Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

Korean Society of Environmental Impact Assessment (한국환경영향평가학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Implication Measures between Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment and Sustainable Development Indicators

전략환경영향평가와 지속가능한 발전 지표의 연계방안

  • Hong, Sang-Pyo (Dept. of Environmental Engineering, Cheongju University)
  • 홍상표 (청주대학교 환경공학과)
  • Received : 2016.01.26
  • Accepted : 2016.02.07
  • Published : 2016.02.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In 2015, Summits of State and Government at United Nations General Assembly agreed to set the world on a path towards Sustainable Development(SD) through the adoption of the 2030 Agenda. 2030 Agenda adopts 17 Sustainable Development Gooals(SDG) to achieve 3 pillars of social security, economic efficiency and environmental integrity. Sustainable Development Indicators(SDI) which are suggested by UN SDSN(United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network), have been developed for measuring SDG implementation, by which Sustainability Assessment(SA) can be accomplished to check through more holistic approaches to poverty alleviation, social inclusion and environmental management. In Korea, Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment(SEIA) has been applied to PPP(policy, plan, program) by 'Ministry of Environment', whereas 'National Land Planning Assessment(NLPA) which is one sort of SEA has been implemented to evaluate PPP of Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport'. Although SEIA and NLPA have been utilized as decision-making support tools for stakeholders including high authorities, the reference criteria of these institutions are not considered as convincible and communicable. Evaluation criteria of alternatives which are core principles for SEIA and NLPA seem so ambiguous and unscientific. Through incorporation of SDI into SEIA, a convenient, quick and credible diagnosis of the key dimensions of SD comprising social equity, economic development and environmental management, can help develop a shared understanding of priorities of implementation of SDG.

