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
SEA requires environmental
Under the Regional Economic Forum of KwaZulu-Natal Province, a trade
data as the basis for its
and industry policy was initiated, drawing on a range of inputs including
predictions; as well as greater preparation of a regional industrial location strategy.
institutional co-operation to
collect the data and to make The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) undertook a
consistent predictions. 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.
By requiring planning
decisions to be made in a The SEA comprised three main elements:
more rational and transparent • An analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
approach, SEA is likely to (SWOT) relevant to the KwaZulu-Natal environment (comprising 10
promote both equity and specialist studies);
• Environmental profiles of 11 industry sectors (sugar, textiles,
public participation (Therivel chemicals, etc.), listing resources consumed and air, water and solid
et al; 1995). waste generated by each type;
• Assessment matrix to link the industry profiles with the SWOT
The aim of SEA is (Partially analysis. This allowed the environmental implications to be identified
after Abaza et al 2004, for component sectors when formulating the trade and industry
policy. For example, sulphur dioxide was listed as an air pollution
UNEP) to promote emission for several industry types, and was a major concern in
environmentally and socially relation to the capacity of Durban and Richards Bay. Other industry
sustainable development by: types not included in the Preliminary SEA could be profiled quickly,
• Anticipating and added to the matrix and assessed if the scope of policy were
preventing increased.
Source: CSIR (1996).
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.
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
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.
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 Situation Analysis

•Identify strategic Issues •Identify sustainability objectives,
•Terms of Reference 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 Box 5: Netherlands environmental test (E-test) of
Scoping is initially undertaken by a group of draft legislation
key interested and affected parties which The environmental test addresses the environmental
plays a coordinating role, for example, and sustainability effects of a proposed law, together
with its enforceability, feasibility and impact on
through a steering committee.
business. The process is internal, informal and
intended to be carried out efficiently, with minimum
This committee could include authorities, delay on government decision-making. Four questions
specialists, non-governmental organisations, are considered:
business and community organisations. 11. What are the effects of the draft legislation on
energy consumption and mobility?
12. What are the effects of the draft legislation on
This group should ensure that the Scoping consumption and stocks of raw materials?
process, which includes a wider range of 13. What are the effects of the draft legislation on
interested and affected parties, focuses on waste streams and air, soil and water emissions?
strategic issues. 14. What are the effects of the draft legislation on
use of physical space?
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).
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,
Box 6: Canada’s Guidelines
economic and
“Guidelines for Implementing the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental biophysical
Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals” outlines what should be resources which
included in the scope of work: provide
“A strategic environmental assessment generally addresses the following opportunities to
five questions
1. What are the potential direct and indirect outcomes of the proposal?
enhance or
2. How do these outcomes interact with the environment? constrain the
3. What is the scope and nature of these environmental interactions? development of the
4. Can the adverse environmental affects be mitigated? human population.
5. Can positive environmental effects be enhanced?
What is the overall potential environmental effect of the proposal after
opportunities for mitigation has
It is important that
been incorporated?” the focus on
(Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (2004: Section 2.3.) 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
 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).
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.

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 Box 9: Institutional and Governance

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.
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.

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, Principles:
on the part of decision makers to implement ƒ Early in plan formulation (flexible)
SEA recommendations. ƒ Purpose to inform not produce a study
ƒ Focus on the major alternatives
The effectiveness of SEA in influencing ƒ Look for benefits as well as consequences
policymaking could be enhanced if it is used ƒ Use the simplest procedures and methods
ƒ Provide information at the right time for
as a tool to take advantage of windows of
decision making
opportunity in policymaking that occur ƒ Monitor interventions
when there is a concurrence of issues, ƒ Evaluate to strengthen the process and
problems, solutions, and people. In procedures

17
summary, the principles that should guide SEA and its use in future policy formulations
are:

The key elements of a SEA should include the Elements:

following: ƒ Contents, main objectives of the Policy,
programme or plan (PPP)
ƒ Current state of the environment including:
Most sensitive environmental
characteristics, existing environmental
problems, environmental protection
objectives (public involvement)
ƒ Opportunities and threat to environment
(public involvement)
ƒ Alternatives identified (public
involvement)
ƒ Assessment matrix of PPP elements
ƒ Interventions
ƒ Monitoring & evaluation requirements

