Having sufficient quality capacity within a given jurisdiction is clearly important to ensure SEA can be delivered effectively and there is a broad trend internationally within environmental assessment toward formally regulating the capacity of key actors. Internationally, certification schemes have been introduced for EIA practitioners in a number of jurisdictions. It is our experience, however, that national certification schemes have often proven problematic in practice. In comparison, there is some evidence to suggest that the more market-driven accreditation processes operating in the UK have had some positive effects. So does regulation work? And what types of regulation work?
You and the readers may be interested in the article by Hipondoka, Daylal-Clayton & Gils 2016 dealing with the issue. The quality of the Term of Reference (ToR) for the EA has been identified a major issue in this article. .
As for the Netherlands, a major constraint in EA is the expertise available within the competent public authority, particularly smaller municipalities to deliver an adequate ToR. The report (2017) that identifies this state of affairs is written in Dutch. Reference and translation of relevant paragraphs on request.
Many thanks Hein Van Gils for your comments and contribution. Interesting points on the ToR.
In case anyone else is interested, here's a link to the article mentioned:
Hipondoka M.H.T., Dalal-Clayton D.B. and van Gils H. (2016) Lessons Learned from Voluntary Strategic Environmental Assessments in Namibia, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14615517.2016.1192829
- Badges
- Science topic