2015년 9월에 세계 각국의 정상이 UN 총회에 모여 지속가능한 발전을 위한 2030 Agenda를 구축하기로 합의하였다. 2030 Agenda에는 사회적 안전성, 경제적 효율성 및 환경적 건전성이라는 3대축을 달성하기 위한 17개의 지속가능한 발전목표(SDG)가 채택되었다. UN 지속가능 발전 구축연합(UN SDSN)에서는 SDG 실행 정도를 측정하기 위한 지속가능 발전지표(SDI)를 개발하여 빈곤퇴치, 사회적 통합, 환경관리 같은 총체적 접근을 통하여 지속가능성의 달성 정도를 확인할 수 있는 지속가능성평가(SA)에 적용할 수 있도록 하였다. 우리나라에서는 전략환경영향평가(SEIA)를 PPP(정책, 계획, 프로그램)에 환경부가 시행하는 반면에, 전략환경평가(SEA)의 일종인 국토계획평가(NLPA)는 국토교통부 자체의 계획에 적용되고 있다. SEIA와 NLPA가 고위 정책당국자를 포함한 이해당사자들에게 의사결정 지원도구로 활용되어 왔지만, 이들 SEA 제도의 핵심원리인 최적 대안 선정의 평가기준은 구체성이 미흡한 실정이다. 우리나라 실정에 적합하게 고안된 SDI를 SEIA에 반영하면 지속가능성을 비교적 간략하게 평가하여 SDG 실행의 실효성을 향상시키는데 기여할 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Barry N, Evelin U. 2007. Categorizing Tools for Sustainability Assessment. Ecological Economics 60: 498-508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.023
  2. Bond A, Saunders A. 2011. Re-evaluating Sustainability Assessment: Aligning the Vision and the Practice. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 31(1): 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2010.01.007
  3. Carraro C, Campagnolo L, Eboli F, Farnia L. 2015. Assessing Sustainable Development Goals. SDSN Conference on 'Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: Getting Started'.
  4. Cho GJ. 2010. Research on SEA Methodology for Urban Master Plans. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  5. Devuyst D. 2000. Linking Impact Assessment and Sustainable Development at the Local Level: Introduction of Sustainability Assessment Systems, Sustainable Development 8: 67-78. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1719(200005)8:2<67::AID-SD131>3.0.CO;2-X
  6. Donnelly A, Jones MB, O'Mahony T, Byrne G. 2007. Selecting Environmental Indicators for Use in Strategic Environmental Assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 27(2): 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2006.10.006
  7. Farnia L, Giove S. 2015. Fuzzy Measures and Experts' Opinion Elicitation, Smart Innovation. Systems and Technologies 37: 229-241.
  8. Gao JJ, Kornov L, Christensen P. 2013. Do Indicators Influence Communication in SEA. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 43: 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2013.06.004
  9. Gudmundsson H, Joumard R, Aschemann R. 2010. Indicators and Their Functions, In: Joumard R, Gudmundsson H. Editors. Indicators of Environmental Sustainability in Transport. Les Collections; pp.23-45.
  10. Hong SP. 2011. A Study on the Implication of Sustainability and Environmental Assessment. J Environ Impact Assess. 20(3): 269-279. [Korean Literature]
  11. Jeong HS, Yun KS. 2003. A Study on Ecological- Economic Model Development for Sustainability Evaluation II. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  12. Kim HS, Song YI, Kim YJ, Lim YS. 2007. Linking Environmental Assessment and Sustainable Development Indicators. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  13. Ko JK, Joo JH. 2015. Developing and Monitoring Indicators of Sustainable Development in Gyeoggi-do. Gyeoggi Research Institute. [Korean Literature]
  14. Korean Ministry of Environment. 2015. Regulations on Preparations of Environmental Impact Statements etc. Notification of Ministry of Environment 2015-141. [Korean Literature]
  15. Kwon YH, Oh JK, Ahn SE. 2014. Indicator Development for Policy-level Plan Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]
  16. Lee JS. 2015. A Study on the Analysis of the Opinion Gap Related to the Constituent Element of Sustainable Development and a Strengthening Plan of the Environmental Element. Ph. D. Dissertation. Chonnam National University, Daejeon. [Korean Literature]
  17. Oh JK, Kwon YH. 2015. A Comparative Study on the Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment in Korea and Foreign Countries. J Environ Impact Assess. 24(3): 244-259. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2015.24.3.244
  18. Oh SG, Kim EK. 2014. A Study on the Sustainability Assessment for Improving Environmental Impact Assessment: A Case of Chungcheongnam-Do. J Local Govern Studies. 17(4): 363-385. [Korean Literature]
  19. Partidario M. 2007. Scales and Associated Data- What is Enough for SEA Needs?. J Environ Impact Assess Review. 27(5): 460-478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2007.02.004
  20. Sadler B. 1999. Framework for Environmental Sustainability Assessment and Assurance. In: Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment. Blackwell Science; p.12-32.
  21. Schwarz J, Beloff B, Beaver E. 2002. Use Sustainability Metrices to Guide Decisionmaking. Available from: http://www.cepmagazine.org
  22. Searcy C. 2009. The Role of Sustainable Development Indicators in Corporate Decision-making. International Institute for Sustainable Development; p.2.
  23. UNCED. 1992. The Rio Declaration Environment and Development.
  24. UN SDSN. 2015. Why a Guide for Getting Started?. p.14.
  25. Yoo HS. 2013. A Study on the Effective Management of the Strategic Environmental Assessment - Establishment Procedure and Characteristics of Policy Plan -. Korea Environment Institute. [Korean Literature]

Cited by

  1. 대체적 분쟁해결 방안으로서 환경영향평가 적용가능성 - 문장대 온천 조성사업 환경갈등 사례연구 - vol.26, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2017.26.6.495
  2. A Study on the Vietnam Environmental Protection Law vol.40, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.35769/elr.2018.40.2.012
  3. Post-2020에 연계한 온실가스 항목의 환경영향평가 개선 방안 vol.28, pp.5, 2019, https://doi.org/10.14249/eia.2019.28.5.483
  4. 자연환경 가치의 효율적 이용과 보전을 위한 환경정책통합 기반연구 vol.30, pp.8, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5322/jesi.2021.30.8.629