POLICY, PLANNING AND STRATEGY COMPONENT

Final report

Review and streamlining of national policies, plans, regional protocols and international conventions:

Strategic Environmental Assessment Policy Framework

October 2006

Prepared for IUCN by Ecosurv (Pty) Ltd October 2006 Department of Environmental Affairs

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 2.0. FRAMEWORK, FOR USING STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IN POLICY FORMULATION...................................................................................................................2

2.1. LITERATURE REVIEW .....................................................................................................................2 2.2. BACKGROUND TO STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT......................................................2 2.3. KEY CONCEPTS ..............................................................................................................................4

2.3.1. Difference between SEA and EIA ..........................................................................................4 2.2.2 SEA Principles ........................................................................................................................5 2.3.3 Effectiveness of SEA................................................................................................................6 2.3.4. Strengths ................................................................................................................................6

2.4. LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY CONTEXT FOR SEA ...............................................................................7 2.5. KEY ELEMENTS AND STAGES OF THE SEA PROCESS.......................................................................8

2.5.1 Screening ..............................................................................................................................10 2.5.2 Scoping .................................................................................................................................10 2.5.3 Situation Analysis .................................................................................................................11 2.5.4. Assessment and Mitigation ..................................................................................................13 2.5.5. Decision-making ..................................................................................................................13 2.5.7. Monitoring and auditing......................................................................................................14

2.6. BOTSWANA RELEVANT ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES, PLANS AND REPORTS .................................14 2.7. RESULTS OF THE SEA REVIEW.....................................................................................................16

2.7.1. SEA Framework for Retrospective Assessments of Policy...................................................16 2.7.2. The Future use of SEA .........................................................................................................16

3.0. THE POLICY FORMULATION PROCESS AND SEA...........................................................19 3.1. POLICY FORMULATION PROCESS .................................................................................................19 3.2. INTERVENTION POINTS FOR SEA IN POLICY FORMULATION ........................................................20 3.3. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS’ SEA OBLIGATIONS WITHIN THE ODMP...............22

3.3.1 Strategic goal 1, Strategy Objective 1.1 ...............................................................................22 3.3.2 Strategic goal 1, Strategy Objective 1.2 ...............................................................................23

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................24

Prepared for IUCN by Ecosurv (Pty) Ltd October 2006

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1- The Difference in Focus Between EIA and SEA [Source: 1].................................... 4 Figure 2– Process for the implementation of SEA on the Wetlands Policy of Botswana......... 9 Figure 3: The Policy Formulation Cycle ................................................................................. 20 Figure 4: SEA intervention points in the policy formulation cycle......................................... 22

Prepared for IUCN by Ecosurv (Pty) Ltd October 2006

List of Tables

Table 1– Example of Matrix to Identify Policy Conflict or Synergy ...................................... 11

Prepared for IUCN by Ecosurv (Pty) Ltd October 2006

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

COP Conference of the Parties CRA Comparative Risk Assessment DEA Department of Environmental Affairs EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIP Environmental Implementation Plan EMA Environmental Management Act EMP Environmental Management Plan EMS Environmental Management Systems ES Environmental Screening IDP Integrated Development Plan IEM Integrated Environmental Management IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature MDGs Millennium Development Goals MEWT Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism NEAC National Environmental Authority Council NEMA National Environmental Management Authority NEMP National Environmental Management Plan NWA National Water Act ODMP Okavango Delta Management Plan PPPs Policies, Plans and Programs PS Permanent Secretary RDC Rural Development Council (Chaired by Ministry of Finance) RSA Republic of South Africa SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SEMFS Strategic Environmental Management Framework SEMPS Strategic Environmental Management Plan ToR Terms of Reference NCSA National Conservation Strategy (coordinating) Agency UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme

Prepared for IUCN by Ecosurv (Pty) Ltd October 2006

1.0. INTRODUCTION This report outlines the activities required to prepare the SEA guidelines section for the ODMP Policy Review. The scope of work outlined below is for six days input being provided by D. Parry:

a. Inception and project meetings (Two client and two internal working meetings) (One day)

b. Draft SEA framework for future policy formulation (Two days literature review and draft)

c. Client meeting to discuss framework and revise structure as appropriate. (One day).

d. Identify intervention points in the policy development process for SEA (One day)

e. Outline of DEA’s SEA obligations in the draft management plan, and

f. Conduct SEA training workshop for DEA staff. This section addresses part of the following ToR sections:

• Specific Output b) A framework, using Strategic Environmental Assessment, that guides and ensures alignment of all future policy formulation.

• Specific Output c) A set of recommendations on how best to achieve effective

cross sectoral coordination in policy formulation, adoption, delivery and, when necessary, decommissioning. This should include, among other methods, ideas on the composition, ministerial and departmental location and mandate for a “policy strategy group” that would consider all future policy development and formulation.

1

2.0. FRAMEWORK, FOR USING STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IN POLICY FORMULATION 2.1. Literature Review The key sources of information used for the guideline identification were:

• SEA for water sector • Ramsar Guidelines • RSA Guidelines for project SEA • SEA training manual (University of Cape town) • World Bank experience of the SEA process and suggestions for its use

The review focused on:

a) Identifying the approach presently adopted for SEA within the region; b) Identify the steps used in SEA of policy; c) Clarify which of the steps identified in (a) & (b) could be applied to

retrospective SEA of existing policy and could be used for future policy assessment.

