Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Converging impact assessment discourses for sustainable development: the case of Flanders, Belgium

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The scientific field of impact assessment encompasses various ‘traditions’, each reflecting a set of particular policy objectives. This paper analyses two types of impact assessment. Regulatory impact analysis focuses on better regulation and competitiveness, while sustainability assessment fosters a holistic approach centred on the values of sustainable development. Through an analysis of the political discourses at the level of the European Union and at the sub-national level of the Flemish Region of Belgium, elements of convergence between the better regulation and sustainable development discourse are identified. The paper analyses how integrated impact assessment can be an integrative tool that allows to merge both discourses and to implement them in day-to-day decision-making. The potential of the existing Flemish regulatory impact analysis framework to be the starting point of an integrated assessment scheme for sustainable development is advocated and motivated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bäcklund, A. K. (2009). Impact assessment in the european commission–a system with multiple objectives. Environmental Science and Policy, 12, 1077–1087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, J., & Proops, J. (1999). Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology. Ecological Economics, 28, 337–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BMI. (2009). Guidance for impact assessment. German interior ministry (in German) http://www.bmi.bund.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/565864/publicationFile/31426/ah_gfa.pdf.

  • DBR. (2004). A comparative analysis of regulatory impact assessment in ten eu countries. A report prepared for the eu directors of better regulation group. Italian. Irish and Dutch presidencies of the council of the European Union. Formez, Italy. http://www.betterregulation.ie/attached_files/Pdfs/Report%20on%20RIA%20in%20the%20EUa.pdf.

  • Devuyst, D., Hens, L., & De Lannoy, W. (2001). How green is the city? Sustainability assessment and the management of urban environments (p. 457). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2009a). Impact assessment guidelines. SEC (2009) 92. http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/docs_en.htm.

  • European Commission. (2009b). Impact assessment board report 2008. commission staff document accompanying the communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. Third strategic review of better regulation in the European Union. http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/key_en.htm.

  • European Commission. (2010). Lisbon Strategy Evaluation Document. Commission Staff Working Document. http://ec.europa.eu/growthandjobs/pdf/lisbon_strategy_evaluation_en.pdf.

  • Flemish Government. (2004). Note on regulatory impact assessment 2004/13 (in Dutch).

  • Flemish Government. (2005). Note to the Flemish Government. concerning: Lisbon strategy, Mid-term review—addendum to the standpoint of the Flemish Government of 24 Nov 2006 (in Dutch).

  • Flemish Government. (2006a). Moving boundaries together. The Flemish regional strategy for SD (in Dutch). Flemish Government.

  • Flemish Government. (2006b). Guidance for regulatory impact analysis (in Dutch). Flemish Government.

  • Flemish Government. (2008). Communication to the members of the Flemish Government. Concerning: Draft Flemish standpoint w.r.t. the consultation on the draft Impact Assessment Guidance of the European Commission (in Dutch). VR 2008 1807 MED. 0383.

  • Flemish Government. (2009). Medeling aan de Vlaamse Regering. Betreft: Eerste aanzet van visie van de Vlaamse Overheid m.b.t. de Lissabonstrategie na 2010. Minister-president van de Vlaamse Regering.

  • Flemish Government. (2009b). Flemish Lisbon Report 2009. Communication to the Flemish Government. (in Dutch) http://www.vlaandereninactie.be/nlapps/data/docattachments/vlaamse_lissabonrapportering_2009_volledig.pdf Last Accessed on 6 Aug 2010.

  • Flemish Parliament. (2008). Regional Law on SD (in Dutch). http://do.vlaanderen.be/nlapps/data/docattachments/Decreet%206-09-2008.pdf. Last Accessed on 6 Aug 2010.

  • German Federal Government. (2008). Progress Report 2008 on the National Strategy for SD. ‘For a sustainable Germany’.

  • Gibson, R. (2005). Sustainability Assessment—Criteria and Process. Earthscan.

  • Gibson, R. (2006). Beyond the pillars: Sustainability assessment as a framework for effective integration of social, economic and ecological considerations in significant decision-making. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 8(3), 69–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, T., & Guthrie, P. (2006). SD objectives in impact assessment. Where do they come from? Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 8(3), 341–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardi, P., & Zdan, T. (1997). Assessing sustainable development: Principles in practice. International institute for sustainable development. http://www.nssd.net/pdf/bellagio.pdf. Last Accessed 23 Nov 2010.

  • Hertin, J., Jacob, K., & Volkery, A. (2008). Policy appraisal. In: Jordan, A, Lenschow, A. (eds.), Innovation in Environmental Policy? Integrating environment for sustainability. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.

  • Hertin, J., Turnpenny, J., Jordan, A., Nilsson, M., Russell, D., & Nykvist, B. (2009). Rationalising the policy mess? Ex ante policy assessment and the utilisation of knowledge in the policy process. Environment and Planning A, 41(5), 1185–1200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holder, J. (2004). Environmental assessment: The regulation of decision-making. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hugé, J., & Hens, L. (2007). Sustainability assessment of poverty reduction strategy papers. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 25(4), 247–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IAIA. (2009). What is impact assessment? http://www.iaia.org/publicdocuments/special-publications/What_is_IA_web.pdf. Last Accessed on 23 Nov 2010.

  • Jacob, K., Hertin, J., & Volkery, A. (2007). Considering environmental aspects in integrated impact assessment: Lessons learned. In: George, C. & Kirkpatrick, C. (eds.), Impact assessment and SD. European Practice and Experience: 90–105. Cheltenham, UK.

