Draft Environment Strategy: strategic environmental assessment

Chapter 2: Approach to the Assessment

Requirement under the 2005 Act

2.1 The Draft Environment Strategy is considered to fall under Section 5(3) of the 2005 Act. Schedule 3(6) of the 2005 Act requires the Environmental Report to consider – “The likely significant effects on the environment, including (a) on issues such as – (i) biodiversity; (ii) population; (iii) human health; (iv) fauna; (v) flora; (vi) soil; (vii) water; (viii) air; (ix) climatic factors; (x) material assets; (xi) cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage; (xii) landscape; and (xiii) the inter-relationship between the issues referred to in heads (i)–(xii); (b) short, medium and long-term effects; (c) permanent and temporary effects; (d) positive and negative effects; and secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects”.

Scoping of SEA Topics

2.2 In accordance with Schedule 2 of the 2005 Act, consideration has been given as to whether the environmental effects (both positive and negative) of the Draft Environment Strategy are likely to be significant.

2.3 Given the high level and broad coverage of some of the proposed measures in the Draft Environment Strategy, all SEA topics required to be considered by the 2005 Act are scoped into the SEA process. These are set out in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: Scoping in/out of SEA Topics

SEA Topic: Biodiversity, flora and fauna

Scoped in: Yes

SEA Topic: Population and human health

Scoped in: Yes

SEA Topic: Soil

Scoped in: Yes

SEA Topic: Water

Scoped in: Yes

SEA Topic: Air

Scoped in: Yes

SEA Topic: Climatic factors

Scoped in: Yes

SEA Topic: Cultural heritage and the historic environment

Scoped in: Yes

SEA Topic: Landscape and visual impacts

Scoped in: Yes

SEA Topic: Material assets

Scoped in: Yes

Approach to assessment

2.4 The approach to the assessment reflects the strategic nature of the Draft Environment Strategy, and the role it plays in bringing together the existing policy framework. As such the assessment takes a narrative approach which describes the existing policy framework, and sets out the additional environmental effects of further measures set out within the Draft Environment Strategy.

2.5 Schedule 2 of the 2005 Act identifies criteria for determining the likely significance of effects on the environment, listed below, which have been reflected in the approach to scoring.

Criteria for assessing likely significant effects

SEA Assessment Criteria

a) the probability, duration, frequency and reversibility of the effects

Breakdown and Description

• Probability
  • Low – Not likely to have an effect
  • Medium – as likely to have an effect as not
  • High – Highly likely to have an effect
• Duration
  • Short-term – 0-1 years
  • Medium-term – 1-2 years (up to the end of strategy period)
  • Long-term – 2+ years (beyond the end of the strategy period)
• Frequency
  • Continual; defined by number of occurrences; or intermittent
• Reversibility
  • Whether the effect can be reversed (i.e. can the receptor return to baseline condition) without significant intervention

b) the cumulative nature of the effects

Breakdown and Description

• Where several options each have insignificant effects but together have a significant or combined effect. This includes synergistic effects, which occur when effects interact to produce a total effect greater than the sum of the individual effects.

c) the transboundary nature of the effects

Breakdown and Description

• Effects beyond Scotland’s boundary.

d) the risks to human health or the environment

Breakdown and Description

• Whether the impact of the effect would present a risk for people and the environment.

e) the magnitude and spatial extent of the effects (geographical area and size of the population likely to be affected)

Breakdown and Description

• Magnitude
• High – High proportion of the receptor affected
• Medium
• Low – Low proportion of the receptor affected
• Spatial extent
• National/Transboundary – Effects on Scotland or England
• International – Effects extending to the UK or beyond

f) the value and vulnerability of the area likely to be affected due to:

• i) special natural characteristics or cultural heritage
• ii) exceeded environmental quality standards or limit values
• iii) intensive land-use

Breakdown and Description

• Impact of the effect on the value or condition of the existing area.

g) the effects on areas or landscapes which have a recognised national, Community or international protection status

Breakdown and Description

• Impacts on areas with national, or international protection.

SEA Framework

2.6 The development of a set of SEA objectives (known as the SEA Framework) is a recognised way in which the likely environmental and sustainability effects of a plan, programme or strategy can be described, analysed and compared. The framework consists of a list of ‘sustainability objectives’ referred to in the report as the SEA objectives. These derive from the review of plans, programmes and strategies (PPS) and an analysis of baseline information and key environmental issues.

2.7 The environmental protection objectives and appraisal guidance (which provide a guide to the factors that should be considered when carrying out assessments) set out in the SEA Framework are subject to change as new information comes to light during the SEA process.

