Policy Trends of Strategic Environmental Assessment in Asia - Term Paper Example

POLICY TRENDS OF STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IN ASIA Introduction The process of integrating ecological concerns into guidelines, plans, and programs is called the “Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)”. Its main objective is to analyze the probable environmental impacts of the policies, plans, and programs, which entail documenting of ecological reports through involving the public. “Environmental impact assessment (EIA)” was used initially, but the incapacity to facilitate the “Environmental Policy Integration (EPI)” at the crucial stages mainly when making policies and plans of the environmental impact. Further, EIA could not report on the various tactical influences of increased effects resulting from consecutive and raised numbers of projects in a given region. Analyzing the policies, programs, and plans by the SEA not only fixed the structure of the environmental impact assessments but also added to its value. The change in SEA has been observed from the initial use as a substitute to the faults of the EIA. It is now used as an instrument in the environmental policy strategies. Thus, SEA implementation has been successful in not only inflicting of environmental regulations, but also assisting the EIA in the protection of the environment. The SEA has also been noted to foster the requirements of the EPI at a more considerable stage rather than the crucial stage. This is one of the benefits that administration bodies can use SEA in drafting of national environmental policies. Globally, there have been questions about the importance of the SEA and its effectiveness in drafting the ecological policies. This has been because of the loopholes in the SEA incorporation in the achieving its full capabilities in environmental governance planning. The implementation of SEA in Asia can be done by imitating the Europe one, but modifying the SEA into the Asia local conditions to avoid any conflicting situations and fulfilling the local goals, which are different from those in Europe (World Bank 2007b). This paper examines the SEA policy patterns in Asia in relation to the European countries. According to the power distance index by Hofstede, the Asian countries fair well than the Europeans in the SEA implementation and governance. Overview of SEA in Asia The development of SEA in several countries in Asia has been facilitated by legislation. These countries include China, Hong Kong, and South Korea among others. In some nations, SEA is being explored in phases to check the progress and extent of success in environmental protection. Here, the implementation of SEA involves legislative, institutional, and capacity building structures. The techniques vary according to the countries and ability to foster the process. China China has incorporated the SEA into law and national planning framework through legislation. When putting up structures in China, SEA policies should be followed from the sector to national levels. The enactment of the implementation of SEA into law is a good platform in the progress of environmental protection in China. However, some problems affect SEA implementation in China. The public’s participation in China has been restricted to a chosen few; this is a derailing factor (Zhou, Tan, Wu & Chang 2005). However, it can be untrue since the EIA law Article 11 has given the public the mandate to participate in the SEA process The public may be uninterested in the SEA, thereby participating poorly. China experiences social-political factors that hinder the implementation of policies such as the SEA. To some extent, it may be but in many nations organizing open debates on the negative impacts of the PPP’s, it is a challenge. On the degree of success in implementation of SEA, China has provided the documentation for various planning disciplines to allow a wider public participation and awareness. A technological approach to implementation of SEA has been adopted in China to assist in the documentation and access to information concerning the subject. Amendments to the law are also a notable progress in China seeking to address the emerging issues concerning environment and social factors. Japan Unlike China, Japan has not incorporated the SEA into the national regulations. However, the country is laying a foundation for the SEA by conducting tests through the help of the government. These tests include managing of waste in the country (Hayashi 2007). Japan’s government does not have any legislation concerning the SEA, although it is not against the system. This is a major problem with implementation of the SEA program due to the inconsistent support. The lack of legislation for SEA in Japan is not an obstacle for the implementation progress. There have been notable achievements in the country towards the implementation. The introduction of SEA to the local planning groups in the country is one of the great steps in the execution. The awareness of the SEA is important since it offers the public relevant reasons for legislation to prevent its opposition. The involvement of the public contributes to another notable progress in Japan in the implementation of the SEA. It gives the public the chance to participate in the social, environmental, and economic aspects that surround any major structural constructions. Malaysia Malaysia has enacted laws with respect to EIA, although lacks legislation for the SEA (Smutny 2008). The national policy of Malaysia states that environmental resources will be included in the development of economic activities with regional, local, and master plans (Article 3.1). The policy means that any natural resource available used will be considered socially and economically for the people of Malaysia. SEA has been used on