2.2. Background to Strategic Environmental Assessment Millennium Development Goal (MDG) Number 7 aims to ensure environmental sustainability. As part of this goal, Target 9 requires countries to “integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs and reverse loss of environmental resources.” The introduction of SEA has resulted from the limitations of project-specific EIAs and the need to ensure that those environmental issues are proactively addressed in policies, plans and programmes (Versfeld, 1997). Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is the formalised, systematic and comprehensive process of evaluating the environmental effects of a policy, plan or programme and its alternatives, including the preparation of a written report on the findings of that evaluation, and using the findings in publicly accountable decision-making (Therivel et. al. 1992). It provides a structured process of analysing the economic, social and ecological impacts of programmes, plans and policies and of identifying alternative economic incentives for conserving and wisely or sustainably using wetlands [7]. The EIA Act of 2005 defines SEA as: “a process for evaluating the environmental consequences of proposed, policy, plan or programme initiatives in order to ensure that they are fully included and appropriately addressed at the earliest stage of decision making, on par with economic and social considerations.” Internationally SEA attempts to integrate environmental factors and sustainability goals into the main stream of development policy making, as called for by the Brundtland Commission and Agenda 21 (Sadler, 1996). However, the adoption and use of SEA

2

varies both geographically and with regard to the levels and sectors of decision-making that are addressed. Only a few countries have established formal SEA systems, although others are in the process of doing so or have acknowledged the importance of applying SEA. In general, the acceptance of SEA to plans and programs is more widely accepted than policy level SEA (CSIR, 1997). SEA is in many ways a prototype of this new approach to environmental issues. It requires institutions to consider the consequences of a wide range of alternatives and actions to be considered at an early stage during the planning process. It also intends to choose the most appropriate action on environmental as well as socio-economic grounds, and to minimise any remaining environmental impacts. It is thus characterised by its strategic nature and its emphasis on preventing environmental damage.

Box 1: Preliminary SEA for Trade and Industry Policy, South Africa Under the Regional Economic Forum of KwaZulu-Natal Province, a trade and industry policy was initiated, drawing on a range of inputs including preparation of a regional industrial location strategy. The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) undertook a preliminary SEA to screen the opportunities and constraints to industrial development and establish a framework for rapid assessment of the environmental implications of the policy components as they evolved. The SEA comprised three main elements: • An analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats

(SWOT) relevant to the KwaZulu-Natal environment (comprising 10 specialist studies);

• Environmental profiles of 11 industry sectors (sugar, textiles, chemicals, etc.), listing resources consumed and air, water and solid waste generated by each type;

• Assessment matrix to link the industry profiles with the SWOT analysis. This allowed the environmental implications to be identified for component sectors when formulating the trade and industry policy. For example, sulphur dioxide was listed as an air pollution emission for several industry types, and was a major concern in relation to the capacity of Durban and Richards Bay. Other industry types not included in the Preliminary SEA could be profiled quickly, added to the matrix and assessed if the scope of policy were increased.

Source: CSIR (1996).

SEA requires environmental data as the basis for its predictions; as well as greater institutional co-operation to collect the data and to make consistent predictions. By requiring planning decisions to be made in a more rational and transparent approach, SEA is likely to promote both equity and public participation (Therivel et al; 1995). The aim of SEA is (Partially after Abaza et al 2004, UNEP) to promote environmentally and socially sustainable development by:

• Anticipating and preventing adverse effects at source;

• Considering and identifying best practicable environmental options; • Ensuring policies and plans are consistent with environmentally and socially

sustainable development goals and safeguards; • Strengthen and streamline project EIA by environmental “clearance” of policy

and planning issues

3

• Early warning of cumulative effects from programmatic or other, spatially related actions;

• Pre-examination of potentially significant effects of specific proposals. 2.3. Key Concepts 2.3.1. Difference between SEA and EIA SEA differs from EIA in that it is applied to policies, plans and programmes rather than to projects. It addresses a number of the shortcomings of EIA in that it is capable of addressing the cumulative impacts of projects, it is capable of addressing the issue of induced impacts (where one project stimulates other development), it can address synergistic impacts (where the impact of several projects exceeds the sum of the individual project impacts), and it can address global impacts such as biodiversity loss. The approach of assessing the effect of the environment on development is an important benefit effect of the of SEA (Figure 1). This is one of the differences between SEA and EIA, as EIAs focus on the effect of development on the environment. In some countries, an EIA-based approach to SEA is followed, where SEA is used to assess the impacts of a plan or programme on the environment. However, an integrative approach is proposed in these Guidelines. This approach considers the opportunities and constraints which the environment places on the policy or programme. Figure 1- The Difference in Focus Between EIA and SEA [Source: 1]

4

2.2.2 SEA Principles SEA is at present a generic term that is not yet linked to a clearly established methodology. It is thus important to recognise that there is no definite approach to SEA internationally. However, commonalties between different SEA processes can be identified and have been used to develop a set of principles, which provide some characterisation of SEA. These principles are based on practical experience in Botswana and the tracking of international trends. The focus of SEA is on the environment (social, economic and biophysical) and the assessment of the effect of the environment on development, whereas EIAs assess the effect of development on the environment, should development take place. SEA is therefore an important tool for the promotion of sustainable development (CSIR, 1997). Furthermore, SEA can be applied at different spatial scales and across different sectors. Two of the main principles for SEA are its flexible approach and its focus on the environment. This flexibility allows it to be applied at high levels of planning, policy formulation and decision making processes. Other SEA principles are as follows:

