IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i3p609-d200464.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenges for Integrating Strategic Environmental Assessment to Enhance Environmental Thinking: A Case Study of Taiwan Energy Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Yen-Yu Wu

    (Graduate Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Taiwan University, No. 1, Sec. 4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei 106, Taiwan)

  • Hwong-Wen Ma

    (Graduate Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Taiwan University, No. 1, Sec. 4, Roosevelt Rd., Taipei 106, Taiwan)

Abstract

There is an increasing need to evaluate environmental impacts at higher policy planning levels, especially after the European Union (EU) strategic environmental assessment (SEA) directive proposed in 2001. However, integrating SEA and policy planning processes is challenging owing to institutional challenges and/or political problems. We aimed to explore the challenges of this integration process through in-depth interviews with core stakeholders in Taiwan energy policy making. Our results reveal three main types of challenge related to policy planning, SEA implementation, and difficulties in dealing with environmental issues. The first includes the policy planning model, transparency in the policy planning process, and controversial issues clarification; the second includes the different types of SEA purposes, unclear feedback on policy planning, and public participation limitation; the third includes a lack of knowledge of brokerage processes, scientific uncertainty, the role of the Taiwan EPA (TEPA) for environmental thinking, and the influence of local information in policy planning. The results of this study can be applied to countries that use impact-oriented SEA (currently the most common type of SEA) and consider environmental issues during the energy policy planning process.

Suggested Citation

  • Yen-Yu Wu & Hwong-Wen Ma, 2019. "Challenges for Integrating Strategic Environmental Assessment to Enhance Environmental Thinking: A Case Study of Taiwan Energy Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:609-:d:200464
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/609/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/609/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Måns Nilsson & Holger Dalkmann, 2001. "Decision Making And Strategic Environmental Assessment," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(03), pages 305-327.
    2. Robert B. Gibson, 2006. "Beyond The Pillars: Sustainability Assessment As A Framework For Effective Integration Of Social, Economic And Ecological Considerations In Significant Decision-Making," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(03), pages 259-280.
    3. Jay, Stephen, 2010. "Strategic environmental assessment for energy production," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3489-3497, July.
    4. Ngar-yin Mah, Daphne & Hills, Peter, 2014. "Participatory governance for energy policy-making: A case study of the UK nuclear consultation in 2007," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 340-351.
    5. Kirk Stinchcombe & Robert B. Gibson, 2001. "Strategic Environmental Assessment As A Means Of Pursuing Sustainability: Ten Advantages And Ten Challenges," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(03), pages 343-372.
    6. Angus Morrison-Saunders & Thomas B Fischer, 2006. "What Is Wrong With Eia And Sea Anyway? A Sceptic'S Perspective On Sustainability Assessment," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(01), pages 19-39.
    7. Thomas C. Beierle, 1999. "Using Social Goals To Evaluate Public Participation In Environmental Decisions," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 16(3‐4), pages 75-103, September.
    8. Ekins, Paul & Simon, Sandrine & Deutsch, Lisa & Folke, Carl & De Groot, Rudolf, 2003. "A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 165-185, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. María de Fátima Poza-Vilches & José Gutiérrez-Pérez & María Teresa Pozo-Llorente, 2020. "Quality Criteria to Evaluate Performance and Scope of 2030 Agenda in Metropolitan Areas: Case Study on Strategic Planning of Environmental Municipality Management," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-29, January.
    2. Evidence Chinedu Enoguanbhor & Florian Gollnow & Blake Byron Walker & Jonas Ostergaard Nielsen & Tobia Lakes, 2021. "Key Challenges for Land Use Planning and Its Environmental Assessments in the Abuja City-Region, Nigeria," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jean Hugé & Tom Waas, 2011. "Converging impact assessment discourses for sustainable development: the case of Flanders, Belgium," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 607-626, June.
    2. Anastasiia Moldavska, 2017. "Defining Organizational Context for Corporate Sustainability Assessment: Cross-Disciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    3. Chye Ing Lim & Wahidul Biswas, 2015. "An Evaluation of Holistic Sustainability Assessment Framework for Palm Oil Production in Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Boško Josimović & Božidar Manić & Nikola Krunić, 2022. "Strategic Environmental Assessment as a Support in a Sustainable National Waste Management Program—European Experience in Serbia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-13, June.
    5. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    6. Daniel Buda & Hoinaru Razvan & Mocanu Mihaela & Roman Aureliana-Geta, 2019. "IAS 41 and beyond for a sustainable EU agriculture," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 13(1), pages 829-839, May.
    7. Badir S. Alsaeed & Dexter V. L. Hunt & Soroosh Sharifi, 2022. "Sustainable Water Resources Management Assessment Frameworks (SWRM-AF) for Arid and Semi-Arid Regions: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-31, November.
    8. Genesis T. Yengoh & Frederick Ato Armah & Edward Ebo Onumah, 2010. "Paths to Attaining Food Security: The Case of Cameroon," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 1(1), pages 1-22, August.
    9. Maria Cerreta & Pasquale De Toro, 2013. "Integrazione della VAS nei processi di pianificazione: il PTCP di Benevento," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(2), pages 15-45.
    10. Ramona Weinrich, 2019. "Opportunities for the Adoption of Health-Based Sustainable Dietary Patterns: A Review on Consumer Research of Meat Substitutes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, July.
    11. Maria Polorecka & Jozef Kubas & Pavel Danihelka & Katarina Petrlova & Katarina Repkova Stofkova & Katarina Buganova, 2021. "Use of Software on Modeling Hazardous Substance Release as a Support Tool for Crisis Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    12. Kevin Summers & Melissa McCullough & Elizabeth Smith & Maureen Gwinn & Fran Kremer & Mya Sjogren & Andrew Geller & Michael Slimak, 2014. "The Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program: The Environmental Protection Agency’s Research Approach to Assisting Community Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13, January.
    13. Margherita Casini & Francesca Gagliardi & Gianni Betti, 2018. "Sustainable Development Goals indicators: a methodological proposal for a fuzzy Super Index in the Mediterranean area," Department of Economics University of Siena 782, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    14. Sylvie Ferrari & Sébastien Lavaud & Jean-Christophe Pereau, 2012. "Critical natural capital, ecological resilience and sustainable wetland management: a french case study," Post-Print hal-00799051, HAL.
    15. Turetta, Ana Paula Dias & Kuyper, Thomas & Malheiros, Tadeu Fabrício & Coutinho, Heitor Luiz da Costa, 2017. "A framework proposal for sustainability assessment of sugarcane in Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 597-603.
    16. Oscar Reicher & Verónica Delgado & José-Luis Arumi, 2021. "Use of Indicators in Strategic Environmental Assessments of Urban-Planning Instruments: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    17. Sharmila Moganadas & Victor Corral-Verdugo & Santhi Ramanathan, 2013. "Toward systemic campus sustainability: gauging dimensions of sustainable development via a motivational and perception-based approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1443-1464, December.
    18. Baumgärtner, Stefan & Quaas, Martin F., 2009. "Ecological-economic viability as a criterion of strong sustainability under uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 2008-2020, May.
    19. Silvio Franco & Barbara Pancino & Angelo Martella, 2021. "Mapping National Environmental Sustainability Distribution by Ecological Footprint: The Case of Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-14, August.
    20. Dietz, Simon & Neumayer, Eric, 2007. "Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: Concepts and measurement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 617-626, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:609-:d:200464. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.