Building a Sustainability Assessment Framework
Building a Sustainability Assessment Framework
The necessity of a new environmental assessment regime
The need to undertake a new environmental assessment regime as proposed by the Liberal Party of Canada is driven on the point that, over almost half a century the since the nation’s first environmental assessment processes and laws were introduced, the have been advances as well as reversals across the globe. The recent changing times have put the dominant record on the environmental assessment as one of the gradually expanded scope, application, openness, ambition and understanding (Noble, 2012). Therefore, in order to put the environmental assessment just like the other areas of environmental law and policy in Canada in the path to ever greater influence and capability, a new environmental assessment regime is an inevitable component of the country’s top political agenda.
Secondly, from the onset the country has experienced resistance on undertaking the environmental assessment obligations from authorities opposing the new scrutiny and obligations as well as the proponents who fear the new costs, potential rejections and approval delays (Schmidt, Joal & Albrecht, 2015). Even though, the need for the new environmental assessment regime within the Liberal Party of Canada’s campaign agenda becomes inevitable since these environmental advances continue in most jurisdictions and in the realms of theory and professional practice. Therefore, the new environmental assessment framework provides advocacy to an elaborative focus to the cumulative effects, public engagement, sustainability objectives and strategic undertakings.
What prompted the Liberal Party of Canada’s outlined goals and subsequent environmental assessment review
The 6 July 2012 adopted Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012 (CEAA 2012) eliminates most of the involvement of the federal government in environmental assessments and this hugely curtails the scope and potential effectiveness of the remaining obligation. Therefore, the formulation and application of the new environmental assessment by the Liberal Party are expected to reduce the number of federally led assessments from thousands to nearly hundreds per annum. This new initiative will narrow the scope of the assessments which are undertaken (Noble, 2010).
Additionally, the country is in need of these new environmental laws which would increase reliance on the ministerial discretion in the process decisions –a change that is likely to foster an increase in the role of political lobbying and reduce process predictability. This has been basically pegged don the fact the requirements of CEAA 2012 are considered to be few, narrowly scoped, late and uncertain to qualify as effective environmental assessment standards.
The Liberal Party of Canada has scrutinized the flawed aspects of the old Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA), which had been in force from 1995 to 2012. Even though, the act had undergone minor adjustments and amendments over the years, it still succumbed to design limitations, which includes exclusive focus on projects (with no attention to strategic-level activities), unwieldy and occasionally late triggering, a mere discretionary requirements for examining the alternatives and purposes, incomplete and confusing approach to the environmental scope to be considered, and ineffective framework in which adequate enforcement and monitoring is undertaken. This has formed the core frontier on which the Liberal Party of Canada finds it essential to come up with an explicit, well-stipulated environmental assessment framework to help in curbing the nation’s environmental challenges.
The Liberal Party of Canada architects saw the difficulty experienced in the implementation of CEAA. These significant implementation difficulties undermined effectiveness, efficiency and credibility of the entire scope of the environmental assessment framework. A portion of these difficulties emerged from the reluctant participation by the federal agencies that are tasked with the responsibility of undertaking assessment requirements or carry out the duty of assessment reviewers (Schmidt, Joal & Albrecht, 2015). On the other hand, some of the implementation problems arose from the ill-defined and an overlapping assignment of the provincial and federal constitutional responsibilities for environmental concerns. Additionally, there is need for the federal assessment to fit with a plethora of the other assessment processes –provincial, Aboriginal and territorial. Within such a context of the review of the old law, the Liberal Party proposes an expanded scope, application and ambition alongside a system of more effective application through enhanced inter-jurisdictional harmonization and internal commitment.
Sustainability Assessment
Sustainability assessment is an instrument for the evaluation and optimization which is geared towards strengthening the integration of sustainable development in the political decision-making process and planning processes across the different areas. This instrument assesses the environmental, social and economic impacts of the political projects and accomplishments on the part of Confederation, thereby, promoting optimization and revealing the conflicting goals at the earliest possible level.
Sustainability assessment generally provides an assessment of the projects by they are realized in the form of an ex-ante evaluation. It gives focus on the strategic, programmatic and planning levels, it becomes applicable to the evaluation of projects, and such undertakings from the widest range of policy sectors. On a specific note, environmental sustainability assessment is the measure of performance indicators and the providing mitigation measures of the potential risks with an aim of reducing the organization’s carbon footprint and accomplishes other environmental goals.
