1. Conclusions SIA seminar 27-28 March 2003

2. 1. The context of SIA is one of intrinsic uncertainty a.Bounded rationality: the definition of the environment depends on the definition of the social system and vice versa b.Plurality of universes of justification of sustainability: which order of justification of action is appropriate in which situation / for which social group? Controversial universes : framing in (a) and (b) becomes a social stake around which strategic games are developing

3. 2. Towards context specific models and collective expertise SustainabilityOrders of justification Question of legitimacy - Civic - Market - fame - … Tests and models to resolve conflicts and settle agreement Plurality of interpretations of sustainability Tests and models in controversial universes Context-based assessment: i.e. each model is relative to the framing of the problem by particular stakeholder interests Integrating new values in the policy process: the definition of problems are as much a responsability for decision-makers and social actors as for scientists, so what is needed is an open process of informed debate among specialists and stakeholders

4. 3.1 Systematisation of experiences of capacity building on trade assessment Swedish white collar union : (a) screening (b) public – private partnership (c ) international TCO label Forest Stewardship Council (WWF-Unilever partnership) SIA study on ACP countries (Solagral –Waterhouse-Coopers partnership) Sustainable production process Consumer confidence Link trade and development Problematic Assumption: automatic change of values Context based assessment

5. 3.2 Systematisation of experiences of institutional learning EU : from SIA as a tool for trade negotiation to a policy dialogue tool Manchester : stakeholder involvement WTO : only national environmental assessments Access to local perceptions of the trade liberalisation process through partnership with WWF Higher legitimacy Efficiency Problematic Assumption: automatic improvment of the practice of modelisation Values in the policy process

6. 4.1 Towards reflexive learning processes in intermediary organisations Improving SIA process through reflexive learning Capacity building Institutional learning context based models integrating new values in the policy process Actors performances New emerging issues A. Integrate new emerging issues in the organisation of the capacity building Institutional frames for investment (garanty funds, enforcement of local financial institutions, access of non-state actors to investment funds) Creation of systems for collective intellectual property rights (e.g. international repository) A. Example:

7. 4.2. Towards reflexive learning processes in intermediary organisations Improving SIA process through reflexive learning Capacity building Institutional learning context based models integrating new values in the policy process Actors performances New emerging issues B. Integrate actors preferences in the conception of the policy process Contractualisation of the partnership (tests of real political consequence, integrate EU demands in the planning of NGO type SIA’s) B. Example:

8. 5. Propostion of a three step process 1 : systematisation of experiences of capacity building and learning (SIA seminar LLN) 2 : reflexive positionning of key organisations in regard of new emerging issues 3 : feedback on the conception of the capacity building process (new demands for information) and the learning process (integrate the new issues in the negotiations)