Bo Elling

Rationality and effectiveness: does EIA/SEA treat them as synonyms?

This article discuss the notion of effectiveness by employing a critical theory understanding of rationality, which recognizes three different types: cognitive-instrumental, moral-practical and aesthetic-expressive. This distinction is important for understanding effectiveness in environmental assessment. Furthermore, such understanding has to do with whether impact assessments can protect environmental values or not. Both terms - rationality and effectiveness - are frequently and vigorously used in theory and discussion on environmental assessment practice and development; they are also widely used synonymously, albeit often unconsciously. In outlining such confusion, the article also discusses so-called post-rational approaches to environmental assessment. Finally, from these theoretical clarifications and detailing of concepts the implications for environmental assessment practice are outlined.

Integration of strategic environmental assessment into regional spatial planning

This article presents the findings from a project on integration of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) into regional planning in Northern Jutland County in Denmark. It was initiated with an analysis of various European examples of SEA of spatial plans. The aim was to test the concept of SEA at the level of spatial planning and support its practical use in the process of revising a regional spatial plan for Northern Jutland County, carried out from the beginning of 1995 to the end of 1997. Several approaches to environmental assessment were tried out, a model for the integration of SEA in regional spatial planning was developed and parts of it tested in practice. Finally, the whole process was evaluated during the autumn of 1998.

Strategic environmental assessment of national policies: the Danish experience of a full concept assessment

This article reports on the experience gained in a study on the application of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) on two Danish bills. All five internationally recognised principles of SEA (a stated document, a fixed procedure, criteria for significance, alternatives and public participation) were included in the assessment. One bill was assessed retrospectively, the other while it was prepared by the competent ministry. The influence of the statement on the readings and adoption in Parliament was observed and analysed. A main conclusion is that it is feasible to carry out a full concept SEA on national policies in a highly relevant way. Some characteristics of SEA at the policy level are highlighted and three theses on SEA for further developments are given.

Communicative planning as counter-power

ABSTRACT This article presents a theory of communicative planning in which the power of citizens is conceived as a resource in the promotion of long-term planning against the short-term interests of investors in public planning. Its point of departure is the depiction of three planning paradigms – traditional synoptic, incremental and participatory planning – and a critical discussion of different theories within the latter. In the light of this, it is argued that, in practice, planning authorities most often regard public participation as a problem, rather than as a potential. The article dismisses this conception and (a) conceptualizes planning on the basis of a Habermasian theory of communicative action and power, (b) shows that the participation of citizens is necessary to secure the inclusion of ethical and aesthetic rationalities in the planning process, and also that (c) citizens may constitute a counterpower to short-term investor interests in planning by (d) strengthening the respect for long-term solutions and the common good. This becomes a structural necessity when it comes to securing sustainability and democratic justice in planning. The article conceptualizes the difference between planning and politics, since in the former, power is constituted in the actual process, not given in advance.

The misleading of public participation in environmental assessment – exploring four infrastructure cases in Denmark

ABSTRACT The article analyses the recent development of public participation in environmental assessment and indicates some unfortunate and unintended results. A number of Danish cases show how the tools involved are employed for a kind of ‘acceptance planning’, instead of actual environmental protection, and that the legitimacy which public inclusion was supposed to bring to environmental assessment has instead been replaced by considerations of legality, which frees entrepreneurs and authorities from including real environmental considerations in their planning. Thus, the undesirable handling of public participation that the article analyses is not only due to the actual difficulties of practising inclusion and the indisputable complexity of the environmental issues but also to a very large extent due to considerations of economic efficiency and an unwillingness among investors – public as well as private – to take account of environmental consequences as a long-term issue. The article ends with a range of recommendations for securing public inclusion in matters of environmental assessment through independent public initiatives or institutions that do not answer to authorities and entrepreneurs.

Borgerne som modmagt i planlægningen

Artiklen fremstiller en kommunikativ planteori, hvori borgernes magt anskues som en ressource, der fremmer langsigtethed i modsaetning til kortsigtede investorinteresser i den offentlige planlaegning. Forst skitseres tre overordnede planparadigmer – traditionel synoptisk, inkrementel og deltagerorienteret planlaegning. Hertil fojes en kritisk diskussion af forskellige teorier inden for det sidstnaevnte. I lyset heraf haevdes det, at planlaeggende myndigheder oftest ser borgerdeltagelsen som et problem frem for et potentiale. Artiklen gor op med et sadant syn og bestemmer a) planbegrebet ud fra en habermasiansk teori om den kommunikative handlen og magt, b) viser, at borgernes deltagelse er nodvendig for at sikre de etiske og aestetiske rationaliteters inddragelse i planprocessen, og c) at borgerne kan udgore en modmagt til kortsigtede investorinteresser i planlaegningen, ved d) at styrke hensynet til langsigtede losninger og almene goder. Derved bliver kommunikativ planlaegning en alternativ position hvad angar magt. Dette ses som en strukturel nodvendighed til sikring af baeredygtighed og demokratisk retfaerdighed i planlaegningen. Artiklen begrebsliggor forskellen pa planlaegning og politik og viser, hvorfor magt ma begribes forskelligt i de to tilfaelde, da magt i det forstnaevnte konstitueres i den aktuelle proces og ikke er givet pa forhand. Det gor det muligt for borgerne at pavirke planprocessen pa en meget mere direkte facon. ENGELSK ABSTRACT: Bo Elling: Citizens as a Counter Power in Planning This article presents a theory of communicative planning in which citizens’ power is conceived of as a resource in long-term planning as opposed to the short-term interests of investors in public planning. Its point of departure is the presentation of three planning paradigms – traditional synoptic, incremental and participatory planning. There is also a critical discussion of different theories of the latter paradigm. The article argues that planning authorities often regard public participation as a problem rather than a potential. The article dismisses this conception and a) conceptualizes planning on the basis of Habermas’ theory of communicative action and power, b) shows that the participation of citizens is necessary to secure the inclusion of ethical and aesthetic rationalities in the planning process, c) shows how citizens may constitute a counter power to short-term investor interests in planning by d) strengthening the respect for long-term solutions and the common good. In this way, communicative planning is an alternative position on power. This becomes a structural necessity when it comes to securing sustainability and democratic justice in planning. With this in mind, the article conceptualizes the difference between planning and politics, and shows why power should be thought of differently in the two, since in the former, power is constituted in the actual process, not given in advance. This makes it possible for citizens to influence the planning process in a much more direct way. Keywords: citizens participation, communicative rationality, planning actions, citizens power, legitimacy.

Findings and Recommendations of the Working Groups

Three discussion sessions were held to address the above topic. One group addressed Methods, one Types of policies, plans and programmes and the third group discussed Procedures.

Danish Experience with SEA in Policy-Making

The study on the Environmental Assessment of Policies was carried out at the EIA-Centre at Roskilde University for the EU-Commission and the Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy and completed in the autumn 1996. An English version of the report Environmental Assessment of Policies has been published by the European Commission, DG XI, B2.