2.8 The SEA Framework is set out overleaf; each primary bullet point constitutes an environmental protection objective and the sub-bullet points set out further guidance to help guide the appraisal of each objective. The SEA Framework is structured to encompass each SEA topic, however, some topics are covered in more than one SEA objective. Table 2.2 details each SEA topic and the corresponding SEA objective(s) developed for the SEA of the Environment Strategy.

Table 2.2: SEA topic and corresponding SEA objective(s)

SEA topic: Biodiversity, flora and fauna

SEA objective: 1. Biodiversity, flora and fauna & 2. Population and human health

SEA topic: Population and human health

SEA objective: 2. Population and human health, 3. Climate change mitigation and adaptation, 4. Air, 5. Soil & 6. Water

SEA topic: Climatic factors mitigation and adaptation & 4. Air

SEA topic: Air

SEA objective: 3. Climate change mitigation & 4. Air

SEA topic: Soil

SEA objective: 5: Soil

SEA topic: Water

SEA objective: 6. Water

SEA topic: Cultural heritage, including architectural and archaeological heritage

SEA objective: 7. Cultural heritage, including architectural and archaeological heritage

SEA topic: Landscape      

SEA objective: 8. Landscape, seascape and townscape

SEA topic: Material assets           

SEA objective: 9: Material assets & 2: Population and human health

1. Biodiversity, flora and fauna

•  1: Biodiversity, flora and fauna: Protect, maintain, and where possible, enhance designated sites, habitats and protected species.
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy protect and enhance designated and undesignated ecological assets, including promoting habitat connectivity; avoiding fragmentation; and adverse impacts on habitats and species from climate adaptation-related changes to air quality, water quality and quantity?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy support the restoration of habitats, including marine and coastal habitats?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy support measures to prevent and control invasive non-native species?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy maintain and enhance a ‘Nature Network’ of ecological assets and blue and green infrastructure, taking into account the impacts of climate change?

2. Population and human health

•  2: Population and human health: Improve the health and wellbeing of the people of Scotland:
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy avoid adverse effects on health, health inequalities and quality of life/well-being?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy improve the resilience of communities, particularly those most vulnerable to climate change?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy encourage the creation, management and enhancement of a coherent green and blue infrastructure (GBI) network?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy increase the resilience of essential services such as healthcare, education, and social care?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy protect and improve human health and wellbeing by improving the quality of the living environment of people and communities?

3a. Climate change mitigation

•  3a. Climate change mitigation: Minimise greenhouse gas emissions from natural and man-made sources.
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy reduce emissions from natural sources?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy reduce emissions from man-made sources?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy support the protection of low carbon and renewable energy generating and transmission sources?

3b. Climate change adaption

• 3b climate change adaptation:
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy support climate adaptation and resilience?

4. Air

•  4: Air: Improve Scotland’s air quality and by reducing concentrations of harmful atmospheric pollutants and avoiding their emission.
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy improve air quality through reduced reliance on and combustion of fossil fuels?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy reduce emissions of harmful atmospheric emissions from all sources?

5. Soil

•  5: Soil: Conserve and enhance Scotland’s soil resources and geological sites:
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy safeguard and improve soil quality and quantity?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy protect, conserve and restore carbon rich soils?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy conserve designated and undesignated geological assets?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy reduce the extent of contaminated and vacant and derelict land?

6. Water

•  6: Water: Preserve and enhance the quality and quantity of waterbodies and groundwater and reduce the risk and effects of flooding, both now and in the future.
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy maintain or improve the quality and quantity of watercourses, surface water (including coastal and marine waters) and groundwater waterbodies?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy direct new development away from areas at highest risk of flooding and avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, taking into account the effects of climate change and mitigate residual risks without increasing flood risk elsewhere?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy increase the resilience of transport systems, infrastructure and public services to the effects of climate change, via flood resilient design?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy promote the use of SuDS (sustainable urban drainage systems), where appropriate?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy encourage the creation, management and enhancement of a coherent green and blue infrastructure (GBI) network to manage surface water and drainage?

7. Cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage

•  7: Cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage: Conserve and enhance the character and built quality of settlements and Scotland’s historic environment and cultural heritage:
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy protect, conserve and enhance designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy improve the resilience of the historic environment from the adverse effects of climate change?

8. Landscape, seascape and townscape

•  8: Landscape, seascape and townscape: Conserve and enhance the character and quality of Scotland’s landscapes / townscapes / seascapes.
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy protect and enhance the character and quality of Scotland’s landscapes, townscapes and seascapes, particularly in designated or sensitive landscapes, from the adverse effects of climate change?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy encourage the retention and planting of green infrastructure to protect landscape character?

9. Material assets

•  9: Material assets: Use natural resources and energy more efficiently.
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy encourage the prudent use of natural resources, particularly scarce resources?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy minimise waste production?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy support responsible waste disposal, supporting a circular economy?
• Does the Draft Environment Strategy protect existing infrastructure?

