Strategic Appropriate Assessment of Spatial Plans
How did we get here? UK history 1992 Habitats Directive AA of plans and projects 1994 Planning guidance = No AA of plans Sep. 2005 Revised planning guidance 20 Oct. 2005 European Court ruling = AA of plans Aug. 2007 ECJ ruling implemented
UK Strategic AA of plans What plans? EC guidance Broad - land-use and sectoral plans “likely significant effect” European Court As EC, where: “plans may have considerable influence on development decisions” Habitats Regulations Development plans Defra Shoreline Management Plans/Flood Risk Management Strategies
SEA & Strategic AA Similarities Consult with environmental bodies Emphasise cumulative effects assessment Require preparation of an assessment report
SEA & Strategic AA Differences SAA Decision Informs Constrains Scope/ Evidence Broad Narrower Biodiversity role General Focus on Natura 2000 Public consultation Mandatory Discretionary
Strategic AA of plans What does it mean? Plans subject to Habitats Directive tests Policies Proposals Effect of whole plan Major cultural shift in plan assessment From informing decisions to taking decisions Avoiding damage to Natura 2000 sites should be central to plan objectives Avoid deferring difficult decisions to lower plans or project level
Purpose of Strategic AA To avoid an adverse effect on a Natura 2000 site If can’t avoid harm, then pass strict tests: No alternative solutions Overriding public interest Habitat compensation
Strategic AA and plans Weighing the alternatives – an iterative process Likely significant effect on Natura 2000 site? No Yes Ascertain no adverse effect on Natura 2000 site? Yes Yes No Less ecologically damaging alternative solutions?
Strategic AA - potential benefits More options available Avoid project level conflict Strategic mitigation strategies Strategic compensation strategies Greater certainty to planners, developers & conservation groups Move towards more environmentally sustainable development
Issues so far… Encourages strategic mitigation Plan deliverability & certainty Impact assessment detail Taking difficult decisions Deferring difficult decisions Hangover from SEA? Stakeholder consultation
Strategic mitigation & compensation Opportunities Deal with cumulative impacts Increase certainty Streamline decision-making Reduce costs Economies of scale Reduce ecological & commercial risks ‘Up front’ provision in the best places Challenges Agreeing ecological standards at strategic level Delivering in advance Securing land Enforcement Financing
Conclusions
Strategic AA Conclusions Significant cultural shift in plan preparation Avoid damage to Natura 2000 sites Avoidance is best (and easiest?) approach Key differences from SEA can help resolve conflicts early Potential for strategic mitigation and compensation Still learning how to do it…