• Is driven by the concept of sustainability. • Identifies the opportunities and constraints, which the environment places on

the development of policies, plans and programs (PPPs). • Sets the criteria for levels of environmental quality or limits of acceptable

change. • Is a flexible process which is adaptable to the policy, planning and sectoral

development cycle. • Is a strategic process, which begins with the conceptualisation of the policy,

plan or programme. • Is part of a tiered approach to environmental assessment and management. • The scope of a SEA is defined within the wider context of environmental

processes. • Is a participative process. • Is set within the context of alternative scenarios. • Is based on the principles of precaution and continuous improvement in

achieving sustainability objectives.

Box 2: SEA good practice guidance (Sadler, 1996; Sadler and Verheem, 1996): • Begin as early as practicable in the process of policy or plan formulation; • Keep in mind the purpose of SEA is to inform decisions not to produce a study; • Ensure an SEA of a proposal corresponds to its potential environmental effects;. • Focus on the comparison of major alternatives; • Look to gain environmental benefits as well avoid adverse impacts; • Use the simplest procedures and methods consistent with the task; • Provide the right information, at the right time for decision-making; • Follow through to implementation and evaluate outcomes; and • Build capacity and strengthen process and procedures based on lessons of experience.

5

SEA is not a procedure that can always be taken "off the shelf". This is because the issues, needs and priorities expressed by the users or clients of the SEA, define the form of SEA. It is important to note that the flexibility of SEA is to be applied for different purposes at different scales. As a result of the flexibility of SEA in its application and approach, it should be noted that few SEAs would adopt all the principles outlined above. However, no SEA should contradict any of the stated principles [6]. 2.3.3 Effectiveness of SEA SEA should be effective through improving the relevant strategic actions and by indirectly affecting other strategic actions by educating decision-makers and influencing the way in which decisions are made. SEA is a process - an ongoing and tiered approach, a process of communication and information. The mind frame of the participants is thus vital. It is important that the participants must be willing to change the strategic action in the light of the SEA findings. SEA should be well integrated into the existing policies, institutional and organisational frameworks. SEA should be started early in the decision making process, before any alternatives have been rejected or substantial decisions made. Thus retrospective SEA of policies may be of little relevance. 2.3.4. Strengths SEA has strengths such as:

• Allowing environmental issues to be considered earlier in decision-making; • Enabling the identification of conflicting objectives within policies; • Identifying responsibilities for environmental protection; • Setting the context for lower-level assessments (such as project EIAs); • Considering non-project related impacts; • Enabling the meaningful consideration of alternatives; and • Providing baseline information for lower-level assessments.

Public participation is a cornerstone of effective SEA, since it ensures that the SEA process is comprehensive, gives appropriate importance to issues and is transparent. Having the public involved in the development phases of a policy or project strengthens the policy or project, helps gain public support, and leads to improved monitoring and evaluation processes. SEA has the unique character of:

• Challenging preconceived ideas - questions ‘established’ ways of doing things and constantly asks ‘what if’ questions in open debate with water users. Initially, this approach can be uncomfortable to those water use managers who are used to reaching decisions through technical discussions in closed

6

committees without reference to the wider community of stakeholder interests. However, such reservations fall away when it is realised that water users and other stake-holders are more likely to accept decisions, (even when they are unpalatable), if the conclusions are justified and reasons for decisions are clearly stated.

• Involving stakeholders and the public • Creating openness and transparency in decision-making - offers an open,

transparent and participative process for examining the likely consequences of implementing a particular policy, strategy, plan or programme without prejudicing the authority of the decision-maker to determine the appropriate course of action. It also provides a framework for monitoring and auditing decisions.

• Providing a sound data-base - identify the issues that are of fundamental importance to decision-makers. These may be technical, social, economic, environmental or political in nature, and their relative importance, in relation to each study area, will only emerge as the SEA progresses.

• Delivering sustainable development - decisions should be soundly based around the concept of sustainable development which implies giving equal weight to social, economic and environmental issues. An important role for the SEA is to develop and test appropriate criteria and indicators that can be used to assess the extent to which specific policies, plans and programmes are capable of delivering these sustainability principles.

2.4. Legislative and Policy Context for Sea Since the enactment of the EIA Act (2005) there has been a legislative requirement for SEA of policies, programmes and projects. The opportunity therefore exists for SEA to provide an approach for integrating sustainability into the implementation of recent legislation. The EIA Act, Section 6.1 requires that “formulation of a policy or programme shall contain or be accompanied by an approved strategic environmental assessment.” It is intended that SEA, at its current stage of development, should be a pro-active management instrument. Initiation of a SEA should arise from the benefits which it provides to a decision-maker. The initiator of an SEA may be, for example, an industry which intends making a strategic decision concerning their future business direction; or a government body that requires a process to enhance strategic decision-making relating to the management of a particular sector or region. Within the context of a retrospective SEA, though, it will not be proactive, rather it will provide insight into areas of conflict with other national policy and environmental programmes

7

2.5. Key Elements and Stages of the Sea Process The following section describes the various stages applied during a SEA. These stages are then modified to make the guideline appropriate to the function of carrying out retrospective SEA on policy.

