Capacity Building Needs Assessment for Implementing the UNECE SEA Protocol in EECCA Countries

1. Capacity Building Needs Assessment for Implementing the UNECE SEA Protocol in the Selected EECCA Countries IAIAConference on international experience & perspectives in SEA Prague, 26-30 September 2005 Session A4 Legal and policy frameworks for SEA in Newly Independent States Ausra Jurkeviciute, the REC (AJurkeviciute@rec.org) Jiri Dusik, the REC (JDusik@re.org) Henrieta Martonakova, UNDP Regional Centre for Europe and CIS(Henrieta.Martonakova@undp.org)

2. Issues for discussion • Need for capacity development (CD) for SEA implementation in signatory countries of the UNECE SEA protocol (specifically in EECCA) • The first step: needs assessment • Framework for needs’ assessment within the UNDP – REC regional project ”SEA Promotion and Capacity Building”, • Lessons learnt conducting CD needs’ assessment: importance, advantages • Key issues in CD programme design

3. Why is there a need for CD? • Transitional countries did a lot of strategic planning with SEA elements before 1990. How those requirements differ from the SEA Protocol? • The key questions for CD is understanding of SEA: • Field of application • SEA methods and tools • Public participation requirements

4. Rational for needs assessment • The CD has to assess future needs and careful allocation of resources • Needs assessment helps to establish contacts with stakeholders and builds trust • Can make other donors interested in the activity and attract additional resources (both financial and professional)

5. Framework for needs’ assessment • Defining where future practicing will be occurring: Identification of PPs that fall under the scope of the SEA Protocol • Defining what needs to be changed: comparative analysis of current EA provisions with those of SEA • Analysis of the priority issues for the effective implementation of the UNECE SEA Protocol • Stakeholder analysis: Key players in SEA reforms • Past, ongoing and planned initiatives to build SEA capacity in the country • Recommendations for the most effective focus of the UNDP/REC project

6. Lessons learnt so far (i) • A lack of experience on evaluation of strategic planning documents • Extremely strong tendency to associate SEA with the project level EA largely based on codes and threshold values. • Absence of tools and clear mechanisms for preparation of strategic planning and legal documents makes old system inactive and calls for new procedures. • A big expectation from the more advanced countries, whereas the mechanisms they bring are not directly applicable, which make planners and experts frustrated with the process.

7. Lessons learnt so far (ii) • An emerging trend to work on amendment of the construction and building codes and other SER regulations to be applicable to the strategic documents • Rudiments of the SER procedure applicable to strategic planning documents call for an ex-post assessment, which is passive in relation to the planning process. • Suggestions for new alternatives and comments and improvements produced during the ex-post evaluations are most often rejected by the planners/decision makers. • Developing traditions and practices of involvement of health authorities into environmental assessment of strategic planning documents requires more efforts.

8. Lessons learnt on capacity assessment • Capacity assessment is a capacity building tool • To carry out CA one has to understand what is SEA. Local experts need training in SEA before they carry out CA • Allocate sufficient support to implement CA. Local experts have to be guided focusing on different aspects of SEA