SEA Analysis Of New Zealand Regional Land Transport Strategies

1. SEA Analysis Of New Zealand Regional Land Transport Strategies Martin Ward, Independent Advisor, New Zealand Tony Brennand, Manager Strategic Direction, TransportGreater Wellington Regional Council, New Zealand SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

2. New Zealand Transport Strategy The New Zealand Transport Strategy establishes a vision for New Zealand’s transport system and sets five objectives to support it. The vision is stated as follows: By 2010 New Zealand will have an affordable, integrated, safe, responsive and sustainable transport system (New Zealand Transport Strategy, p2). The five objectives supporting the vision: • Assisting economic development, • Assisting safety and personal security, • Improving access and mobility, • Protecting and promoting public health • Ensuring environmental sustainability SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

3. Land Transport Strategy Development and Planning National and regional transport planning is guided by the Land Transport Management Act which requires preparation of: • Regional Land Transport Strategies, • Regional Land Transport Programmes, and • A National Land Transport Programme The National Land Transport Programme comprises elements of the Regional Land Transport Programme assessed for funding from a central government budget administered by Land Transport New Zealand. Land transport programmes are prepared annually. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

4. Regional Land Transport Strategies Regional Land Transport Strategies (RLTS) identify the region’s land transport needs, and state how those needs are to be met. Land transport needs cover: • Roads • Rail • Public transport • Freight transport • Cycling • Walking Regional Land Transport Strategies are prepared every 5 years. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

5. Start here Vision and values Issues and needs assessment Objectives and targets Monitoring Assessment criteria Assessment Evaluation and Choice Implementation RLTS preparation process SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

6. SEA Analysis of Regional Land Transport Strategies Research funded by Transfund (now Land Transport New Zealand) examined three Regional Land Transport Strategies for alignment with SEA practice. Results were reported in: “Ward M, Wilson J and Sadler B, (2005). Application of Strategic Environmental Assessment to Regional Land Transport Strategies, Land Transport New Zealand Research Report, Wellington, New Zealand: Land Transport New Zealand.” SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

7. The Research Approach Three Regional Land Transport Strategies were studied: • Waikato • Canterbury • Wellington The following core elements of SEA were assessed:. • Developing environmental objectives • Scoping environmental impacts • Establishing an environmental baseline • Consideration of alternatives to meet objectives • Undertaking environmental assessment • Ensuring quality review • Providing information for decision making • Implementing environmental monitoring • Providing for public participation • These elements may be applicable in responding to other objectives SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

8. Developing Environmental Objectives • Were clear environmental objectives established and used to guide RLTS development? • Were objectives developed with reference to environmental objectives in other relevant policies and plans? • Were there opportunities for public participation in the development of the objectives? While environmental objectives were developed early in the RLTS process, the objectives set were very broad in nature. Each RLTS adopted the term sustainability but there was little indication its use was based on a clear understanding of what it meant for land transport. The lack of clarity raised questions about whether the objectives were sufficiently clear to guide subsequent stages of strategy development. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

9. Scoping Environmental Issues and Setting an Environmental Baseline • Was a process used to identify key environmental issues? • Was information on the current state of the environment collected and used? For the most part, information on environmental issues collected and used in the RLTS development process was limited. To some extent, this can be seen as a reflection of the quality and quantity of available data. However, in some cases, even where data was available it was not used. All three regions would have been assisted by a comprehensive approach to scoping. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

10. Consideration of Alternatives • Did the process identify alternatives to support the strategy’s environmental objectives? • Did the alternatives include a “do nothing” option and a best practicable environmental option? Consideration of alternatives in strategy development could be described as “reactive” rather the “proactive”. In general, alternatives were identified in response to existing problems rather than as a way of achieving the RLTS’s environmental objectives. In contrast, in an objectives-led process, alternatives could be expected to de derived directly from the objectives. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

11. Environmental Assessment • Was an environmental assessment carried out? • Were the methods used to analyse effects and evaluate significance clearly identified and appropriate? Approaches to environmental assessment were restricted. A narrow set of environmental criteria were used to assess alternatives, and there was little if any assessment of secondary or cumulative impacts. One of the factors influencing the approach to assessment was the view that environmental effects would be addressed through the resource consent process at a later stage. Time and cost constraints meant effort focussed on those factors easier to assess, such as carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide emissions. There were also issues regarding whether some impacts should be addressed at the national rather than the regional level. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

12. Quality Review • Were quality assurance measures provided for in the RLTS preparation process? There was no formal and little informal quality assurance in the RLTS preparation process. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

13. Decision Making • Was environmental information taken into account and used to inform decision making? The limited approach to assessment meant that decision making was not underpinned by a strong environmental information base. The small number of environmental factors considered in the assessment and gaps in information indicate the process could have been enhanced by access to a wider range of environmental information sources. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

14. Monitoring • Are clear monitoring measure, linked to the strategy’s objectives and indicators, in place? • Are monitoring measures adequate to meet environmental information needs? While measures to monitor strategy implementation were identified in each RLTS, monitoring reports show data is not yet being consistently collected to measure performance. One of the constraints identified by the councils was the cost of implementing monitoring programmes and collecting required data. Better provision for monitoring could have been assisted by the use of a scoping process in the early stages of RLTS development. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

15. Public Participation • Were opportunities provided for public participation in the RLTS process? • Did public participation processes help to facilitate involvement? • Were public interest groups with particular environmental and/or social concerns identified and involved? • Were the views expressed by the public taken into account in decision making processes? For the most part, RLTS consultation processes tended to be targeted at “key stakeholders”. A narrow interpretation of “stakeholder” meant that industry, commercial interests and road users tended to be better represented in consultation processes than environmental and other public interest groups. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

16. RLTS preparation process meets some SEA criteria • identifiable environmental objectives were developed early in the process in all regions but were of a general nature • some informal scoping of environmental issues was done but was limited • alternatives were identified primarily in response to existing transport problems rather than as a way of achieving RLTS objectives • assessment of alternatives generally considered a limited number of environmental criteria • public participation of variable quality and inclusiveness Nonetheless the process meets the para-SEA test of Sadler/Dalal-Clayton (2005). SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS

17. SEA Analysis of New Zealand RLTS – Some Conclusions This mixed report card reflects: • the SEA analysis was applied retrospectively • timing of the work relative to the NZTS and the LTMA • lack of guidance from central government • dominance of the field by traffic engineers • limited resources applied to environmental assessment Many of these lessons may be applicable to responding to other NZTS objectives. However it provided a clear picture of how and where to introduce SEA based approaches, tools and methods. SEA Analysis of NZ RLTS