Scottish Government

Environmental Assessment of Development Plans: Interim Planning Advice

Appendix I

Sustainability appraisal

Introduction

1. Some planning authorities may wish to extend the environmental assessment of the development plan so that it also covers socio-economic issues. Only environmental assessment is required by the Directive.

2. It will be seen from Table 2 in the main report that many of the assessments of Scottish development plans have been full sustainability appraisals so there is a growing amount of experience in these types of assessment.

3. The overall process of assessment is no different to that described in this advice. The principal differences are in the wider selection of sustainability objectives and criteria, and the increased volume of information required to cover social and economic factors and issues. On average, in Scottish development plan sustainability appraisals between 1995 and 2002, about half the objectives and criteria related to socio-economic issues and half to environmental issues.

4. The case study below provides an example of a range of objectives used in a sustainability appraisal.

5. The remainder of this Appendix provides a brief commentary on matters that may require to be considered in undertaking a sustainability appraisal rather than an environmental assessment. After a brief resume of the advantages and disadvantages, comments are related to the 14 key stages of the process described in the IPA.

Potential advantages and disadvantages of sustainability appraisal compared with environmental assessment.

6. The two main advantages of a sustainability appraisal are firstly, that it allows a balanced view of the total effects of the development plan; for example, negative environmental effects may be more clearly understood and justified by substantial social or economic benefits not apparent in the environmnetal assessment and report. Secondly, it allows for a more integrated approach to assessment because the complex interactions, for example, those between the economics of land use, the social advantages of public transport and the amenity of the environment. There are close connections between environmental equity and social justice. These kinds of relationships can be more fully explored, assessed and presented in a sustainability appraisal.

7. In assessing their quality of life, few people would distinguish whether the advantages of an attractive, healthy, clean and safe environment in which to live and work, travel and spend their leisure time were "environmental" or "social" considerations. There are clear relationships between the quality of environment in terms of its amenity and the ability of a local economy to attract inward investment. The development plan seeks to address these kinds of issues in an integrated way and the wider remit of a sustainability appraisal will generally be more consistent with that more integrated approach.

8. However, the inclusion of socio-economic factors will complicate and extend the assessment process. It is likely to take more time and involve more staff, and therefore more resources. It will need to engage a wider range of stakeholders, further adding to the time and resources needed. An environmental assessment would comply with the Directive; exceeding minimum requirements may not be seen as a priority in some authorities. Much will depend on the timing, stage of plan preparation, local issues and priorities and resources that can be made available as to whether a planning authority chooses to extend the assessment. Delaying the plan production process should be avoided. It is for planning authorities to decide the extent of the assessment of their development plans.

Effects on the Key stages

Stage 1 Screening

9. This stage is unlikely to be affected because all new and replacement plans and the large majority of alterations will be subject to assessment in any event.

Stage 2 Information collation and forecasting

10. It will be evident that a significant additional input to a sustainability appraisal will be the collation and forecasting of socio-economic information in addition to, and on a comparable basis with that of, environmental information. One aspect of the appraisal should not be significantly more or less comprehensive than the others. Forecasting socio-economic information can be as difficult as forecasting environmental information.

Stage 3 Scoping the sustainability report

11. Again, it will be necessary to ensure an even-handed approach, with as much effort devoted to the identification of significant socio-economic issues as environmental ones. Consultations will be needed with a range of organisations in addition to the consultation authorities for the environmental assessment.

Stage 4 Adopting sustainability objectives and criteria.

12. As indicated above, this is one of the main stages where the differences between the two kinds of assessment will be very apparent. The appraisal must adopt socio-economic objectives and criteria usually related to national objectives, for example those set out in SPP1 - economic competitiveness, social justice, integrated transport etc. In most appraisals to date the socio-economic criteria have concentrated on employment, economic growth and diversification, housing (especially affordable housing), provision of key services including health, education, recreation and shopping facilities and accessibility to services and public transport.

13. The number of objectives, and thus the criteria to be applied can escalate at this point and a clear focus on key issues and potentially significant adverse socio-economic and environmental effects, that the plan should be tested for, is required. Without a substantial team of assessors it is unlikely that the assessment will be able to simply add as many socio-economic criteria as would be selected for environmental criteria in an environmental assessment.