Box 3: Example of Information Required under the European Commission SEA Directive 2004 (After Abaza et al 2004)

1. An outline of the contents, main objectives of the policy, plan or programme and relationship with other relevant policies, plans and programmes;

2. The relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the plan or programme;

3. The environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected;

4. Any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the policy, plan or programme including those relating to any areas of a particular environmental importance,

5. The environmental protection objectives, established at international, Community or Member State level, which are relevant to the policy, plan or programme and the way those objectives and any environmental considerations have been taken into account during its preparation;

6. The likely significant effects on the environment, including on issues such as biodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors;

7. The measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset significant adverse effects on the environment of the policy, plan/ or programme;

8. An outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with, and a description of how the assessment was undertaken including any difficulties encountered in compiling the required information;

9. Description of the monitoring measures; 10. A non-technical summary of the information

provided under the above headings.

The structured procedure of SEA means that it can be used as a tool for reviewing and amending legislation, institutions and practices to ensure the wise use of wetlands. Additionally, as a part of this review process, SEA can provide a means of designing appropriate incentive measures for wetland conservation and wise use. In this way SEA is closely linked both to the legal and institutional reviews. Stages This section describes the essential elements of SEA and indicates how these elements can be combined into a SEA process. SEA is context-specific, and this process would need to be refined and adapted to suit the context in which it is applied. The key elements to implement a SEA process on the Wetlands Guidelines are shown in Figure 3 and listed below:

• Screening; • Scoping; • Situation Analysis • Assessment • Decision-making; • Monitoring and auditing

8

Box 4: Policy appraisal EIA-based approach • List the objectives of the proposal and summarize the policy issue, identifying constraints and trade-

offs • Screen to trigger SEA and identify likely scope of review needed • Specify the range of options for achieving the objectives, including the do nothing option • Scope to identify key issues and alternatives, clarify objectives and to develop terms of reference for

SEA • Identify and list all impacts on the environment and consider mitigation measures to off set them • Compare alternatives including no action options to clarify implications and trade-offs • Assess the significance of the impacts in relation to other costs and benefits • Involve the public early – e.g. at the scoping stage – and with sufficient information • Value costs and benefits, including those based on monetary values, ranking or physical quantities • Analyse impacts, evaluate alternatives, and • identify mitigation and follow up measures • State the preferred option with reasons for doing so • Document the findings including recommended terms and conditions for implementation • Monitor and evaluate the results, making appropriate arrangements for doing so as early as possible • Review the quality of the SEA report to check the information is sufficient & relevant for decision-

making • Carry out follow up measures as necessary to monitor effects, check on implementation, etc

Source: UK Department of Environment (1991), UK DETR (1998). Source: UNECE (1992)

Figure 2– Process for the implementation of SEA on the Wetlands Policy of Botswana

Screening

Scoping•Identify strategic Issues

•Terms of Reference

Situation Analysis•Identify sustainability objectives,

criteria and indicators from strategic agreed sources

Assessment and Mitigations•State sustainability parameters •Assess policy against the above

Decision Making•Review by the Reference Group

•Record Decisions

Implementation

Monitoring and Audit

9

2.5.1 Screening This stage is to be set by National Guidelines and EIA Act of 2005. 2.5.2 Scoping The aim of Scoping is to determine the nature and extent of the SEA. This involves identification of significant strategic issues to be addressed in the SEA. This stage should be informed by effective participation procedures which are applicable to the particular context of the policy. It is suggested that Scoping is initially undertaken by a group of key interested and affected parties which plays a coordinating role, for example, through a steering committee. This committee could include authorities, specialists, non-governmental organisations, business and community organisations. This group should ensure that the Scoping process, which includes a wider range of interested and affected parties, focuses on strategic issues. The strategic issues identified come from national strategic environmental documents that are direct relevant to the policy under the SEA and may relate to direct impacts (e.g. water pollution), the cause of impacts (e.g. coal burning) or a general concern (e.g. decrease in security).

Box 5: Netherlands environmental test (E-test) of draft legislation The environmental test addresses the environmental and sustainability effects of a proposed law, together with its enforceability, feasibility and impact on business. The process is internal, informal and intended to be carried out efficiently, with minimum delay on government decision-making. Four questions are considered:

11. What are the effects of the draft legislation on energy consumption and mobility?

12. What are the effects of the draft legislation on consumption and stocks of raw materials?

13. What are the effects of the draft legislation on waste streams and air, soil and water emissions?

14. What are the effects of the draft legislation on use of physical space?

In an EIA, these issues are translated into impacts of development on the environment. However, in a SEA the focus is on the opportunities and constraints of the environment on development. It is therefore suggested that strategic issues be translated into social,

economic and biophysical resources which provide opportunities to enhance or constrain the development of the human population.

Box 6: Canada’s Guidelines “Guidelines for Implementing the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals” outlines what should be included in the scope of work: “A strategic environmental assessment generally addresses the following five questions 1. What are the potential direct and indirect outcomes of the proposal? 2. How do these outcomes interact with the environment? 3. What is the scope and nature of these environmental interactions? 4. Can the adverse environmental affects be mitigated? 5. Can positive environmental effects be enhanced? What is the overall potential environmental effect of the proposal after opportunities for mitigation has been incorporated?” (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (2004: Section 2.3.)