Purposes of Sustainability Assessment
Environmental sustainability assessment establishes proactive processes to attain sustainability which would create improvement of the operational efficiencies, boost asset value and ensure enhancement of the stakeholder work environments. For instance, it provides a benchmark on which whether the new instruments should be developed, or whether the existing assessment tools should be expanded through an incorporation of additional criteria (Noble, 2010).
Secondly, the purpose of the sustainability assessment is to provide an evaluation and optimization of the federal projects in relation to the goals of sustainable development. This assessment should facilitate the identification of the deficiencies and imbalances between the dimensions of economy, society, and environment, to pinpoint opportunities for the optimization, and to achieve a long-term equilibrium between the highlighted three dimensions (Fitzpatrick & Sinclair, 2009). Moreover, the environmental assessment provides a platform for the improvement of planning capabilities and capital budgeting as it tracks budgets and costs associated with the environmental deficiencies.
The conceptual framework of this assessment is envisioned to form a common instrumental framework for addressing the different requirements and expectations arising from the various areas to be addressed, for instance, draft strategies, programs, legislation, plans, and concepts.
Application of Sustainability Assessment
Sustainability assessment provides a methodological framework applicable to the different projects falling within all the sectoral policies. The criteria for the associated sustainable development and the target dimensions are applicable to all the projects in every domain. Detailed methodological steps are the indicators used towards impact analysis and on the other hand, may be different from one policy or domain area to another (Ahmed & Sánchez, 2011).
Sustainability assessment is not considered as a new assessment instrument to replace or be conducted alongside planned or existing assessment and testing processes. It should rather be applied in combination with other instruments (for example, health impact analysis or strategic environmental analysis) as a section of the established process and should be built on results (Schmidt, Joal & Albrecht, 2015).
Proposal on how to apply sustainability assessment in Canada
Statement of Principles
The increasingly growing interest in consideration of the environmental issues has prompted the Canadians to strive for sustainability and pursuit for better management of development in harmony with the environment. Alongside this growth of interest, there has been an introduction of new legislation, coming from both the international and national sources, for example, the European Commission, which seeks to influence the interconnection between environment and development.
The legislative strategy of CEAA 2012 was to shift a good portion of the environmental assessment task to the provinces. This limited the scope of the assessments by the federal agencies to matters of exclusive federal jurisdiction leaving the issues of shared environmental jurisdiction to the provincial assessment processes which covered only a few of the projects involved. Moreover, CEAA provided for the matters of exclusive federal aspect which ensured that there was substitution of appropriate provincial processes (Munier, 2014). Therefore, the proposal of the new environmental assessment laws would expand reliance of the provinces through substitution and deferral which is meant to bar subjecting the proponents to provincial and federal processed.
The proponents of the new Canadian environmental assessment law would advocate for undertaking of the proposed projects on the federal lands alongside those carried outside of Canada which the federal government has the intention to fund or carry out, are considered in a more precautionary and careful manner with an aim of avoiding significant adverse environmental effects (Kondyli, 2010).
This proposal seeks to investigate the environmental assessments in Canada would encompass the involvement of evaluation of various natural resources utilization, for instance, extraction projects of the non-renewable resource, in order to determine the effectiveness of the environmental assessment initiative in the country and how they contribute to meeting the responsibility to consult Aboriginals (Noble, 2010).
There are questions that this proposal seeks to give an insight view on. These would encompass role of environmental assessments in ensuring the duty to consult and accommodate an overlap with the other areas of difficulty for the environmental assessments -including limited consideration of cumulative impacts (Sheate, 2010). A good number of assessments focus on the project-level concerns, thereby adopting a thin focus both temporally and spatially. Such issues accompany several other sustainability concerns which are associated with the environmental assessments, for instance, integrating assessment of the socio-economic and cultural together with biophysical impacts of the projects aimed at an overall lasting positive contributions from the projects. It is certain that the assessments need to adopt a wider scope and be able to address those concerns which are beyond the project level if the target is to achieve a long-term sustainability (Dalal-Clayton & Sadler, 2015). In other regions in Canada, there exist multiple projects which are being conducted and have cumulative impacts on Aboriginal lands. Therefore, effective assessment of the cumulative effects and other concerns on sustainability becomes appropriate in satisfying the duty to consult in such areas.
