Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment (환경영향평가)

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

DOI QR Code

A Study on the international case studies for SEA follow-up

전략환경평가 사후관리 해외 사례 분석

  • Cho, Hanna (Korea Environment Institute) ;
  • Park, Joo-Yang (Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, Hanyang University)
  • 조한나 (한국환경정책.평가연구원) ;
  • 박주양 (한양대학교 건설환경공학과)
  • Received : 2015.05.25
  • Accepted : 2015.06.16
  • Published : 2015.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study analyzed international case studies on Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) follow-up and suggested implications based on the study's findings to aid implementation of SEA follow-up in Korea. SEA requires follow-up in order to identify unforseen adverse effects and enable appropriate remedial action to be taken. Tool kits and methodological framework for effective SEA follow-up are only being researched recently. Based on the study's findings, following implications for implementing SEA follow-up in Korea were drawn. First, the system of carrying out SEA follow-up would be different depending on the PPP topic. During the scoping stage, significant impacts should be identified according to the PPP topic, and thus help determine the indicators to be developed in the later stage. Secondly, responsibility, method, time, intervals and actions from SEA follow-up may vary depending on the target SEA consultation. Thirdly, the indicators of SEA follow-up may be considered together with various environmental standards and current political, social and economic indicators which are a big issue in society. Fourthly, SEA follow-up can be used as an integration system of its target planning and environmental planning. Finally, SEA feedback system should be needed. The result of SEA follow-up should be used for target PPP. These would lead to improvements to the target PPP. If SEA follow up is successfully implemented and actively carried out for domestic PPPs, Korea can be a step closer to realization of sustainable development.

연구는 SEA 사후관리에 대한 국내 외 제도와 해외사례를 조사 분석하여 시사점을 도출함으로 국내 SEA 제도 개선에 밑거름이 되고자 한다. 국내는 SEIA를 시행하고 있으며 현재 대상계획, 구체적인 지표, 실효성 있는 운영방안 등 관련 논의와 연구가 활발히 진행 중이다. 현 상황에서 국내 SEA 사후관리를 위한 구체적인 방안을 제시하기엔 한계가 있으므로 국내 SEA 사후관리를 위한 시사점을 몇 가지 제안하고자 한다. 첫째, SEA 사후관리의 내용은 대상계획에 따라 달라질 수 있으며, 계획의 특성을 고려하여야 한다. 둘째, SEA 사후관리의 주체, 방법, 시기 및 주기, 조치결과 등은 SEA 협의대상에 따라 다르게 적용할 수 있다. 셋째, SEA 사후관리의 지표에는 다양한 환경기준과 더불어 현재 정치 사회 경제적 큰 이슈가 되는 지표들을 함께 고려할 수 있다. 넷째, SEA 사후관리는 해당 대상계획과 환경계획과의 통합과정으로 활용될 수 있다. 다섯째, SEA 모니터링의 결과가 환류될 수 있는 시스템이 마련되어야 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 고정희. 2013. 독일 환경평가정책현황과 사후관리제도.(Ko J. 2013. Germany Environmental Assessment Policy and surveillance systems.)
  2. 고정희. 2014. 독일 사례분석.(Ko J. 2014. German Case Study.)
  3. 고정희. 독일의 환경정보공개제도와 공공참여제도.(Ko J. Germany's environmental information disclosure system and public participation.)
  4. 권영한 외. 2014. 정책계획 전략환경영향평가를 위한 지표개발. 한국환경정책.평가연구원.(Kwon Y et al. 2014. Indicator Development for Policy-level Plan Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment. Korea Environment Institute.)
  5. 정주철. 2014. 영국의 SEA와 SA의 비교.(Jung J. 2014. Comparison SEA with SA in England.)
  6. 엄정희 외. 2011.도시계획의 전략환경평가를 위한 기후요소 평가기법의 해외사례분석. 한국환경정책.평가연구원.(Um J et al. 2011. Review on Evaluation Methods of Urban Climatic Factors for Strategic Environmental Assessment in Urban Planning. Korea Environment Institute.)
  7. 유헌석 외. 2013. 전략환경평가제도의 실효적 운용 방안 연구. 한국환경정책.평가연구원.(Yoo H et al. 2013. A study on the effective management of the strategic environmental assessment. Korea Environment Institute.)
  8. 조공장 외. 2010. 도시기본계획의 전략환경평가 방법론 연구. 한국환경정책.평가연구원.(Cho K et al. 2010. Korea Environment Institute. Korea Environment Institute.)
  9. 환경영향평가법 시행규칙. 제2조.(Environmental Impact Assessment Act Enforcement Rules. Article II.)
  10. 환경영향평가법. 제2조.(Environmental Impact Assessment Act. Article II.)
  11. Lundberg K et al. 2010. SEA monitoring in Swedish regional transport infrastructure plans - Improvement opportunities identified in practical experience.
  12. Gachechiladze M et al. 2012. Benefits of barriers to SEA follow-up.
  13. Gachechiladze M. 2010. Strategic Environmental Assessment Follow-up: from promise to practice. Case studies from the UK and Canada.
  14. Hanusch M et al. 2008. Much ado about SEA/SA monitoring: The performance of English Regional Spatial Strategies, and some German comparisons.
  15. Sadler B, Verheem R. 1996. Strategic environmental assessment-status, challenges and future derection. Hague; Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the environment.