It is important that the focus on significant issues is not lost through this

10

translation into opportunities and constraints. These opportunities and constraints are then used to inform the development of the policy. In summary, the product of the Scoping phase is an agreed, focused set of issues and alternatives. It is recommend the use of a matrix to determine the compatibility between programme, plan or policy objectives and sustainability aims. Scoping is a key stage for ensuring that potential impacts on the ecological character of wetlands are identified and examined in the SEA. It is then necessary to identify relevant indicators for measuring and representing environmental trends which can then help to set appropriate targets. These indicators can be state of the environment indicators (i.e., related to the ecological character descriptions of the wetlands), impact or pressure indicators (i.e., number of Ramsar listed sites which are listed as on the Montreux Record), or action indicators (i.e., policies reviewed and amended to integrate wetlands conservation and wise use issues)[3]. Table 1– Example of Matrix to Identify Policy Conflict or Synergy

2.5.3 Situation Analysis A situation analysis of the focus policies must be prepared which:

• Identifies the social, economic and biophysical resources which should be maintained and/or enhanced;

• Identifies the social, economic and biophysical trends on all relevant scales, which will influence the maintenance and enhancement of these resources; and

11

• Identifies the existing institutions, legislation, policies, plans and programmes, which will influence the maintenance and enhancement of the environmental resources.

• Environmental opportunities and constrains must also be identified.

Box 7: Examples of methods Baseline study • State of the Environment reports and similar documents • Listing of environmental stock and resource assets • “Points of reference” for valued ecosystem components Screening/scoping • Environmental scan • Analogues or case comparison • Checklists and cause-effect networks • Public or expert consultation Formulating options • Scenario development • Comparative risk assessment • Policy, strategies, plans, commitments & precedents • Public values and preferences Impact analysis • Vulnerability mapping • Environmental indicators and criteria • Policy impact matrix • Predictive and simulation models • GIS, capacity/habitat analysis • Benefit/cost analysis and other economic valuation techniques • Multi-criteria analysis Documentation for • Cross-impact matrices • Decision-making • Consistency analysis • Sensitivity analysis • Trade-off mapping/ “decision trees” Source: updated from Sadler and Verheem (1996).

12

Comparative Risk Assessment

CRA provides a systematic framework for first evaluating different environmental problems that pose different types and degrees of risks to human health and the environment, and then for deciding what to do about them. The basic premise of CRA is that risk provides an objective measure for comparing the relative severity of different environmental problems, and risk reduction provides a metric for organizing and evaluating efforts to address the problems. CRA generally has two stages:

• Risk Assessment. In this stage, the environmental problems facing an area are identified, evaluated and compared, with the aim of developing a ranking of the problems in order of their relative severity. The problems are ranked based on the risks they pose. In some cases a single risk metric is employed. In other cases different rankings are developed for different risk categories, e.g., health versus ecological risks. The ranking process involves assembling and analyzing relevant data on the environmental problems (including information from existing scientific risk analyses) and using structured judgments to fill gaps in data. Although the risk ranking process is scientifically oriented, there is extensive need for value judgments. The hazards to be considered in the risk assessment, how “risk” is to be measured, how different risks should be weighted, and how uncertainty should be treated are matters which often involve local values and social choice.

• Risk Management. In this stage, initiatives, action plans or budgetary alternatives are developed and assessed. The considerations in this stage extend beyond risk to include a broad balancing of economic, technical, institutional, legal, and political factors.

Box 8: Priority Setting of Environmental Issues (Adapted from World Bank 2005)

A number of factors can influence the establishment of environmental priorities including public clamor, cultural/historical/institutional/political factors, political priorities, international agreements, judicial decisions, and the results of technical studies employing analytical/quantitative techniques. Given the factors, a structured, two-fold approach to identify priority environmental issues is recommended. The first is use of a quantitative technique to value environmental damage in economic terms, so that a direct comparison can be made with a country’s Gross Domestic Product. The second is to use more participatory techniques, such as surveys and focus groups of those most affected by environmental degradation, so that a better understanding is obtained of how much of a priority tackling these issues are for these stakeholders (i.e., those most affected by the degradation).

2.5.4. Assessment and Mitigation A matrix should be build in order to show if the policy will cause a conflict or synergy. In the case of causing a synergy the effects should be maximized. If causes conflict mitigation measures should be addressed. This sustainability framework can be used in two ways: either to guide the formulation of new plans and programmes or to provide a measure against which existing plans and programmes can be assessed. This framework may also be used to evaluate policies which have already been developed. This will assist in determining their sustainability, in terms of the context-specific objectives and criteria for sustainability. In this case, the policy may be divided into its component parts and evaluated against the sustainability framework. 2.5.5. Decision-making A review, conducted by the agreed reference group, should be made to evaluate the positive and negative aspects of the framework for sustainability and the final draft of the

13

policy. The review process must be guided by a terms of reference as determined at the beginning of the SEA process. Reviewers could include relevant authorities, specialists and interested and affected parties, which will form the reference group. The initiator of the SEA decides on whether the environmental consequences of the policy have been adequately considered in planning. Amendments may have to be made before final acceptance. A statement of the decision, indicating how SEA requirements were taken into account, should be drawn up. This stage of decision-making is usually part of established processes for policy approval. Decision-making may occur throughout the policy formulation process. A record of these decisions should be kept and made available as necessary. 2.5.6. Implementation After acceptance of the policy it is implemented. The conditions of acceptance may require that an environmental management system be prepared and implemented, and that an environmental committee be established to guide the monitoring and auditing process. This stage is unlikely to be undertaken in retrospective SEAs. 2.5.7. Monitoring and auditing Resources should be monitored and audited to proactively identify any threat of non sustainable use and allow for measures to restore sustainability. The information obtained from the monitoring and auditing should be fed back into the baseline information used for SEAs, in order to promote continual improvement. Monitoring and auditing also allows for adjustment of the sustainability framework and the nature of the policy. 2.6. Botswana Relevant Environmental Policies, Plans and Reports The key policy and planning documents that will be considered in the SEA are