Description of the environmental assessment process steps
The Canadian environmental assessment process should be designed to provide a mechanism for reviewing the major projects in order to assess the potential impacts the various projects hold. The process is significantly essential as it ensures that the major projects attain the objectives of economic, social, and environmental responsibility (Deakin & Reid, 2014). It is necessary that the authorities take the environmental assessment process steps effectively to ensure that the concerns and issues of the nations, public, interested stakeholders and the various government agencies are addressed. The environmental assessment process steps for the Canadian scenario would encompass:
Screening
This entails ensuring that the proposed project lies within the remit of the Canadian regulations. It further looks into its significant impact on the environment and thus its necessary to have an assessment.
Scoping
This stage ensures that it determines the extent to which the environmental issues are to be considered in the framework of undertaking an assessment and reporting in the environmental statement.
Preparation of an environmental statement
It is inevitable for the applicant to compile the information required to undertake an assessment of the possible significant environmental effects of this process as long as it is decided that assessment is necessary. This statement is formulated by the applicant after having been provided with any relevant environmental information in the custody of public authorities.
Undertaking a planning application and consultation
The well-frames environmental statement and the application of development must be publicized. The various statutory institutions and the general public must be given the opportunity to give their views on the proposed development and environmental statement.
Decision-making
The applicant takes the responsibility to submit the Environmental Statement and any relevant information to the Secretary of State or the local planning authority to decide whether to give their consent for such development. This decision and the reasons behind it must be passed to the public in record time.
Selection of Assessment Tools
The process of selecting necessary environmental assessment tools would entail a strategic measurement of the impacts of the environmental concerns on the lives of humans and plants. The selection of vital assessment tools is carried with a major intention of restoring public resources and minimizing possible effects of environmental challenges through mapping and longitudinal data products in determining the environmental damage (Kasperson & Kasperson, 2011). The tools must integrate static and real-time data in an easy-to-use format for the environmental assessment responders and decision makers (Noble, 2010).
A Decision Tree
A comparison and contrast of this proposal and the federal environmental assessment system under CEAA 2012
The similarities of the proposed framework to the current system
The proposed framework and the current federal environmental assessment system of CEAA 2012 are purposefully designed to protect components of the environment which are within the federal legislative authority from the underlying adverse environmental effects caused by a designated project (Ahmed & Sánchez, 2011). This is done by ensuring that the designated projects are carried out in a focused, precautionary and careful manner in order to eliminate significant adverse environmental effects as the federal authority exercises a function required for the project to proceed.
Differences of the proposed framework and the current system
CEAA 2012 rejects both the harmonization and coordination in favor of reliance on the provinces. On the other hand, the proposed framework provides a simple attractive means of streamlining, which is highly vulnerable to substantive problems coming from the great provincial differences on the basic assessment components (Sheate, 2010).
Difficulties in implementing the proposal
Though a good number of provincial processes deliver significantly comprehensive assessment which entails coverage of exclusively federal concerns, but there are no grounds to expect consistency or adequacy of the project assessments which were previously covered by the federal requirements.
Additionally, the proponents of the new proposal across Canada are faced with unhelpful diversity of the requirements of assessment to the detriment of the overall efficiencies. Inter-jurisdiction disparity still hinder assessment processes among the public, and the vaguely stated requirements are never designed to encourage the initiatives of basic national equivalency at a credibly high level.
References
Ahmed, K., & Sánchez, T. E. (2011). Strategic environmental assessment for policies: An instrument for good governance. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Dalal-Clayton, B., & Sadler, B. (2015). Strategic Environmental Assessment: A Sourcebook and Reference Guide to International Experience. London: Earthscan.
Deakin, M., & Reid, A. (2014). Sustainable urban development: Use of the environmental assessment methods. Sustainable Cities And Society, 10, 39-48.
Fitzpatrick, P., & Sinclair, A. (2009). Multi-jurisdictional environmental impact assessment: Canadian experiences. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29(4), 252-260.
Kasperson, J., & Kasperson, R. (2011). Global environmental risk. Shibuya-ku, Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
Kondyli, J. (2010). Measurement and evaluation of sustainable development. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 30(6), 347-356.
Munier, N. (2014). Multicriteria environmental assessment. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Noble, B. F. (2010). Introduction to environmental impact assessment: A guide to principles and practice. Don Mills, Ont: New York.
Noble, B. (2012). A state-of-practice survey of policy, plan, and program assessment in Canadian provinces. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24(3), 351-361.
Schmidt, M., João, E., & Albrecht, E. (2015). Implementing strategic environmental assessment. Berlin: Springer.
Sheate, W. (2010). Tools, techniques & approaches for sustainability. Singapore: World Scientific Pub. Co.