several Malaysian projects, which encountered problems from the country. The country has poor interests on the implementation of SEA, hence a big problem with the progress of the system (Halimaton 2007). However, the country mentioned SEA and EIA in the ninth plan for 2006-2010, but still faced a low adoption in the state. It stated that they would use the systems in the analysis and reduce the environmental impacts, which arise due to development activities. Another problem facing the SEA in Malaysia is the unstructured procedure of conducting the study. Having an unstructured system is bound to affect the effectiveness in the application of SEA. Several descriptions exist for conducting SEA in Malaysia, which collide with others, thereby causing conflicts. In addition, poor public sensitization of the system affects the execution. Many Malaysians have no or less knowledge than the required to have an effective SEA implementation (Hezri & Hasan 2006). This big challenge slows the progress. The recommendation of the system by the government ministry is an encouragement to the achievement of SEA. SEA Problems, Progress, and Prospects The implementation of SEA in Asia has been coupled with a number of factors. The imitation of the European countries has led to the legislation of the law in some nations while others adopt the policies. The SEA has faced several issues in Asia, thereby hindering its implementation. The major issue is the nation’s involvement of politics in making decisions. In Asia, political interference is high in the implementing and following of the SEA policies, which is also a problem even in countries with law to support the system. A challenge in public participation is a problem affecting Asian counties with the cases of no transparency being rife within these countries. The last problem is the utilization of the SEA framework, which differs with nations and projects of different countries. The inconsistent SEA structures in the different states and locals in Asia have contributed to non-uniformity in the general perception of SEA (Fisher 2007). The result is the slow progress and different perceptions of the system. On the bright side, SEA has had major breakthrough in the Asian countries with an increased awareness by the public, who in turn participate in the study in large numbers. The involvement is among the main objectives of the SEA. Legislation and policy creation is another in the Asian countries. Government support of SEA is vital in the progress of the study (Thérivel 1993). On the prospect of SEA, seeking legislation authority in some countries, transparency, public participation, and expansion of awareness are the aims. These prospects are mainly from the problems encountered. SEA Paradigm Analysis and Policy Implications Countries that have adopted the SEA system have a symbolic representation, which is determined by the various extents of adoption. The system uses white or green tiger and white or green elephants to show the nations that are dedicated to the adoption. The elephants signify an observable and framed policy tool such as law. The tiger, on the other hand, symbolizes non-laid out measures, but are still practiced such as the public involvement. Color green signifies the high functionality, whereas white is a symbol of low functionality. There have been implications to the adoption of SEA due to the different SEA principles by different countries. These conflicts are labeled according to the SEA paradigm. The implications arise from the public and shareholder participation, which some countries differ on the ideology (Bina 2006). The government involvement also serves as an implication to the SEA implementation in the formulation of the policies. Conclusion The adoption of the SEA in Asian countries has not been easy. The nations that have managed to legislate the study have also faced problems in implementation even with the remarkable process. The problems observed in implementing SEA such as the awareness campaigns should be remedied using the available resources to reach the majority of people possible. Advances in technology should also be used in ensuring the process is done and reaches a great magnitude of people. Asia is growing fast with challenges from population and pollution. The adoption of SEA should be done to mitigate such adverse effects. References Bina, O 2006, ‘Strategic environmental assessment’, Paper presented at workshop “Innovation in Environmental Policy? Integrating the Environment for Sustainability,. Stockholm. Fisher, T 2007, The theory and practice of strategic environmental assessment: towards a more systematic approach. Earthscan. Halimaton, SH 2007, A Malaysian experience in strategic environmental assessment (SEA), presentation at a workshop. In: Understanding Strategic Environmental Assessment, Putrajaya. Hayashi, K 2007 Comparative study on strategic environmental assessment system in selected countries. In: International symposium on EcoTopia Science (ISETS 2007), Nagoya, Japan, pp. 23–25. Hezri, A, & Nordin Hasan, M, 2006, ‘Towards sustainable development? The evolution of environmental policy in Malaysia’, Nat. Resour. Forum vol. 30, pp. 37–50. Smutny, M2008, Evaluation of environmental assessment for socio-economic development plan of Con Dao district, unpublished material, Integra Consulting Services. incomplete reference Thérivel, R 1993, ‘Systems of strategic environmental assessment, environmental’, Impact Assessment Review, vol. 13, pp. 145-168. World Bank 2007b Strategic environmental assessment and integrated water resources management and development, final draft, Environment Department, World Bank. June 12 2007 Zhou, T, Wu, J & Chang, I 2005, ‘Requirements for strategic environmental assessment in China’, Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 81–97 Read More