• Vision 2016 • Millennium Development Goals (The Millennium Development Goals

reflects Botswana’s development priorities a articulated in Vision 2016. It is a synthesis of the goals, 8 at the total, and targets needed to be achieved to effectively combat poverty, being the 7th goal to ensure environmental sustainability.)

• National Policy on Natural Resources Conservation and Development The most authoritative government policy document on the environment is the National Policy on Natural Resources Conservation and Development of 1990 is based upon two primary goals:

• To increase the effectiveness with which natural resources are used and managed, so that beneficial interactions are optimised and harmful environmental side-effects are minimized

14

• To integrate the work of the many sectoral Ministries and interest groups throughout Botswana, thereby improving the development of natural resources through conservation.

• National Development Plan 9: The ninth National Development Plan (NDP 9) marks the first major step towards integration of the long-term vision for Botswana, Vision 2016: Towards Prosperity for All, into the development planning process. The theme of this plan is “Towards Realisation of Vision 2016: Sustainable and Diversified Development through Competitiveness in Global Markets”.

• State of the Environment Report (The State of the Environment Reviews (SOERs) in Botswana dates back to 1990 when the National Conservation Strategy (NCS) was developed and culminated in a National Policy on Natural Resources Conservation and Development. The aim to prepare SOERs is to support sustainable development decision-making through the provision of credible, comprehensive and science based information conditions and trends, including their significance.)

• National Master Plan for Wastewater and Sanitation: The status and situation of wastewater services in Botswana has been thoroughly assesses as part of the National Master Plan for Wastewater and Sanitation (NWWSMP).

• National Conservation Strategy (NCS) The main thrust of the NCS is the introduction of new and different strategic approaches to achieve the integration of conservation of natural resources into the development process.

• Botswana Wetlands Policy and Strategy (Draft) • National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan- Stocktaking Report: The

purpose of this report is to provide information on the status of biodiversity in Botswana and to highlight issues concerned with biodiversity conservation and use.

• The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is ratified by Botswana in 1995. As a party to this convention, Botswana is committed to work toward the three main goals:

• Water Resource Management • Botswana National Water Master Plan Study • National Policy on Agricultural Development • Tribal Grazing Land Policy: The Tribal Grazing Land Policy (TGLP) was

introduced in 1975 in order to promote the development of the livestock industry in Botswana, and to halt rangeland degradation. TGLP was intended to reach appropriate stoking rates in the tribal grazing areas by encouraging large livestock owners, who were exploiting the potential of the Kgalagadi region and western Botswana, to move to newly created leasehold cattle ranches.

• National Waste Management Plan • Botswana National Settlement Policy: The main goal of this policy was to

come up with a framework, which would guide and encourage equitable distribution of investment, in order to achieve a spatially balanced development across the whole country. The Settlement Policy empathized

15

development and job creation in the least developed areas, especially rural ones.

2.7. Results of the SEA Review 2.7.1. SEA Framework for Retrospective Assessments of Policy The review has highlighted the following about the use of SEA for retrospective assessments of policy:

• The value of SEA is in shaping policy and preparing strategies to ensure environmental requirements are included into the policy. In retrospective SEA one can only show areas of conflict.

• The procedures (stages) in retrospective SEA will exclude certain stages as

these are redundant once the policy has been finalised.

• The value of SEA is to ascertain how the existing environment will influence the policy (as interpreted in the NSOER and biodiversity stocktaking). It should also consider how existing environmental policies (including those that rely on the environment (such as Agriculture)) influence the proposed policy. Finally consideration of existing macro land use planning and national implementation strategies will affect the proposed policy. In terms of retrospective SEA only areas of conflict can be highlighted these conflicts could be considered in implementation strategies or to interpret failure to implement policy.

2.7.2. The Future use of SEA It is also clear that the SEA process is evolving and, as suggested by the World Bank, needs to move towards Adaptive Management and Inclusive methodology as outlined below: Moving from “one-time” to continuous engagement There are problems associated with treating SEA as an essentially “one-time” assessment, particularly in the context of a process which has multiple decision points. Policy formulation and implementation occur over a long period of time and that there is value in having a mechanism for continuous engagement that effectively integrates priority environmental aspects. Integrating the SEA process with the policymaking process, including implementation Timing is important if SEAs are to be conducted in an integrated manner with the policy formulation processes. There is clearly a relatively greater chance of having an influence

