Bram F. Noble

Institutional criteria for co-management

Much attention has focused around co-management as a process to effective fisheries management. While it is generally accepted that co-management is an effective means of minimizing conflict in fisheries management and recirculating the benefits of effective management back into the local communities, its development has been slowed by institutional constraints. Institutions are important prerequisites to effective co-management, and form the entity from which decisions are made and collective action is taken. This paper suggests how institutions can both facilitate and constrain fisheries co-management. What is presented here is the normative criteria from which to evaluate and improve the institutional development of cooperative fisheries management arrangements.

The Canadian experience with SEA and sustainability

Abstract The project-specific nature of current environmental assessment (EA) practice is often seen as a constraint on accounting for sustainability. Sustainability will only be realized if consideration is given to the environment at all significant decision points; this includes decisions at the policy, plan and program (PPP) level. Strategic EA (SEA), the EA of proposed and existing PPP and their alternatives, is gaining widespread recognition as a supporting tool for decision making towards achieving sustainable development. This paper discusses some key principles and characteristics that should underpin the SEA process if SEA is to contribute to the design of more sustainable policies and strategies, and explores the current state-of-the-art of SEA in Canada.

Strategic approaches to regional cumulative effects assessment: a case study of the Great Sand Hills, Canada

This paper examines the experience with regional cumulative effects assessment (CEA) in the Great Sand Hills, Saskatchewan, Canada, and the lessons that emerge for better practice. The benefits of a regional approach to CEA are widely discusssed; however, in practice, regional CEA, particularly in Canada, has fallen short of its potential. Part of the reason for this, arguably, is the lack of strategic frameworks to support good practice. Most attempts at regional CEA have been constrained by the strong influence of project-based environmental assessment, and are focused on modeling past and present stressors and responses, rather than on projecting cumulative trends and systematically identifying and evaluating desirable futures. Regional CEA is inherently futures-oriented. This requires a supporting SEA framework, structured scenario-based analysis, a multi-scaled perspective, and an integrated approach to CEA and regional plan development.

Strategic environmental assessment quality assurance: evaluating and improving the consistency of judgments in assessment panels

Assessment panels and expert judgment are playing increasing roles in the practice of strategic environmental assessment (SEA). Thus, the quality of an SEA decision rests considerably on the quality of the judgments of the assessment panel. However, there exists very little guidance in the SEA literature for practitioners concerning the treatment and integration of expert judgment into SEA decision-making processes. Subsequently, the performance of SEAs based on expert judgment is often less than satisfactory, and quality improvements are required in the SEA process. Based on the lessons learned from strategic- and project-level impact assessment practices, this paper outlines a number of principles concerning the use of assessment panels in SEA decision-making, and attempts to provide some guidance for SEA practitioners in this regard. Particular attention is given to the notion and value of consistency in assessment panel judgments.

A conceptual basis and methodological framework for regional strategic environmental assessment (R-SEA)

The need to better assess and manage the cumulative effects of human development is well recognized; however, the practice of cumulative effects assessment has been constrained by the current project-based approach. Further, the broader regional and strategic frameworks designed to ensure a more proactive and futures-oriented cumulative effects assessment have, ironically, remained divorced from current practice and from each other. In response, in 2008, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment and various federal and provincial agencies identified the notion of ‘regional strategic environmental assessment’ as a means to integrate the current silos of environmental assessment in Canada and improve the overall practice of cumulative effects assessment. In this paper we report on the ongoing initiative to advance regional strategic environmental assessment, and present a conceptual basis and methodological framework for its development and application.

Strengthening EIA through adaptive management: a systems perspective

Abstract The paper addresses major difficulties in current EIA by pointing out the potential of adaptive management. Several researchers have already suggested this approach, and they stress limitations in our abilities to predict and develop mitigative strategies for complex, dynamic environmental systems. Adaptive EIA adjusts for the unexpected impacts of human activities on the environment. The adaptive approach reflects a conclusion that EIA strategies should be facilitated through an approach that allows adjustments to changing events, decisions, and circumstances and that can modify implementation and mitigative strategies as new knowledge is gained.

Auditing Strategic Environmental Assessment Practice In Canada

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is taking place in diverse forms, and SEA requirements vary considerably from one nation to the next. While the true measure of effectiveness of SEA is its influence on decision output and policy, plan and program (PPP) outcomes, an effective SEA requires a quality assessment process. This paper suggests that there is no generic set of audit criteria that is appropriate for evaluating the quality of all SEA applications. Auditing SEA quality performance requires criteria that reflect the guidelines and procedural requirements of the institutional arrangements within which SEA is practised. Based on a proposed set of SEA quality performance criteria for Canada, this paper presents the findings of an audit of five national-level Canadian SEA applications.

A framework for assessing cumulative effects in watersheds: An introduction to Canadian case studies

From 2008 to 2013, a series of studies supported by the Canadian Water Network were conducted in Canadian watersheds in an effort to improve methods to assess cumulative effects. These studies fit under a common framework for watershed cumulative effects assessment (CEA). This article presents an introduction to the Special Series on Watershed CEA in IEAM including the framework and its impetus, a brief introduction to each of the articles in the series, challenges, and a path forward. The framework includes a regional water monitoring program that produces 3 core outputs: an accumulated state assessment, stressor-response relationships, and development of predictive cumulative effects scenario models. The framework considers core values, indicators, thresholds, and use of consistent terminology. It emphasizes that CEA requires 2 components, accumulated state quantification and predictive scenario forecasting. It recognizes both of these components must be supported by a regional, multiscale monitoring program.

Survey of current methods and guidance for strategic environmental assessment

This paper examines methods promoted and used in strategic environmental assessment (SEA) practice, practitioner choices about methodology and the nature of SEA guidance. Results show that SEA is not challenged by a lack of methods, but the range of methods promoted and used is restrictive. A major challenge to practice is making the ‘right choices’ about methods and methodology. Much SEA guidance is focused on flexibility in SEA, providing high-level principles, and is too generic to facilitate such choices. It is assumed that there is sufficient expertise amongst SEA practitioners, and that practitioners will simply know what methods and methodologies are best. Our results indicate that more detailed operational guidance is needed at the practitioner level on how to make sound methodological choices and how to select the best available methods for the SEA tier and context at hand.

Following-up in strategic environmental assessment: a case study of 20-year forest management planning in Saskatchewan, Canada.

The concept of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) has received considerable attention in recent years; however, the focus has been on the pre-decision stages of policies, plans and programs with much less attention to post-decision follow-up and monitoring. In those instances where SEA follow-up has been addressed, it has been done so much more from a conceptual than a practical perspective. As a result, the principles and concept of SEA follow-up are moving forward but we know little of the practice itself. This paper explores the practice and utility of SEA follow-up for twenty-year forest management planning and assessment in Saskatchewan, Canada. To do this, we develop and implement an analytical framework consisting of the necessary strategic, design and procedural, and institutional principles to enable ‘good’ SEA follow-up. The overall objective is to identify opportunities to learn from experience and to help advance SEA follow-up from concept to practice.