14. Although a few assessments have used in excess of twenty criteria, a doubling of the number of criteria recommended in the IPAto over 30 is unlikely to be practical. Consequently it is likely that some objectives and criteria may need to be omitted or amalgamated. Care needs to be taken to avoid narrowing the environmental criteria to such an extent that environmental effects required to be considered by the Directive are omitted from the assessment. Equally, the caution advocated in the IPA against reducing the number of criteria by amalgamating them to such an extent that it makes them too complex to apply, should be heeded.

Stage 5 Assessing the plan's vision and aims

15. This will follow the same method as environmental assessment but the matrix would be constructed to include the socio-economic criteria.

Stage 6 Consideration of transboundary effects

16. It is unlikely that transboundary socio-economic effects will be an issue.

Stage 7 Assessing alternatives

17. This stage could be made more effective in a sustainability appraisal because it allows for a more thorough and balanced assessment of all the advantages and disadvantages of alternative policy approaches and spatial strategies. In the environmental assessment it is likely that socio-economic issues will need to be addressed, in any event, in order to explain the selection of options. This stage is likely to be more transparent and clearer if socio-economic factors are dealt with in the same degree of detailed assessment as the environmental factors.

Stage 8 Checking the policy range

18. It will be apprarent that this stage will require considerably more input because the total range of policies will need to be considered, not just those relating to the environment. This will generally increase the length of the checklist (such as that reproduced in Appendix D) by between 50% and 100%, depending on the sources used to derive the extended checklist to cover socio-economic issues eg SPPs, NPPGs, PANs and other development plans.

Stage 9 Assessing the plan's policies and proposals

19. Whilst each policy and proposal will be subject to assessment in the environmental assessment, it follows that the consideration of each will need to be extended and the matrices or checklists will need to be more comprehensive, not only in the wider range of criteria but in the commentary that will explain the analysis. Socio-economic effects of policies and proposals are no more or less difficult to assess than environmental ones, and the assessment is likely to need considerable additional thought and a wider range of expertise to advise or contribute to the assessment. The socio-economic effects of some proposals, especially employment-related allocations eg busines, industry, commerce, retail and warehousing/distribution, can be extremely difficult to assess in the absence of specific proposals. The matrices are likely to exhibit a high level of uncertainty and reliance on cross-compliance.

20. The example below includes the socio-economic analysis of the same proposals assessed in Appendix F above, for the South East Wedge JDS but this time including the whole sustainability appraisal showing the derivation of the 22 criteria and their application to the selected proposals, so that the full picture of the analysis is presented.

Stage 10 Preparing and publishing the sustainability report

21. Again, it will be self evident that if the report is to contain all that it would have done for an environmental assessment it will be substantially longer if it is to present the socio-economic assessment in a comparable way. Whilst it is unlikely to be twice the length, the substantial additional time in its preparation and consultation will need to be considered.

Stages 11 to 13, relating to modification, deposit and adoption

22. These are unlikely to vary from the steps in the environmental assessment but it needs to be born in mind that a wider range of comments on the sustainability report are likely as a result of its wider remit. On the other hand, it is likely that the report will be seen as a more integrated assessment, possibly explaining some of the choices made in selecting options, and some of the adverse effects of the plan, in a way that is more transparent to the consultees and the public. Again, a wider range of stakeholders may be interested in a sustainability report rather than an environmental report.

Stage 14 Monitoring and review

23. Self evidently the monitoring of the plan and the monitoring proposals in the sustainability report, and the report on monitoring in accordance with Article 9, at the stage of adoption, will need to extend to a full suite of socio-economic indicators and targets as well as environmental ones. The principles underlying selection of indicators and targets will be much the same as those identified in Appendix H. However, monitoring of socio-economic issues is more likely to embrace the existing monitoring programmes of development plans, eg in terms of population, housing supply and completions, employment etc.

Example of sustainability assessment

South East Wedge Joint Development Study

Assessment of Proposals

The following Table shows how the criteria were drawn from the aims and objectives for all the sustainability crteria, including socio economic criteria as well as the environmental criteria previously presented in Appendix F. Table 2 records the assessment of key principals.