IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Comparing Legislative Mechanisms For Sea Screening And Decision-Making: Austrian And Australian Experiences

Listed author(s):


    (Department of Spatial, Landscape and Infrastructure Sciences, Institute of Spatial Planning and Rural Development, BOKU-University Vienna, 1190 Vienna, Austria)



    (School of Environmental Sciences and Development, North West University, South Africa; School of Environmental Science, Murdoch University, Australia)



    (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia)

Registered author(s):

    Austrian and Australian approaches to strategic environmental assessment (SEA) are compared with particular emphasis upon the legal basis for the initial phase of agreement/screening and the final stage of SEA decision-making and implementation. In Austrian SEA, screening is compulsory and the outcome leads only to recommendations, meaning that the SEA results have to be considered, but are not binding for the approval decision. In Australia engagement in SEA is largely voluntary but the process results in legally binding conditions of approval that can be applied to relevant actions arising from an assessed policy, plan or programme; the incentive for proponents to participate voluntarily is that subsequent project level activities may be exempt from further assessment processes. Compulsory SEA in Australia also provides a legally certain outcome, a factor of benefit to proponents. Examples of SEAs are provided to demonstrate the operation of the respective stages in the two countries. In Austria compulsory screening results in a lot of energy being spent avoiding triggering a full SEA. Although Australian proponents have been somewhat cautious in volunteering for SEA of their activities, there are signs that this is changing. We argue that the regulatory framework characteristics are a key determinant of the behaviour of proponents and the competent authority in practice and subsequently of SEA potential and outcomes. Consideration of the construct of the regulatory framework for SEA screening and decision-making provides a useful point of reflection for practitioners attempting to understand the effectiveness of SEA processes in a given jurisdiction.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. in its journal Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management.

    Volume (Year): 12 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 04 ()
    Pages: 399-423

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:wsi:jeapmx:v:12:y:2010:i:04:p:399-423
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Email:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:jeapmx:v:12:y:2010:i:04:p:399-423. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Tai Tone Lim)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.