Use of the SEA Framework

2.9 The findings from the SEA are presented in SEA matrices, which include a colour coded symbol showing the score of each option (including reasonable alternatives) against each of the SEA objectives along with a concise justification for the score given. The SEA matrices are presented in Appendix B. Summaries of the findings for each component of the Draft Environment Strategy are described in Chapter 5 of the Environmental Report.

2.10 The use of colour coding in the matrices allows for likely significant effects (both positive and negative) to be easily identified, as shown in Table 2.3. Reflecting the role of the Draft Environment Strategy in drawing together existing policy and strategy the proposed assessment framework for each objective is shown in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3: SEA scoring of effects

SEA effect: ++

Description of effect: Significant positive effect likely

SEA effect: ++/-

Description of effect: Mixed significant positive and minor negative effects likely

SEA effect: +

Description of effect: Minor positive effect likely

SEA effect: +/-

Description of effect: Mixed minor effects likely

SEA effect: ++/--

Description of effect: Mixed significant effects likely

SEA effect: -

Description of effect: Minor negative effect likely

SEA effect: --/+

Description of effect: Mixed significant negative and minor positive effects likely

SEA effect: --

Description of effect: Significant negative effect likely

SEA effect: 0

Description of effect: No or negligible effect likely

SEA effect: ?

Description of effect: Likely effect uncertain

SEA effect: N/A

Description of effect: Assessment criterion not applicable

2.11 The dividing line between environmental effects is often quite small. Where significant effects are distinguished from more minor effects this is because, using the appraisal questions and criteria and applying professional judgement, the effect of the option in relation to achievement of the SEA objective will be of such magnitude that it will have a noticeable and measurable effect compared with other factors that may influence the achievement of that objective.

Consideration of Reasonable Alternatives

2.12 Part 14(2) of the 2005 Act requires that:

2.13 The report shall identify, describe and evaluate the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing (a) the plan or programme; and (b) reasonable alternatives to the plan or programme, taking into account the objectives and the geographical scope of the Plan or Programme.

2.14 Therefore, the SEA must appraise not only the objectives and actions, but reasonable alternatives to these. This implies that alternatives that are not reasonable do not need to be subject to appraisal. It is important to note that when considering the scope of alternatives the 2005 Act does not specify whether this means considering an alternative plan, programme, or strategy, or different alternatives within the plan, programme, or strategy itself that should be assessed. Part (b) of Regulation 14(2) above notes that reasonable alternatives will take into account the objectives of the plan, as well as its geographical scope. Therefore, alternatives that do not meet the objectives of national policy are unlikely to be reasonable.

2.15 Consideration of alternatives was undertaken in discussion with the Scottish Government. The extent to which alternatives for the Environment Strategy could be considered ‘reasonable’ was influenced by the following factors: the legislative framework for the document; the significant proportion of committed policy and action embodied in the document.

2.16 The following alternative option to the Environment Strategy was proposed by the Scottish Government:

• Demonstrate the additional impact of rapid behavioural change, where the Scottish Government has not yet identified the policies to bring about that change.

2.17 The reasonable alternatives do not include consideration of a ‘do nothing’ scenario, as the strategy was placed on a statutory basis by the UK Withdrawal from the European Union (Continuity) (Scotland) Act 2021 ('the Continuity Act'), with Section 47 requiring Scottish Ministers to prepare and publish an environmental policy strategy.

Mitigation and monitoring proposals and opportunities for enhancement

2.18 A key part of the SEA process is the identification of opportunities to mitigate adverse effects and enhance benefits. As part of the iterative role of SEA, a Draft note of SEA findings on the Draft Environment Strategy was provided to the Scottish Government in early February, which provided some recommendations for mitigation and enhancement.

2.19 The process also includes the development of proposals for monitoring post adoption.

2.20 As noted above, initial feedback on mitigation and enhancement measures was provided to allow this to be reflected in the Environment Strategy as appropriate. This included the recognition of the recommended enhancement, but in some cases acknowledgement that this would be reflected in future work.

2.21 Recommendations for monitoring are covered in Chapter 7.

Difficulties Encountered

2.22 The main difficulties encountered in the SEA relate to the lack of detail on the scale of policy actions which will be achieved through the Environment Strategy. In addition, several of the policy actions relate to the content of future plans, policies or programmes which are yet to be written. Although the broad content of these documents is known, the level of detail and scale of outcomes to be achieved through these is unknown.

2.23 There are varying levels of detail in relation to some of the policy actions described, which mean the scale of environmental effects is unclear. Furthermore, the content of the Draft Environment Strategy refers both to the continuation of current actions and the expansion and enhancement of these. Where actions relate to increased education, knowledge sharing, training and partnership working, the scale of environmental effects achieved through these is challenging to assess.