16

than when the SEA process is only partially integrated or the SEA outcomes are only forthcoming after the policy formulation process is complete (as in retroactive SEA). Potentially, such a correctly timed SEA could feed into the policy implementation phase but this would need effective monitoring and follow-up. Focusing on Priority Environmental Issues It is important that priority environmental issue are integrated into policy rather than lower priority, environmental issues. It is necessary that there is a basis for identifying priority environmental issues compared with other priority issues, such as poverty reduction or economic growth. Where a specific prioritization step occurs, it helps to highlight which issue are most critical (through both analytical work coupled with consultations with the poor). Providing Equal Representation Public consultation based on EIA methodologies can be difficult to implement in the context of policy formulation, particularly where the groups that participate are not always representative of those most affected by environmental degradation. Less Focus on Reports, more on Outcomes It is also interesting to note that in the majority of the cases, there seems to have been less thought given to how the SEA could be used to influence decision makers, but rather much more emphasis on the production of a report, which was expected to feed automatically into a process in which policy decisions would be made following a rational, linear process. In practice, however, the policy making process is very different. Furthermore, there seems to have been limited follow-up, and hence accountability, on the part of decision makers to implement SEA recommendations. The effectiveness of SEA in influencing policymaking could be enhanced if it is used as a tool to take advantage of windows of opportunity in policymaking that occur when there is a concurrence of issues, problems, solutions, and people. In

Box 9: Institutional and Governance The World Bank considers that institutional and governance dimensions need to be brought into SEA if we are to integrate sustainability concepts into policy formulation. These comprised of four key elements: 1. Prioritization of environmental issues

based on their effects on economic development and poverty reduction

2. Stakeholder Representation through mechanisms that bring together different viewpoints, and in particular mechanisms that give those most affected by environmental degradation a voice during the policy formulation and implementation process

3. Feedback mechanisms that ensure social accountability

4. Systems through which social learning can occur in order to raise more attention to priority environmental issues.

Principles: Early in plan formulation (flexible) Purpose to inform not produce a study Focus on the major alternatives Look for benefits as well as consequences Use the simplest procedures and methods Provide information at the right time for

decision making Monitor interventions Evaluate to strengthen the process and

procedures

17

summary, the principles that should guide SEA and its use in future policy formulations are:

Elements: Contents, main objectives of the Policy,

programme or plan (PPP) Current state of the environment including:

Most sensitive environmental characteristics, existing environmental problems, environmental protection objectives (public involvement)

Opportunities and threat to environment (public involvement)

Alternatives identified (public involvement)

Assessment matrix of PPP elements Interventions Monitoring & evaluation requirements

The key elements of a SEA should include the following:

18

3.0. THE POLICY FORMULATION PROCESS AND SEA 3.1. Policy Formulation Process During the preparation of the Wetlands Policy and Strategy, the following steps were undertaken during policy formulation:

• The inception of the process came from the national wetlands committee who informed the DEA (then NCSA) of the need for policy

• The DEA then hosted a workshop to

identify the main problems facing wetlands and the need for a national policy on wetlands.

• DEA then appointed the National

Wetlands Steering Committee to oversee the preparation of a policy and strategy.

• The Committee and their consultants

then hosted a national consultative workshop on the issues and the to identify objectives of the policy

National Wetlands Committee - Reports to the NCSA

IssuesFor NationalConsultation

IssuesFor NationalConsultation

Stakeholder Workshop

National Consultation

Draft WetlandsPolicyDraft WetlandsPolicy

Stakeholder Workshop

National Wetlands Policy and Strategy

Consultation

• A draft policy and strategy were prepared together with a broad range of

publicity materials (Ministerial speeches, newspaper articles and duel language pamphlets). The public were asked to contribute to the process. These comments were incorporated into a second draft of the policy.

• A national consultative conference was then held to finalise the Wetlands policy and Strategy.

• The final Policy and Strategy was then adopted by DEA who then began the

official acceptance process where the documents have to be presented to and accepted by the National Environmental Affairs Council (Made up of the NCSA and Agricultural Resources Boards) and the National Rural Development Council.

• A cabinet memo is then prepared for Cabinet approval.

These steps have been modified into a policy cycle (Figure 3) and discussed with the client

19

20

Figure 3: The Policy Formulation Cycle

.2. Intervention Points for SEA in Policy Formulation

ased on the conclusions from the SEA assessment (principles and elements), a number

Inception of Idea Policy Dev. Team

Government commitment

Clarify the Issues

Identify Alternatives/Options

National Consultations

Define the Objectives

Identify implications

Cabinet Approval

Draft Memo

NEAC & RDC Approval

Cab Memo

Implementation(Integrate into NDP)

Review

Strategy & Action Plan

Draft Policy

Identify policyneed

Public process

Government process

Approval

Initiation

Formulation

Implementation

3 Bof intervention points have been identified in the SEA cycle. These are illustrated in (

Figure 4) and described below. 1. SEA needs to start early enough in the policy formulation process that it can

significantly influence policy decisions. The old approach of subjecting a policy to SEA at the end of policy formulation has very little influence on the policy outcomes. It is the responsibility of DEA to ensure that SEA is understood and called for by Departments that are creating new policies, programmes or plans.

2. The major environmental issues, key concerns and the opportunities and

constraints posed by the environmental needs to be available for policy development.

3. Alternatives to the approach, suggested by the policy for addressing issues,

must be considered. This is particularly important in non-environmental policy, programmes or plans.

4. The SEA should be complete and the recommendations for mitigations available for the national consultative workshop and final drafting of policy, strategy and action plans. This will ensure that the environmental requirements are integrated into the policy framework.

5. Transparency, through public involvement, is important throughout the SEA

process. SEA can ensure that public involvement in the policy formulation occurs. DEA to ensure public participation process is carried out for SEA.

