK
Retief F (2007) A performance evaluation of strategic environmental assessment processes within the South African context. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 27(1):84–100
Salant P, Dillman DA. (1994) How to conduct your own survey. John Wiley and Sons, New York
Sheate W, Dagg S, Richardson J, Anderson A, Palerm J, Steen U (2003) Integrating environment into strategic decision making: conceptualizing policy-SEA. European Environment 13:1–18
Shiferaw B, Holden S (1999) Soil erosion and smallholders’ conservation decisions in the highlands of Ethiopia. World Development 27:739–752
Statistics Canada. 2003. 2001 Census of Agriculture. http://www.statcan.ca/english/ agcensus2001/. Last accessed 17 November 17 2006
Vicente G, Partidário M (2006) SEA – enhancing communication for better environmental decisions. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 26:696–706
Voogd H (1983) Multicriteria evaluation for urban and regional planning. London, Pion
Wiseman K (2000) Environmental assessment and planning in South Africa: the SEA connection. In M.R. Partidario and R. Clark (eds.) Perspectives on strategic environmental assessment. Lewis Press, Boca Raton, FL
Acknowledgments
Funding for this research was provided by the BIOCAP Canada research foundation and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. We would like to express our appreciation to the individuals who took the time to participate in this assessment during the busy agricultural season. We are also grateful for the insightful comments and suggestions of four anonymous reviewers who helped us improve significantly upon the original version of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Noble, B.F., Christmas, L.M. Strategic Environmental Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Options in the Canadian Agricultural Sector. Environmental Management 41, 64–78 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-007-9017-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-007-9017-y