  • Jacobs, S. (2006). Current Trends in Regulatory Impact Analysis: The Challenges of Mainstreaming RIA into Policy-making. Washington DC: Jacobs & Associates Inc. http://www.regulatoryreform.com/pdfs/Current%20Trends%20and%20Processes%20in%20RIA%20-%20May%202006%20Jacobs%20and%20Associates.pdf Last Accessed 10 Aug 2010.

  • Jha-Thakur, U., Gazzola, P., Peel, D., Fischer, T., & Kidd, S. (2009). Effectiveness of strategic environmental assessment–the significance of learning. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27, 133–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, C., & Lee, N. (2002). Further development of the methodology for a sustainability impact assessment of proposed WTO negotiations. Final report to the European commission. Institute for development policy and management. University of Manchester. April 2002.

  • Lee, N. (2006). Bridging the gap between theory and practice in integrated assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 26, 57–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luks, F., & Siebenhüner, B. (2007). Transdisciplinarity for social learning? The contribution of the German socio-ecological research initiative to sustainability governance. Ecological Economics, 63, 418–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandelkern Group on Better Regulation. (2001). Final report. 13 Nov 2001. Brussels.

  • Morrisson-Saunders, A., & Fischer, T. (2006). What is wrong with EIA and SEA anyway? A sceptic’s perspective on sustainability assessment. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 8, 19–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom, S. (2007). Impact assessment procedures for sustainable development: A complexity theory perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 22, 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2006). Maximising the impact of regulatory impact analysis on regulatory quality. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • PODDO. (2009). Sustainability assessment. belgian federal public service for sustainable development (In French and in Dutch). http\\:www.poddo.be/NL/instrumenten/doeb Last Accessed 23 Nov 2010.

  • Pope, J. (2006). What’s so special about sustainability assessment? Editorial. Journal of Environmental Policy and Management, 8(3), v–x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, J., Morrisson-Saunders, A., & Annandale, D. (2005). Applying sustainability assessment models. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 23(4), 293–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radaelli, C. M. (2007). Whither better regulation for the Lisbon agenda? Journal of European Public Policy, 14(2), 190–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renda, A. (2009). Better regulation. In Policy-making in the European Union: Achievements, challenges and proposals for reform. CEPS Paper back. June 2009.

  • Robinson, J. (2004). Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 48, 369–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runhaar, H., Dieperink, C., & Driessen, P. (2005). Policy analysis for sustainable development—Complexities and methodological responses. Paper for the Workshop on Complexity and Policy Analysis. Cork, Ireland, 22–24 June 2005.

  • Scrase, J. I., & Sheate, W. R. (2002). Integration and integrated approaches to assessment: What do they mean for the environment? Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 4, 275–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sedlacko, M., & Gjoksi, N. (2009). Sustainable development and economic growth: Overview and reflections on initiatives in Europe and beyond. European Sustainable Development Network Quarterly Report. Dec 2009.

  • SERV. (2009a). Pact 2020: A new plan for the future of Flanders. 20 objectives. Social-Economic Council of Flanders (in Dutch). Jan 2009. http://www.serv.be/uitgaven/1450.pdf.

  • SERV. (2009b). Inter-Institutional Agreement (IIA) between the Flemish Parliament, the Flemish Government, the Socio-Economic Council for Flanders and the Strategic Advisory Boards on a common approach to Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) (in Dutch). http://www.serv.be/uitgaven/1467.pdf.

  • Tanasescu, I. (2006). Competitiveness and environmental policy: A failed marriage? Journal of Contemporary European Research, 2(1), 92–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanasescu, I. (2009). Stakeholder involvement in the impact assessment procedure at the EU level. The European commission and interest groups—towards a deliberative interpretation of stakeholder involvement in EU Policy-Making. (p. 285). Brussels: VUB Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • TEP. (2007). Evaluation of the commission’s impact assessment system. Final Report—Executive Summary. The Evaluation Partnership. http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/docs/key_docs/tep_eias_final_report_executive_summary_en.pdf.

  • UNEP. (2008). Global Green New Deal—UNEP Green Economy Initiative. Beschikbaar op: http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=548&ArticleID=5955&l=en.

  • Van Humbeeck, P. (2007). Best practices in regulatory impact analysis: A review of the Flemish Region in Belgium. Social Economic Council of Flanders (SERV). Working Paper. Feb 2007.

  • Wachter, D. 2005. Sustainability assessment in Switzerland: From theory to practice. EASY-ECO 1st Conference. Manchester, United Kingdom. 15–17 June 2005.

  • WCED. (1987). Report of the world commission on environment and development. General Assembly Resolution 42/187. 11 Dec 1987.

  • Wilkins, H. (2003). The need for subjectivity in EIA: Discourse as a tool for sustainable development. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 23, 401–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Flemish Policy Research Centre for Sustainable Development & APNA, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050, Brussels, Belgium

    Jean Hugé & Tom Waas

Authors
  1. Jean Hugé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tom Waas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean Hugé.

Additional information

Readers should send their comments on this paper to BhaskarNath@aol.com within 3 months of publication of this issue.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hugé, J., Waas, T. Converging impact assessment discourses for sustainable development: the case of Flanders, Belgium. Environ Dev Sustain 13, 607–626 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-010-9279-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-010-9279-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation