BIODIVERSITY IN IMPACT ASSESSMENT Background ... - CBD · BIODIVERSITY IN IMPACT ASSESSMENT Background Document to Decision VIII/28 ... Assessment. CBD Technical Series No. 26 Biodiversity

CBD Technical Series No.Secretariat

of the Convention on

Biological Diversity

BIODIVERSITY IN IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Background Document to Decision VIII/28

of the Convention on Biological Diversity:

Voluntary Guidelines on

Biodiversity-Inclusive Impact

Assessment

CBD Technical Series No. 26

Biodiversity in Impact Assessment

Background Document to CBD Decision VIII/28: Voluntary Guidelines on Biodiversity-Inclusive Impact Assessment

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

PublishedjointlybytheSecretariatoftheConventiononBiologicalDiversityandtheNetherlandsCommission for Environmental Assessment, in collaboration with the Secretariat of the Convention onWetlands(Ramsar,Iran,1971),theSecretariatoftheConventiononMigratorySpeciesandtheInternationalAssociationforImpactAssessment.ISBN:92-9225-060-4

Copyright©2006,SecretariatoftheConventiononBiologicalDiversity;©2006,NetherlandsCommissionforEnvironmentalAssessment.

Thedesignationsemployedandthepresentationofmaterialinthispublicationdonotimplytheexpressionof any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, theNetherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment, the Secretariat of the Ramsar Convention, theSecretariatoftheConventiononMigratorySpeciesortheInternationalAssociationforImpactAssessmentconcerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning thedelimitationofitsfrontiersorboundaries.

This publication was compiled from CBD decision VIII/28, document UNEP/CBD/COP/8/27/ADD2(VoluntaryGuidelinesonBiodiversity-InclusiveImpactAssessment)andadditionalbackgroundmaterialcompiled by Roel Slootweg, Arend Kolhoff, Rob Verheem and Robert Höft. The views expressed in thebackgroundmaterialcontainedinthispublicationarethoseofthecontributingauthorsanddonotnecessarilyreflectthoseoftheSecretariatsoftheConventiononBiologicalDiversityortheNetherlandsCommissionforEnvironmentalAssessment.This publication may be reproduced for educational or non-profit purposes without special permissionfromthecopyrightholders,providedacknowledgementofthesourceismade.TheEnglishversionofthisdocumenthasbeenoriginallypublishedby theNetherlandsCommission forEnvironmentalAssessmentandisaccessibleathttp://www.eia.nl/ncea/pdfs/biodiversityeiasea.pdf.

PhotoCredits:RoelSlootweg

Citation:Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Netherlands Commission for EnvironmentalAssessment(2006).BiodiversityinImpactAssessment,BackgroundDocumenttoCBDDecisionVIII/28:VoluntaryGuidelinesonBiodiversity-InclusiveImpactAssessment,Montreal,Canada,x_ypages.

or

CommissionforEnvironmentalAssessmentP.OBox23453500GHUtrechtTheNetherlandsPhone:31302347666Fax:31302331295E-mail:[email protected]:www.eia.nl

Forfurtherinformationpleasecontact:

SecretariatoftheConventiononBiologicalDiversityWorldTradeCentre413St.Jacques,Suite800Montreal,Quebec,CanadaH2Y1N9Phone:1(514)2882220Fax:1(514)2886588E-mail:[email protected]:http://www.biodiv.org

3

BiodiversityinImpactAssessment

FOREWORD

Achievingthe2010target—tosignificantlyreducetherateofbiodiversityloss—hasbecomeaparamountaimoftheworld’snationssincetheadoptionofthetargetbytheConventiononBiologicalDiversity(CBD)andtheWorldSummitonSustainableDevelopmentin2002.Yet,astheMillenniumEcosystemAssessmentconcluded, an unprecedented effort will be needed to achieve this target. The loss of genetic diversity,speciesandecosystemsisproceedingapaceasaresultofhabitatchange,climatechange,invasivespecies,overexploitationofresourcesandmanyformsofpollution.

Global Biodiversity Outlook 2 demonstrates that, by and large, we already have the tools to face thischallenge.Whatisneededisgreatercommitmenttousethesetoolstosystematicallyevaluatetheeconomic,environmentalandsocialoutcomesofdevelopmentprojects—bothpositiveandnegative.Wemustconsiderthefullrangeofoptionsforcarryingoutaproject,implementingaprogramme,oradoptingapolicy,includingtheoptionofrejectingaproposalifitsimpactwouldcompromiseachievementofthe2010target.

Voluntaryguidelinesonbiodiversity-inclusiveimpactassessmentwereendorsedbytheeighthmeetingoftheConferenceofthePartiestotheCBDinCuritiba,Brazil(20-31March2006).Theyprovidedetailedguidanceonwhether,when,andhowtoconsiderbiodiversityinbothproject-andstrategic-levelimpactassessments.TheguidelinesareanelaborationandrefinementofguidelinespreviouslyadoptedbytheCBD(DecisionVI/7-A),theRamsarConventiononWetlands(ResolutionVIII.9)andtheConventiononMigratorySpecies(Resolution7.2).

Thecasestudies,backgroundmaterialandexamplescontainedinthepresentdocumentwillhelpthereadertomakefulluseoftheguidelineswhenconsideringbiodiversityinimpactassessments.ManyofthecasestudieswereprovidedbymembersoftheInternationalAssociationforImpactAssessment(IAIA).SeveralIAIAannualconferences,participantsintheIAIAprojectonCapacity-BuildingforBiodiversityandImpactAssessment(CBBIA),andgovernmentexpertshavereviewedthematerial.

Wewishtoexpressourdeepgratitudetoallthosewhohavededicatedtimeandcontributedexpertisetotheelaborationoftheguidelines.WealsothanktheNetherlandsCommissionforEnvironmentalAssessmentfortheircontributionandformakingthisdocumentavailabletothe26thAnnualConferenceofIAIA(Stavanger,Norway,23-26May2006). It isourhope that theguidelineswillhelp toensure that impactassessmentsincreasingly take intoaccountbiodiversity considerationsand therebymakeadirect contribution to theachievingthe2010target.

AhmedDjoghlaf PeterBridgewater RobertHepworth ExecutiveSecretary Secretary-General ExecutiveSecretary Conventionon RamsarConvention Conventionon BiologicalDiversity onWetlands MigratorySpecies

4


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................7

CHAPTER 1: Introduction ............................................................................................8

CHAPTER 2: COP Decision VIII/28. Impact assessment: Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive impact assessment (convention text) ......................................11

A. Environmental impact assessment ..............................................................................11

B. Strategic environmental assessment ............................................................................12

CHAPTER 3: How to interpret biodiversity: the broad view .....................................13

3.1 What is biodiversity? ...................................................................................................13

3.2 Objectives of biodiversity management ......................................................................14

3.3 Ecosystem services: translating biodiversity into decision makers language ............15

3.4 How to assess impacts on biodiversity? .......................................................................16

3.5 Biodiversity principles for impact assessment ............................................................17

CHAPTER 4 : Conceptual reflections ..........................................................................18

4.1 Direct drivers of change: impact assessment framework ...........................................18

4.2 Indirect drivers of change: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment framework...............18

4.3 Links between both frameworks .................................................................................20

CHAPTER 5: Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive Environmental Impact Assessment (convention text) .......................................................................................21

5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................22

5.2 Stages in the process ....................................................................................................22

5.3 Biodiversity issues at different stages of environmental impact assessment .............23

(a)Screening..........................................................................................................................23

(b)Scoping............................................................................................................................26

(c)Assessmentandevaluationofimpacts,anddevelopmentofalternatives....................28

(d)Reporting:theenvironmentalimpactstatement(EIS).................................................31

(e)Reviewoftheenvironmentalimpactstatement............................................................31

5


(f)Decision-making..............................................................................................................31

(g)Monitoring,compliance,enforcementandenvironmentalauditing.............................32

Appendix 1: Indicative set of screening criteria to be further elaborated at national level / ............................................................................................................................34

Appendix 2: Indicative list of ecosystem services ....................................................................35

Appendix 3: Aspects of biodiversity: composition, structure and key processes ...................37

CHAPTER 6: Draft guidance on biodiversity-inclusive Strategic Environmental Assessment (convention text) .......................................................................................39

6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................40

6.2 Strategic environmental assessment applies a multitude of tools .............................40

Strategicenvironmentalassessmentvs.integratedassessment.............................................41

Paralleltoorintegratedwithinaplanningprocess?..............................................................41

StepsintheSEAprocess..........................................................................................................42

6.3 Why give special attention to biodiversity in SEA and decision-making? .................43

6.4 What biodiversity issues are relevant to SEA ..............................................................46

BiodiversityinSEA–differentperspectives...........................................................................46

Biodiversityinthisguidance.................................................................................................47

Biodiversity“triggers”forSEA................................................................................................47

6.5 How to address biodiversity in SEA ............................................................................51

Theassessmentframework.....................................................................................................51

Identifyingpotentialbiodiversityimpactsthroughbiodiversitytriggers..............................51

APPENDIX:Summary overview of when and how to address biodiversity in SEA ...............55

Annex 1: Case study contributions ..........................................................................................57

Annex 2: Important features of the Ecosystem Approach .......................................................58

Annex 3: Additional Information on the SEA ..........................................................................62

Annex 4: Summary of lessons from case studies on biodiversity in SEA ................................66

6


LIST OF BOXES TABLES AND FIGURES

Table1.1: ProductionandreviewprocessofthisdocumentFigure4.1: ImpactassessmentframeworkFigure4.2: ConceptualframeworkusedbytheMillenniumEcosystemAssessmentTable5.1: QuestionspertinenttoscreeningonbiodiversityimpactsBox5.1: StakeholdersandparticipationFigure6.1: CombinationsofSEAandplanningprocessBox6.1: EcosystemservicesintheirregulatorycontextBox6.2: StakeholdersandparticipationBox6.3: DirectdriversofchangeBox6.4: IndirectdriversofchangeFigure6.2: AssessmentframeworkFigure6.3: Summaryoverviewofproceduretodefinebiodiversityimpactsstartingwithoneora combinationofbiodiversitytriggers

ABBREVIATIONS

BAP: BiodiversityActionPlanCBBIA: AIA’sCapacityBuildingprojectforBiodiversityinImpactAssessmentCBD: ConventiononBiologicalDiversityCOP: ConferenceofPartiesEIA: EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentEIS: EnvironmentalImpactStatement(alsoEIAreport)EMP: EnvironmentalManagementPlanIAIA: InternationalAssociationforImpactassessmentMA: MillenniumEcosystemAssessmentMGDs:: MillenniumDevelopmentGoalsNBSAP: NationalBiodiversityStrategyandActionPlanNEN: NationalEcologicalNetworkPPP: Policy,planand/orprogrammeRSA: RepublicofSouthAfricaSBSTTA: CBDSubsidiaryBodyonScientific,Technical&TechnologicalAdviceSEA: StrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentSAP: SpeciesActionPlanToR: TermsofReferenceUK: UnitedKingdom

7


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document is based on contributions of many enthusiastic biodiversity and impact assessmentprofessionalsaroundtheworld.Inputswereprovidedascasestudies,writtencommentsontextproposals,oralcontributionstodiscussionsatIAIAconferences,andthroughtheformalCBDreviewprocedure.ThisdocumentistheresultofaprocessthatstartedwiththelaunchofaBiodiversitySectionatthe1998IAIAconference inChristchurch,NewZealand.It is impossible tosumupall individualcontributionsto thisprocess,butthisworldwidecommunityofprofessionalsisthefirsttoacknowledgeforitseffectivenessinprovidingthebiodiversityconventionswithrelevantinputs. TheprojecttoproducecomprehensiveguidelinesonEIAaswellasSEAstartedinJuly2004.ItispartofIAIA’sActionProgrammeonBiodiversityinImpactAssessment,endorsedbyIAIAin2001(Cartagena)andupdatedin2004(Vancouver). Financial support was provided by the Netherlands government through their support to theSecretariatoftheConventiononBiologicalDiversity(specialthankstoAartvanderHorstattheMinistryofForeignAffairsandArthurEijsattheMinistryofEnvironment). Case studies and other contributions were provided by (in alphabetical order): Susie Brownlie(RSA), Larry Burrows (UK), Marc van Dijk (Belgium), Thea Jordan (RSA), Clive George (UK), ArendKolhoff(Netherlands),VinodMathur (India),AshaRajvanshi (India),AhmadSaeed (Pakistan),MarliesvanSchooten(Netherlands),RoelSlootweg(Netherlands),JoTreweek(UK),BathuUprety(Nepal)&LouisdeVilliers(RSA).ThankstoJoTreweek,technicalprogrammemanager,andNapeleonTiapo,programmeadministrator, for liaising with the Capacity Building in Biodiversity and Impact Assessment (CBBIA)projectofIAIA. Anearlierdrafttextwasreviewedorcommenteduponby:JillAdams(UK),SusieBrownlie(RSA),Helen Byron (UK), Mauricio Castro-Salazar (Costa Rica), Alissar Chaker (Lebanon), Juri Dusik (CzechRepublic),Thea Jordan(RSA),ThomasFisher (UK),PetrievanGent (Netherlands),CliveGeorge (UK),VinodMathur(India),LisaPalframan(Canada),MariaPartidario(Portugal),AshaRajvanshi(India),BerntRydgren(Sweden),JoTreweek(UK)&LouisdeVilliers(RSA). SpecialthankstoHelenByron,chairoftheEcologyandBiodiversitysectionofIAIA,forcontinuousorganisational and moral support; Liduina Wildenburg and Maike van der Zee at the secretariat of theNetherlandsCommissionofEnvironmentalAssessment(NCEA)forbeingthereattherightmoments.

8


CHAPTER 1: Introduction

Paragraph1ofArticle14of theConventiononBiologicalDiversity (CBD) identifies impactassessmentasakeyinstrumentforachievingtheconservation,sustainableuseandequitablesharingobjectivesoftheConvention. Inparagraph4ofdecision IV/10-C, theConferenceof Parties (COP) recommended thatappropriateissuesrelatedtoenvironmentalimpactassessmentbeintegratedinto,andbecomeanintegralpartofrelevantsectoralandthematicissuesunderitsprogrammeofwork.Atitssixthmeeting(TheHague2002),theCOPendorseddraftguidelinesforincorporatingbiodiversity-relatedissuesintoenvironmentalimpactassessmentlegislationand/orprocessesandinstrategicenvironmentalassessment(DecisionVI/7-A). These2002guidelineswereadoptedwithannotationsdescribing theirrelevancetotheRamsarConventionbytheeighthmeetingoftheConferenceofContractingPartiestotheConventiononWetlands(Ramsar,Iran,1971)(ResolutionVIII.9).TheseventhmeetingoftheConferenceofPartiestotheConventiononConservationofMigratorySpeciesofWildAnimalswelcomedtheendorsementbyCBD-COPoftheguidelinesandurgeditsPartiestomakeuseofthemasappropriate(ResolutionVII.2). CBDdecisionVI/7-ArequeststheExecutiveSecretarytoprepareproposalsforfurtherdevelopmentandrefinementoftheguidelines,incollaborationwithrelevantorganisations,inparticulartheInternationalAssociationforImpactAssessment(IAIA),incorporatingallstagesoftheenvironmentalimpactassessmentandstrategicenvironmentalassessmentprocessestakingintoaccounttheecosystemapproach. TheExecutiveSecretaryinvitedpartiestocontributerecentexperiencesinenvironmentalimpactassessmentandstrategicenvironmentalassessmentproceduresthatincorporatebiodiversity-relatedissues.Inaddition,experiencesinapplyingtheguidelinescontainedintheannextodecisionVI/7-Awerereadilyaccepted.AvailablecasematerialwascombinedwithcontributionsfromtheIAIAnetworkin2003inaninformationdocumenttoSBSTTA(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/18:Reportonongoingwork),containing51references. In2004,theCBDSecretariatinvitedtheNetherlandsCommissionforEnvironmentalAssessmenttotaketheleadinproducingrevisedguidelinesonbiodiversity-inclusiveenvironmentalimpactassessment(EIA)andstrategicenvironmentalassessment(SEA).InadditiontothematerialprovidedbyParties,theNetherlandsCommissionforEnvironmentalAssessment(NCEA)solicitedrelevantSEAcasestudiesthroughthe International Association for Impact Assessment and through its own network. These case studies,availablethroughtheClearing-housemechanismoftheConvention1,wereanalysedforthedevelopmentoftheSEAguidancedocument(seeAnnex1foranoverviewofcasecontributionstothisdocument). DuringtheproductionprocessitwasdecidedtoproduceseparatedocumentsonEIAandSEA.TheEIAdocumentcontainsarefinementoftheearlierguidelines,anddoesnotdeviatesubstantiallyfromthe earlier COP Decision VI/7-A. The SEA document however, is conceived as a totally new guidancedocument. Structure and character of both documents are widely different, emphasising the potentiallygreat differences in procedure and contents between EIA and SEA. The review process of various draftversionsofthedocumentswaselaborate.Seetable1.1foranoverviewoftheentireproductionprocess. ThisbackgrounddocumentcontainsformaltextsendorsedbytheConferenceofPartiesinApril2006, i.e. the Decision on “Impact assessment: Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity–inclusive impactassessment”presentedinchapter2,theannextothedecisioncontaining“Voluntaryguidelinesonbiodiversity-inclusiveenvironmentalimpactassessment”presentedinchapter5,andthedraft“guidanceonbiodiversity-inclusivestrategicenvironmentalassessment”containedinannexIItothenotebytheExecutiveSecretaryregardingvoluntaryguidelinesonbiodiversity-inclusiveimpactassessment(UNEP/CBD/COP/8/27/Add.2),presentedinchapter6.Thebackgrounddocumentiscomplementedbyachapter(3)providingadescriptionofbiodiversityaccordingtothedefinitionandobjectivesoftheConvention,achapter(4)explainingtheconceptualframeworksusedintheguidelines,andanumberofappendices.Theannexesprovidealistofcasestudies,usedtodrafttheSEAGuidance(annex1),ananalysisoftheecosystemapproachinrelationtoenvironmentalassessment(annex2),moregeneralinformationonSEAandasummaryoflessonsdrawnfromtheanalysisofcasestudiesonSEA.

1 http://www.biodiv.org/programmes/cross-cutting/impact/search.aspx

9


Table1.1.:Productionandreviewprocessofthisdocument

Phase1:analysisandwriting(September2004)- SolicitedcasestudiesonBiodivinSEA- ExpandEIAguidelines- Analysisofcases&outlineofSEAguidelines- Internalreview- FirstdraftEIAguidelinesandSEAguidance

Phase2:review(fromDecember2004)- Externalreview:invitedbiodiversity(7)&SEA(5)practitioners- CommentssolicitedthroughIAIAlist(4)- Seconddraftofdocuments- CBDlaunchesweb-basedcasestudiesdatabase- CBDfocalpointsinvitedforinternetdiscussion- IAIA conference (Boston, June 2005): discussions with members of the CBBIA network andconferenceworkshop- SubmissionoffinaldraftdocumentstoCBDsecretariat

Phase3:CBDprocess(fromJuly2005)- ProductionofinformationdocumenttoSBSTTA(UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/11/INF/19).- IAIAconferenceonSEA(Prague,Sept.2005)- InvitationtofocalpointsofCBD-COPandSBSTTAtocommentondocuments- Secretariatreceives7formalreactions- PreparationofdrafttextforCOPdecision(UNEP/CBD/COP/8/27/Add.2)- COPDecisionVIII/28(April2006)

How to use this document

TheCBD,theRamsarConventionandtheCMSrecogniseimpactassessmentasanimportanttooltoensurethat development is planned and implemented with biodiversity ‘in mind’. The CBD requires parties toapplyimpactassessmenttoprojects,programmes,plansandpolicieswithapotentialnegativeimpactonbiodiversity.ConsiderableprogresshasbeenmadeinstrengtheningimpactassessmentasatooltofurthertheaimsoftheCBDandrelatedconventions.However,practiseshowsthatmoreworkisneeded. Biodiversityisrelevanttoalltypesofimpactassessmentandshouldbeaddressedatalllevels,fromenvironmentalimpactassessmentcarriedoutforindividualprojects(EIA)tothestrategicenvironmentalassessmentofpolicies,plansandprogrammes(SEA).Biodiversityvaluesshouldbeaddressedinsocialimpactassessment;healthimpactassessmentmayneedtoconsidertheroleofbiodiversityindiseasetransmissionorbiologicalcontrol.Finally,biodiversityprovidescommoditiesforinternationaltradethatmaybethesubjectofstudyintradeimpactassessment(sometimesreferredtoassustainabilityimpactassessment). Individualcountriesmayredefinestepsintheproceduretotheirneedsandrequirementsasbefitstheirinstitutionalandlegalsetting.Inordertobeeffective,theenvironmentalimpactassessmentprocess,shouldbefullyincorporatedintoexistinglegalplanningprocessesandnotbeseenasan“add-on”process.Asaprerequisite,thedefinitionoftheterm“environment”innationallegislationandproceduresshouldfullyincorporatetheconceptofbiologicaldiversityasdefinedbytheConventiononBiologicalDiversity,suchthatplants,animalsandmicro-organismsareconsideredatthegenetic,species/communityandecosystem/habitatlevels,andalsointermsofecosystemstructureandfunction. Environmentalimpactassessmentproceduresshouldrefertootherrelevantnational,regionalandinternationallegislation,regulations,guidelinesandotherpolicydocumentssuchasthenationalbiodiversitystrategy and action plan documents, the Convention on Biological Diversity and biodiversity relatedconventionsandagreementsincluding,inparticular,theConventiononInternationalTradeinEndangeredSpeciesofWildFaunaandFlora(CITES),theConventionontheConservationofMigratorySpeciesofWild

10


Animalsandtherelatedagreements,theConventiononWetlands(Ramsar,Iran,1971),theConventiononEnvironmentalImpactAssessmentinaTransboundaryContext;theUnitedNationsConventionontheLawoftheSea;theEuropeanUniondirectivesonenvironmentalimpactassessment,andtheProtocolfortheProtectionoftheMediterraneanSeaagainstPollutionfromLand-basedSources. Consideration should be given to improving integration of national biodiversity strategy andactionplansandnationaldevelopmentstrategies.Strategicenvironmentalassessmentshouldbeusedasatoolforsuchintegrationtopromotetheestablishmentofclearconservationtargetsthroughthenationalbiodiversitystrategyandactionplanprocess.Theuseofthosetargetsforthescreeningandscopingtargetsofenvironmentalimpactassessmentandfordevelopingmitigationmeasuresshouldalsohelptoimproveintegration.. Implementation of the guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive impact assessment requires thedevelopmentofthenecessarycapacitieswithrespecttothedesignationandcapacitatingabilities/scopeofrelevantinstitutions,thedeliveryoftrainingandraisingofawarenessandtheformationandfacilitationofprofessionalnetworks.Thesuccessfulintegrationofbiodiversityconsiderationsasacomponentinimpactassessments,bothatprojectandthestrategiclevel,requiresanestablishedandfunctionalimpactassessmentsystem. Capacitydevelopmentprogrammesshouldbecountry-specificbecause the legislation, statusofimplementation and procedures of impact assessment within a given country are the result of cultural,socio-economicandnaturalconditions.Theintegrationofabiodiversitycomponentinimpactassessmentlegislation and procedures requires the development of country-specific guidance and implementationby the competent authorities and relevant stakeholders in that country. The guidelines on biodiversity-inclusiveenvironmentalimpactassessment(chapter4)andtheguidanceonbiodiversity–inclusivestrategicenvironmentalassessment(chapter5)containsuggestionsandelementsthatmaybehelpfulindevelopingcountry-specificguidance.

11


CHAPTER 2: COP Decision VIII/28. Impact assessment: Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive impact assessment (convention text)

TheConferenceoftheParties

1. NotesthattheAkwé:KonVoluntaryGuidelinesfortheConductofCultural,EnvironmentalandSocial Impact Assessments regarding Developments Proposed to Take Place on, or which are Likely toImpacton,SacredSitesandonLandsandWatersTraditionallyOccupiedorusedbyIndigenousandLocalCommunities(decisionVII/16F,annex)shouldbeusedinconjunctionwiththevoluntaryguidelinesonbiodiversity-inclusive environmental impact assessment contained in annex I and the draft guidance onbiodiversity-inclusivestrategicenvironmentalassessmentcontainedinannexIItothenotebytheExecutiveSecretary on voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive impact assessment (UNEP/CBD/COP/8/27/Add.2);2. Welcomesthedatabaseofcase-studiesonbiodiversityandimpactassessmentestablishedundertheclearing-housemechanismoftheConvention2asausefulinformation-sharingtool,andencouragesParties,otherGovernmentsandrelevantorganisationstomakeuseandcontributetoitsfurtherdevelopment;

A. Environmental impact assessment

3. Endorses the voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive environmental impact assessmentcontainedintheannextothepresentdecision;4. Emphasises that the voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive environmental impactassessmentareintendedtoserveasguidanceforPartiesandotherGovernments,subjecttotheirnationallegislation,andforregionalauthoritiesor internationalagencies,asappropriate, inthedevelopmentandimplementationoftheirimpact-assessmentinstrumentsandprocedures;5. Urges Parties, other Governments and relevant organisations to apply the voluntary guidelineson biodiversity-inclusive environmental impact assessment as appropriate in the context of theirimplementationofparagraph1(a)ofArticle14oftheConventionandoftarget5.1oftheprovisionalframeworkofgoalsandtargetsforassessingprogresstowards2010andtosharetheirexperience,interalia,throughtheclearing-housemechanismandnationalreporting;6. Encouragesthosemultilateralenvironmentalagreementsthathaveendorsedtheguidelinescontainedin decision VI/7 A, in particular the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International ImportanceEspeciallyasWaterfowlHabitatandtheConventionontheConservationofMigratorySpeciesofWildAnimals,totakenoteof,andifappropriateendorsethevoluntaryguidelinesonbiodiversity-inclusiveenvironmentalimpactassessmentcontainedinannexItothepresentdecision;7. Invitesothermultilateralenvironmentalagreementstotakenoteofandifappropriateapplythevoluntaryguidelinesonbiodiversity-inclusiveenvironmentalimpactassessment;8. RequeststheExecutiveSecretaryto:

(a) Continuecollaboratingwithrelevantorganisations,interaliathroughtheInternationalAssociationforImpactAssessmentanditsprojectoncapacity-buildinginbiodiversityandimpactassessment, to contribute to the development of necessary capacities for the application of theguidelines on biodiversity-inclusive environmental impact assessment taking into account thespecificcircumstancesinwhichtheyaretobeapplied;(b) Compile informationontheexperiencesmadebyParties,otherGovernmentsrelevantorganisations and practitioners in applying the guidelines to the circumstances in which theyaretobeapplied,andtoreporttoameetingoftheSubsidiaryBodyonScientific,TechnicalandTechnologicalAdvicepriortoafuturemeetingoftheConferenceofthePartiesatwhichimpactassessmentwillbereviewed;

2 http://www.biodiv.org/programmes/cross-cutting/impact/search.aspx

12


B. Strategic environmental assessment

9. Endorsesthedraftguidanceonbiodiversity-inclusivestrategicenvironmentalassessmentcontainedin annexII to the note by the Executive Secretary on voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusiveimpactassessment(UNEP/CBD/COP/8/27/Add.2);10. Encourages Parties, other Governments and relevant organisations to take into account asappropriatethisguidanceinthecontextoftheirimplementationofparagraph1(b)ofArticle14oftheConventionandotherrelevantmandatesandtosharetheirexperience,interalia,throughtheclearing-housemechanism;11. Invites other multilateral environmental agreements to take note of the draft guidance onbiodiversity-inclusivestrategicenvironmentalassessmentandtoconsideritsapplicationwithintheirrespectivemandates;12. RequeststheExecutiveSecretaryto:

(a) Facilitate, in collaboration with the International Association for Impact Assessmentand other relevant partners, capacity development activities focusing on the translation of theguidance on biodiversity-inclusive Strategic Environmental Assessment into practical national,sub-regional,regionalorsectoralapproachesandguidelines;(b) Continue collaborating with the Economics and Trade Branch of the United NationsEnvironment Programme and other relevant organisations in developing practical guidance onassessingimpactsoftradeonbiodiversityandincompilingandmakingavailableinformationongoodpracticesandpositiveimpactsoftradeonbiodiversity;(c) CompileinformationontheexperiencesmadebyParties,otherGovernments,organisationsandpractitionersinusingtheguidance;(d) Prepare, forconsiderationbyameetingof theSubsidiaryBodyonScientific,Technicaland Technological Advice prior to a future meeting of the Conference of the Parties at whichimpactassessmentwillbereviewed,proposalsoncomplementingthisguidancewithexamplesofitspracticalapplication.

13


CHAPTER 3: How to interpret biodiversity: the broad view

Thissectionprovidesanoverviewoftheminimumknowledgerequiredtoaddressbiodiversityinimpactassessment.Itdescribeshowpartiestotheconventionshavedefinedbiodiversity,andsummarisesanumberofrelateddocuments:

• PrinciplesoftheCBD3

• Ecosystemapproach4• IAIAprinciplesonBiodiversityinclusiveimpactassessment5

• ConceptualframeworktotheMillenniumEcosystemAssessment6

Theaddedsubtitle,“thebroadview”referstothefactthatmanynon-biodiversityexpertsinimpactassessmentmayviewthepresenteddescriptionofbiodiversityasanall-encompassingconcept.Thatis,itincludesmanyaspectsofimpactassessment,alreadycommonpracticewithoutnecessarilybeingdescribedasbiodiversity.Thischapterwillshowthatbiodiversityindeedisabroadconcept.Present-dayimpactassessmentalreadyeffectivelydealswithmanyaspectsofbiodiversity.However,improvementsandmoreconsistencywiththeinternationallyagreedprinciplesoftheconventionareneeded.Thiscanandwillbedonewithoutcreatinganynewimpactassessmenttools.Thefollowingelementswillbeaddressed:

1. What is biodiversity.TheCBDdefinitionofbiodiversityisprovided,includingashortdescriptionofthethreecommonlydistinguishedlevelsofbiodiversity.2. Objectives of biodiversity management describingthethreeCBDobjectives,includingguidingprinciples on how to address these objectives in impact assessment. The ecosystem approach isintroducedasaframeworkforaddressingtheCBDobjectivesinabalancedway.3. Ecosystem servicesareprominentlyintroducedbytheMillenniumEcosystemsassessment.Theseprovideanimportantmeanstotranslatebiodiversityintodecisionmakerslanguage.4. How to assess impacts on biodiversityexplainstheconceptofdriversofchange,andhowthesedriversofchangeaffectbiodiversitythroughtheirimpactsonthecomposition,structureorkeyprocessesofbiodiversity,themainaspectsofbiodiversity.Knowledgeofchangestotheseaspectsallowustoassesspotentialimpactsonecosystemservices.5. Biodiversity principles for impact assessmentrefertotheprecautionaryprincipleandnonetlossprinciple, and stress the importance of stakeholders participation and information sharing betweenexpertsandlocal/indigenousgroups.

3.1 What is biodiversity?

TheConventiononBiologicalDiversity(CBD)definesbiodiversityas“thevariabilityamonglivingorganismsfrom all sources including inter alia, terrestrial,marine and other aquatic ecosystemsand the ecologicalcomplexesofwhichtheyarepart;thisincludesdiversitywithinspecies,betweenspeciesandofecosystems.”Inotherwords,itisthevarietyoflifeonearthatalllevels,fromgenestoworldwidepopulationsofthesamespecies;fromcommunitiesofspeciessharingthesamesmallareaofhabitattoworldwideecosystems.Levelsofbiodiversity. CountriesthathavesignedtheCBDarerequiredtoimplementpoliciestoprotectbiodiversityatdifferentlevels:

• Ecosystems containing rich biodiversity, large numbers of threatened or endemic species, withsocial, economic, cultural or scientific significance, or relevant for key processes such evolutionary

3 http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp4 Convention on Biological Diversity: Decision V/6 Ecosystem Approach (http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-05&id=7148&lg=0)andDecisionVII/11EcosystemApproach(http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-07&id=7748&lg=0))5 IAIASpecialPublicationsSeriesNo.3 (July2005).Biodiversity inImpactAssessment(www.iaia.org).Alsoavailable inFrenchandSpanish.6 MillenniumEcosystemAssessment(2003).EcosystemsandHumanWell-being:AFrameworkforAssessment.IslandPress.(http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/products.ehwb.aspx)

14


processes,andecosystemsofrelevancetomigratingspecies.• Speciesandcommunitiesofspeciesthatarethreatenedintheirexistence,relatedtodomesticatedorcultivatedspecies, andspecieswithmedicinal, agricultural,orothereconomic, social, culturalorscientificsignificance,andindicatorspecies.• Genotypeswithsocial,scientificoreconomicsignificance.

3.2 Objectives of biodiversity management

TheCBDhasthreemainobjectives.Foreachmainobjectiveanumberofguidingprinciplesisprovidedtobetakenintoaccountintheassessmentofbiodiversity-relatedimpacts.

1. Theconservationofbiologicaldiversity(i.e.maintainingearth’slifesupportsystemsandmaintainingfutureoptionsforhumandevelopment);

• Ecosystem,speciesandgeneticdiversityareconservedtoensurethattheypersistintothefuture,providingarangeofvaluesforhumanwellbeing.Priorityisgiventoensuringtheprotectionof threatened, declining or endemic ecosystems, ecosystems which play a key role in providingecosystemservices(e.g.floodprotection,supplyofwaterandrawmaterials,geneticresources,etc.),uniquehabitats,endemic,threatenedordecliningspecies,speciesofknownuseorculturalvaluetosociety.• Prioritiesandtargetsforbiodiversityconservationatinternational,national,regionalandlocallevelarerespected,andapositivecontributiontoachievingthesetargetsismade.• Some biodiversity is irreplaceable, for example when a species or habitat is lost whichcannot be found anywhere else; in these situations such biodiversity must be protected since itcannotbereplacedandmayhaveunknownfuturevalues.• Thepersistenceofecosystemsandspeciesispromotedbymakingprovisionfor,and/ormaintaining,naturalcorridorsbetweenfragmentsofaparticularecosystem,andbetween/alongdifferentgradients(e.g.altitude,climatic,landscape,watershedgradients).• Habitatswhichplayavitalroleinsupportingseasonalormigrantspeciesareconserved.• Opportunities to enhance biodiversity through restoring, re-creating or rehabilitatingnatural habitat are used to optimum benefit. Unavoidable negative impacts on biodiversity arefullycompensatedbyprovidingsubstitutesofatleastsimilarbiodiversityvalue(thelatterisoftenreferredtoasthenonetlossprinciple).

2. Thesustainableuseof itscomponents(i.e.providinglivelihoodstopeople,without jeopardisingfutureoptions);

• Life support systems and ecosystem services such as water yield, water purification,breakdownofwastes,floodcontrol,stormandcoastalprotection,soilformationandconservation,sedimentation processes, nutrient cycling, carbon storage and climatic regulation, amongstothers,aremaintained,thussafeguardinglivelihoodsandkeepingfutureoptionsopenforhumandevelopment.• Useoflivingmaterialsissuchthatyieldorharvestcanbemaintainedovertime,supportinglivesandlivelihoods.3. Thefairandequitablesharingofbenefitsarisingfromtheuseofgeneticresources.• Benefitsfromcommercialuseofnaturalresourcesaresharedfairly,givingdueconsiderationtothosewhohavetraditionallyhadaccessto,and/orknowledgeofthoseresources.• Thelikelyneedsoffuturegenerations,aswellasthoseofcurrentgenerations,aretakenintoaccount(intergenerationalneeds).Thatis,naturalcapitalisnot‘tradedin’tomeetshorttermneedsinamannerwhichlimitsthefreedomoffuturegenerationstochoosetheirowndevelopmentpaths.

The ecosystem approach is considered to be the primary framework for addressing the three objectivesof theBiodiversityConventioninabalancedway.Theecosystemapproachisanapproachfor integratedmanagement of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an

15


equitableway.ApplicationoftheecosystemapproachwillhelptoreachabalanceofthethreeobjectivesoftheConvention:conservation,sustainableuse,andthefairandequitablesharingofthebenefitsarisingoutoftheutilisationofgeneticresources.Inaddition,theecosystemapproachhasbeenrecognisedbytheWorldSummitonSustainableDevelopmentasanimportantinstrumentforenhancingsustainabledevelopmentandpovertyalleviation(CBDDecisionVII-117).Humans,withtheirculturaldiversity,areanintegralcomponentofmanyecosystems.Peopleandbiodiversitydependonwell-functioningecosystemsandprocesses;assessedinanintegratedway,notconstrainedbyartificialboundaries.Theecosystemapproachisparticipativeandrequiresalong-termperspectivebuiltonabiodiversity-basedstudyarea.Itrequiresadaptivemanagementtodealwiththedynamicnatureofecosystemsandtheabsenceofcompleteunderstandingoftheirfunctioning.Annex2providesmoreinformationontheapproach.

3.3 Ecosystem services: translating biodiversity into decision makers language

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) provides an elaborate conceptual framework using thecommondenominatorecosystemservicestodescribeallgoodsandservicesprovidedbybiodiversity.TheMA defines ecosystem services as “the benefits that people obtain from ecosystems”. Ecosystem servicesinfluencehumanwell-being,and thusrepresentavalue for society.Theconceptofecosystemservices isastrongtoolforimpactassessment,asitprovidesameanstotranslatebiodiversityintoaspectsofhumanwell-being,whichcanbetakenintoaccountindecisionmakingonproposedprojects,programmes,plansorpolicies.ExamplesofecosystemservicesareprovidedinAppendix2.

Fourcategoriesofservicesaredistinguished:

• Provisioningservices:harvestablegoodssuchasfish,timber,bushmeat,fruits,geneticmaterial.• Regulating services responsible for maintaining biological diversity itself, including naturalprocessesanddynamics,suchaswaterpurification,biologicalcontrolmechanisms,carbonsequestration,pollinationofcommerciallyvaluablecrops,etc.• Culturalservicesprovidingasourceofartistic,aesthetic,spiritual,religious,recreationalorscientificenrichment,ornonmaterialbenefits.• Supporting services necessary for the production of all other ecosystem services, such as soilformation,nutrientscyclingandprimaryproduction.• Ecosystemservicesrepresentvaluesforsociety.Apolicy,plan,programmeorprojectmayresultinchangesinthesevalues.Impactassessmenthastoprovideinformationonthesechangesresultingfromhumaninitiatives.Decisionmakingisaboutweighingthesechangesagainsteachother,includingthoseofalternativeinitiatives.

Decision making can be particularly challenging because different philosophical views and schools ofthought conceive of the values of ecosystems differently. In the utilitarian (anthropocentric) concept ofvalue,ecosystemsandtheservicestheyprovidehaveavaluetohumansocietiesbecausepeoplebenefitfromtheiruse,eitherdirectlyor indirectly(usevalues).Peoplealsovalueecosystemservicesthattheyarenotcurrentlyusing(non-usevalues).Adistinctioncanbemadebetween:

• Economicvalues:(i)directincome,forexamplebysellingproducts;(ii)inputtootheractivitiesbyprovidingrawmaterials;(iii)indirectvaluebyprovidingservicesthatwouldrequirelargeinvestments-ifnotpresent-suchascoastalprotectionbydunesormangroves;• Socialvalues:employment,safety,health,qualityoflife,socialsecurity,appreciationofthepresenceofanimalandplantlife,etc.• Ecologicalvaluesorfuture(non-use)values,savingbiodiversityanditssofarunrecognisedpotentialforfutureuse.

7 ConventiononBiologicalDiversity:DecisionV/6andDecisionVII/11EcosystemApproach.(http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-05&id=7148&lg=0)(http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.aspx?m=COP-07&id=7748&lg=0)

16


Thenon-utilitarianapproachconsidersbiodiversityashavingavalueinitself(intrinsicvalue),irrespectiveofitscontributiontohumanwell-being.Althoughusingincomparableexpressionsofvalues,bothviewsareusedinpoliticaldecisionmaking8.

3.4 How to assess impacts on biodiversity?

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment states that understanding the factors that cause changes inecosystemsandecosystemservicesisessentialtothedesignofinterventionswhichenhancepositiveandminimisenegativeimpacts.Suchfactorsarecalleddriversofchangeandcanbenaturalorhuman-induced.Impactassessmentisprimarilyconcernedwithhuman-induceddriversofchange.Naturaldriversofchangeareimportanthowever,astheydefinebackgroundtrendsorchangesagainstwhichhuman-inducedchangesneedtobeevaluated.

Thedesignoftheimpactassessmentprocessissuch,that:

• Thefullrangeoffactorsthatcausechangesinbiodiversityisconsidered:- direct drivers of change,whichcanbe identifiedandmeasured, includethe followinggroupings:(i)changesinlanduseandlandcover,(ii)fragmentationandisolation,(iii)extraction,harvest, or removal of species, (iv) external inputs such as emissions, effluents, chemicals,(v) disturbance, (vi) introduction of invasive, alien and/or genetically modified species, (vii)restoration.- indirect drivers of change which can in turn influence the direct drivers, include (i)demographic, (ii)economic, (iii) socio-political, (iv)culturaland(v) technologicalprocessesorinterventions.

• Differentiation is made between those drivers that can be influenced by a decision-maker(endogenous driver), and others which may be beyond the control of a particular decision-maker(exogenousdrivers).• Thetemporal,spatialandorganisationalscalesatwhichadriverofchangecanbeaddressed,aredefined.

Signatorycountries(=parties)totheCBDmustidentifyactivitiesthatarelikelytohavesignificantadverseimpactsontheconservationandsustainableuseofbiologicaldiversity,andmonitortheireffects.Theimpactsresultingfromdriversofchangecan,ateachlevelofdiversity,bestbeassessedintermsoftheeffectononeofthefollowingaspectsofbiodiversity:

• Composition: what is there and how abundant (in a particular time frame); this is the mostcommonlyknownaspectofbiodiversity. Inreal terms impactassessmentoftendoesnotgobeyondthedescriptionofeffectsonspeciescompositionofhigherplantandanimalspecies.Keystonespeciesareofparticularrelevance;changesinpopulationsofthesespecieshavegreaterimpactsonecosystemsthanwouldbeexpectedfromitsrelativeabundanceortotalbiomass;alimitedchangeinthenumberofindividualshasdisproportionaleffectsontheentiresystem.• Structure (or pattern):howbiologicalunitsareorganisedintimeandspace:

- spatial structure and scale of the ecosystem in relation to the scale of the humanintervention.Ecosystem‘scale’referstothespaceitoccupiesandthewayitchangesovertime.Thescaleofhumaninterventionmaybesmallinrelationtothescaleofanecosystem(e.g.localerosionwithinariverbasinoraminordevelopmentwithinanextensiveecosystem)orlarge(e.g.amajordaminthatriverbasin).Humaninterventionswithimpactsatsimilarorlargerscale(ascomparedtotheecosystemscale)arepotentiallymoreinfluential.Anadditionalproblemwithassessmentsatlargescaleusingdataatcoarseresolutions,isthattheseassessmentsmaynotdetectfine-resolutionprocesses.

8 Chapter6ofEcosystemsandhumanWell-being:AFrameworkforAssessmentbytheMillenniumEcosystemAssessment

providesin-depthfurtherreading.(www.millenniumassessment.org).

17


- foodwebstructureandinteractionsthatshapetheflowofenergyandthedistributionofbiomass:changes in the foodwebhave immediaterepercussion for the functioningof theentiresystem.Forexample,theintroductionofthepredatorynon-indigenousNileperchinlakeVictoriahas upset the entire ecosystem; dozens of specialised fish species feeding on algae have beeneradicated,leadingtoaturbidandlocallydeoxygenisedlake.- linkages to habitat of the same or different ecosystems, which provide an important‘playingfield’forecologicalprocessesandenablethegoaloftheirpersistence.Theselinkagesareincontrasttoahighlyfragmentedlandscapewherepatchesofnaturalhabitatareeffectivelyisolated.

• Key processes (including ecosystem function):whichnatural(i.e.physicaland/orbiological)and/orhuman-inducedprocessesareofkeyimportanceforthecreationand/ormaintenanceofecosystems.Forexample,keyphysicalprocessesarethesedimentbalanceinamangrovecoastoratidalmudflat,the inundationregimeofwetlands,orfire inafire-drivenecosystem;akeybiologicalprocess is thegrazing/browsingpatterninsavannahs,orpredationofcoralreefsbystarfish.Notethatkeyprocessescan be driven by external factors (climate, tidal regime, sediment flow), or by internal ecosystemprocesses(nutrientandenergyflow,populationdynamics,etc.).Inaddition,humanprocessescanbeofkeyimportance;anumberofecosystems(betterreferredtoasland-usesystems)havebeencreatedbycenturiesofhumanmanagement;examplesarehighaltitudemeadows,heatherlandsandnutrient-poorgrasslands.(Appendix3providesanon-exhaustivelistofkeyprocessesresponsibleforthecreationandmaintenanceofanumberofecosystems).

Itisimportanttorealisethatpotentialimpactsonbiodiversitycanbeidentifiedwithouthavingacompletedescription of that biodiversity. If an intervention is expected to result in changes of the composition,structureorkeyprocesses,thereisaseriousreasontoexpectthatecosystemsandrelatedecosystemserviceswillbeaffected.Furtherstudiescanbefocussedontheaspectofbiodiversitywhichisexpectedtobeaffectedand on resulting impacts on associated ecosystem services. Especially for areas where available data onbiodiversityarelimited,thisapproachhastheadvantageoffocussingcostlydatacollectioneffortsontherelevantaspectofbiodiversity(thusavoiding lengthydescriptivestudiesofallbiodiversityaspects in theinterventionarea).

3.5 Biodiversity principles for impact assessment

No net loss.Furtherlossofbiodiversity,inquantitativeaswellasqualitativeterms,mustcometoastandstill.Thisimpliesthatlossofirreplaceablebiodiversitymustbeavoided,andlossofotherbiodiversityhasto be compensated (in term of quality and quantity). For example, loss of an ecosystem service may beirreversible,butcould foreseeably, be ‘replaced’usingappropriate technology, insome instances.Wherepossible,opportunitiesforbiodiversityenhancementshouldbeidentifiedandsupported. The precautionary principle asksforarisk-averseandcautiousapproachincaseswhereimpactscannotbepredictedwithconfidence,and/orwherethereisuncertaintyabouttheeffectivenessofmitigationmeasures.Iftheimpactsonimportantbiodiversityresourcescannotbeestablishedwithsufficientcertainty,theactivityiseitherhalteduntilenoughinformationisavailable,ora‘worst-case’scenarioisadoptedwithregard to biodiversity impact, and the proposal, its implementation and management are designed tominimiseriskstoacceptablelevels.(Disproportionaluseoftheprincipleshouldbeavoided,forexamplewheresocietalstakesarehighandbiodiversityatriskisminimal,e.g.non-threatenedorreplaceable). Local, traditional and indigenous knowledge is used in the impact assessment to provide acompleteandreliableoverviewofissuespertainingtobiodiversity.Viewsareexchangedwithstakeholdersandexpertsasvaluableelementsofthatassessment.Informationonbiodiversityisconsolidated. Participation.Differentgroupsorindividualsinsocietyhaveaninterest(astake)inthemaintenanceand/oruseofbiodiversity.Consequently,valuationofbiodiversityandecosystemservicescanonlybedoneinnegotiationwithstakeholders.Stakeholdersthushavearoleintheimpactassessmentprocess.

18


CHAPTER 4 : Conceptual reflections

4.1 Direct drivers of change: impact assessment framework

TheconceptualframeworkbehindtheGuidelinesonBiodiversityinImpactAssessment,firstendorsedbytheCBDin2002,andfurtherelaboratedinthisdocument,isdevelopedunderauspicesoftheInternationalAssociationforImpactAssessment(seeFigure4.1below).Theframeworkhasbeendevelopedforconcreteinterventionsinthebiophysicalandsocialenvironmentandprovidesameanstointegratebiophysicalandsocialprocessesinimpactassessment.

Figure 4.1:Impactassessmentframework9

Physical(1)andsocial(andeconomic)(2)interventionsleadtobiophysical(3)andsocial(4)changes,eachofthesepotentiallyleadingtohigherorderchanges(5).Somesocialchangesmayleadtobiophysicalchanges(6).Withintheirrangeofinfluenceanddependingonthetypeofecosystemunderinfluence(7),biophysicalchangesmayinfluencedifferentaspectsofbiodiversity.Iftheseimpactsaresignificant,thishasanimpactontheecosystemservicesprovidedbybiodiversity(8).Impactsonecosystemserviceswillleadtoachangeinthevaluationoftheseservicesbyvariousstakeholdersinsociety(9),thusaffectinghumanwell-being.Peoplemayrespondtothesechangesinthevalueofecosystemservicesandactaccordingly(10),thusleadingtonewsocialchanges. Theloopsinthisframeworkofthinkingcaninprinciplebeendless;goodparticipatoryscoping,applyingbestavailablescientificandlocalknowledge,hastoresultinthemostrelevantimpactsandassociatedcause-effectschains,thatneedtobestudied/managed.

4.2 Indirect drivers of change: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment framework

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) is a four-year international work programme designed tomeettheneedsofdecision-makersforscientificinformationonthelinksbetweenecosystemchangeand

9 AdaptedfromSlootweg,R.,F.VanclayandM.L.F.vanSchooten(2001).Functionevaluationasaframeworkforintegratingsocial and environmental impacts. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 19: 19 - 28 (available at www.sevs.nl), and furtherelaboratedforbiodiversitybySlootweg,R.&A.Kolhoff(2003)AgenericapproachtointegratebiodiversityconsiderationsinscreeningandscopingforEIA.EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentReview23:657-681(availableatwww.eia.nl).

intervention

human impactsimpacts on ecosystem services

social changes

biophysicalchanges in so il,

w a te r, a ir, flo ra & fauna

2nd order2nd order

1

3 4

5

2

6 5

7

8 9

10

19


humanwell-being.ItwaslaunchedbyUNSGKofiAnnaninJune2001.Leadingscientistsfromover100nationsareconductingtheMA. ThefirstproductoftheMAisaconceptualframeworkprovidingthethinkingbehindallongoingwork. Relevant features of the framework are explained below (see figure 4.2)10. The MA conceptualframeworkisfullyconsistentwiththeCBDEcosystemApproach.

Figure 4.2:ConceptualframeworkusedbytheMillenniumEcosystemAssessment.

AnimportantfeatureoftheMAisthetranslationofbiodiversityintoecosystemservices,whichcontributetohumanwell-beingandpovertyreduction.Ultimately,humanityisfullydependentontheflowofecosystemservices. The degradation of ecosystems place a growing burden on human well-being and economicdevelopment. Ecosystem services are (i) provisioning services (harvestable goods such as fish, timber,bushmeat, fruits,geneticmaterial), (ii) regulatingservicesresponsible formaintainingnaturalprocessesanddynamics(e.g.waterpurification,biologicalcontrolmechanisms,carbonsequestration,pollinationofcommerciallyvaluablecrops,etc.),(iii)culturalservicesprovidingasourceofartistic,aesthetic,spiritual,religious, recreational or scientific enrichment, or nonmaterial benefits, and (iv) supporting servicesnecessary for the production of all other ecosystem services (e.g. soil formation, nutrients cycling andprimaryproduction).Anecosystemserviceisdescribedintermsofstock,flowandresilience. Theperformanceofecosystemservicescanbeinfluencedbydriversofchange.IntheMA,a“driver”isany factor thatchangesanaspectofanecosystem.Adirectdriverunequivocally influencesecosystemprocessesandcanthereforebeidentifiedandmeasuredtodifferingdegreesofaccuracy.Anindirectdriveroperates more diffusely, often by altering one of more direct drivers, and its influence is established byunderstandingitseffectonadirectdriver.Demographic,economic,socio-political,culturalandtechnologicalprocessescanbeindirectdriversofchange.Actorscanhaveinfluenceonsomedrivers(endogenousdriver),butothersmaybebeyondthecontrolofaparticularactorordecision-maker(exogenousdrivers).Thegeographicalscaleatwhichstrategiesandinterventionscanaffectadriverofchangevariesfromlocaltoglobal,andmayworkatwidelydifferenttimescales.Consequently,theorganisationalscaleatwhichtobestaddressadriverofchangeneedstobeassessedforeachsituation.

10 MillenniumEcosystemAssessment(2003).EcosystemsandHumanWell-being:AFrameworkforAssessment.IslandPress.(http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/products.ehwb.aspx)

20


4.3 Links between both frameworks

TheImpactAssessmentframeworkprovidesastructuretodescribedirectdriversofchangethatresultfromhumaninterventions.Itestablishes linkagesbetweenbiophysicalandsocialchangesandprovides insightin how interventions may lead to impacts, either through biophysical interventions or through socialinterventions. It makes a clear distinction between transitional biophysical and social changes (effect ofhumaninterventionsthatcanbemeasured,modelled,predicted)andimpactsthataredefinedbythelocalcontext(affectedecosystems,includingassociatedstakeholders).Itisastrongconceptualbasisforimpactassessmentat levelswhereinterventionsinthesocialandbiophysicalenvironmentareknown,atprojectlevelbutalsoatthelevelofstrategicassessmentforregionalorsectoralplans. The Millennium Assessment is not developed for such types of impact assessment, but aims atproviding information for natural resources management polices. Its concepts are largely similar to theImpactAssessmentframework,butmoreeffectivelyservesthehighestlevelofstrategicassessmentwhereinterventionsarenotpreciselyknown.Thenotionofindirectdriversofchange,orinotherwords,diffusesocietal processes that influence or even govern direct drivers of change, provides a strong concept tocoherentlydescribechainsofcauseandeffectatpolicylevel. N.B:TheMAframeworklargelyoverlooksthatsocialchangescanalsobeconsidereddirectdriversofchange.Forexample,thecreationofemploymentinarelativelyuninhabitedareawillattractmigrantsthatsettleinthevicinityofthefacility,occupyingformerlyuninhabitedareas.Thereisnothingdiffusetothisasitisaplannedactivitywithpredictableconsequences. Althoughconceptuallysimilar,bothframeworkshavebeendevelopedfordifferentsettingsandcanbeconsideredascomplementary.Chapter4furtherelaborateswithinthecontextofSEAonthemannerinwhichbothframeworksarelinked.

21


CHAPTER 5: Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive Environmental Impact Assessment (convention text)

Contents

A.Stagesintheprocess...............................................................................................................................22B.Biodiversityissuesatdifferentstagesofenvironmentalimpactassessment...................................23 (a)Screening..................................................................................................................................23 (b)Scoping......................................................................................................................................26 (c)Assessmentandevaluationofimpacts,anddevelopmentofalternatives........................28 (d)Reporting:theenvironmentalimpactstatement(eis).........................................................31 (e)Reviewoftheenvironmentalimpactstatement..................................................................31 (f)Decision-making.....................................................................................................................31 (g)Monitoring,compliance,enforcementandenvironmentalauditing................................32

Appendices1.Indicativesetofscreeningcriteriatobefurtherelaboratedatnationallevel..........................342.Indicativelistofecosystemservices..............................................................................................353.Aspectsofbiodiversity:composition,structureandkeyprocesses..........................................37

22


5.1 Introduction

Theguidelinesarestructuredinaccordancewiththeinternationallyacceptedsequenceofproceduralstepscharacterisinggood-practiceenvironmentalimpactassessment(EIA)11.Theyaimatabetterintegrationofbiodiversity-relatedconsiderationsintotheEIAprocess. NationalEIAsystemsareregularlybeingevaluatedandrevised.Theseguidelinesareintendedtoassistnationalauthorities,regionalauthoritiesorinternationalagenciesasappropriateinbetterincorporatingbiodiversity-relatedconsiderationsduringsucharevision,atwhichasignificantenhancementoftheEIAsystemcanbemade.Thisalsoimpliesthatfurtherelaborationofpracticalguidelinesisneededtoreflecttheecological,socio-economic,culturalandinstitutionalconditionsforwhichtheEIAsystemisdesigned. Theguidelinesfocusonhowtopromoteandfacilitateabiodiversity-inclusiveEIAprocess.Theydonotprovideatechnicalmanualonhowtoconductabiodiversity-inclusiveassessmentstudy.ScreeningandscopingareconsideredcriticalstagesintheEIAprocessandconsequentlyreceiveparticularattention. Screening provides the trigger to start an EIA process. During scoping relevant impacts areidentifiedresulting inthetermsofreferencefortheactual impactstudy.Thescopingstage isconsideredcriticalintheprocessasitdefinestheissuestobestudiedanditprovidesthereferenceinformationonwhichthereviewofthestudyresultswillbebased.Scopingandreviewusuallyarelinkedtosomeformofpublicinformation,consultationorparticipation.Duringscopingpromisingalternativescanbeidentifiedthatmaysignificantlyreduceorentirelypreventadverseimpactsonbiodiversity.

5.2 Stages in the process

Environmental impactassessment (EIA) is aprocessof evaluating the likelyenvironmental impactsofaproposedprojectordevelopment12,takingintoaccountinter-relatedsocio-economic,culturalandhuman-healthimpacts,bothbeneficialandadverse.Theeffectiveparticipationofrelevantstakeholders,includingindigenousandlocalcommunities,isapreconditionforasuccessfulEIA.Althoughlegislationandpracticevary around the world, the fundamental components of an EIA would necessarily involve the followingstages:

a. Screeningtodeterminewhichprojectsordevelopmentsrequireafullorpartialimpactassessmentstudy;b. Scopingtoidentifywhichpotentialimpactsarerelevanttoassess(basedonlegislativerequirements,international conventions, expert knowledge and public involvement), to identify alternativesolutions that avoid, mitigate or compensate adverse impacts on biodiversity (including the optionofnotproceedingwiththedevelopment,findingalternativedesignsorsiteswhichavoidtheimpacts,incorporatingsafeguardsinthedesignoftheproject,orprovidingcompensationforadverseimpacts),andfinallytoderivetermsofreferencefortheimpactassessment;c. Assessmentandevaluationofimpactsanddevelopmentofalternatives,topredictandidentifythelikelyenvironmentalimpactsofaproposedprojectordevelopment,includingthedetailedelaborationofalternatives;d. Reporting:theenvironmentalimpactstatement(EIS)orEIAreport,includinganenvironmentalmanagementplan(EMP),andanon-technicalsummaryforthegeneralaudience;e. Review of the environmental impact statement, based on the terms of reference (scoping) andpublic(includingauthority)participation;f. Decision-makingonwhethertoapprovetheprojectornot,andunderwhatconditions;andg. Monitoring,compliance,enforcementandenvironmentalauditing.Monitorwhetherthepredictedimpacts and proposed mitigation measures occur as defined in the EMP. Verify the compliance ofproponentwiththeEMP,toensurethatunpredictedimpactsorfailedmitigationmeasuresareidentifiedandaddressedinatimelyfashion.

11 See, for example, the International Association for Impact Assessment’s principles of Environmental ImpactAssessmentbestpractice–www.iaia.org12 Thetermsproject,activityanddevelopmentareusedinterchangeably;thereisnointendeddistinctionbetween

them.

23


5.3 Biodiversity issues at different stages of environmental impact assessment

(a) Screening

ScreeningisusedtodeterminewhichproposalsshouldbesubjecttoEIA,toexcludethoseunlikelytohaveharmfulenvironmentalimpactsandtoindicatethelevelofassessmentrequired.Screeningcriteriahavetoincludebiodiversitymeasures,orelsethereisariskthatproposalswithpotentiallysignificantimpactsonbiodiversitywillbescreenedout.Theoutcomeofthescreeningprocessisascreeningdecision. SincelegalrequirementsforEIAmaynotguaranteethatbiodiversitywillbetakenintoaccount,consideration should be given to incorporating biodiversity criteria into existing, or the development ofnew,screeningcriteria.Importantinformationfordevelopingscreeningcriteriacanbefoundinnationalbiodiversitystrategiesandactionplans(NBSAPs)orequivalentdocuments.Thesestrategiesprovidedetailedinformationonconservationprioritiesandontypesandconservationstatusofecosystems.Furthermoretheydescribetrendsandthreatsatecosystemaswellasspecieslevelandprovideanoverviewofplannedconservationactivities. Pertinentquestionsfromabiodiversityperspective.TakingintoaccountthethreeobjectivesoftheConvention,fundamentalquestionswhichneedtobeansweredinanEIAstudyinclude:

a. Would the intended activity affect the biophysical environment directly or indirectly in such amannerorcausesuchbiologicalchangesthatitwillincreaserisksofextinctionofgenotypes,cultivars,varieties,populationsofspecies,orthechanceoflossofhabitatsorecosystems?b. Would the intended activity surpass the maximum sustainable yield, the carrying capacity of ahabitat/ecosystemorthemaximumallowabledisturbancelevelofaresource,population,orecosystem,takingintoaccountthefullspectrumofvaluesofthatresource,populationorecosystem?c. Would the intended activity result in changes to the access to, and/or rights over biologicalresources?

Tofacilitatethedevelopmentofscreeningcriteria,thequestionsabovehavebeenreformulatedforthethreelevelsofdiversity,reproducedintable5.1below.

Typesofexistingscreeningmechanismsinclude:

• PositivelistsidentifyingprojectsrequiringEIA(inclusionlists).Adisadvantageofthisapproachisthatthesignificanceofimpactsofprojectsvariessubstantiallydependingonthenatureofthereceivingenvironment, which is not taken into account. A few countries use (or have used) negative lists,identifyingthoseprojectsnotsubjecttoEIA(exclusionlists).Bothtypesoflistsshouldbereassessedtoevaluatetheirinclusionofbiodiversityaspects;• Listsidentifyingthosegeographicalareaswhereimportantbiodiversityisfound,inwhichprojectswould require EIA. The advantage of this approach is that the emphasis is on the sensitivity of thereceivingenvironmentratherthanonthetypeofproject;• Expertjudgement(withorwithoutalimitedstudy,sometimesreferredtoasinitialenvironmentalexaminationorpreliminaryenvironmentalassessment).Biodiversityexpertiseshouldbeincludedinexpertteams;and• AcombinationofalistplusexpertjudgementtodeterminetheneedforanEIA.

24


Table 5.1Questionspertinenttoscreeningonbiodiversityimpacts

Level of diversity Conservation of biodiversity Sustainable use of biodiversity

Ecosystemdiversity13

Would the intended activity lead, eitherdirectly or indirectly, to serious damage ortotal loss of (an) ecosystem(s), or land-usetype(s), thus leading to a loss of ecosystemservices of scientific/ecological value, or ofculturalvalue?

Does the intended activity affectthe sustainable human exploitationof (an) ecosystem(s) or land-usetype(s) in such manner that theexploitation becomes destructiveor non-sustainable (i.e. the loss ofecosystem services of social and/oreconomicvalue)?

Speciesdiversity13 Wouldtheintendedactivitycauseadirectorindirectlossofapopulationofaspecies?

Would the intended activity affectsustainableuseofapopulationofaspecies?

GeneticdiversityWouldtheintendedactivityresultinextinctionofapopulationofalocalisedendemicspeciesofscientific,ecological,orculturalvalue?

Does the intended activity causea local loss of varieties/cultivars/breeds of cultivated plants and/ordomesticated animals and theirrelatives, genes or genomes ofsocial, scientific and economicimportance?

Ascreeningdecisiondefinestheappropriatelevelofassessment.Theresultofascreeningdecisioncanbethat:13

• The proposed project is “fatally flawed” in that it would be inconsistent with international ornationalconventions,policiesorlaws.Itisadvisablenottopursuetheproposedproject.Shouldtheproponentwishtoproceedathis/herrisk,anEIAwouldberequired;• AnEIAisrequired(oftenreferredtoascategoryAprojects);• A limited environmental study is sufficient because only limited environmental impacts areexpected;thescreeningdecisionisbasedonasetofcriteriawithquantitativebenchmarksorthresholdvalues(oftenreferredtoascategoryBprojects);• ThereisstilluncertaintywhetheranEIAisrequiredandaninitialenvironmentalexaminationhastobeconductedtodeterminewhetheraprojectrequiresEIAornot;or• TheprojectdoesnotrequireanEIA.

Biodiversity-inclusive screening criteria set out circumstances in which EIA is justified on the basis ofbiodiversityconsiderations.Theymayrelateto:

• Categoriesofactivitiesknowntocausebiodiversityimpacts,includingthresholdsreferringtosizeoftheinterventionareaand/ormagnitude,durationandfrequencyoftheactivity;• Themagnitudeofbiophysicalchangethatiscausedbytheactivity;or• Mapsindicatingareasimportantforbiodiversity,oftenwiththeirlegalstatus.Asuggestedapproachtothedevelopmentofbiodiversity-inclusivescreeningcriteria,combiningtheabovetypesofcriteria,includesthefollowingsteps:(i)designabiodiversityscreeningmapindicatingareas inwhichEIA is required; (ii)defineactivities forwhichEIA is required; (iii)define thresholdvalues todistinguishbetween full, limited/undecidedornoEIA(seeappendix1 foragenericsetofscreening criteria). The suggested approach takes account of biodiversity values (including valuedecosystemservices)andactivitiesthatmightimpactdriversofchangeofbiodiversity.

13 Thescaleatwhichecosystemsaredefineddependsonthedefinitionofcriteriainacountry,andshouldtakeintoaccounttheprinciplesoftheecosystemapproach.Similarly,thelevelatwhich“population”istobedefineddependsonthescreeningcrite-riausedbyacountry.Forexample,theconservationstatusofspeciescanbeassessedwithintheboundariesofacountry(forlegalprotection),orcanbeassessedglobally(IUCNRedLists).

25


If possible, biodiversity-inclusive screening criteria should be integrated with the development (orrevision) of a national biodiversity strategy and action plan. This process can generate valuableinformationsuchasanational spatialbiodiversityassessment, includingconservationprioritiesandtargets,whichcanguidethefurtherdevelopmentofEIAscreeningcriteria.

Step 1: Accordingtotheprinciplesof theecosystemapproach,abiodiversityscreeningmapisdesigned,indicatingimportantecosystemservices(replacingtheconceptofsensitiveareas–seeappendix2below).Themapisbasedonexpertjudgementandhastobeformallyapproved.

Suggestedcategoriesofgeographicallydefinedareas,relatedtoimportantecosystemservices,are:

• Areaswithimportantregulatingservicesintermsofmaintainingbiodiversity:- Protected areas: depending on the legal provisions in a country these may be definedasareas inwhichnohuman intervention isallowed,orasareaswhere impactassessmentatanappropriatelevelofdetailisalwaysrequired;- Areascontainingthreatenedecosystemsoutsideofformallyprotectedareas,wherecertainclassesofactivities(seestep2)wouldalwaysrequireanimpactassessmentatanappropriatelevelofdetail;- Areasidentifiedasbeingimportantforthemaintenanceofkeyecologicalorevolutionaryprocesses,wherecertainclassesofactivities(seestep2)wouldalwaysrequireanimpactassessmentatanappropriatelevelofdetail;- Areasknowntobehabitatforthreatenedspecies,whichwouldalwaysrequireanimpactassessmentatanappropriatelevelofdetail.

• Areas with important regulating services for maintaining natural processes with regard to soil,water,orair,where impactassessmentatanappropriate levelofdetail is always required.Examplescanbewetlands,highlyerodableormobilesoilsprotectedbyvegetation(e.g.steepslopes,dunefields),forestedareas,coastaloroffshorebufferareas;etc.• Areaswith importantprovisioning services,where impactassessmentat anappropriate levelofdetailisalwaysrequired.Examplescanbeextractivereserves,landsandwaterstraditionallyoccupiedorusedbyindigenousandlocalcommunities,fishbreedinggrounds;etc.• Areaswithimportantculturalservices,whereimpactassessmentatanappropriatelevelofdetailisalwaysrequired.Examplescanbesceniclandscapes,heritagesites,sacredsites;etc.• Areaswithotherrelevantecosystemservices(suchasfloodstorageareas,groundwaterrechargeareas,catchmentareas,areaswithvaluedlandscapequality,etc.);theneedforimpactassessmentand/orthelevelofassessmentistobedetermined(dependingonthescreeningsysteminplace);• Allotherareas:noimpactassessmentrequiredfromabiodiversityperspective(anEIAmaystillberequiredforotherreasons).

Step 2: Defineactivitiesforwhichimpactassessmentmayberequiredfromabiodiversityperspective.Theactivitiesarecharacterisedbythefollowingdirectdriversofchange:

• Changeofland-useorlandcover,andundergroundextraction:aboveadefinedareaaffected,EIAalwaysrequired,regardlessofthelocationoftheactivity-definethresholdsforlevelofassessmentintermsofsurface(orunderground)areaaffected;• Changeintheuseofmarineand/orcoastalecosystems,andextractionofseabedresources:aboveadefinedareaaffected,EIAalwaysrequired,regardlessofthelocationoftheactivity-definethresholdsforlevelofassessmentintermsofsurface(orunderground)areaaffected;• Fragmentation,usuallyrelatedtolinearinfrastructure.Aboveadefinedlength,EIAalwaysrequired,regardlessofthelocationoftheactivity–definethresholdsforlevelofassessmentintermsofthelengthoftheproposedinfrastructuralworks;• Emissions, effluents or other chemical, thermal, radiation or noise emissions - relate level ofassessmenttotheecosystemservicesmap;• Introduction or removal of species, changes to ecosystem composition, ecosystem structure, or

26


keyecosystemprocesses responsible for themaintenanceof ecosystemsandecosystemservices (seeappendix2belowforanindicativelisting)-relatelevelofassessmenttoecosystemservicesmap.It shouldbenotedthat thesecriteriaonlyrelate tobiodiversityandserveasanadd-on insituationswherebiodiversityhasnotbeenfullycoveredbytheexistingscreeningcriteria.

Determiningnormsorthresholdvaluesforscreeningispartlyatechnicalandpartlyapoliticalprocesstheoutcomeofwhichmayvarybetweencountriesandecosystems.Thetechnicalprocessshouldatleastprovideadescriptionof:

a. Categories of activities that create direct drivers of change (extraction, harvest or removal ofspecies,change in land-useorcover, fragmentationand isolation,external inputssuchasemissions,effluents,orotherchemical,radiation,thermalornoiseemissions,introductionofinvasivealienspeciesorgeneticallymodifiedorganisms,orchangeinecosystemcomposition,structureorkeyprocesses),taking into account characteristics such as: type or nature of activity, magnitude, extent/location,timing,duration,reversibility/irreversibility,irreplaceability,likelihood,andsignificance;possibilityofinteractionwithotheractivitiesorimpacts;b. Whereandwhen:theareaofinfluenceofthesedirectdriversofchangecanbemodelledorpredicted;thetiminganddurationofinfluencecanbesimilarlydefined;c. map of valued ecosystem services (including maintenance of biodiversity itself) on the basis ofwhichdecisionmakerscandefinelevelsofprotectionorconservationmeasuresforeachdefinedarea.Thismapistheexperts’inputintothedefinitionofcategoriesonthebiodiversityscreeningmapreferredtoaboveunderstep1.

(b) Scoping

Scopingisusedtodefinethefocusoftheimpactassessmentstudyandtoidentifykeyissues,whichshouldbestudiedinmoredetail.Itisusedtoderivetermsofreference(sometimesreferredtoasguidelines)fortheEIAstudyandtosetouttheproposedapproachandmethodology.Scopingalsoenablesthecompetentauthority(orEIAprofessionalsincountrieswherescopingisvoluntary)to:

a. Guidestudyteamsonsignificantissuesandalternativestobeassessed,clarifyhowtheyshouldbeexamined(methodsofpredictionandanalysis,depthofanalysis),andaccordingtowhichguidelinesandcriteria;b. ProvideanopportunityforstakeholderstohavetheirintereststakenintoaccountintheEIA;c. EnsurethattheresultingEnvironmentalImpactStatementisusefultothedecisionmakerandisunderstandabletothepublic.

Duringthescopingphase,promisingalternativescanbeidentifiedforin-depthconsiderationduringtheEIAstudy.

Considerationofmitigationand/orenhancementmeasures:ThepurposeofmitigationinEIAistolookforwaystoachievetheprojectobjectiveswhileavoidingnegativeimpactsorreducingthemtoacceptablelevels.Thepurposeofenhancementistolookforwaysofoptimisingenvironmentalbenefits.Bothmitigationandenhancementofimpactsshouldstrivetoensurethatthepublicorindividualsdonotbearcosts,whicharegreaterthanthebenefitsthataccruetothem. Remedialactioncantakeseveralforms,i.e.avoidance(orprevention),mitigation(byconsideringchangestothescale,design,location,siting,process,sequencing,phasing,managementand/ormonitoringoftheproposedactivity,aswellasrestorationorrehabilitationofsites),andcompensation(oftenassociatedwith residual impacts after prevention and mitigation). A ‘positive planning approach’ should be used,whereavoidancehaspriorityandcompensationisusedasalastresortmeasure.Oneshouldacknowledgethatcompensationwillnotalwaysbepossible:therearecaseswhereitisappropriatetorejectadevelopmentproposalongroundsofirreversibledamageto,orirreplaceablelossof,biodiversity.Practicalevidencewithrespecttomitigationsuggeststhat:

27


• Timelyandampleattentiontomitigationandcompensation,aswellastheinteractionwithsociety,willlargelyreducetheriskofnegativepublicity,publicoppositionanddelays,includingassociatedcosts.SpecialistinputonbiodiversitycantakeplacepriortoinitiatingthelegallyrequiredEIAprocess,asacomponentoftheprojectproposal.ThisapproachimprovesandstreamlinestheformalEIAprocessbyidentifyingandavoiding,preventingormitigatingbiodiversityimpactsattheearliestpossiblestageofplanning;• Mitigation requires a joint effort of the proponent, planners, engineers, ecologists and otherspecialists,toarriveatthebestpracticableenvironmentaloption;• Potentialmitigationorcompensationmeasureshavetobeincludedinanimpactstudyinordertoassesstheirfeasibility;consequentlytheyarebestidentifiedduringthescopingstage;• Inprojectplanning,ithastobekeptinmindthatitmaytaketimeforeffectstobecomeapparent.The following sequence of questions provides an example of the kind of information that shouldbe requested in the terms of reference of an impact study if the project screening suggests that theproposedactivityislikelytohaveadverseimpactsonbiodiversity.Itshouldbenotedthatthislistofsteps represents an iterativeprocess. Scopingand impact studyare two formal roundsof iteration;duringthestudyfurtheriterativeroundsmaybeneeded,forexamplewhenalternativestotheproposedprojectdesignhavetobedefinedandassessed.a. Describe the typeofproject, anddefineeachprojectactivity in termsof itsnature,magnitude,location,timing,durationandfrequency;b. Define possible alternatives, including “no net biodiversity loss” or “biodiversity restoration”alternatives (suchalternativesmaynotbe readily identifiableat theoutsetof impact study,andonewould need to go through the impact study to determine such alternatives). Alternatives includelocationalternatives,scalealternatives,sitingorlayoutalternatives,and/ortechnologyalternatives;c. Describeexpectedbiophysicalchanges (in soil,water,air,flora, fauna) resulting fromproposedactivitiesorinducedbyanysocio-economicchangescausedbytheactivity;d. Determinethespatialandtemporalscaleofinfluenceofeachbiophysicalchange,identifyingeffectsonconnectivitybetweenecosystems,andpotentialcumulativeeffects;e. Describe ecosystems and land-use types lying within the range of influence of biophysicalchanges;f. Determine, for each of these ecosystems or land-use types, if biophysical changes are likely tohaveadverse impactsonbiodiversity in termsofcomposition,structure(spatialandtemporal),andkeyprocesses.Give indicationof the levelcertaintyofpredictions,andtake intoaccountmitigationmeasures.Highlightanyirreversibleimpactsandanyirreplaceableloss;g. For the affected areas, collect available information on baseline conditions and any anticipatedtrendsinbiodiversityintheabsenceoftheproposal;h. Identify,inconsultationwithstakeholders,thecurrentandpotentialecosystemservicesprovidedby theaffectedecosystemsor land-use typesanddetermine thevalues these functionsrepresent forsociety(seebox5.1).Giveanindicationofthemainbeneficiariesandthoseadverselyaffectedfromanecosystemservicesperspective,focusingonvulnerablestakeholders;i. Determinewhichof these serviceswillbe significantlyaffectedby theproposedproject, givingconfidencelevelsinpredictions,andtakingintoaccountmitigationmeasures.Highlightanyirreversibleimpactsandanyirreplaceableloss;j. Definepossiblemeasurestoavoid,minimiseorcompensateforsignificantdamageto,orlossof,biodiversityand/orecosystemservices;definepossibilitiestoenhancebiodiversity.Makereferencetoanylegalrequirements;k. Evaluate the significance of residual impacts, i.e. in consultation with stakeholders define theimportance of expected impacts for the alternatives considered. Relate the importance of expectedimpactstoareferencesituation,whichmaybetheexistingsituation,ahistoricalsituation,aprobablefuture situation (e.g. the ‘without project’ or ‘autonomous development’ situation), or an externalreferencesituation.Whendeterminingimportance(weight),considergeographicimportanceofeachresidualimpact(e.g.impactoflocal/regional/national/continental/globalimportance)andindicateits

28


temporaldimension.l. Identify necessary surveys to gather information required to support decision making. Identifyimportantgapsinknowledge;m. Providedetailsonrequiredmethodologyandtimescale.

Oneshouldbearinmindthatnotimplementingaprojectmayinsomecasesalsohaveadverseeffectsonbiodiversity.Inrarecasestheadverseeffectsmaybemoresignificantthantheimpactsofaproposedactivity(e.g.projectscounteractingdegradationprocesses). An analysis of current impact assessment practice14 has provided a number of practicalrecommendationswhenaddressingbiodiversity-relatedissues:

• Beyondthefocusonprotectedspeciesandprotectedareas,furtherattentionneedstobegivento(i)sustainableuseofecosystemservices;(ii)ecosystemleveldiversity;(iii)non-protectedbiodiversity;and(iv)ecologicalprocessesandtheirspatialscale;• The terms of reference should be unambiguous, specific and compatible with the ecosystemapproach;toooftenthetermsofreferencearetoogeneralandimpractical;• Inordertoprovideasoundbasisforassessingthesignificanceofimpacts,baselineconditionsmustbedefinedandunderstoodandquantifiedwherepossible.Baselineconditionsaredynamic,implyingthatpresentandexpectedfuturedevelopmentsiftheproposedprojectisnotimplemented(autonomousdevelopment)needtobeincluded;• Fieldsurveys,quantitativedata,meaningfulanalyses,andabroad,long-termperspectiveenablingcause-effectchainstobetrackedintimeandspaceareimportantelementswhenassessingbiodiversityimpacts.Potentialindirectandcumulativeimpactsshouldbebetterassessed;• Alternativesand/ormitigationmeasuresmustbeidentifiedanddescribedindetail,includingananalysisoftheirlikelysuccessandrealisticpotentialtooffsetadverseprojectimpacts;• Guidance for scoping on biodiversity issues in EIA needs to be developed at country-level, butshould,whereappropriate,alsoconsiderregionalaspectstopreventtransboundaryimpacts;• Guidance for determining levels of acceptable change to biodiversity needs to be developed atcountryleveltofacilitatedecision-making;• Guidanceonassessingandevaluatingimpactsonecosystemprocesses,ratherthanoncompositionorstructure,needtobedevelopedatcountry level.Theconservationofecosystemprocesses,whichsupportcompositionandstructure,requiresasignificantlylargerproportionofthelandscapethanisrequiredtorepresentbiodiversitycompositionandstructure;• Capacitydevelopmentisneededtoeffectivelyrepresentbiodiversityissuesinthescopingstage;thiswillresultinbetterguidelinesfortheEIAstudy.

(c) Assessmentandevaluationofimpacts,anddevelopmentofalternatives

EIAshouldbeaniterativeprocessofassessingimpacts,re-designingalternativesandcomparison.Themaintasksofimpactanalysisandassessmentare:

a. Refinementoftheunderstandingofthenatureofthepotentialimpactsidentifiedduringscreeningandscopinganddescribed in the termsofreference.This includes the identificationof indirectandcumulativeimpacts,andofthelikelycause–effectchains;b. Identificationanddescriptionofrelevantcriteriafordecision-makingcanbeanessentialelementofthisstage;c. Reviewandredesignofalternatives; considerationofmitigationandenhancementmeasures,aswellascompensationofresidualimpacts;planningofimpactmanagement;evaluationofimpacts;andcomparisonofthealternatives;and

14 SeedocumentUNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/9/INF/18.

29


d. Reportingofstudyresultsinanenvironmentalimpactstatement(EIS)orEIAreport.Assessingimpactsusuallyinvolvesadetailedanalysisoftheirnature,magnitude,extentandduration,and a judgement of their significance, i.e., whether the impacts are acceptable to stakeholders andsocietyasawhole,requiremitigationand/orcompensation,orareunacceptable.

Available biodiversity information is usually limited and descriptive, and cannot be used as a basis fornumericalpredictions.Thereisaneedtodevelopbiodiversitycriteriaforimpactevaluationandmeasurablestandardsorobjectivesagainstwhichthesignificanceofindividualimpactscanbeevaluated.Theprioritiesand targets set in the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan process can provide guidance fordeveloping thesecriteria.Toolswillneed tobedeveloped todealwithuncertainty, includingcriteriaonusingriskassessmenttechniques,precautionaryapproachandadaptivemanagement.Anumberofpracticallessonswithrespecttothestudyprocesshaveemergedincludingthattheassessmentshould:

a. Allowforenoughsurveytimetotakeseasonalfeaturesintoaccount,whereconfidencelevelsinpredictingthesignificanceofimpactsarelowwithoutsuchsurvey;b. Focus on processes and services, which are critical to human well-being and the integrity ofecosystems.Explainthemainrisksandopportunitiesforbiodiversity;c. Apply the ecosystem approach and actively seek information from relevant stakeholders andindigenous and local communities. Address any request from stakeholders for further informationand/orinvestigationadequately.Thisdoesnotnecessarilyimplythatallrequestsneedtobehonoured;however,clearreasonsshouldbeprovidedwhererequestsarenothonoured;d. Consider the full range of factors affecting biodiversity. These include direct drivers of changeassociated with a proposal (e.g. land conversion, vegetation removal, emissions, disturbance,introductionofinvasivealienspeciesorgeneticallymodifiedorganisms,etc.)and,totheextentpossible,indirectdriversofchange,includingdemographic,economic,socio-political,culturalandtechnologicalprocessesorinterventions;e. Evaluate impacts of alternatives with reference to the baseline situation. Compare against legalstandards,thresholds,targetsand/orobjectivesforbiodiversity.Usenationalbiodiversitystrategiesandactionplansandotherrelevantdocumentsforinformationandobjectives.Thevision,objectivesandtargetsfortheconservationandsustainableuseofbiodiversitycontainedinlocalplans,policiesandstrategies,aswellaslevelsofpublicconcernabout,dependenceon,orinterestin,biodiversityprovideusefulindicatorsofacceptablechange;f. Takeaccountofcumulativethreatsandimpactsresultingeitherfromrepeatedimpactsofprojectsof the same or different nature over space and time, and/or from proposed plans, programmes orpolicies;g. Recognise that biodiversity is influenced by cultural, social, economic and biophysical factors.Cooperationbetweendifferentspecialistsintheteamisthusessential,asistheintegrationoffindings,whichhavebearingonbiodiversity;h. Provide insight into cause – effect chains. Also explain why certain chains do not need to bestudied;i. Ifpossible,quantifythechangesinbiodiversitycomposition,structureandkeyprocesses,aswellasecosystemservices.Explain theexpectedconsequencesof the lossofbiodiversityassociatedwiththeproposal,includingthecostsofreplacingecosystemservicesiftheywillbeadverselyaffectedbyaproposal;j. Indicatethelegalprovisionsthatguidedecision-making.Listalltypesofpotentialimpactsidentifiedduring screening and scoping and described in the terms of reference and identify applicable legalprovisions.Ensurethatpotentialimpactstowhichnolegalprovisionappliesaretakenintoaccountduringdecision-making.

30


Box 5.1: Stakeholders and participation

Impactassessmentisconcernedwith(i)information,(ii)participationand(iii)transparencyofdecision-making.PublicinvolvementconsequentlyisaprerequisiteforeffectiveEIAandcantakeplaceatdifferentlevels: informing (one-way flow of information), consulting (two-way flow of information), or “real”participation(sharedanalysisandassessment).InallstagesofEIApublicparticipationisrelevant.Thelegalrequirementsforandthelevelofparticipationdifferamongcountries,butitisgenerallyacceptedthatpublicconsultationatthescopingandreviewstageareessential;participationduringtheassessmentstudyisgenerallyacknowledgedtoenhancethequalityoftheprocess.

Withrespecttobiodiversity,relevantstakeholdersintheprocessare:

•Beneficiariesoftheproject-targetgroupsmakinguseof,orputtingavalueto,knownecosystemserviceswhicharepurposefullyenhancedbytheproject;•Affectedpeople–i.e.thosepeoplethatexperience,asaresultoftheproject,intendedorunintendedchangesinecosystemservicesthattheyvalue;•Generalstakeholders–i.e.formalorinformalinstitutionsandgroupsrepresentingeitheraffectedpeopleorbiodiversityitself.•Futuregenerations–“absentstakeholders”,i.e.thosestakeholdersoffuturegenerations,whomayrelyonbiodiversityaroundwhichdecisionsarepresentlytaken.

Thereisanumberofpotentialconstraintstoeffectivepublicparticipation.Theseinclude:

• Deficient identification ofrelevantstakeholdersmaymakepublicinvolvementineffective;•Poverty:involvementrequirestimespentawayfromincome-producingtasks;Ruralsettings:increasingdistancemakescommunicationmoredifficultandexpensive;• Illiteracy:or lackofcommandofnon-local languages,can inhibitrepresentative involvement ifprintmediaareused;• Local values/culture: behavioural norms or cultural practice can inhibit involvement of somegroups,whomaynotfeelfreetodisagreepubliclywithdominantgroups;• Languages: in some areas a number of different languages or dialects may be spoken, makingcommunicationdifficult;•Legal systems:maybeinconflictwithtraditionalsystems,andcauseconfusionaboutrightsandresponsibilitiesforresources;•Interest groups: mayhaveconflictingordivergentviews,andvestedinterests;•Confidentiality:canbeimportantfortheproponent,whomaybeagainstearlyinvolvementandconsiderationofalternatives.

Also refer to decision VII/16F containing the Akwé: Kon Voluntary Guidelines for the Conduct ofCultural,EnvironmentalandSocialImpactAssessmentregardingDevelopmentsProposedtoTakePlaceon,orwhichareLikelytoImpacton,SacredSitesandonLandsandWatersTraditionallyOccupiedorUsedbyIndigenousandLocalCommunities.

ffuu ttuu rree gg ee nn ee rraa tt iioo nn ss

stakeho lders

affected peop le

benefic iaries

31


(d) Reporting:theenvironmentalimpactstatement(EIS)

Theenvironmentalimpactstatementconsistsof:(i)atechnicalreportwithannexes,(ii)anenvironmentalmanagement plan, providing detailed information on how measures to avoid, mitigate or compensateexpectedimpactsaretobeimplemented,managedandmonitored,and(iii)anon-technicalsummary.

Theenvironmentalimpactstatementisdesignedtoassist:

• Theproponenttoplan,designandimplementtheproposalinawaythateliminatesorminimisesthenegativeeffectonthebiophysicalandsocio-economicenvironmentsandmaximisesthebenefitstoallpartiesinthemostcost-effectivemanner;

• TheGovernmentorresponsibleauthoritytodecidewhetheraproposalshouldbeapprovedandthetermsandconditionsthatshouldbeapplied;and

• Thepublictounderstandtheproposalanditsimpactsonthecommunityandenvironment,andprovideanopportunityforcommentsontheproposedactionforconsiderationbydecisionmakers.Someadverseimpactsmaybewiderangingandhaveeffectsbeyondthelimitsofparticularhabitats/ecosystemsornationalboundaries. Therefore, environmentalmanagementplansand strategiescontained in the environmental impact statement should consider regional and transboundaryimpacts,takingintoaccounttheecosystemapproach.Theinclusionofanon-technicalsummaryoftheEIA,understandabletotheinterestedgeneralaudience,isstronglyrecommended.

(e) Reviewoftheenvironmentalimpactstatement

The purpose of the review of the environmental impact statement is to ensure that the information fordecisionmakers is sufficient, focusedon thekey issues,and is scientificallyand technicallyaccurate. Inaddition,thereviewshouldevaluatewhether:

• Thelikelyimpactswouldbeacceptablefromanenvironmentalviewpoint;• The design complies with relevant standards and policies, or standards of good practice where

officialstandardsdonotexist;• Alloftherelevantimpacts,includingindirectandcumulativeimpacts,ofaproposedactivityhave

beenidentifiedandadequatelyaddressedintheEIA.Tothisend,biodiversityspecialistsshouldbecalleduponforthereviewandinformationonofficialstandardsand/orstandardsforgoodpracticetobecompiledanddisseminated.

Publicinvolvement,includingthefullandeffectiveparticipationofindigenousandlocalcommunities,isimportantinvariousstagesoftheprocessandparticularlyatthisstage.Theconcernsandcommentsofallstakeholdersareadequatelyconsideredandincludedinthefinalreportpresentedtodecisionmakers.Theprocessestablisheslocalownershipoftheproposalandpromotesabetterunderstandingofrelevantissuesandconcerns. ReviewshouldalsoguaranteethattheinformationprovidedintheenvironmentalimpactstatementissufficientforadecisionmakertodeterminewhethertheprojectiscompliantwithorcontradictorytotheobjectivesoftheConventiononBiologicalDiversity. Theeffectivenessofthereviewprocessdependsonthequalityofthetermsofreferencedefiningtheissuestobeincludedinthestudy.Scopingandreviewarethereforecomplementarystages.Reviewersshouldasfaraspossiblebeindependentanddifferentfromthepersons/organisationswhopreparetheenvironmentalimpactstatement.

(f) Decision-making

Decision-makingtakesplacethroughouttheprocessofEIAinanincrementalwayfromthescreeningandscopingstagestodecisionsduringdata-collectingandanalysis,andimpactprediction,tomakingchoicesbetween alternatives and mitigation measures, and finally the decision to either refuse or authorise the

32


project. Biodiversityissuesshouldplayapartindecision-makingthroughout.Thefinaldecisionisessentiallyapoliticalchoiceaboutwhetherornottheproposalistoproceed,andunderwhatconditions.Ifrejected,theprojectcanberedesignedandresubmitted.Itisdesirablethattheproponentandthedecision-makingbodyaretwodifferententities. Itisimportantthatthereareclearcriteriafortakingbiodiversityintoaccountindecision-making,andtoguidetrade-offsbetweensocial,economicandenvironmentalissuesincludingbiodiversity. Thesecriteriadrawonprinciples,objectives,targetsandstandardsforbiodiversityandecosystemservicescontainedininternationalandnational,regionalandlocallaws,policies,plansandstrategies. Theprecautionaryapproachshouldbeappliedindecision-makingincasesofscientificuncertaintywhen there is a risk of significant harm to biodiversity. Higher risks and/or greater potential harm tobiodiversityrequiregreaterreliabilityandcertaintyofinformation.Thereverseimpliesthattheprecautionaryapproachshouldnotbepursuedtotheextreme;incaseofminimalrisk,agreaterlevelofuncertaintycanbeaccepted.GuidelinesforapplyingtheprecautionaryprincipletobiodiversityconservationandnaturalresourcemanagementhavebeendevelopedunderthePrecautionaryPrincipleProject,ajointinitiativeofFauna&FloraInternational,IUCN-TheWorldConservationUnion,ResourceAfricaandTRAFFIC,andareavailableinEnglish,FrenchandSpanishat:http://www.pprinciple.net/. Insteadofweighingconservationgoalsagainstdevelopmentgoals,thedecisionshouldseektostrikeabalancebetweenconservationandsustainableuseforeconomicallyviable,andsociallyandecologicallysustainablesolutions.

(g) Monitoring,compliance,enforcementandenvironmentalauditing

EIAdoesnotstopwiththeproductionofareportandadecisionontheproposedproject.ActivitiesthathavetomakesuretherecommendationsfromEISorEMPareimplementedarecommonlygroupedundertheheadingof“EIAfollow-up”.Theymayincludeactivitiesrelatedtomonitoring,compliance,enforcementandenvironmentalauditing. Rolesandresponsibilitieswithrespecttothesearevariableanddependonregulatoryframeworksinplace. Monitoringandauditingareusedtocomparetheactualoutcomesafterproject implementationhas started with those anticipated before implementation. It also serves to verify that the proponent iscompliantwiththeenvironmentalmanagementplan(EMP).TheEMPcanbeaseparatedocument,butisconsideredpartoftheenvironmentalimpactstatement.AnEMPusuallyisrequiredtoobtainapermissiontoimplementtheproject.Inanumberofcountries,anEMPisnotalegalrequirement. Managementplans,programmesandsystems,includingclearmanagementtargets,responsibilitiesand appropriate monitoring should be established to ensure that mitigation is effectively implemented,unforeseen negative effects or trends are detected and addressed, and expected benefits (or positivedevelopments)areachievedastheprojectproceeds.Soundbaselineinformationand/orpre-implementationmonitoringisessentialtoprovideareliablebenchmarkagainstwhichchangescausedbytheprojectcanbemeasured. Provisionshouldbemadeforemergencyresponsemeasuresand/orcontingencyplanswhereunforeseeneventsoraccidentscouldthreatenbiodiversity.TheEMPshoulddefineresponsibilities,budgetsandanynecessarytrainingformonitoringandimpactmanagement,anddescribehowresultswillbereportedandtowhom. Monitoringfocusesonthosecomponentsofbiodiversitymost likelytochangeasaresultoftheproject.Theuseofindicatororganismsorecosystemsthataremostsensitivetothepredictedimpactsisthusappropriate,toprovidetheearliestpossibleindicationofundesirablechange.Sincemonitoringoftenhastoconsidernaturalfluxesaswellashuman-inducedeffects,complementaryindicatorsmaybeappropriateinmonitoring.Indicatorsshouldbespecific,measurable,achievable,relevantandtimely.Wherepossible,thechoiceofindicatorsshouldbealignedwithexistingindicatorprocesses. Theresultsofmonitoringprovideinformationforperiodicreviewandalterationofenvironmentalmanagementplans,andforoptimisingenvironmentalprotectionthroughgood,adaptivemanagementatallstagesoftheproject.BiodiversitydatageneratedbyEIAshouldbemadeaccessibleanduseablebyothersandshouldbelinkedtobiodiversityassessmentprocessesbeingdesignedandcarriedoutatthenationalandgloballevels.

33


Provision is made for regular auditing in order to verify the proponent’s compliance with theEMP, and to assess the need for adaptation of the EMP (usually including the proponent’s license). Anenvironmentalauditisanindependentexaminationandassessmentofaproject’s(past)performance.ItispartoftheevaluationoftheenvironmentalmanagementplanandcontributestotheenforcementofEIAapprovaldecisions. Implementation of activities described in the EMP and formally regulated in the proponent’senvironmentallicenseinpracticedependsontheenforcementofformalprocedures.ItiscommonlyfoundthatalackofenforcementleadstoreducedcomplianceandinadequateimplementationofEMPs.Competentauthoritiesareresponsibleforenforcingpertinentimpactassessmentregulations,whenformalregulationsareinplace.

34


APPENDIX 1: Indicative set of screening criteria to be further elaborated at national level1514

Category A: Environmental impact assessment mandatory for:•Activitiesinprotectedareas(definetypeandlevelofprotection);•Activitiesinthreatenedecosystemsoutsideprotectedareas;• Activities in ecological corridors identified as being important for ecological or evolutionaryprocesses;•Activitiesinareasknowntoprovideimportantecosystemservices;•Activitiesinareasknowntobehabitatforthreatenedspecies;•Extractiveactivitiesoractivitiesleadingtoachangeofland-useoccupyingordirectlyinfluencinganareaofatminimumacertainthresholdsize(landorwater,aboveorunderground- thresholdtobedefined);• Creation of linear infrastructure that leads to fragmentation of habitats over a minimum length(thresholdtobedefined);•Activitiesresultinginemissions,effluents,and/orothermeansofchemical,radiation,thermalornoiseemissionsinareasprovidingkeyecosystemservices(areastobedefined);162

• Activities leading to changes in ecosystem composition, ecosystem structure or key processes173responsibleforthemaintenanceofecosystemsandecosystemservicesinareasprovidingkeyecosystemservices(areastobedefined).

Category B: The need for, or the level of environmental impact assessment is to be determined for:•Activitiesresultinginemissions,effluentsand/orotherchemical,thermal,radiationornoiseemissionsinareasprovidingotherrelevantecosystemservices(areastobedefined);•Activitiesleadingtochangesinecosystemcomposition,ecosystemstructure,orecosystemfunctionsresponsibleforthemaintenanceofecosystemsandecosystemservicesinareasprovidingotherrelevantecosystemservices(areastobedefined);• Extractive activities, activities leading to a change of land-use or a change of use of inland waterecosystemsorachangeofuseofmarineandcoastalecosystems,andcreationoflinearinfrastructurebelowtheCategoryAthreshold,inareasprovidingkeyandotherrelevantecosystemservices(areastobedefined).

15 Note:Thesecriteriaonlypertaintobiodiversityandshouldthereforebeappliedasanadd-ontoexistingscreeningcriteria.

16 Foranon-exhaustivelistofecosystemservices,seeappendix2below.17 Forexamplesoftheseaspectsofbiodiversity,seeappendix3below.

35


APPENDIX 2: Indicative list of ecosystem services

Regulating services responsibleformaintainingnaturalprocessesanddynamics

Biodiversity-relatedregulatingservices- maintenanceofgenetic,speciesandecosystemcomposition- maintenanceofecosystemstructure- maintenanceofkeyecosystemprocessesforcreatingormaintainingbiodiversity

Land-basedregulatingservices- decompositionoforganicmaterial- naturaldesalinisationofsoils- development/preventionofacidsulphatesoils- biologicalcontrolmechanisms- pollinationofcrops- seasonalcleansingofsoils- soilwaterstoragecapacity- coastalprotectionagainstfloods- coastalstabilisation(againstaccretion/erosion)- soilprotection- suitabilityforhumansettlement- suitabilityforleisureandtourismactivities- suitabilityfornatureconservation- suitabilityforinfrastructure

Waterrelatedregulatingservices- waterfiltering- dilutionofpollutants- dischargeofpollutants- flushing/cleansing- bio-chemical/physicalpurificationofwater- storageofpollutants- flowregulationforfloodcontrol- riverbaseflowregulation- waterstoragecapacity- groundwaterrechargecapacity- regulationofwaterbalance- sedimentation/retentioncapacity- protectionagainstwatererosion- protectionagainstwaveaction- preventionofsalinegroundwaterintrusion- preventionofsalinesurface-waterintrusion- transmissionofdiseases- suitabilityfornavigation- suitabilityforleisureandtourismactivities- suitabilityfornatureconservation

Air-relatedregulatingservices- filteringofair- carryoffbyairtootherareas- photo-chemicalairprocessing(smog)- windbreaks- transmissionofdiseases- carbonsequestration

36


Provisioning services:harvestablegoods

Naturalproduction:- timber- firewood- grasses(constructionandartisanaluse)- fodder&manure- harvestablepeat- secondary(minor)products- harvestablebushmeat- fishandshellfish- drinkingwatersupply- supplyofwaterforirrigationandindustry- watersupplyforhydroelectricity- supplyofsurfacewaterforotherlandscapes- supplyofgroundwaterforotherlandscapes- geneticmaterial

Nature-basedhumanproduction- cropproductivity- treeplantationsproductivity- managedforestproductivity- rangeland/livestockproductivity- aquacultureproductivity(freshwater)- maricultureproductivity(brackish/saltwater)

Cultural services providing a source of artistic, aesthetic, spiritual, religious, recreational or scientificenrichment,ornonmaterialbenefits.

Supporting services necessaryfortheproductionofallotherecosystemservices- soilformation,- nutrientscycling- primaryproduction.- evolutionaryprocesses

37


APPENDIX 3

Aspects of biodiversity: composition, structure and key processesComposition Influenced by:

Minimalviablepopulationof:(a) legally protected varieties/cultivars/breeds

of cultivated plants and/or domesticatedanimals and their relatives, genes orgenomes of social, scientific and economicimportance;

(b) legallyprotectedspecies;(c) migratory birds, migratory fish, species

protectedbyCITES;(d) non-legallyprotected,butthreatenedspecies

(cf. IUCNRedListofThreatenedSpecies);species which are important in locallivelihoodsandcultures.

- selectiveremovalofoneorafewspeciesbyfisheries,forestry, hunting, collecting of plants (includinglivingbotanicalandzoologicalresources);

- fragmentation of their habitats leading toreproductiveisolation;

- introducing genetically modified organisms thatmay transfer transgenes to varieties / cultivars /breeds of cultivated plants and/or domesticatedanimalsandtheirrelatives;

- disturbanceorpollution;- habitatalterationorreduction;- introduction of (non-endemic) predators,

competitorsorparasitesofprotectedspecies.

Structure Influenced by:

Changesinspatialortemporalstructure,atthescaleofrelevantareas,suchas:(a) legallyprotectedareas;(b) areas providing important ecosystem

services, such as (i) maintaining highdiversity (hot spots), large numbers ofendemic or threatened species, requiredbymigratoryspecies;(ii)servicesofsocial,economic,culturalorscientificimportance;(iii) or supporting services associatedwith key evolutionary or other biologicalprocesses.

Effects of human activities that work on a similar(or larger) scale as the area under consideration. Forexample, by emissions into the area, diversion ofsurfacewaterthatflowsthroughthearea,extractionofgroundwaterinasharedaquifer,disturbancebynoiseorlights,pollutionthroughair,etc.

Foodwebstructureandinteractions:Speciesorgroupsofspeciesperformcertainrolesinthefoodweb(functionalgroups);changesinspeciescompositionmaynotnecessarilyleadtochangesinthefoodwebaslongasrolesaretakenoverbyotherspecies.

Allinfluencesmentionedwithcompositionmayleadtochangesinthefoodweb,butonlywhenanentirerole(orfunctionalgroup)isaffected.Specialisedecologicalknowledgeisrequired.

Presenceofkeystonespecies:Keystone species often singularly represent agivenfunctionaltype(orrole)inthefoodweb.

Allinfluencesmentionedwithcompositionthatworkdirectly on keystone species. This is a relatively new,but rapidly developing field of ecological knowledge.Examplesare:- seaottersandkelpforest- elephantsandAfricansavannah- starfishinintertidalzones- salmonintemperaterainforest- tigersharkinsomemarineecosystems- beaverinsomefreshwaterhabitats- black-tailedprairiedogsandprairies

38


Key processes (selected examples only) Influenced by:

Sedimentation patterns (sediment transport,sedimentation, and accretion) in intertidal systems(mangroves,mudflats,seagrassbeds)

Reduced sediment supply by damming ofrivers; interruption of littoral drift by seawardstructures

Plant-animal dependency for pollination, seeddispersal,nutrientcyclingintropicalrainforests

Selective removal of species by logging,collectingorhunting

Soil surface stability and soil processes in montaneforests

Imprudent logging leads to increased erosionandlossoftopsoil

Nutrient cycling by invertebrates and fungi indeciduousforests

Soil and groundwater acidity by use ofagrochemicals.

Plant available moisture in non-forested, steeplyslopingmountains

Overgrazing and soil compaction lead toreducedavailablesoilmoisture

Grazingbyherbivorousmammalsinsavannahs Cattleranchingpractises

Succession after fire, and dependence on fire forcompletionoflife-cyclesinsavannahs

Exclusion of fire leads to loss of speciesdiversity

Available nutrients and sunlight penetration infreshwaterlakes

In-flow of fertilizers and activities leadingto increased turbidity of water (dredging,emissions)

Hydrological regime in floodplains, flooded forestsandtidalwetlands

Changesinriverhydrologyortidalrhythmbyhydraulicinfrastructureorwaterdiversions

Permanentlywaterloggedconditionsinpeatswampsandacid-sulphatesoils

Drainage leads to destruction of vegetation(and peat formation process), oxidisation ofpeatlayersandsubsequentsoilsubsidence;acidsulphatesoilsrapidlydegradewhenoxidised

Evaporationsurplusinsaline/alkalinelakes Outfall of drainage water into these lakeschangesthewaterbalance

Tidalprismandsalt/freshwaterbalanceinestuariesInfrastructure creating blockages to tidalinfluence; changes in river hydrology changethesaltbalanceinestuaries.

Hydrological processes like vertical convection,currentsanddrifts,andthetransversecirculationincoastalseas

Coastalinfrastructure,dredging.

Populationdynamics Reductioninhabitatleadstodramaticdropinpopulationsize,leadingtoextinction

39


CHAPTER 6: Draft guidance on biodiversity-inclusive Strategic Environmental Assessment (convention text)

CONTENTS

6.1Introduction....................................................................................................................................................406.2Strategicenvironmentalassessmentappliesamultitudeoftools............................................................40 Strategicenvironmentalassessmentvs.Integratedassessment........................................................41 Paralleltoorintegratedwithinaplanningprocess?..........................................................................41 Stepsintheseaprocess..........................................................................................................................426.3WhygivespecialattentiontobiodiversityinSEAanddecision-making?.............................................436.4WhatbiodiversityissuesarerelevanttoSEA.............................................................................................46 Biodiversityinsea–differentperspectives.........................................................................................46 Biodiversityinthisguidance.................................................................................................................47 Biodiversity“triggers”forsea................................................................................................................476.5HowtoaddressbiodiversityinSEA............................................................................................................51 Theassessmentframework...................................................................................................................51 Identifyingpotentialbiodiversityimpactsthroughbiodiversitytriggers.......................................51Appendix:SummaryoverviewofwhenandhowtoaddressbiodiversityinSEA........................................55

40


6.1 Introduction

Strategicenvironmentalassessment(SEA) isnowwidelyapplied,andan increasingnumberofcountrieshaveintegrated,orareintheprocessofintegrating,SEAintotheirnationalproceduresforenvironmentalassessment.Thisguidanceisintendedtoassistinbetterincorporatingbiodiversityduringthisprocess.ThetargetaudienceofthisdocumentconsequentlyarethoseinvolvedintheprocessofestablishingSEAsystems.Thesetypicallyarenationalauthoritiesbutcanalsoincluderegionalauthoritiesorinternationalagencies. The generic nature of this guidance implies that further elaboration of its practical applicationis needed to reflect the ecological, social-economic, cultural and institutional conditions for which theSEA system is designed. The focus of the guidance is on how to guarantee a biodiversity-inclusive SEAprocess.Theguidancedoesnotintendtoprovideatechnicalmanualforpractitionersonhowtocarryoutabiodiversity-inclusiveassessmentstudy. Thisguidanceisnotstructuredaccordingtoagivenprocedure.Theprincipalreasonisthatgoodpractice SEA should ideally be fully integrated into a planning (or policy development) process. Sinceplanning processes differ widely, there is, by definition, no typical sequence of procedural steps in SEA.Moreover,thereisnogeneralagreementonwhatatypicalSEAproceduremightbe.Itisintendedtoprovideguidanceonhowto integratebiodiversity issues intotheSEA,which inturnshouldbe integrated intoaplanningprocess.Becausetheplanningprocessmayvarybetweencountries,theSEAisnotdescribedasseparateprocessbutasanintegralcomponentoftheapplicableplanningprocess. SituationsinwhichSEAisappliedandthescopeoftheassessments,areallvaried.TheSEAprocessthereforeneedstobestructuredtoreflectthespecificsituation.SEAisnotamereexpansionofanEIAanditdoesnotusuallyfollowthesamestagesasanEIA.Theapproachandlanguageusedarethereforeconceptualinnature. TheguidanceisfullyconsistentwiththeEcosystemApproach(decisionV/6andVII/11).Itfocusesonpeople-natureinteractionsandtheroleofstakeholdersinidentifyingandvaluingpotentialimpactsonbiodiversity.Fortheidentificationofstakeholdersandthevaluingofbiodiversity,theconceptofecosystemservicesaselaboratedbytheMillenniumEcosystemAssessment(MA)providesausefultool.Ittranslatesbiodiversityinto(presentandfuture)valuesforsociety.Itprovidesamechanismto‘translate’thelanguageofbiodiversityspecialistsintolanguagecommonlyunderstoodbydecisionmakers.TheguidanceisconsistentwiththeMAconceptualframeworkandterminology. TheguidanceintendstofacilitatetheabilitytocontributetoGoal7oftheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals, i.e. to ‘ensureenvironmentalsustainability’,anditstarget9to ‘integratetheprinciplesofsustainabledevelopmentintocountrypoliciesandprogramsandreversethelossofenvironmentalresources’.

6.2 Strategic environmental assessment applies a multitude of tools

Strategic environmental assessment has been defined as ‘the formalised, systematic and comprehensiveprocess of identifying and evaluating the environmental consequences of proposed policies, plans orprogrammestoensurethattheyarefullyincludedandappropriatelyaddressedattheearliestpossiblestageof decision-making on a par with economic and social considerations’18.4 Since this original definition,thefieldofSEAhasrapidlydevelopedandexpanded,andthenumberofdefinitionsofSEAhasmultipliedaccordingly.SEA,byitsnature,coversawiderrangeofactivitiesorawiderareaandoftenoveralongertimespanthantheenvironmentalimpactassessmentofprojects.SEAmightbeappliedtoanentiresector(suchasanationalpolicyonenergy,forexample)ortoageographicalarea(forexample,inthecontextofaregionaldevelopmentscheme). SEAdoesnotreplaceorreducetheneedforproject-levelEIA(althoughinsomecasesitcan),butitcanhelptostreamlineandfocustheincorporationofenvironmentalconcerns(includingbiodiversity)intothedecision-makingprocess,oftenmakingproject-levelEIAamoreeffectiveprocess.SEAisnowadayscommonlyunderstoodasbeingproactiveandsustainability-driven,whilstEIAisoftendescribedasbeinglargelyreactive.Annex3providesmoregeneralinformationonSEA.

18 BasedonSadlerandVerheem,1996.StrategicEnvironmentalAssessment.Status,ChallengesandFutureDirections,MinistryofHousing,SpatialPlanningandtheEnvironment,TheNetherlands:188pp.

41


Strategicenvironmentalassessmentvs.integratedassessment

SEAisarapidlyevolvingfieldwithnumerousdefinitionsandinterpretationintheory,inregulations,andinpractice.SEAisrequiredbylegislationinmanycountriesandcarriedoutinformallyinothers.TherearealsoapproachesthatusesomeoralloftheprinciplesofSEAwithoutusingthetermSEAtodescribethem.However,practicesinSEAandrelatedapproachesshowanemergingcontinuousspectrumofinterpretationandapplication. Atoneendofthecontinuum,thefocus ismainlyonthebiophysicalenvironment.It ischaracterisedbythegoalofmainstreamingandup-streamingenvironmentalconsiderationsintostrategicdecision-makingattheearlieststagesofplanningprocessestoensuretheyarefullyincludedandappropriatelyaddressed. The 2001 SEA Directive of the European Union and SEA Protocol to the Convention onEnvironmentalImpactAssessmentinaTransboundaryContext(Espoo,1991)areexamplesofthisapproach.Attheotherendofthespectrumisanapproach,whichaddressesthethreepillarsofsustainabilityandaimstoassessenvironmental,socialandeconomicconcernsinanintegratedmanner.DependingontheneedsofSEAusersandthedifferentlegalrequirements,SEAcanbeappliedindifferentwaysalongthisspectrumusingavarietyofmethodologies.

Accordingly, SEA is referred to as “a family of tools that identifies and addresses the environmentalconsequencesandstakeholderconcernsinthedevelopmentofpolicies,plans,programmesandotherhighlevelinitiatives”19.5Inmorespecificterms,theNetherlandsCommissionforEnvironmentalAssessment206describesSEAasatoolto:

1. Structure the public and government debate in the preparation of policies, plans andprogrammes;2. Feed thisdebate througha robustassessmentof theenvironmentalconsequencesand theirinterrelationshipswithsocialandeconomicaspects;3. Ensurethattheresultsofassessmentanddebatearetakenintoaccountduringdecisionmakingandimplementation.

This means that stakeholder involvement, transparency and good quality information are key principles.SEA is thusmore than thepreparationofa report; it isa tool toenhancegoodgovernance.SEAcanbea formal procedure laid down by law (e.g. the SEA Directive of the European Union) or used flexibly/opportunistically.

Paralleltoorintegratedwithinaplanningprocess?

SEAisdesignedinaccordancewiththenationalcontextandthecharacteristicsoftheplanningprocessesinwhichSEAisapplied.Traditionally,SEAisoftenappliedasastand-aloneprocessparalleltoplanning,intendedtosupportthedecisionmakingattheendoftheplanningprocess.Morerecently,SEAhasbeenfurtherdevelopedintoitsmosteffectiveform:integratedintotheplanningprocess,bringingstakeholderstogether during key stages of the planning process and feeding their debate with reliable environmentalinformation(figure6.1).Insomecases,whereplanningproceduresareweakorabsent;SEAmaystructureoreffectivelyrepresenttheplanningprocess. Ideally,SEAisintegratedthroughoutthedevelopmentprocessofaspecificlegislation,policy,planorprogramme,startingasearlyaspossible.However,evenwhendecisionshavealreadybeentaken,SEAcanplayameaningfulroleinmonitoringimplementation-forexample,todecideonnecessarymitigatingactionsortofeedintofuturereviewsofdecisions.SEAmayeventakeontheformofasectoralassessmentusedtosettheagendaforfuturepoliciesandplans. There is no typical sequence of procedural steps to define an SEA process. By definition SEA issituation-specific.

19 OECDDevelopmentAssistanceCommitteeNetworkonEnvironmentandDevelopmentCooperation–TaskTeamonStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment.20 NetherlandsCommissionforEnvironmentalAssessment:StrategicEnvironmentalAssessment-ViewsandExperiences(factsheetathttp://www.eia.nl/nceia/products/publications.htm).

42


Figure 6.1: CombinationsofSEAandplanningprocess

StepsintheSEAprocess

SEAaimsatbetterstrategies,rangingfromlegislationandcountry-widedevelopmentpoliciestosectoralandspatialplans.Inspiteofthewidevariationinapplicationanddefinitions,allgoodpracticeSEAscomplywithanumberofperformancecriteriaandwithcommonproceduralprinciples21.7WhenadecisionontheneedforanSEAhasbeentaken,“goodpracticeSEA”canbecharacterisedbythefollowingphases21:8

• Phase1:Createtransparency:

(i) AnnouncethestartoftheSEAandensurethatrelevantstakeholdersareawarethattheprocessisstarting;

(ii) Bring stakeholders together and facilitate development of a shared vision on(environmental)problems,objectives,andalternativeactionstoachievethese;

(iii)Examine,incooperationwithallrelevantagencies,whethertheobjectivesofthenewpolicyorplanare in linewith those inexistingpolicies, includingenvironmentalobjectives(consistencyanalysis).

• Phase2:Technicalassessment:

(iv) Elaborate terms of reference for the technical assessment, based on the results ofstakeholderconsultationandconsistencyanalysis;

(v) Carry out the actual assessment, document its results and make these accessible.Organise an effective quality assurance system of both SEA information andprocess.

• Phase3:Useinformationindecision-making:

(vi) Bring stakeholders together to discuss results and make recommendations todecision-makers.

(vii)Make sure any final decision is motivated in writing in light of the assessmentresults.

• Phase4:Post-decisionmonitoringandevaluation:

(viii) Monitortheimplementationoftheadoptedpolicyorplan,anddiscusstheneedforfollow-upaction.

21 SeeIAIAStrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentPerformanceCriteria.IAIASpecialPublicationsSeriesNo.1,January2002.22 OECD Development Assistance Committee Network on Environment and Development Cooperation – Task Team on

StrategicEnvironmentalAssessment.

planprocess

SEA

S E A lead ing

planprocess

SEA

P aralle l In tegrated

planprocess

SEA

planprocess

SEA

S E A lead ing

planprocess

SEA

S E A lead ing

planprocess

SEA

P aralle l

planprocess

SEA

P aralle l In tegrated

planprocess

SEA

In tegrated

planprocess

SEA

43


SEAisflexible,i.e.thescopeandlevelofdetailoftheabovestepscandifferdependingontimeandresourcesavailable:fromrapid(2-3months)tocomprehensive(1-2years).Theextentofdocumentationisalsohighlyvariable – in some SEAs, particularly where decision-makers are involved throughout, the process is ofparamountimportance,whilstinothersreportingassumesgreaterimportance.

6.3 Why give special attention to biodiversity in SEA and decision-making?

Importantreasonstopayattentiontotheeffectiveincorporationofbiodiversityinenvironmentalassessmentaresummarisedbelow:

Legalobligations. AreasontopayparticularattentiontobiodiversityinSEAisalegalnational,regionalorinternationalobligationtodoso.Anumberoflegalobligationscanbedistinguished:

- Protected areas and protected species: ecosystems, habitats and species can have a form of legalprotection,rangingfromstrictlyprotectedtorestrictionsoncertainactivities.

- Valuedecosystemservicescanbesubjecttosomeformoflegalregulationtriggeringtheneedforenvironmentassessment.Examplesarefisheriesandforestryactivities,coastalprotection(bydunesorforestedwetlands),waterinfiltrationareasforpublicwatersupply,recreationalareas,landscapeparks,etc.(Seebox6.1onecosystemservicesintheirregulatorycontext).

- Landsandwaterstraditionallyoccupiedorusedbyindigenousandlocalcommunitiesrepresentaspecialcaseofecosystemservices.

- Internationaltreaties,conventionsandagreementssuchastheWorldHeritageConvention,RamsarConvention, the UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme or Regional Seas agreements. BybecomingaPartytotheseagreements,countriesagreetocertainobligationtomanagetheseareasaccordingtointernationallyagreedprinciples.

Facilitation of stakeholder identification. The concept of biodiversity-derived ecosystem services providesausefultooltoidentifypotentiallyaffectedgroupsofpeople.Ecosystemsaremultifunctionalandprovidemultiple services.Byapplying theecosystemapproachand focusingonecosystemservices indescribingbiodiversity,directlyand indirectlyaffectedstakeholderscanbe identifiedand,asappropriate, invited toparticipateintheSEAprocess.

Safeguarding livelihoods. The identification of stakeholders through recognition of ecosystemservicescanleadtoabetterunderstandingofhowthe livelihoodsofpeoplewhodependonbiodiversitywillbeaffected.Inmanycountries,especiallyindevelopingcountries,alargeproportionofruralsocietyisdirectlydependentonbiodiversity.Asthesegroupsmayalsobelongtothepoorerandlesseducatedstrataofsociety,theymaygounnoticedastheyarenotalwayscapabletoparticipatemeaningfullyinanSEAprocess(seebox6.2).

Soundeconomicdecisionmaking.Ecosystemservicessuchaserosioncontrol,waterretentionandsupply,andrecreationalpotential canbevalued inmonetary terms, thusprovidingafigureonpotentialeconomicbenefitsand/orlossescausedbytheimplementationofplannedactivities.

Cumulativeeffectsonbiodiversityarebestanticipatedatastrategiclevel.Byapplyingtheprinciplesoftheecosystemapproachthecumulativeeffectsofactivitiesonthoseecosystemserviceswhichsupporthumanwell-beingcanbeaddressed.Atthesametime,itisappropriatetodefinelevelsofacceptablechangeordesiredlevelsofenvironmentalqualityatthestrategic(ecosystemorcatchment)level.

Maintainingthegeneticbaseofevolutionforfutureopportunities.Theconservationofbiodiversityforfuturegenerationsisoneimportantaspectofsustainability.Itseekstomaintainoptionsforthewealthofyetunknownpotentialusesofbiodiversity.Moreover,maintainingthecapacityofbiodiversitytoadapttochangingenvironments(e.g.climatechange)andtocontinueprovidingviablelivingspaceforpeopleiscriticaltohumansurvival.Anylong-termsustainabilityassessmenthastomakeprovisionsforsafeguardingthatcapacity.

44


Benefiting society. By promoting/facilitating sustainable solutions to development needs SEA isbenefitingsocietyasawhole

Box 6.1: Ecosystem services in their regulatory context

SEA provides information on policies, plans and programmes for decision makers, including theirconsistencywiththeregulatorycontext. Itisimportanttorealizethatecosystemservicesoftenhaveformalrecognitionbysomeformoflegalprotection.Legislationoftenhasageographicalbasis(e.g.protectedareas)butthisisnotnecessarilyalwaysthecase(e.g.speciesprotectionisnotalwayslimitedtodemarcatedareas).Ofcourse,thelegalcontextinanycountryorregionisdifferentandneedstobetreatedassuch.

Someexamplesofecosystemserviceslinkedtoformalregulations:

Ecosystemservice:preservationofbiodiversity:• Nationallyprotectedareas/habitats,protectedspecies;• Internationalstatus:Ramsarconvention,UNESCOManandBiosphere,WorldHeritageSites• Subject to national policies such as the U.K. Biodiversity Action Plans (BAP), or regionalregulationssuchastheEuropeanNatura2000Network.• MarineEnvironmentalHighRiskAreas(sensitiveareaspronetooilpollutionfromshipping)·• Sites identifiedanddesignatedunder internationalagreements,e.g.OSPARMarineProtectedAreas• SiteshostingspecieslistedundertheConventionontheConservationofMigratorySpeciesofWildAnimalsortheConventiononInternationalTradeinEndangeredSpeciesofWildFloraandFauna• SiteshostingspecieslistedundertheBernConvention(Annex1and2oftheConventionontheConservationofEuropeanWildlifeandNaturalHabitats,1979)

Ecosystemservice:provisionoflivelihoodtopeople:• Extractivereserves(forests,marine,agriculture)• Areasofindigenousinterest• Touristic(underwater)parks(service:maintainingbiodiversitytoenhancetourism)

Ecosystemservice:preservationofhumanculturalhistory/religioussites:• Landscapeparks• Sacredsites,groves• Archaeologicalparks

Otherecosystemservices,insomecountriesformallyrecognized:• Floodstorageareas(service:floodprotectionorwaterstorage)• Waterinfiltrationareas(service:publicwatersupply)• Areassensitivetoerosion(service:vegetationpreventingerosion)• Coastaldefences(dunes,mangroves)(service:protectingcoastalhinterlands)• Urbanorperi-urbanparks(service:recreationalfacilitiestourbaninhabitants)• Ecosystemfunctioning(soilbiodiversity,pollination,pestcontrol)

45


Box 6.2: Stakeholders and participation

Impactassessmentisconcernedwith:(i)information,(ii)participationand(iii)transparencyindecisionmaking.Publicinvolvementconsequentlyisaprerequisiteforeffectiveimpactassessmentandcantakeplaceatdifferentlevels:informing(one-wayflowofinformation),consulting(two-wayflowofinformation),or“real”participation(sharedanalysisandassessment).Inallstagesoftheprocesspublicparticipationisrelevant.Thelegalrequirementsforandthelevelofparticipationdifferamongcountries,butitisgenerallyacceptedthatpublicconsultationatthescopingandreviewstageareminimallyrequired;participationduringtheassessmentstudyisgenerallyacknowledgedtoenhancethequalityoftheprocess. Withrespecttobiodiversity,threegroupingsofstakeholderscanbedistinguished.(N.B:notethatthecategoriesrepresentthreelevels,eachhigherlevelencompassingtheearliercategory):

• Beneficiaries ofthepolicy,planorprogramme-targetgroupsmakinguseoforputtingavaluetoknownecosystemserviceswhicharepurposefullyenhancedbythepolicy,planorprogramme;• Affected (groups of) people –i.e.thosepeoplethatexperience,asaresultofthepolicy,planorprogramme,intendedorunintendedchangesinecosystemservicesthattheyvalue;• General stakeholders:

-National or local government institutions having a formal government responsibility withrespecttothemanagementofdefinedareas(town&countryplanningdepartments,etc.)orthemanagementofecosystemservices(fisheries,forestry,watersupply,coastaldefence,etc.);-Formal and informal institutions representing affected people (water boards, trade unions,consumerorganizations,civilrightsmovements,adhoccitizenscommittees,etc.);- Formalandinformalinstitutionsrepresenting(theintrinsicvalueof)biodiversity itself(non-governmentalnatureconservationorganizations,parkmanagementcommittees,scientificpanels,etc.).-Thegeneralaudiencethatwantstobeinformedonnewdevelopmentsintheirdirectorindirectenvironment(linkedtotransparencyofdemocraticprocesses).-Stakeholders of future generations, who may rely on biodiversity around which we makedecisions. Formal and informal organizations are increasingly aware of their responsibility totakeintoaccounttheinterestsofthese‘absentstakeholders’.

Ingeneralitcanbeobservedthattheroleofinstitutionalizedstakeholdersbecomesmoreimportantathigherstrategiclevelsofassessment;atlowerleveltheactualbeneficiariesandaffectedpeoplewillbecomemoreimportant.

Thereisanumberofpotentialconstraintstoeffectivepublicparticipation.Theseinclude:

-Poverty:involvementmeanstimespentawayfromincome-producingtasks;-Ruralsettings:increaseddistancesmakecommunicationmoredifficultandexpensive;-Illiteracy:orlackofcommandofnon-locallanguages,caninhibitrepresentativeinvolvementifprintmediaareused;-Localvalues/culture:behaviouralnormsorculturalpracticecaninhibit involvementofsomegroups,whomaynot feel free todisagreepubliclywithdominantgroups (e.g.womenversusmen);-Languages:insomeareasanumberofdifferentlanguagesordialectsmaybespoken,makingcommunicationdifficult;-Legalsystems:maybeinconflictwithtraditionalsystems,andcauseconfusionaboutrightsandresponsibilitiesforresources;-Interestgroups:mayhaveconflictingordivergentviews,andvestedinterests;-Confidentiality:canbeimportantfortheproponent,whomaybeagainstearlyinvolvementandconsiderationofalternatives.

46


6.4 What biodiversity issues are relevant to SEA

BiodiversityinSEA–differentperspectives

The spectrum of SEA ranging from those with a focus on the biophysical environment to broadlysustainability-oriented SEA focussed on the social, economic and biophysical environments, results indifferentperspectivesonbiodiversityinSEA.AlthoughtheConventiontextisveryclearonhowbiodiversityshould be interpreted, day-to-day practice shows widely different interpretations. Some prominentdifferencesarediscussedbelow:

Biodiversity conservation as nature conservation. SEA traditionally focuses on the biophysicalenvironment.Otherinstrumentsareusedtorepresenttheeconomicandsocialinterestsofstakeholders.Biodiversitythereforetendstobeconsideredfromanatureconservationperspectiveinwhichprotectionratherthansustainableorequitableuseofbiodiversityishighlighted.Inthismannernatureconservationbecomessegregatedfrom,andpotentiallyconflictingwith,economicandsocialdevelopment.

Theproblemwiththesectoralapproachinconventionalimpactassessmentisthatresponsibilityforbiodiversityisdividedbetweenanumberofsectoralorganisations.Forexample,theexploitationoffishorforestresources,agriculture,waterqualityandquantitymanagementallhavetodowith(sustainable)useofbiodiversity,butregulationsandpoliciesaredefinedbydifferententitiesthatdonotrefertotheiractivitiesassustainableuseofbiodiversity.

Biodiversityforsocialandeconomicwell-being.Inrecentyears,environmentalassessmentpracticeshavebeenadoptedinmostdevelopingcountries.Inthesecountriesthebiophysicalenvironment,includingbiodiversity,isnotonlylookedatfromanatureconservationperspective,butastheprovideroflivelihoods.Especially in rural areas the main objective of development is the social and economic improvement ofthe situation of poor communities. Both social/economic and biophysical environments are seen ascomplementaryandconsequentlyanintegratedassessmentapproachhasbeendevelopedinmanyofthesecountries. Biodiversity conservation and sustainable use are equally important issues in SEA; decisionmakershavetodealwiththeequitablesharingofbenefitsderivedfrombiodiversity,includingthosederivedfromtheutilisationofgeneticresources,insocietiescharacterisedbyunequaldistributionofwealth.SuchintegratedapproachesreflectabroadperspectiveonbiodiversityinaccordancewiththeConventionandtheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals.

Mergingperspectives.Boththe integratedandsectorallydividedapproachesareconvergingas itisbeingrealisedthattheenvironment,includingitsbiodiversitycomponents,providesgoodsandservicesthatcannotbeassignedtoasector(biodiversityprovidesmultiplegoodsandservicessimultaneously)orageographicallydefinedarea(goodsandservicesarenotlimitedtoprotectedareasonly).Atthesametimeit is generally recognised that certain parts of the world are of such importance for the conservation ofbiodiversity,thattheseareasshouldbesafeguardedforthefutureandrequirestrictprotectivemeasures.

Time and space. From a biodiversity perspective spatial and temporal scales are of particularimportance.InconventionalSEA,theplanninghorizonisoftenlinkedtoeconomicplanningmechanismswith planning horizons of around 15 years. Assessing the impacts on biodiversity generally requires alongertimehorizon.Biophysicalprocessessuchassoilformation,forest(re)growth,geneticerosionandevolutionaryprocesses,effectsofclimaticchangesandsealevelrise,operateonfarlongertimescalesandarerarelytakenintoaccountinconventionalSEAs.Alongertimehorizonisrequiredtoaddressthefundamentalprocessesregulatingtheworld’sbiologicaldiversity.

Similarly,flowsofenergy,waterandnutrientslinktheworld’secosystems.Effectsinanareaunderassessment may have much wider biodiversity repercussions. The most visible example is the linkage ofecosystemsonaglobalscalebymigratoryspecies;onacontinentalorregionalscaleecosystemsarelinkedbyhydrologicalprocessesthroughriverssystemsandundergroundaquifers;onalocalscalepollinators,onwhichimportantcommercialspeciesdepend,mayhavespecifichabitatneedsbeyondtheboundariesofanSEA.BiodiversityconsiderationsmayconsequentlyrequireageographicalfocusthatexceedstheareaforwhichanSEAiscarriedout.

Opportunitiesandconstraintsversuscause-effectchains.Biodiversityunderpinsecosystemservicesonwhichhumanwell-beingrelies.Biodiversitythusrepresentsarangeofopportunitiesfor,andconstraintsto,sustainabledevelopment.Recognitionoftheseopportunitiesandconstraintsasthepointofdeparturefor

47


informingthedevelopmentofpolicies,plansandprogrammesatastrategiclevelenablesoptimaloutcomesforsustainabledevelopment.ThequestionatSEA level is therefore“howdoes theenvironmentaffectordeterminedevelopmentopportunitiesandconstraints?”Thisapproachcontrastswiththe largelyreactiveapproachadoptedinprojectEIA,wherethekeyquestionbeingaskedis“whatwilltheeffectofthisprojectbeontheenvironment?”

Two broad approaches can be used in SEA: the reactive cause-effect chain approach where theinterventionisknownandthecause-effectchainarefairlyclear(comparabletoEIA),andthe‘bottomup’opportunitiesandconstraintsofthenaturalenvironmentapproachwheretheenvironmenteffectivelyshapesthepolicy,programmeorplan.Thelatterismostoftenusedinlanduseplanning/spatialplanningwhereinterventionsarepotentiallywide-rangingandtheobjectiveistotailorlandusestobemostsuitedtothenaturalenvironment.

Biodiversityinthisguidance

Thewayinwhichbiodiversityisinterpretedinthisdocumenthasbeendescribedindetailinchapter3.Themostimportantfeaturesaresummarisedbelow:

• InSEA,biodiversitycanbestbedefinedintermsoftheecosystemservicesprovidedbybiodiversity.These services represent ecological or scientific, social (including cultural) and economic values forsocietyandcanbe linked tostakeholders. Stakeholderscanrepresentbiodiversity interestsandcanconsequentlybeinvolvedinanSEAprocess.Maintenanceofbiodiversity(ornatureconservation)isanimportantecosystemserviceforpresentandfuturegenerationsbutbiodiversityprovidesmanymoreecosystemservices(seeappendix2oftheVoluntaryguidelinesonbiodiversity-inclusiveEnvironmentalImpactAssessment).• Direct drivers of change are human interventions (activities) resulting in biophysical and socialeffectswithknownimpactsonbiodiversityandassociatedecosystemservices(seebox6.3).• Indirectdriversofchangearesocietalchanges,whichmayundercertainconditionsinfluencedirectdriversofchange,ultimatelyleadingtoimpactsonecosystemservices(seebox6.4).• Aspectsofbiodiversity:Todeterminepotentialimpactsonecosystemservices,oneneedstoassesswhether the ecosystems providing these services are significantly impacted by the policies, plans orprogrammesunderstudy. Impactscanbestbeassessed in termsofchanges incomposition(what isthere),changesinstructure(howisitorganisedintimeandspace),orchangesinkeyprocesses(whatphysical,biologicalorhumanprocessesgoverncreationand/ormaintenanceofecosystems).• Threelevelsofbiodiversityaredistinguished:genetic,species,andecosystemdiversity.Ingeneral,theecosystemlevelisthemostsuitableleveltoaddressbiodiversityinSEA.However,situationswithaneedtoaddresslowerlevelsexist.

Biodiversity“triggers”forSEA

To be able to make a judgement if a policy, plan or programme has potential biodiversity impacts, twoelementsareofoverridingimportance:(i)affectedareaandecosystemserviceslinkedtothisarea,and(ii)typesofplannedactivitiesthatcanactasdriverofchangeinecosystemservices.

When any one or a combination of the conditions below apply to a policy, plan or programme, specialattentiontobiodiversityisrequiredintheSEAofthispolicy,planorprogramme.

• Importantecosystemservices.Whenanareaaffectedbyapolicy,planorprogramme isknownto provide one or more important ecosystem services, these services and their stakeholders shouldbe taken into account in an SEA. Geographical delineation of an area provides the most importantbiodiversityinformationasitispossibletoidentifytheecosystemsandland-usepracticesinthearea,andidentifyecosystemservicesprovidedbytheseecosystemsor land-usetypes.Foreachecosystemservice,stakeholder(s)canbeidentifiedwhopreferablyareinvitedtoparticipateintheSEAprocess.Area-relatedpoliciesandlegislationcanbetakenintoaccount(seebox6.2above);

48


• Interventions acting as direct drivers of change. If a proposed intervention is know to produceor contribute to one or more drivers of change with known impact on ecosystem services (see box6.3),specialattentionneedstobegiventobiodiversity.Iftheinterventionareaofthepolicy,planorprogrammehasnotyetbeengeographicallydefined(e.g.inthecaseofasectorpolicy),theSEAcanonlydefinebiodiversityimpactsinconditionalterms:impactsareexpectedtooccurincasethepolicy,planorprogrammewillaffectcertaintypesofecosystemsprovidingimportantecosystemservices.Ifthe intervention area is known it is possible to link drivers of change to ecosystem services and itsstakeholders;• Interventions acting as indirect drivers of change. When a policy, plan or programme leads toactivitiesactingasindirectdriverofchange(e.g.foratradepolicy,apovertyreductionstrategy,orataxmeasure),itbecomesmorecomplextoidentifypotentialimpactsonecosystemservices(seebox6.4).Inbroadterms,biodiversityattentionisneededinSEAwhenthepolicy,planorprogrammeisexpectedtosignificantlyaffectthewayinwhichasociety:

- Consumesproductsderivedfromlivingorganisms,orproductsthatdependonecosystemservicesfortheirproduction;- Occupiesareasoflandandwater;or- Exploitsitsnaturalresourcesandecosystemservices.

49


Box 6.3: Direct drivers of change...

...arehumaninterventions(activities)resulting inbiophysicalandsocial/economiceffectswithknownimpactsonbiodiversityandassociatedecosystemservices.

Biophysicalchangesknowntoactasapotentialdriverofchangecomprise:

• Landconversion:theexistinghabitatiscompletelyremovedandreplacedbysomeotherformoflanduseorcover.Thisisthemostimportantcauseoflossofecosystemservices.• Fragmentation by linear infrastructure: roads, railways, canals, dikes, powerlines, etc. affectsecosystem structure by cutting habitats into smaller parts, leading to isolation of populations. Asimilareffectiscreatedbyisolationthroughsurroundinglandconversion.Fragmentationisaseriousreasonforconcerninareaswherenaturalhabitatarealreadyfragmented.• Extractionoflivingorganismsisusuallyselectivesinceonlyfewspeciesareofvalue,andleadstochangesinspeciescompositionofecosystems,potentiallyupsettingtheentiresystem.Forestryandfisheriesarecommonexamples.• Extractionofminerals,oresandwatercansignificantlydisturbtheareawheresuchextractionstakeplace,oftenwithsignificantdownstreamand/orcumulativeeffects.• Wastes (emissions, effluents, solid waste), or other chemical, thermal, radiation or noise inputs:humanactivitiescanresultinliquid,solidorgaseouswastesaffectingair,waterorlandquality.Pointsources(chimneys,drains,undergroundinjections)aswellasdiffuseemission(agriculture,traffic)haveawideareaofimpactasthepollutantsarecarriedawaybywind,waterorpercolation.Therangeofpotentialimpactsonbiodiversityisverybroad.• Disturbanceofecosystemcomposition,structureorkeyprocesses:appendix2oftheEIAguidelinescontainsanoverviewofhowhumanactivitiescanaffecttheseaspectofbiodiversity.

Somesocialchangescanalsobeconsideredtobedirectdriversofchangeastheyareknowntoleadtooneoftheabove-mentionedbiophysicalchanges(non-exhaustive):

• Population changes due to permanent (settlement/resettlement), temporary (temporaryworkers),seasonalin-migration(tourism)oropportunisticin-migration(job-seekers)usuallyleadtolandoccupancy(=landconversion),pollutionanddisturbance,harvestoflivingorganisms,andintroductionofnon-nativespecies(especiallyinrelativelyundisturbedareas).• Conversionordiversificationofeconomicactivities:especiallyineconomicsectorsrelatedtolandandwater,diversificationwillleadtointensifiedlanduseandwateruse,includingtheuseofpesticidesandfertilizers,increasedextractionofwater,introductionofnewcropvarieties(andtheconsequentlossoftraditionalvarieties).Changefromsubsistencefarmingtocashcropsisanexample.Changestotraditionalrightsoraccesstobiodiversitygoodsandservicesfallswithinthiscategory.Uncertaintyorinconsistenciesregardingownershipandtenurefacilitateunsustainablelanduseandconversion.• Conversionordiversificationofland-use:forexample,theenhancementofextensivecattleraisingincludes conversion of natural grassland to managed pastures, application of fertilizers, geneticchangeoflivestock,increasedgrazingdensity.Changestothestatus,useormanagementofprotectedareasisanotherexample.• Enhancedtransportinfrastructureandservices,and/orenhanced(rural)accessibility;openingupofruralareaswillcreateaninfluxofpeopleintoformerlyinaccessibleareas.• Marginalisationandexclusionof(groupsof)ruralpeople:landlessruralpoorareforcedtoputmarginallandsintoeconomicuseforshorttermbenefit.Suchareasmayincludeerosionsensitivesoils, where the protective service provided by natural vegetation is destroyed by unsustainablefarmingpractices.Deforestationandlanddegradationarearesultofsuchpractices,createdbynon-equitablesharingofbenefitsderivedfromnaturalresources.

50


Box 6.4: Indirect drivers of change...

...aresocietalchanges,whichmayundercertainconditionsinfluencedirectdriversofchange,ultimatelyleadingtoimpactsonecosystemservices.

Theperformanceofecosystemservicesisinfluencedbydriversofchange.IntheMillenniumEcosystemAssessment(MA)conceptualframework,a“driver”isanyfactorthatchangesanaspectofanecosystem.Adirectdriverunequivocallyinfluencesecosystemprocessesandcanthereforebeidentifiedandmeasuredtodifferingdegreesofaccuracy.Inthecaseofactivitiesthathavenoobviousbiophysicalconsequencesitbecomesmorecomplextodefineimpactsonecosystemservices.TheMAconceptualframeworkprovidesastructuredwayofaddressingsuchsituations. Activitieswithoutdirectbiophysicalconsequencesexerttheirinfluencethroughindirectdriverofchange.Theseoperatemorediffusely,oftenbyalteringoneormoredirectdrivers,anditsinfluenceisestablishedbyunderstandingitseffectonadirectdriver.

Indirectdriverofchangecanbe:

• Demographic: e.g. population size and rate of change over time (birth and death rates), ageandgender structure,householddistributionby sizeandcomposition,migrationpattern, levelofeducationalattainment;• Economic(macro):e.g.globaleconomicgrowthanditsdistributionbycountry;• Socio-political: e.g. democratisation and participation in decision making, decentralisation,conflictresolutionmechanisms,privatisation;• Scientificandtechnologicalprocesses:e.g.ratesofinvestmentinR&D,rateofadoptionofnewtechnologies, changes in productivity and extractive capabilities, access to and dissemination ofinformation;• Culturalandreligiousvalues:values,beliefsandnormsinfluencesbehaviourwithregardtotheenvironment

Actorscanhaveinfluenceonsomedrivers(endogenousdriver),butothersmaybebeyondthecontrolofaparticularactorordecision-maker(exogenousdrivers).

51


6.5 How to address biodiversity in SEA

Theassessmentframework

Figure 6.2 depicts the conceptual framework used in these guidelines. It integrates the MA conceptualframeworkwithamoredetailedintegratedimpactassessmentframework,describingpathwaysofactivitiestoimpacts.Itpositionsthebiodiversitytriggers,i.e.(1)affectedecosystemservices,andactivitiesproducingdirect(2)orindirect(3)driversofchangeinecosystemservices. Activitiesresultingfromapolicy,planorprogrammeleadtobiophysicalchangesand/orsocial/economicchanges(activity1infigure6.2).Social/economicchangesinfluencehumanwell-beingdirectly,butsomeofthesechangesmayinturnalsoleadtobiophysicalchanges(forexamplein-migrationofpeopleleads tooccupationof land). Within their spatial and temporal rangeof influence,biophysical changesmay influence thecompositionorstructureofecosystems,or influencekeyprocessesmaintaining theseecosystems.Activitiesresultinginthistypeofbiophysicalchangesarereferredtoasdirectdriversofchange.Theecosystemservicesprovidedbyimpactedecosystemsmaybeaffected,thusaffectinggroupsinsocietywhodependontheseservicesfortheirwell-being.Peoplemayrespondtochangesinthevalueofecosystemservicesandactaccordingly,thusleadingtonewsocial/economicchanges.Goodparticipatoryscopingandapplicationofthebestavailablescientificandlocalknowledgeresultsintheidentificationofmostrelevantimpactsandassociatedcause-effectchainsthatneedfurtherstudyintheSEA.

Figure6.2.Assessmentframework(explanationinmaintext)

Identifyingimpactsonecosystemservicesresultingfromindirectdriversofchange(activity2infigure6.2)isamorechallengingtask.Asthefigureshows,thelinksbetweenindirectanddirectdriversofchangehavenotyetbeenfullyestablished.ThescenariodevelopmentundertheMAprovidesfurtherelaborationofthelinkagesbetweenindirectanddirectdriversofchangeinbiodiversity.

Identifyingpotentialbiodiversityimpactsthroughbiodiversitytriggers

Trigger1: Theareainfluencedbythepolicy,planorprogrammeprovidesimportantecosystemservices:

Focus:Area-orientedpolicies,plansorprogrammeswithoutpreciselydefinedactivities.Biodiversitycan

activity 1activity 1

soc ia l &m icro -

econom icchanges

soc ia l &m icro -

econom icchanges

b ioph ys ica lchanges

(in land , w a te r,a ir, flo ra fauna)

bioph ys ica lchanges

(in land , w a te r,a ir, flo ra fauna)

ecosystem s(com position ,

s tructu re & keyprocesses)

ecosystem s(com position ,

s tructu re & keyprocesses)

hum an w ell-be ingbasic m ate ria lhea lthsocia l re la tionssecurityfreedom

hum an w ell-be ingbasic m ate ria lhea lthsocia l re la tionssecurityfreedom

B iod ivers ity trigger 2


Ind irec t drivers ofchange

• dem ography• sc ience &

techno logy• cu ltu ra l & re lig ious• m acro -econom ic

Ind irec t drivers ofchange

• dem ography• sc ience &

techno logy• cu ltu ra l & re lig ious• m acro -econom ic

activity 2activity 2

?


d irec t driver(s) o f change

ecosystem serv ices

ind irec t drivers ofchange

52


bedescribedintermsofecosystemservicesprovidinggoodsandservicesforthedevelopmentand/orwell-beingofpeopleandsociety.Themaintenanceofbiodiversity(forfuturegenerationsorbecausebiodiversityisconsidered tohavean intrinsicvalue) isoftenemphasisedasa specialecosystemservice,described interms of conservation status of ecosystem, habitats and species, possibly supported by legal protectionmechanisms;

Thistriggerisoftenassociatedwiththe‘bottomup’opportunitiesandconstraintsofthenaturalenvironmentapproach,asmaybeusedinlanduseplanning/spatialplanningwhereinterventionsarepotentiallywide-rangingandtheobjectiveistodevelopsuitablelandusesinlinewiththenaturalconditions;

Summaryofprocedure:

•Identifyecosystemsandland-usetypesintheareatowhichthepolicy,planorprogrammeapplies(human land-use can be considered as an attempt by humankind to maximise one or few specificecosystemservices,forexampleproductivityinagriculture,oftenatthecostofotherservices).Identifyandmapecosystemservicesprovidedbytheseecosystemsorland-usetypes;•Identifywhichgroupsinsocietyhaveastakeineachecosystemservice;invitesuchstakeholderstoparticipateintheSEAprocess.Identificationandvaluationofecosystemservicesisaniterativeprocessinitiatedbyexperts(ecologists,naturalresourcesspecialists)butwithstakeholdersplayinganequallyimportantrole.Thefrequencyofrelianceonecosystemgoodsorservicesshouldnotnecessarilybeusedasanindicationormeasureoftheirvaluebecauseecosystemservicesonwhichlocalcommunitiesrelyevenonanoccasionalbasiscanbecriticaltotheresilienceandsurvivalofthesecommunitiesduringsurpriseorextremenaturalconditions;• For absent stakeholders (future generations), identify important protected and non-protectedbiodiversitywhichisrepresentativeofspecies,habitatsand/orkeyecologicalandevolutionaryprocesses(forexamplebyapplyingsystematicconservationplanningorsimilarapproaches);•Ecosystemservicesidentifiedbyexpertsbutwithoutactualstakeholdersmayrepresentanunexploitedopportunity for social, economic or ecological development. Similarly, ecosystem services withconflictingstakeholdersmayindicateoverexploitationofthisservicerepresentingaproblemthatneedstobeaddressed.

Trigger 2: The policy, plan or programme is concerned with interventions producing direct drivers ofchange:

Focus:Asexplainedabove,interventionsresultingfromapolicy,planorprogrammecandirectly,orthroughsocio-economicchanges,leadtobiophysicalchangesthataffectecosystemsandservicesprovidedbytheseecosystems.Impactsonecosystemservicescanonlybedefinedaspotentialimpacts,sincethelocationoftheinterventionortheareawhereitsinfluenceisnoticedmaynotbeknown;

This trigger is often associated with policies, plans or programmes without defined geographical area ofintervention,suchassectoralpolicies,orpolicies,plansorprogrammesproducingsocial/economicdriversofchangewhichcannotbegeographicallydemarcated;

Summaryofprocedure:

•Identifydriversofchange,i.e.activitiesleadingtobiophysicalchangesknowntoaffectbiodiversity(seebox6.3);•Withintheadministrativeboundaries(province,state,country)towhichthepolicy,planorprogrammeapplies,identifyecosystemssensitivetotheexpectedbiophysicalchanges.Withintheseadministrativeboundaries sensitive ecosystem can be identified. The SEA needs to develop a mechanism to avoid,mitigateorcompensatepotentialnegativeimpactstotheseecosystemsincludingtheidentificationoflessdamagingalternatives.

Triggers1and2combined:Thepolicy,planorprogrammeconcernsactivitiesproducingdirectdriversofchangeinanareawithimportantecosystemservices:

53


Focus:Knowledgeofthenatureofinterventionsandtheareaofinfluenceallowsrelativelydetailedassessmentof potential impacts by defining changes in composition or structure of ecosystems, or changes in keyprocessesmaintainingecosystemsandassociatedecosystemservices;

ThiscombinationoftriggersisoftenassociatedwithSEAscarriedoutforprogrammes(resemblingcomplex,large-scaleEIAs).Examplesaredetailedspatialplans,programmelevellocationandroutingalternativesortechnologyalternatives;

Summary of procedure: The procedure is a combination of the procedures for trigger 1 and 2, but thecombinationallowsforgreaterdetailindefiningexpectedimpacts:

•Identifydirectdriversofchangeanddefinetheirspatialandtemporalrangeofinfluence;• Identify ecosystems lying within this range of influence (in some cases species or genetic levelinformationmaybeneeded);• Describe effects of identified drivers of change on identified ecosystems in terms of changes incompositionor structureofbiodiversity,or changes inkeyprocesses responsible for thecreationormaintenanceofbiodiversity;•Ifadriverofchangesignificantlyaffectseithercomposition,orstructure,orakeyprocess,thereisaveryhighprobabilitythatecosystemsservicesprovidedbytheecosystemwillbesignificantlyaffected;•Identifystakeholdersoftheseecosystemservicesandinvitethemtoparticipateintheprocess.Takeintoaccounttheabsent(future)stakeholders.

Trigger 3: The policy, plan or programme is concerned with interventions affecting indirect drivers ofchange.

Anexampleofsuchatriggerwouldbetradeliberalisationintheagriculturalsectorandtheeffectsthismighthaveonbiodiversity.AstudycarriedoutwithintheframeworkoftheConventiononBiologicalDiversitysynthesisedexistingapproachesandassessmentframeworks23.1

Baseline conditions, trends and characteristics of the production and socio-economic systemsdeterminewhether indirectconsequenceswill affectbiodiversity.ThisSEAworkswithacombinationofeconomic modelling studies, empirical evidence from literature, case-study analysis and causal chainanalysis.Biodiversityimpactisdescribedinverybroadterms,mainlyaschangesinsurfaceareaandspeciesrichness.Groupingsofcountrieswithcomparablecharacteristicsarestudiedinfurtherdetailbyselectingonecountrypergroupinginwhichanin-depthcase-studyiscarriedout.Thedifficultyintheidentificationofbiodiversity-relatedimpactsliesinthedefinitionofimpactmechanism. More research and case material is needed to elaborate this biodiversity trigger. The MAmethodology is potentially valuable to identify linkages between indirect and direct drivers of change.The scenarios working group of the MA considered the possible evolution of ecosystem services duringthetwenty-firstcenturybydevelopingfourglobalscenariosexploringplausiblefuturechangesindrivers,ecosystems,ecosystemservices,andhumanwell-being.Thereportsonglobalandsub-globalassessmentsmayalsoprovidesuitablematerial. Figure6.3providesasummaryoverviewofthewayinwhichpotentialbiodiversityimpactsofapolicy,planorprogrammecanbeidentified.Itstartswiththeidentificationofpotentialbiodiversitytriggersinthepolicy,planorprogrammetobeanalysed,including:(i)anareawithvaluedecosystemservices;(ii)activitiesaffectingdirectdriversofchange;(iii)activitiesaffectingindirectdriversofchange;oracombinationof(i)and(ii)whereactivitieswithknowndriversofchangeinfluenceaknownareawithvaluedecosystemservices.Ifoneofthesetriggersispresentinthepolicy,planorprogramme,theflowchartshowsthetypeofinformationthatcanandshouldbeobtainedintheSEAprocess.Thelinkbetweenindirectanddirectdriversofchangeischaracterisedbycomplexinteractions,manyofwhicharepresentlysubjecttointenseresearcheffortsworldwide.

23 SeeUNEP/CBD/COP/7/INF/15.

54


Figure 6.3. Summary overview of procedure to define biodiversity impacts starting with one or acombinationofbiodiversitytriggers.

Theappendixtothepresentguidanceprovidesasummaryoverviewoftheconditionsunderwhichastrategicenvironmentalassessmentshouldplaceparticularattentiontobiodiversityissuesandhowtheyshouldbeaddressed.

a ffectedstakeho lders


com position ,s tructure or ke yprocess a ffected

im pact onecos ystem services

im pact onecos ystem services1 & 2

area known ecos ystem s known poten tia lly a ffec tedecos ystem services

po ten tia lly a ffec tedecos ystem services1

activity withb iophysica lconsequences

po ten tia lly a ffec tedecos ystem s


d irect d rivers o fchange known2

scenario deve lopm ent(b lack box?)

activity withou tb iophysica lconsequences

ind irect d rivers o fchange known3





im pact onecos ystem services1 & 2 a ffected

stakeho ldersa ffectedstakeho lders



im pact onecos ystem services1 & 2

area known ecos ystem s known poten tia lly a ffec tedecos ystem services

po ten tia lly a ffec tedecos ystem services1 area known ecos ystem s known poten tia lly a ffec tedecos ystem services

po ten tia lly a ffec tedecos ystem services1









scenario deve lopm ent(b lack box?)



C om plex in teractions





55


APPENDIX:Summary overview of when and how to address biodiversity in SEA

Biodiversity triggers in policy, plan or programme

When is biodiversity attention needed How to address biodiversity issues

Trigger1

Areaknowntoprovideimportantecosystemservices

Doesthepolicy,planorprogrammeinfluence:

Importantecosystemservices,bothprotected(formal)ornon-protected(stakeholdervalues)Areaswithlegaland/orinternationalstatus;

Importantbiodiversitytobemaintainedforfuturegenerations

Areafocus

Systematicconservationplanningfornon-protectedbiodiversity.

Ecosystemservicesmapping.

Linkecosystemservicestostakeholders.Invitestakeholdersforconsultation.

Trigger2

Policy,planorprogrammeaffectingdirectdriversofchange(i.e.biophysicalandnon-biophysicalinterventionswithbiophysicalconsequencesknowntoaffectecosystemservices)

Doesthepolicy,planorprogrammeleadto:

Biophysicalchangesknowntosignificantlyaffectecosystemservices(e.g.landconversion,fragmentation,emissions,introductions,extraction,etc.)

Non-biophysicalchangeswithknownbiophysicalconsequences(e.g.relocation/migrationofpeople,migrantlabour,changeinland-usepractices,enhancedaccessibility,marginalisation).

Focusondirectdriversofchangeandpotentiallyaffectedecosystem

Identifydriversofchange,i.e.biophysicalchangesknowntoaffectbiodiversity.

Withinadministrativeboundariestowhichthepolicy,planorprogrammeapplies,identifyecosystemssensitivetoexpectedbiophysicalchanges.

Combinedtriggers1&2

Interventionswithknowndirectdriversofchangeaffectingareawithknownecosystemservices

Combinationoftriggers1and2above Knowledgeofinterventionandareaofinfluenceallowspredictionofimpactsoncompositionorstructureofbiodiversityoronkeyprocessesmaintainingbiodiversity

Focusondirectdriversofchange,i.e.biophysicalchangesknowntoaffectbiodiversity.Definespatialandtemporalinfluence.

Identifyecosystemswithinrangeofinfluence.

Defineimpactsofdriversofchangeoncomposition,structure,orkeyprocesses.

Describeaffectedecosystemsservicesandlinkservicestostakeholders.

InvitestakeholdersintoSEAprocess.Takeintoaccounttheabsent(future)stakeholders.

56


Trigger3

Policy, plan orprogramme affectingindirect drivers ofchange, but withoutdirect biophysicalconsequences

Are indirect drivers of change affectingthewayinwhichasociety:

producesorconsumesgoods,occupieslandandwater,orexploitsecosystemservices?

Moreresearchandcasematerialneeded

MAmethodologypotentiallyvaluabletoidentify linkages between indirect anddirectdriversofchange.

57


Annex 1: Case study contributions

Invited cases through IAIA’s Capacity Building on Biodiversity in Impact Assessment programme:SouthAfrica:Mhlathuzestrategiccatchmentassessment-atoolforsustainablelandusemanagement

andplanning.TheavanderWaterenIndia:EcologicalevaluationofthesiteproposedfornuclearpowerstationnearNagarjunasagar-

SrisailamTigerReserve.AshaRajvanshi&VinodMathurIndia:SEAofproposedHumanRiverirrigationproject,MaharashtraState.AshaRajvanshi&Vinod

MathurNepal: Biodiversity considerations in strategic environmental assessment A case of Nepal water

plan.BatuKrishnaUpretyPakistan:NationalConservationStrategy–pavingthewayforSEA.IUCNPakistanAhmadSaeed

Contributions received through the IAIA network:UnitedKingdom:IntegrationofbiodiversityissuesintoSEA.CasestudySomersetCountyCouncil.

LarryBurrowsUnitedKingdom:SEAof theLowerParrettandToneFloodManagementStrategy,Somerset. Jo

TreweekBelgium:SigmaPlan:floodsafetyintheScheldtrivervalleyanditstributaries.ResourceAnalysis,

BelgiumEuropeanUnion:Integratedimpactassessmentofinternationaltradepolicyandagreements:the

EU’saustainabilityimpactassessmentsofproposedWTOagreementsonagricultureandforestproducts.CliveGeorge

Draft publications from the Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, special issue on Biodiversity in SEA(Volume7,No.2,June2005):

Sweden: Impacts of region-wide urban development on biodiversity in SEA. Berit Balfors, UllaMörtberg,PeterBrokking&MikaelGontier.

SouthAfrica:Systematicbiodiversityplanning in theCapefloristicregionandsucculentKaroo,South Africa: enabling sound spatial development frameworks and improved impactassessment.SusieBrownlie.

TheNetherlands:BiodiversityinSEAforspatialplans–5ExperiencesfromTheNetherlands.ArendKolhoff&RoelSlootweg.

Prepared by the Netherlands Commission for Environmental Assessment:Bolivia:SEAontheSantaCruz–PuertoSuarezCorridor.TheNetherlands:SEAforthepolicyplanforthesupplyofdrinkingwaterandIndustrialwater.TheNetherlands:Partialrevisionofthenationalpolicyonshellmining.TheNetherlands.SEAontheroutingoftheZandmaas/Maasroute.

58


Annex 2: Important features of the Ecosystem Approach

Convention decisions.

TheecosystemapproachwasendorsedbytheConventiononBiologicalDiversityin2001(DecisionV/6).Theoriginaldocumentcontained12principlesandadditionalguidanceonimplementation.furtherguidancewasprovidedinadocumentrefiningandelaboratingtheapproach,basedonanassessmentofexperiencesintheimplementationoftheapproach(DecisionVII/11).Aselectivesummaryoftheapproachisprovidedbelow,differentiatingpotentialrolesofprivateandpublicsectorsandcivilsociety. TheecosystemapproachisconsideredtheprimaryframeworkforaddressingthethreeobjectivesoftheBiodiversityConvention-conservation,sustainableuseandequitablesharingofbenefitsderivedfrombiodiversity-inabalancedway. TheConferenceofPartiesof theconventionrecommendsParties (memberstates) toundertakefocussedactivitiesinpartnershipwiththeprivatesectortodeepentheunderstandingandfurtherapplicationoftheapproach.

The ecosystem approach

Theecosystemapproachisastrategyfortheintegratedmanagementofland,waterandlivingresources.TheapplicationoftheecosystemapproachwillhelptoreachabalanceofallthreeobjectivesoftheConvention:conservation;sustainableuseandfairandequitablesharingofbenefitsarisingfromtheutilisationofgeneticresources.Inaddition,theecosystemapproachhasbeenrecognisedbytheWorldSummitonSustainableDevelopmentasanimportantinstrumentforenhancingsustainabledevelopmentandpovertyalleviation. The ecosystem approach is based on the application of appropriate scientific methodologiesfocusedonlevelsofbiologicalorganisation,whichencompasstheessentialstructure,processes,functionsand interactionsamongorganismsand theirenvironment. It recognises thathumans,with theirculturaldiversity,areanintegralcomponentofmanyecosystems.

The ecosystem approach provides an integrating framework for implementation of objectives of theConvention.Theapproachincorporatesthreeimportantconsiderations:

(a) Managementoflivingcomponentsisconsideredalongsideeconomicandsocialconsiderationsattheecosystem level of organisation;notsimplyafocusonmanagingspeciesandhabitats;(b) Ifmanagementofland,water,andlivingresourcesinequitablewaysistobesustainable,itmustbeintegratedandworkwithin the natural boundariesandutilisethenaturalfunctioningofecosystems;(c) Ecosystem management is a social process. Many interested communities must be involvedthroughthedevelopmentofefficientandeffectivestructuresandprocesses fordecision-makingandmanagement.

Thereisnosinglecorrectwaytoachievetheecosystemapproachtomanagementofland,water,andlivingresources.Theunderlyingprinciplescanbe translatedflexibly toaddressmanagement issues indifferentsocialcontexts.

Thereareanumberofoptionsforimplementationofingtheecosystemapproach.Accordingtotheconventiontexttheprinciplescanbeincorporatedintothedesignandimplementationofnationalbiodiversitystrategiesand action plans and regional strategies, or incorporate the ecosystem approach principles into policyinstruments,mainstreaminginplanningprocesses,andsectoralplans.Theconventiontexthasastrongfocusonresponsibilitiesofgovernmentauthorities,explainedbythefactthatsignatorypartiesoftheconventionarenationalgovernments.Anumberofprinciplesaretheprimeresponsibilityofgovernment,butothersmaybeequallytakenupbytheprivatesector,bycivilsocietyorcanbeinterpretedasasharedresponsibility.

59


Principles of the ecosystem approach

Theecosystemapproachisgovernedby12principles.

Principle1:Theobjectivesofmanagementofland,waterandlivingresourcesareamatterofsocietalchoice.Differentsectorsofsocietyviewecosystemsintermsoftheirowneconomic,culturalandsocietalneeds.Bothculturalandbiologicaldiversityarecentralcomponentsoftheecosystemapproach,andmanagementshould take this into account. Societal choices should be expressed as clearly as possible. Key-words intheaccompanyingguidelines refer to theprocessofdecisionmaking: transparencyofdecisionmaking,accountability,stakeholderinterests,equalaccesstoinformationofallinvolved,andequitablecapacitytobeinvolved(referringtolessprivilegedgroups).Theneedtoincludetheinterestsoffuturegenerationsishighlighted.

Consequences:thisprincipleisofutmostimportancetoallpartiesinvolvedinanydecisionmakingprocessinvolvingbiologicaldiversity(ornaturalresourcesingeneral),asitdefinesingeneraltermsthe“rulesofthegame”.

Principle2:Managementshouldbedecentralizedtothelowestappropriatelevel.Thisprincipleofsubsidiarityis well known; practical experience stresses the need for a mechanism to coordinate decisions andmanagementactionsatdifferentorganisationallevels.Furthermore,goodgovernancearrangementsaskforclear accountabilities. If no appropriate body is available at certain management level, a new body maybecreated,anexistingbodymodified,oradifferentlevelchosen.Withoutinstitutionalarrangementsthatsupportandcoordinatedecision-makingauthorities,theirworkisworthless.

Consequences: this principle relates to the so-called tiering in impact assessment, where governmentdevelopspolicies,plansandprogrammessubjecttostrategicenvironmentalassessment(SEA),while(lower)government and the private sector perform project-level environmental and social impact assessments.It is in the interest of the private sector that a mechanism for SEA is in place in order to clearly defineaccountabilities.

Principle3:Ecosystemmanagersshouldconsidertheeffects(actualorpotential)oftheiractivitiesonadjacentandotherecosystems.Effectsofinterventionsarenotconfinedtothepointofimpact,andcaninfluenceotherecosystems. Time-lags and non-linear processes are likely to occur. In case of effects elsewhere, relevantstakeholdersand technicalexpertisehave tobebrought together.Feed-backmechanisms tomonitor theeffectsofinterventionsshouldbeestablished.

Consequences:impactassessmentisthetooltoaddresstheseissues,atproject-levelbyaprojectproponent,atstrategiclevelbygovernmentauthorities.

Principle4:Recognizingpotentialgainsfrommanagement,thereisusuallyaneedtounderstandandmanagetheecosysteminaneconomiccontext.Anysuchecosystem-managementprogrammeshould:(a)Reducethosemarketdistortionsthatadverselyaffectbiologicaldiversity;(b)Alignincentivestopromotebiodiversityconservationandsustainableuse;(c)Internalizecostsandbenefitsinthegivenecosystemtotheextentfeasible.Manyecosystemsprovideeconomicallyvaluablegoodsandservicesanditisthereforenecessarytounderstandandmanageecosystemsinaneconomiccontext.Frequently,economicsystemsdonotmakeprovisionsforthemany,often,intangiblevaluesderivedfromecologicalsystems.Inthisregarditshouldbenotedthatecosystemgoodsandservicesarefrequentlyundervaluedineconomicsystems.Evenwhenvaluationiscomplete,mostenvironmentalgoodsandserviceshavethecharacteristicof“publicgoods” inaneconomicsense,whichare difficult to incorporate into markets. Deriving economic benefits is not necessarily inconsistent withattainingbiodiversityconservationandimprovementofenvironmentalquality.

Consequences:Theprivatesector,aswellasgovernmentauthorities,shouldincorporatesocialandeconomicvaluesofecosystemgoodsandservicesinimpactassessmentandresourcemanagementdecisions.

60


Principle 5: Conservation of ecosystem structure and functioning, in order to maintain ecosystem services,shouldbeaprioritytargetoftheecosystemapproach.Theconservationand,whereappropriate,restorationofecosysteminteractionsandprocessesisofgreatersignificanceforthelong-termmaintenanceofbiologicaldiversitythansimplyprotectionofspecies.Giventhecomplexityofecosystemfunctioning,managementmust focus on maintaining, and where appropriate restoring the key structures and ecological processesratherthanjustonindividualspecies.However,vulnerableandeconomicallyimportant,specieshavetobemonitoredtoavoidlossofbiodiversity.Managementofecosystemprocesseshastobecarriedoutdespiteincompleteknowledgeofecosystemfunctioning.

Consequences:Focusonmaintenanceofecosystemstructuresandkeyprocessesandavoidtoomuchfocusonspeciesonly.

Principle6:Ecosystemsmustbemanagedwithinthelimitsoftheirfunctioning.Therearelimitstothelevelofdemandthatcanbeplacedonanecosystemwhilemaintainingitsintegrityandcapacitytocontinueprovidingthegoodsandservicesthatprovidethebasisforhumanwell-beingandenvironmentalsustainability.

Consequences:Ourcurrentunderstandingisinsufficienttoallowtheselimitstobepreciselydefined,andthereforeaprecautionaryapproachlinkedtoadaptivemanagement,isadvised.Dependingontherigourofthescopingprocedure,impactassessmentprocedurescaterfortheprecautionaryapproach;anenvironmentalmanagementplanwouldhavetodefinetheconsequencesofadaptivemanagement.

Principle7:Theecosystemapproachshouldbeundertakenattheappropriatespatialandtemporalscales.Failuretotakescaleintoaccountcanresultinmismatchesbetweenthespatialandtimeframesofthemanagementandthoseoftheecosystembeingmanaged.

Consequences:Giventhatecosystemcomponentsandprocessesarelinkedacrossscalesofbothtimeandspace,managementinterventionsneedtobeplannedtotranscendthesescales.Developinganestedhierarchyofspatialscalesmaybeappropriateinsomecircumstances.Project-levelEIAisoftennotsufficienttodealwiththesescales;higherlevelSEAprovidesasystematicapproachtosuchanestedhierarchy.

Principle 8: Recognising the varying temporal scales and lag-effects that characterise ecosystem processes,objectivesforecosystemmanagementshouldbesetforthelongterm.Managementsystemstendtooperateatrelativelyshorttimescales,oftenmuchshorterthanthetimescalesforchangeinecosystemprocesses.

Consequences:Adaptivemanagementshouldtakeintoaccounttrade-offsbetweenshort-termbenefitsandlong-termgoalsindecision-makingprocesses.Theprivatesectorisprimarilyinterestedinthelife-timeofaproject;politicaldecisionmakinghastoaddresslong-termobjectivesthatcreatetheboundaryconditionsforactivities.

Principle9: Managementmustrecognisethatchangeisinevitable.Naturalandhuman-inducedchangeinecosystemsisinevitable;thereforemanagementobjectivesshouldnotbeconstruedasfixedoutcomesbutratherthemaintenanceofnaturalecologicalprocesses.Traditionalknowledgeandpractisemayenablebetterunderstandingofecosystemchangeandhelpindevelopingadaptationmeasures.

Consequences:Thenotionthatmaintenanceofecologicalprocessesismoreimportantthanfixedoutcomesmayinsomecasesbearimportantconsequencesfortheformulationofenvironmentalmanagementplans.Besidestechnicalknowledge,localknowledgealsoprovidesrelevantclues.

Principle 10: The ecosystem approach should seek the appropriate balance between, and integration of,conservation and use of biological diversity. Biological resources provide goods and services on whichhumanityultimatelydepends.Therehasbeenatendencyinthepasttomanagecomponentsofbiologicaldiversityeitherasprotectedornon-protected.Thereisaneedforashifttomoreflexiblesituations,whereconservationanduseareseenincontextandthefullrangeofmeasures isappliedinacontinuum,fromstrictlyprotectedtohuman-madeecosystems.

61


Consequences: impact assessment should not be limited to looking at presence of protected areas only.Areaswithimportantecosystemservices,notnecessarilyprotected,mayalsorequirespecialmanagementmeasures. Extensive stakeholder consultation is an important tool in identifying important biodiversity-relatedgoodsandservices.

Principle11: Theecosystemapproachshouldconsiderall formsofrelevantinformation,includingscientificandindigenousandlocalknowledge, innovationsandpractices. Informationfromallsourcesiscriticaltoarrivingateffectiveecosystemmanagementstrategies.Sharingofinformationwithallstakeholdersisequallyimportant.

Consequences:Aswellas technical information,knowledge,experienceandperceptionsof stakeholders,local populations may provide important insights in the effect of proposed management interventions /decisions.Sharingknowledge is fundamental foreffectiveparticipationofstakeholders.For the industry,sharingofsometimesclassifiedinformationmayposedifficulties,especiallyinearlystagesofdevelopment.Nevertheless,itshouldbestressedthatactivesharingofinformationandknowledgecreatesabetterbasisoftrust,asenseofownership,andoverallsupportforanactivity.

Principle12: Theecosystemapproachshouldinvolveallrelevantsectorsofsocietyandscientificdisciplines.The integrated management of land, water and living resources requires increased communication andcooperation,(i)betweensectors,(ii)atvariouslevelsofgovernment(national,provincial,local),and(iii)amonggovernments,civilsocietyandprivatesectorstakeholders.

Consequences: Procedures and mechanisms should be established to ensure effective participation of allrelevantstakeholdersandactorsduringtheconsultationprocesses,decisionmakingonmanagementgoalsandactions.Government,industryandcivilsocietyhaveasharedresponsibilitytoachieverealsustainability.

62


Annex 3. Additional Information on the SEA

The advantages of SEA

SEAmeetstheneedformoreholistic,integratedandbalancedstrategicdecisionmakingascalledforinmanyinitiatives, includingthe2002WorldSummitonSustainableDevelopment.Also,SEAservesMillenniumDevelopment Goal 7 to ‘integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies andprogrammesandhelpsreversethelossofenvironmentalresources.’

The final objective of SEA is to contribute to sustainable development, poverty reduction and goodgovernance.AdvantagesofSEAtodecisionmakersare:

• Enhanced credibility of their decisions in the eyes of stakeholders, leading to swifterimplementation;• Improved economic efficiency because potential environmental stumbling blocks for economicdevelopmentarebetterknown;• ThebroaderapproachofSEAkeepstheprocessawareofpromisingalternatives• Abetterunderstandingofthecumulativeimpactofaseriesofsmallerprojects, thuspreventingcostlyandunnecessarymistakes;• Betterinsightinthetrade-offsbetweenenvironmental,economicandsocialissues,enhancingthechanceoffindingwin-winoptions;• Moreknowledgeofthesocialfeasibilityofadecision,thusavoidingresistancefromunhappylocalgroups,badimageforplanners,uselessmitigatingmeasuresandsimplymissingthebiggerpicture;• Easierassessmentattheprojectlevelbecausestrategicdiscussions,e.g.onlocations,havealreadybeenbroughttoaconclusion.

SEA and EIA: a hierarchy of tiered instruments

SEA is described as a tiered or layered process in which decisions on a higher level influence decisionmakingatlowerlevel.Inanidealisedsituationtheprocessstartswithapolicybroadlydescribingobjectivesandsettingthecontextforproposedactions,usuallywithasectoralorgeographicscope.Policyobjectivesaretranslatedintoanactionplan,furtheroperationalisedinprogrammes;actualimplementationisdonethroughprojects(seefigure).Impactassessmentatprojectlevelisgovernedby,oftenlegallyembedded,EIAprocedures,whileimpactassessmentforpolicies,plansandprogrammesisdonethroughSEA. SEAaimstocomplementproject-levelEIA.EIAislimitedinthedevelopmentofalternativessincehigherstrategicdecisionshavealreadybeentaken.SEAcanhelpstreamlineEIAprocesses,particularlyifitisundertakeninatieredmannerupstreamfromprojectconsiderations–atthelevelofpolicies,plansandprogrammes.SEAsatthislevelwillconsiderbroaderenvironmentalissueslikelytobecommontomultipleprojectinitiativesinasectororinaregion.ItcanthushavetheeffectoffocusingsubsequentEIAprocesseson impacts specific to individualproposals–and therefore improvingefficiencyandeffectivenessof theoverallprocess.

63


Hierarchyofpolicies,plansandprogrammes:anexamplefromtheNetherlands

CharacteristicsofSEAandEIA

SEA EIA

takesplaceatearlierstagesofthedecisionmakingcycle takesplaceattheendofthedecisionmakingcycle

pro-active approach to help development ofproposals reactiveapproachtodevelopmentofproposals

considersbroadrangeofpotentialalternatives considerslimitednumberoffeasiblealternativesearlywarningofcumulativeeffects limitedreviewofcumulativeeffects

N ational po licy on w aterquan tity m anagem ent

reg iona l rivers coast

N ational p lan fo r upper andlow er de lta rivers .

U pper de lta Low er delta

R eg ional p rog ram m e todeve lop in te rvention packagesfor the low er de lta rivers

M euse R hine Lek

P ro ject in te rventions a long riverM euse

O verd iep other pro jec ts

W ater m anag em ent in the 21 st cen tu ry. Three-s tep stra tegy: ( i) re ta in ing , (ii) s to ring and (iii)d ra in ing , to m in im ise the pass ing on of w ater-re la ted prob lem s.

S pace for R ivers . G uarantee in land sa fe ty undercond itions of increased d ischarges through m a jorrivers , th rough prov is ion of space for rivers .

S pace for low er delta rive rs . D esign of (cost-)e ffec tive in te rvention packages in low er de lta ,fo llow ing the three step stra tegy.

F lood m itigation in O verd iep po lder. M easuresto a llow em ergency flood ing of M euse river in a500 ha po lder, sa feguard ing spatia l qua lity ,agricu ltu ra l functions and fa rm steads.

64


emphasis on meeting objectives and maintainingsystems emphasisonmitigatingandminimisingimpacts

broader perspective and lower level of detail toprovideavisionandoverallframework narrowerperspectiveandhigherlevelofdetail

multistage process, continuing and iterative,overlappingcomponents well-definedprocess,clearbeginningandend

focuses on sustainability agenda and sources ofenvironmentaldeterioration

focuses on standard agenda and symptoms ofenvironmentaldeterioration

ThekeystepsofSEAresemblethoseinEIA.However,theactualtasksduringthosestepsmaybequitedifferent.

StepsinSEAandEIA

SEA EIA

Screening Mostlydecidedcasebycase Projects requiring EA are oftenlisted

Scoping Combination of political agenda, stake-holderdiscussionandexpertjudgement

Combination of local issues andtechnicalchecklists

Public participation Focusonrepresentativebodies OftenincludegeneralpublicAssessment Morequalitative(expertjudgement) Morequantitative

Quality review Bothqualityofinformationandstakeholderprocess Focusonqualityofinformation

Decision making Comparison of alternatives against policyobjectives

Comparison against norms andstandards

Monitoring Focusonplanimplementation Focus on measuring actualimpacts

IAIA Performance Criteria on SEA242

Agood-qualityStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment(SEA)processinformsplanners,decisionmakersandaffectedcommunitiesonthesustainabilityofstrategicdecisions,facilitatesthesearchforthebestalternativeandensuresademocraticdecision-makingprocess.Thisenhancesthecredibilityofdecisionsandleadstomorecost-andtime-effectiveEAattheprojectlevel.Forthispurpose,agood-qualitySEAprocess:

Is integrated• Ensures an appropriate environmental assessment of all strategic decisions relevant for theachievementofsustainabledevelopment.• Addressestheinterrelationshipsofbiophysical,socialandeconomicaspects.• Is tiered to policies in relevant sectors and (transboundary) regions and, where appropriate, toprojectEIAanddecisionmaking.

Is sustainability-led • Facilitates identification of development options and alternative proposals that are more

sustainable.

Is focused 24 IAIASpecialPublicationSeriesNo.1.StrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentPerformanceCriteria.(http://www.iaia.org/Non_Members/Pubs_Ref_Material/pubs_ref_material_index.htm)

65


• Provides sufficient, reliable and usable information for development planning and decisionmaking.• Concentratesonkeyissuesofsustainabledevelopment.• Iscustomisedtothecharacteristicsofthedecisionmakingprocess.• Iscost-andtime-effective.

Is accountable • Istheresponsibilityoftheleadingagenciesforstrategicdecisionstobetaken.• Iscarriedoutwithprofessionalism,rigor,fairness,impartialityandbalance.• Issubjecttoindependentchecksandverification.• Documentsandjustifieshowsustainabilityissuesweretakenintoaccountindecisionmaking.

Is participative • Informsandinvolvesinterestedandaffectedpublicandgovernmentbodiesthroughoutthedecisionmakingprocess.• Explicitlyaddressestheirinputsandconcernsindocumentationanddecisionmaking.• Hasclear,easily-understoodinformationrequirementsandensuressufficientaccesstoallrelevantinformation.

Is iterative • Ensuresavailabilityoftheassessmentresultsearlyenoughtoinfluencethedecision-makingprocess

andinspirefutureplanning.• Providessufficientinformationontheactualimpactsofimplementingastrategicdecision,tojudge

whetherthisdecisionshouldbeamendedandtoprovideabasisforfuturedecisions.

66


Annex 4: Summary of lessons from case studies on biodiversity in SEA

Thissectiondiscussesanumberofissuesinsomemoredetail,makinguseofthecasematerialwhichhasbeencollectedintheprocessofpreparingtheseguidelines.

1. Biodiversity trigger 1: PPP affecting an area with known ecosystem services

Twocasestudies,bothfromSouthAfricahavebeenanalysedasexamplesofthiscategory.Thefirstcaseprovides evidenceof the economicand social sense itmakes tomaintainbiodiversity for the services itprovides. It shows a good example of mapping and monetisation of ecosystem services in a knowngeographical area as an input for informed decision making on priorities for interventions. It stronglyemphasisesthevalueoftheconceptofecosystemservicesasameanstotranslatebiodiversityinformationintospatialplanningandthelanguageofdecisionmakers.

•AnSEAhasbeencarriedout for theplanningofopenspace inUmhlathuze,arapidlydevelopingandurbanisingmunicipality inSouthAfrica.Rivercatchmentsprovidedaneffectiveenvironmentalentityforassessingsynergisticimpactsofurbandevelopment.Astrategiccatchmentassessmenthadtoprovidecriteriaformeasuresofprotectionandplanningofdevelopmentinnon-developedlands.Itaccountedforthebalancebetweensupplyofenvironmentalgoodsandservicesprovidedbythenaturalenvironment and the demand for these goods and services by people. A status quo report of eachcatchment indicated required management actions where needed. Important benefits derived fromecosystem services included water supply and regulation, flood and draught management, nutrientcyclingandwastemanagement;these‘free’ecosystemservicesprovidedacalculatedeconomicbenefitofR1.7billionannually.Monetisationofecosystemservicesmadedecisionmakersreactmuchmoreopenly to the need for conservation measures, even when reputed for not listening to biodiversityarguments25.1.

Thesecondcaseprovidesamechanismtofocusonmaintenanceofbiodiversityasanecosystemservicetofuturegenerations.Uniqueandimportantbiodiversityneedstobepreservedinasituationofoverwhelmingpresenceofnon-protectedbiodiversity,withoutjeopardisingtheneedofthecountrytodevelop.

•Since2000,municipalitiesinSouthAfricanhavetoprepareSpatialDevelopmentFrameworksandcarryoutassociatedSEAs.IntworegionssystematicbiodiversityplanningwasappliedtosupportthisprocessinanattempttoimproveeffectiveconsiderationofbiodiversityinEnvironmentalAssessment.MostbiodiversityinSouthAfrica,includingpriorityareasforconservation,doesnotfallwithinexistingprotectedareas.Changinglandusepatternshaveamajorimpactonbiodiversity.UndersuchconditionssoundSEAinland-useplanningiscriticaltodecisionmaking.Systematicbiodiversityplanningaimsatconservingarepresentativesampleofspecies/habitatsandkeyecologicalandevolutionaryprocesses.Thefocusonpriorityareasallowsforrecognitionofcompetinglandusesanddevelopmentneeds.Itsetstargetforconservationanddefineslimitsofacceptablechangewithinwhichhumanimpactshavetobekept.Althoughdrivenbyconservationobjectives,theprocessisverysimilartoSEAandoutputsareeasilyintegratedintheSEAprocess26.2.

The combination of the two South African cases provides an excellent example of how to combineconservationofbiodiversityanditsecosystemsservicesforfuturegenerationswhenprotectionis largelylacking,withpresent-daysustainableuseofbiodiversityderivedecosystemservices. Translating biodiversity into ecosystem services is an effective means to make biodiversitytangible in impactassessment. Servicesrepresentecological,socialandeconomicvaluesforsocietyandcan consequently be linked to stakeholders. Stakeholders can speak on behalf of biodiversity and canconsequently be involved in an SEA process. A case from the UK showed that by taking an ecosystem25 VanderWateren,Thea,Diederichs,Nicci,Mander,Myles,Markewicz,TonyandO’Connor,Tim(2004)MhlathuzeStrategicCatchmentAssessment,Richardbay,SouthAfrica.CasestudycompiledforthedraftingofCBDguidelinesonBiodiversityinSEA.UMhlathuzeMunicipality26 Brownlie,S.,deVilliers,C.,Driver,A.,Job,N.AndVonHase,A.(2005).SystematicBiodiversityPlanningintheCapeFloristicRegionandSucculentKaroo,SouthAfrica:EnablingSoundSpatialDevelopmentFrameworksandImprovedImpactAs-sessment.JournalofEnvironmentalAssessmentPolicyandManagementSpecialEditiononSEAandBiodiversity.

67


servicesapproachwithactiveinvolvementofstakeholders,animportantcontributiontothedefinitionofviableSEAalternativeswasmade. The availability of Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) and Species Action Plans (SAPs) providedbiodiversityobjectives foranSEAona localfloodmanagement strategy in theUK.Within thewetlandecosystem, priority habitats and priority species have been defined in the BAP. Furthermore, ecosystemserviceswereconsideredanimportanteconomicassetoftheregion,withbiodiversitybasedtourismasthemostimportantsector.Opportunitiestousewetlandsforfloodattenuationprovidedadditionalimportantbenefits.Floodmanagementwasconsidered tobeakeydriverofchange,asflooding isakeyecologicalprocessinwetlands.Thestudyareawasdefinedonthebasisoflikelylimitsofimpacts.Fortheassessmentitwasconsideredappropriatetoidentifyrisksandthemainecologicalprocesseslikelytoaffectoutcomesforbiodiversityinrelationtoobjectivesforthearea.Publicparticipationwasaction-oriented,focussedonidentifyingpreferredchangestoachieveoutcomescompatiblewithstakeholderinterests;localknowledgewasanimportantsourceofinformation.Biodiversityspecialistswereabletoprovideeffectivefloodcontrolalternativesbasedonoptimisationoffloodattenuationasanecosystemservices27.3

Acase fromtheWaddensea in theNetherlandsshows thatnaturalecosystemsprovidemultipleservices.Exploitationofoneserviceleadstopotentialimpactsonotherswhenkeyecosystemprocessedareaffected.Stakeholder involvementreoriented theSEAstudy tobemore focussedon thesekeyprocesses,insteadoflookingattheexploitedecosystemserviceonly.

•TheNetherlandsnationalpolicyonlarge-scaleextractionofshellsinmarineenvironmentrequiredanSEA.Shellminingalsotakesplaceinprotectedareas,representingimportantinternationalecosystemservicesforthemaintenanceofpathwaysofmigratorybirdsandbreedinggroundsofNorthSeafish,tourism,etc.Focusofthepermittingprocedurewasonwhethershelldeposits(theecosystemservice)wasnotoverexploited;inotherwordsthenaturalregenerationofshelldepositswasstudiedinrelationtoexploitationpressure.However, theminingprocess itself also influenceskeyecologicalprocesses,essentialtootherecosystemservices.BottommorphologyandrelatedbottomlifewereconsequentlyincludedintheSEAstudy.Stakeholdercontributionshighlightedthelackofknowledgeonthefunctionofshellsandshellbanksintheecosystems.Asaresultmorealternativeswereincludedinthestudy.Thestudyconcludedthatnaturalre-growthfullycompensatesmining;itwasconcludedhoweverthatkeyecologicalprocessesshoulddefineminingconditions.Potentialmininglocationswererankedaccordingtheseconditions.Insmallpartsoftheareatheprecautionaryprinciplewasappliedbecausetoolittlewasknownonthefunctionofshellbanksandminingwasprohibited.Aninterestingequitydiscussionerupted.Shellminingwasamonopolisedbusiness;theSEAprocesstriggeredadiscussiononpublictenderproceduresforotherinterestedoperators.Thisrequestwasgranted28.4

AcasefromtheScheldtriverinBelgiumshowsthatrestorationandconservationofbiodiversitywassoughtafterasameanstooptimiseotherecosystemservicesprovidedbytheriver,representingsocialandeconomicvalues,inthiscasesafetyfromfloodingandnavigabilityandaccessibilityoftheAntwerpport.

•TheSigmaplanintendstoguaranteesafetyagainstinundationsinthevalleyoftheScheldtriveranditstributaries.Thestudyareaincorporatesover250kilometresofrivervalley.Mostofitissubjectedtotwice-dailytidesandmuchofthevalleywouldbeinundatedeverydaywereitnotforthepresenceofdikes.ThefreshwatertidalareasareuniquetoNorth-westernEurope.Constructionofdikesresultedinconsiderablelossoftheoriginalbiodiversityanditsfloodretentioncapacityasanecosystemservice.Partialrestorationofthisbiodiversityanditsassociatedfloodretentionfunctionisstillfeasible.NatureconservationwasanimportantelementintheSEA.However,natureconservationisnotseenasanendinitself,butasawaytoobtaina“solidandrobust”ecologicalsystemintheestuary,capableofsupportingintenseshippingactivities(accessibilityofAntwerpport).OtherecosystemservicesaddressedbytheSEAstudyarepollutionbreakdownandrecreation29.5

27 JoTreweek(2004).UnitedKingdom:StrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentoftheLowerParrettandToneFloodManage-mentStrategy,Somerset,England.CasestudycompiledforthedraftingofCBDguidelinesonBiodiversityinSEA.28 MarliesvanSchooten(2004)TheNetherlands:SEAfortheNationalPolicyPlanonShellmining.CasestudycompiledforthedraftingofCBDguidelinesonBiodiversityinSEA.SevSconsultants.29 MarcvanDijk(2005).SEAoftheSigmaplanforfloodsafetyandecologicalrestorationoftheScheldtriver.CasestudycompiledforthedraftingofCBDguidelinesonBiodiversityinSEA.ResourceAnalysis,Antwerp,Belgium.

68


The cases presented in this guidelines document are a selection of good-practice cases. In reality, manyaspectsofbiodiversitywilloftengounnoticedinSEAastheconceptofecosystemservicesdoesnotyetreceivewiderecognition.Asstatedearlier,manyoftheecosystemservicesareconsideredtobetheresponsibilityofsectordepartments(fisheries,irrigationdepartment,publicworksdepartment,etc.)withoutanobviouslinktobiodiversity-relatedissuesandusuallydon’tconsidertheiractivitiesinanintegrated,cross-sectoralmanner.Thisexplainsthatmanyecosystemservicesgounnoticed,thuslosinganopportunitytodescribethe actual values of biodiversity. In summary: ecosystem services are linked and interdependent. SEAfocusedonbiodiversitycanhelptoshowtheselinksandthuspreventtheoptimisationofoneservicecausingdegradationofanother,equallyvaluableorevenmorevaluableservice.

2. Biodiversity trigger 2: PPP producing direct drivers of change

Directdriversofchangearehumaninterventions(activities)leadingtobiophysicalandsocialchangeswithknown impactsonecosystemsandassociatedecosystemservices.Twocases illustrate that evenwithoutconcreteknowledgeofwhereactivitiesor impactsaregeographically located, thereareways todescribebiodiversityimpactingeneralterms,designmitigationmeasures,andprovideguidanceforfurtherstudyatlowerlevelofassessment.ThefirstcasefromtheNetherlandsillustratesasectoralpolicywithoutpredefinedlocationsofinterventionsbutwithacleardriverofchange,i.e.achangeinhydrologyofsurfacewatersandundergroundaquifers.

• The SEA for the Netherlands National Policy on Water Supply focussed on the most importantbiophysicaleffectofwaterextraction,i.e.achangeinthehydrologyofundergroundaquifersandsurfacewaters.Amajorissueatnationalscaleisthedesiccationofvarioustypesoflandscapes,predominantlyoldland-usetypes,primarilyconvertedwetlands,richinbiodiversityandhighlyvaluedforcharacteristic“Dutch” landscape features. Quantitative information on potential impacts of water extraction wasconsiderednecessary.Thenationalscaleofthestudyforcedthestudyteamtofocusonsimplevegetationindicationsforhydrologicalchanges.Combinationofpotentialhydrologicalchanges(modelled)withnationallyavailablevegetationdataprovidedacomputationalmodelidentifyingpotentiallysensitiveareasthatrequirespecialattention.Thisinformationservedthepurposeofnationaldecisionmaking.Furtherelaborationofthepolicyintoconcreteplansandprogrammesrequiresfurthersite-specificfieldobservationstoquantifypotentialimpacts30.6.

ThesecondcasefromBoliviaillustratesaprogrammewithknownareaofintervention,butwithunknownareaofinfluence.ItshowstheimportanceofusingSEAinabroad,integratedmanner,includingsocialandeconomicprocessesasthemajordriverofchangeinecosystemservices.

•AnSEAfora600-kmroadinBolivia identifiedsocialandeconomic impactsas themaindriversof change associated to the road scheme. Economic development, creation of employment andimmigration from the Andean highlands were considered main pressures on ecosystem services asthesewouldleadtoincreasedlandconversion,withoutexactlyknowingwherethesepressureswouldappear.Thepotentialinfluenceoftheroadisimmenseandidentificationofimpactsateachindividualecosystem, impossible. Instead,and inventoryofmajor typesofecosystems in theentireregionwasmade,processesofkeyimportanceforthemaintenanceofthesesystemwereidentified,andpotentialimpactsinducedbyroaddevelopmentwereidentified.Ahierarchywasdesigned,assigningtypesofecosystemintocategorieswithdifferinglevelsofprotection.Anextensivemonitoringandmitigationprogrammeaccompaniedtheroadscheme,includingassistancetomanagementofnationalparksintheregionandsocialsupportprogrammes31.7.

AcasefromSwedentakesbiophysicalchangesresultingfromurbandevelopment(=thedriverofchange)asthebasisforidentifyingindicatorstomeasurechangeinbiodiversity.Thecasefocusesonbiodiversityconservationasimportantecosystemservice.ThecasehassimilaritiestothesystematicbiodiversityplanningcasefromSouthAfrica;non-protectedbiodiversityistakenintoaccount.30 MarliesvanSchooten(2004).TheNetherlands:SEAfortheNationalPolicyPlanonIndustrialandDrinkingWaterSup-ply.CasestudycompiledforthedraftingofCBDguidelinesonBiodiversityinSEA.SevSconsultants.

31 ConsorcioPrimeEngenharia/MuseoNoelKempffMercado/AsociaciónPotlatch(2004) Evaluación ambiental estratégica y revisión / complementación del eeia del corredor de transporte santa cruz – puerto suárez. Resumen ejecutivo.

69


• Urban planning of the area surrounding Stockholm (Sweden) requires strategic decision makingmodelledafterurbanexpansioninabiodiversityrichenvironment.Abiodiversityanalysisatecosystemlevelwascarriedout to support theSEAprocess.Theanalysis resulted in (i)operational targets forbiodiversityconservationtranslatingbiodiversitypolicies intoconcreteobjectives for theregion,(ii)distinctiveindicatorsforhabitatchange,(iii)reliablepredictionmethods,and(iv)sensiblescenariosforfutureurbangrowthasabaseforcomparison.Theindicatorswerelinkedtothemajorbiophysicalchanges resulting from the driver of change, in this case of urban development being: habitat loss,isolation/fragmentation,anddisturbances32.8

Similarlybiophysicalchangeswereusedasindicatorstomodeltheimpactsofmajorinterventionsinriverhydrology(=thedriverofchange)intheNetherlands.Thiscasefurtherillustratestheconceptofecosystemservicesandshowsthatecosystemlevelinformationprovidessufficientinformationfordecisionmaking.

• An SEA for a river management project along the river Meuse in the Netherlands had to analysepotential combinations of seemingly contradictory ecosystem services: flood control, shipping andnaturerestoration.Areductionofpeakflowsintheriverasasafetyprecaution,wasthemainobjective.TheSEAtookahistoricalperspectiveandportrayedmajorservicesoftheecosystemsthroughouttheages–biodiversityhasbeenmanagedandexploited tosuchanextent that theresultingecosystemsdependonhumanmanagementasakeyprocesstomaintaintheirappreciatedfeatures.Basedonthisinformationfouralternativesweredeveloped.Waterdepth,flooddurationandgroundwaterlevelwereconsideredkeybiophysicalchangesaffecting biodiversity. Theseweremodelledinacomputationalmodel and linked to the requirements of different ‘ecotypes’. It provided sufficient information tocomparealternatives,althoughfurtherfieldobservationsarerequiredforfuturedetailedinterventionplanning33.9

The availability of biodiversity inventory data greatly enhances SEA studies by allowing computationalmodelstolinkcomputedbiophysicalchangestoindicatorspeciesorecosystems.Effectsoftheinterventionscanbeestimatedatalevelofdetailwhichissufficientforstrategicdecisionmaking.

3. Aspects of biodiversity

Impactsonbiodiversitycanbestbedescribedintermsofchangesincomposition(whatisthere),orchangesinstructure(howisitorganisedintimeandspace),orchangesinkeyprocesses(whatphysical,biologicalorhumanprocessesgoverncreationandmaintenanceofecosystems). AcasefromNepalshowsthatpriorknowledgeontheeffectofabiophysicalchangetoaspecificaspectofbiodiversityprovidesameanstofocusanSEAstudy.Inthiscaseforestry(=driverofchange)leadstoselectiveremovaloftrees(biophysicalchange),affectingspeciescomposition.

•PlanlevelSEAswerecarriedoutinNepaltoassesstheenvironmentalimpactsofDistrictForestryPlans.Forestrypracticeswereconsideredtoimpactonbiodiversitybychangingthespeciescompositionofforests;consequently,thisbecamethefocusofthestudy.TheSEAresultedinrecommendationsontotheinclusionofconservationprinciplesinforestryactivities34.10

FromIndia twoexampleswereprovidedwhere theneed foranSEAwas triggeredbyprotectedspecies,butwheretheSEAstudyfocussedonecosystemandfoodwebstructuretoproviderelevantandsufficientinformation.

32 Balfors,B.,Mörtberg,U.,Brokking,P.andGontier,M.(2005).ImpactsofRegion-WideUrbanDevelopmentonBiodiversityinStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment.JournalofEnvironmentalAssessmentPolicyandManagementSpecialEditiononSEAandBiodiversity.33 MarliesvanSchooten(2004).TheNetherlands:SEAontheroutingtheRiverMeuse(Zandmaas/Maasroute)CasestudycompiledforthedraftingofCBDguidelinesonBiodiversityinSEA.SevSconsultants.34 B.Uprety(2005):IntegrationofBiodiversityAspectsinStrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentofNepalWaterPlanandEnvironmentalImpactAssessmentofOperationalForestManagementPlansinNepal

70


• SEA was used in India as a diagnostic tool to assess site alternatives for a nuclear power facility.ThefacilitywaspartiallyprojectedononeofIndia’sprominenttigerreserves.Thefacilityalsoaffectedtraditionallandusepractices.Regulationslimitedthestudyareatoa25kmradius.Withinthisradiusprotectedareasandecologicallysensitiveareasweredefined.Thestudyfocusedoncontiguityofhabitatsforendangeredspecies(suchastiger,leopard,Indianwolfandothers)andtheareaneededforpredatorstohavesufficientstockofpreyanimals.Inotherwords,thestudyfocussedonecosystemstructure:thespatialstructureofhabitatandfoodwebstructure35.11

•AnSEAapproachwasfollowedinIndiatoreviewanEIAofaplanneddamandirrigationschemewhichresultedindeadlock.Thedeadlockresultedfromalackofattentiontowildlife(includingtigers)migration routes. The SEA aimed at enhancement of conservation planning and mediation to steerenvironmentaldecisionmaking.Againvitalhabitatlinks(corridors)andfoodwebstructurewerethefocusofstudy.Thecreationofanewreservoirprovidedimportantnewhabitats;thedesignofacanalcreatedfragmentationofmajorhabitats.Redesignofanewmigrationcorridorupstreamofthecanalmitigatedthisproblem,andtheSEAresultedinreneweddecisionmaking.

Changes in key processes as a means to identify impacts on ecosystem services appear in the earlierdescribedcasesonfloodmanagementinUKandtheNetherlands,andintheshellminingcasefromtheNetherlands.

4. Levels of biodiversity.

Threelevelsaredistinguished(genetic,species,ecosystems)butingeneral,theecosystemlevelisthemostsuitable level to address biodiversity in SEA, as most cases above have shown. Even in cases where thetriggertostartanSEAwasatspecies level(protectedtigers inIndia), thestudiesfocussedonecosystemstructure.Similarly,theNepalcasefocusesonspeciescompositiononlyanddoesnotgointofurtherdetailofindividualspecies.Inotherstudiesindividualspeciesonlyservethepurposeofbeinganindicatorforchanges in key ecosystem processes. The large extent of study areas, the limited resources available forSEA,andalesserlevelofdetailrequiredforstrategicdecisionmakingexplainthisfocusonmoregenericbiodiversityissuesanda‘loss’offocusonspecieslevelinformation. However,situationswherethereisaneedtoaddress lower levels,doexist.AcasefromtheUKshowsthatforlocallevelplansitmaybeneededandpossiblethattheSEAlooksatspecieslevelinformation.Thelimitedextentof thestudyareaandthepresenceof manyprotectedspecies innon-protectedareasrequireddetailedanalysisofthesespecies.AsintheSwedishcase,thestudyfocussedonindicatorspeciesforeachbiophysicalchangeinordertoreducedatacollectioneffort.

•IntheUKALocalTransportPlanrequiredanSEA.Inanareawell-knownforitsspeciesdiversity,theSEAfocussedonspeciesandtheirhabitats.Roadswereconsideredtoleadtoanumberbiophysicalchanges:barriereffects(forexamplecuttingofroutestoforagingareasofbats),roadmortality,emissionintoairandwater,hydrologicalchangesandfragmentationofhabitats.Foreacheffecta‘focalspecies’wasusedas an indicator.Manyprotected species relyonunprotectedcountrysideand species-levelattention.Furthermore,thestudyincludedalternativesthatwouldminimiseimpactsonpriorityhabitataslistedintheBiodiversityActionPlan36.12

5. Legal protection - a word of caution.

Acase from theNetherlands shows the far-reaching influenceof a formal system forprotectedareasaswellasapolicyfortheenhancementofthissystembecausethismayleadtoinsufficientattentiontonon-protectedbiodiversity.ItforcesspatialplannerstotakebiodiversityintoaccountanditdefinesthesettingforSEAofsuchplans.SimilarlyformalpoliciestriggerbiodiversityattentionwithinSEAthroughBiodiversityActionPlansintheUKandinmanyothercountries.

•AnalysisoffourspatialplanningSEAsatnational,provincialandmunicipallevelintheNetherlands35 RajvanshiA.&V.Matur(2004).IntegratingBiodiversityintoStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment.CaseStudiesfrom

India.WildlifeInstituteofIndia,Dehradun,India.36 LarryBurrows(2004).UnitedKingdom:IntegrationofBiodiversityIssuesintoSEA:SomersetCountryCouncil.CasestudycompiledforthedraftingofCBDguidelinesonBiodiversityinSEA.SomersetCountyCouncil,UK.

71


revealed the overwhelming importance of the National Ecological Network (NEN, predecessor toandpartoftheEuropeanNatura2000networkofprotectedareas).TheNENisintendedtocreateacontinuousnetworkofprotectedareas;theareahasbeenformallydefined,butinbroadterms.AllspatialplanscoincidingwiththeNENhavetoincludenaturerestorationmeasuresinordertocomplywiththeNENpolicyandSEAsstrictlyassessproposedalternativesonthisaspect.Thefocusconsequentlyisonecosystems;speciesleveldiversitydoesnotplayaroleastheNENincludesspecies-relatedprotectedareas(EUbirds&habitatdirectives).Furtherbiodiversityattentionisfocussedonrestorationofkeyhydrologicalprocessesinexistingprotectedareas.Sincemostactivitiesfocusonenhancingthequalityofexistingnatureandincreasingthesurfaceareaofprotectedarea,non-protectedbiodiversityislostoutofsight37.13

The down-sideof this powerfulDutch policyon the National EcologicalNetwork is that non-protectedbiodiversityandecosystemservices-otherthanmaintenanceofbiodiversity–willbeplacedoutoffocusinspatialplanning,andevenintheSEAsofsuchplans.SEAissupposedtopicturetheimpactsofplansonprotectedandnon-protectedbiodiversity.Thebuilt-inargumentisthatifbiodiversityisnotprotected,itprobablyisnotworthtakingintoaccountanditconsequentlydoesnotappearintheSEA.TheUMhlathuzestrategiccatchmentassessment(SouthAfrica)providedverystrongargumentsthatnon-protectedandnon-threatenedbiodiversitystillrepresenthighlyvaluedecosystemservices. Publicparticipationmaybethekeytobiodiversity-inclusiveSEAincaseswherethisisnottriggeredbyobjectivesofthestudyorbyformalregulations.Inanumberofcasespublicparticipationleadtoabroaderperspectiveofbiodiversityresultinginformulationofdifferentalternatives.TheUKfloodmanagementcaseandtheDutchshellminingcasebothshowthatpublicparticipationresultedinenhancedstudies,includingasignificantcontributiontoformulationofviablealternatives.

6. Scale issues: extent and grain size.

Therequiredlevelofdetailinastudydependsonavarietyoffactors,suchasthespatialandtemporalscaleofthestudy,thenumberofrelevantissuestobestudied,theseverityofdecisionmakingimplications,availablehumanandfinancialresources,etc.Fromabiodiversityperspectivetwoscaleaspectsareimportant:

•Theextentof the study, in termsof sizeof theareaand timescaleunderconsideration.Physical,biologicalorsocialprocessesworkondifferentscalesintimeandspace.Theextentofthestudyisnotnecessarylimitedbygeographicallimitsorbythetimehorizonofthepolicyorplanunderassessment.Itisimportanttoknowtherelevantprocesstobestudiedanddefinetheextentofthestudyaccordingly.•Thelevelof detail,inecologyoftenreferredtoasgrainsize,ofthestudy.Animportantdeterminantoftherequiredlevelofdetailisthelevelofdecisionmaking.LookingattheidealisedtieredstructureofSEA,ingeneralahigherlevelofdecisionmaking,suchaspolicydecisions,requirelowerlevelofdetail.Descendingfrompolicytoprogrammesandplanstherequiredlevelofdetailincreaseswhileinsomecases(butdefinitelynotalways)theextentofthestudyareaisreduced.Theavailabilityofinformationandfinancialresources,andprioritiesexpressedbystakeholdersduringthescopingprocesswillfurtherdefinethelevelofdetailatwhichthestudyneedstobecarriedout.

Biodiversityhasfinegrainandlargeextent.Instudyingbiodiversityfinegrainhastobesacrificedforalargeextent,orreciprocally,arequirementforfine-graininformationoftenlimitstheextentofthestudy.Somepracticalexamplesshowhowthedilemmaoflargeextentandfaingrainofbiodiversitycanbeaddressedindifferentsituations.Theyshowthatbiodiversityaspectscomposition,structureandkeyprocessprovideagoodmeanstofocustheassessmentandtolimitdatagatheringrequirements:

•Limited extent with high level of detail: focus on species composition. Selectiveloggingbyforestryactivitiesprimarilyaffectsspeciescomposition.SEAsfordistrictforestryplansinNepalconcentratedontheeffectsofforestryonforestcompositionandlookedatspecieslevelinformationonly.Theextentofthestudywaslimited,sospecieslevelinformationcouldbeobtained38.14

37 ArendKolhoff&RoelSlootweg(2005).BiodiversityinSEAforspatialplans–experiencesfromTheNetherlands.Journal

ofEnvironmentalAssessmentPolicyandManagementSpecialEditiononSEAandBiodiversity.37 B. Uprety (2005): Integration of Biodiversity Aspects in Strategic Environmental Assessment of Nepal Water Plan and

EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentofOperationalForestManagementPlansinNepal.

72


•Very large extent and low level of detail: focus on key processes.Hydrologicalprocessesarecriticalforthemaintenanceofwetlands.Roadconstructionpotentiallyaffectshydrology.AnSEAfora600kmroadinBoliviaconcentratedonhydrologyasakeyprocess(apart fromsocialaspectnotelaboratedhere);becausetheroadcrossedwetlandsofinternationalimportancehydrologicalchangesneededtobeavoidedormitigated.Eventhoughtheextentofthestudyareawasofsuchmagnitudethatfurtherdetailed biodiversity analysis was not feasible, the focus on hydrology provided enough relevantinformationfordecisionmaking39.15

•Medium extent and reduced level of detail:focusonecosystemstructure.AnSEAforthesitingofanuclearpowerplantinIndiafocussedontheconnectivityoftigerhabitats.Thehighlyendangeredandstrictlyprotectedtigertriggeredthestudy,butthestudyfocussedonecosystemstructure,thusavoidingunnecessarydetailedsurveys40.16

•Large extent, high level of detail:strongfocusonkeyprocessandindicatorspecies.AnSEAforaNational Drinking Water Policy in the Netherlands concentrated on the main biophysical effects ofwaterextraction(hydrologicalchange).Theextentofthestudywaslarge(theentirenation);definingalimitednumberofvegetationindicatorsforimpactdeterminationprovidedtherequiredlevelofdetailforpolicydecisions.Theavailabilityofdetailedvegetationinventoriesfacilitatedtheuseofcomputertechnologytohighlightareassensitivetohydrologicalchanges41.17

39 ConsorcioPrimeEngenharia/MuseoNoelKempffMercado/AsociaciónPotlatch(2004)Evaluaciónambientalestratégica

yrevisión/complementacióndeleeiadelcorredordetransportesantacruz–puertosuárez.Resumenejecutivo.40 A. Rajvanshi & V. Matur (2004). Integrating Biodiversity into Strategic Environmental Assessment. Case Studies from

India.WildlifeInstituteofIndia,Dehradun,India.41 M.L.F.vanSchooten(2004).SEAfortheNationalPolicyPlanonIndustrialandDrinkingWaterSupply,theNetherlands.CasestudycompiledforthedraftingofCBDguidelinesonBiodiversityinSEA.SevSconsultants.