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 National Wetlands
during policy formulation: Committee - Reports to
• The inception of the process came the NCSA

from the national wetlands committee Issues

Stakeholder
who informed the DEA (then NCSA) Workshop For National
of the need for policy Consultation
National
• The DEA then hosted a workshop to Consultation
identify the main problems facing
wetlands and the need for a national
policy on wetlands. Draft Wetlands Stakeholder Workshop
Policy

• DEA then appointed the National

Wetlands Steering Committee to Consultation
oversee the preparation of a policy and
strategy.
National Wetlands Policy
• The Committee and their consultants and Strategy
then hosted a national consultative
workshop on the issues and the to identify objectives of the policy

• 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
Figure 3: The Policy Formulation Cycle
Government process

Identify policy Government

commitment Public process
need

Inception of Idea Policy Dev. Team

Initiation
Review Clarify the Issues
Implementation
Implementation
(Integrate into NDP) Define the Objectives

Cabinet Approval

Identify Alternatives/Options
Approval
Cab Memo Formulation

Identify implications
NEAC & RDC Approval

Draft Memo Draft Policy

National Strategy &

Consultations Action Plan

3.2. Intervention Points for SEA in Policy Formulation

Based on the conclusions from the SEA assessment (principles and elements), a number
of intervention points have been identified in the SEA cycle. These are illustrated in (

20
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

Government process
1) Require SEA
Public process Government early in process
Identify policy
need commitment
SEA process
2) Define major env.
Inception of Idea Policy Dev. Team opportunities and
8) Monitor & threats
review
Review Clarify the Issues

Implementation
(Integrate into NDP) Define the Objectives

Cabinet Approval
7) Ensure Identify Alternatives/Options
env. mitigations
implemented Cab Memo 3)
Old Style
SEA Alternatives
Identify implications considered
NEAC & RDC Approval
6) NEAC to
require SEA and Draft Memo Draft Policy
ensure env. 4) SEA complete &
considerations National Strategy & Env. mitigations in
influence decision Consultations Action Plan strategy

5) Ensure transparency

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. EIA and SEA: Towards an integrated approach.

2004
Sadler, B. UNEP publication.
Briscoe, Andrew and Environmental Geosciences Law in Botswana;
2001
Attorneys Department of Geological Survey; 2001
Botswana
Department of Guideline Document – Strategic Environmental
2000
Environmental Affairs Assessment in South Africa; February 2000
and Tourism
Department of Water 1999 Manual – Implementation of Strategic
Affairs and Forestry Environmental Assessment in the Water Sector;
October 1999 Pretoria
Department of Water 2001 A Guide to Strategic Environmental Assessment
Affairs and Forestry for Water Use in Catchments – Draft Report;
September 2001
Ramsar Convention 2000 Reviewing laws and institutions to promote the
Bureau conservation and wise use of wetlands; Ramsar–
Convention on Wetlands, Handbook; 2000
Switzerland
World Bank; 2005 Integrating environmental considerations in
Environmental policy formulation: Lessons from policy based
Department SEA experiences. Report No. 32783

Ministry of Finance and 2003 National Development Plan 9 – 2003/4-2008/9;

Development Planning March,2003, Botswana
Snowy Mountains 1992 Botswana National Water Master Plan Study –
Engineering Corporation Final Report on Phase 2, Volume 1 – Report;
and Knight Piésold Ministry of Mineral Resources and Water Affairs
– Department of Water Affairs; July 2002,
Botswana
Government of 1991 National Policy on Agricultural Development –
Botswana 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 1998 National Conservation Strategy (NCS) Action
Strategy (Coordinating) Plan Consultancy Reports; National
Agency Conservation Strategy (Advisory) Board; March

24
 1998, Botswana
NNR A/S and 1999 National Water Conservation Policy and Strategy
Hedeselskabet Framework – 3rd Draft; Water Quality
Management Project; Department of Water
Affairs – Water Quality and pollution Control
Section; May 1999, Botswana
Government of 1998 Botswana National Settlement Policy –
Botswana Government Paper NO.2 of 1998; August 1998,
Botswana
Government of 1990 Botswana National Conservation Strategy –
Botswana 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