6. It appears that policies have two gateways on their route to Cabinet approval.

Environmental policies pass through the National Environmental Affairs Council (not yet formally established) and then the Rural Development Council. The Permanent Secretary for MEWT sits on the council. The PS should be aware of the Ministry’s role in requiring SEA on all policy. The PS of MEWT will also be the Chairperson for the NEAC and hence will have a duel role of ensuring SEA has been completed for policies and that the recommendations for mitigation have been included into the policy framework.

7. The Department of Environmental Affairs should undertake audit of the policy implementation to ensure that mitigations are being implemented.

8. Resources identified as potentially effected should be monitored and audited

to proactively identify any threat of non-sustainable use and allow for measures to restore sustainability. This monitoring could be linked directly to the district, urban or national SOERs

21

Figure 4: SEA intervention points in the policy formulation cycle

Public process

Government process

3) Alternatives considered

2) Define major env.opportunities and threats

1) Require SEAearly in process

5) Ensure transparency

7) Ensureenv. mitigationsimplemented

8) Monitor &review

Old StyleSEA

6) NEAC to require SEA andensure env. considerationsinfluence decision

SEA process

Inception of Idea Policy Dev. Team

Government commitment

Clarify the Issues

Identify Alternatives/Options

National Consultations

Define the Objectives

Identify implications

Cabinet Approval

Draft Memo

NEAC & RDC Approval

Implementation(Integrate into NDP)

Review

Strategy & Action Plan

Draft Policy

Identify policyneed

4) SEA complete &Env. mitigations in strategy

Cab Memo

3.3. Department of Environmental Affairs’ SEA Obligations within the ODMP DEA obligations within the ODMP in relation to SEA should be as follows: 3.3.1 Strategic goal 1, Strategy Objective 1.1

• Nationally ensure all policy is subject to approval by NEAC and that NEAC is aware of its role, has resources available to call for and carry out SEA and that it ensures that all heads of Departments are aware of the need for SEA as required in the EIA Act.

• Work with Okacom to address upstream and cross border policy impacts. Interact

with upstream basin states during formulation of their policy formulation, preparation of implementation strategies and in planning and programmes. Use the SEA of the ODMP to illustrate how Okacom should be involved in policy or plan development.

22

3.3.2 Strategic goal 1, Strategy Objective 1.2 Ensure the implementation of SEA:

• To bring the key environmental constraints and opportunities, cumulative, induced, synergistic and global impacts into all future plans and programmes within the Ramsar site and ,

• To ensure that other district or national plans, programmes and policies do not affect the sustainable development and ecosystems objectives of the Delta.

• Establish district issues based environmental indicators that assist in sustainable development monitoring of the Delta.

• Prepare a SEA seminar series for Heads of Departments.

23

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abaza, H., Bisset, R. Sadler, B. 2004 EIA and SEA: Towards an integrated approach.

UNEP publication. Briscoe, Andrew and Attorneys 2001 Environmental Geosciences Law in Botswana;

Department of Geological Survey; 2001 Botswana

Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

2000 Guideline Document – Strategic Environmental Assessment in South Africa; February 2000

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

1999 Manual – Implementation of Strategic Environmental Assessment in the Water Sector; October 1999 Pretoria

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

2001 A Guide to Strategic Environmental Assessment for Water Use in Catchments – Draft Report; September 2001

Ramsar Convention Bureau

2000 Reviewing laws and institutions to promote the conservation and wise use of wetlands; Ramsar– Convention on Wetlands, Handbook; 2000 Switzerland

World Bank; Environmental Department

2005 Integrating environmental considerations in policy formulation: Lessons from policy based SEA experiences. Report No. 32783

Ministry of Finance and Development Planning

2003 National Development Plan 9 – 2003/4-2008/9; March,2003, Botswana

Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation and Knight Piésold

1992 Botswana National Water Master Plan Study – Final Report on Phase 2, Volume 1 – Report; Ministry of Mineral Resources and Water Affairs – Department of Water Affairs; July 2002, Botswana

Government of Botswana

1991 National Policy on Agricultural Development – Government Paper NO. 1 of 1991; Ministry of Agriculture; February 1991, Botswana

Geoflux Pty 2002 State of the Environment Report; Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism – National Conservation Strategy Coordinating Agency; September 2002, Botswana

IUCN and Ecosurv 2003 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan – Stocktaking Report, Final Draft; NATIONAL conservation Strategy (Coordinating) AGENCY; July 2003, Botswana

National Conservation Strategy (Coordinating) Agency

1998 National Conservation Strategy (NCS) Action Plan Consultancy Reports; National Conservation Strategy (Advisory) Board; March

24

1998, Botswana NNR A/S and Hedeselskabet

1999 National Water Conservation Policy and Strategy Framework – 3rd Draft; Water Quality Management Project; Department of Water Affairs – Water Quality and pollution Control Section; May 1999, Botswana

Government of Botswana

1998 Botswana National Settlement Policy – Government Paper NO.2 of 1998; August 1998, Botswana

Government of Botswana

1990 Botswana National Conservation Strategy – Government Paper NO.1 of 1990; National Policy on Natural Resources Conservation and Development; December 1990, Botswana

Consulted web pages:

1. http://www.dwaf.gov.za/sfra/SEA/SEA%20Background.asp 2. http://www.ramsar.org/cop7/cop7_doc_19.1_e.htm

25