Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/25759
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Social Sciences Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: How well do strategic environmental assessments in Scotland consider human health?
Author(s): Douglas, Margaret
Carver, Hannah
Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal
Contact Email: hannah.carver@stir.ac.uk
Keywords: Environmental assessment
Health impact assessment
Issue Date: Sep-2011
Citation: Douglas M, Carver H & Katikireddi SV (2011) How well do strategic environmental assessments in Scotland consider human health?, Public Health, 125 (9), pp. 585-591.
Abstract: Objectives  Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is a systematic approach to identifying, describing, evaluating and reporting on the environmental – and health – effects of policies, plans and strategies. SEAs have potential to improve population health because they assess ‘upstream’ health determinants and recommend measures to improve these. The authors studied the range of health issues considered in SEAs in Scotland, and the evidence used in their assessment.  Study design  Documentary review of 62 consecutive SEA reports.  Methods  Environmental reports were categorized by sector, and the health-related environmental problems, SEA objectives/criteria, differential impacts, evidence, recommended mitigation and monitoring were identified for each report.  Results  Environmental reports identified many health-related issues, and set a wide range of health-related objectives/criteria, but these were inconsistent for SEAs assessing similar plans. Few identified differential impacts or mental health impacts. Mitigation focused on mitigating adverse impacts rather than enhancing positive impacts. It was unclear what health evidence was used to inform the judgements made in scoring the plans against SEA objectives.  Conclusions  Many SEAs in Scotland adopt a wide perspective on health, but most fail to identify differential impacts. Health involvement in scoping of health issues and better use of health evidence may enhance their quality.
DOI Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2011.06.005
Rights: The publisher does not allow this work to be made publicly available in this Repository. Please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study.

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Douglas, Carver & Katikireddi (2011).pdf149.47 kBAdobe PDFUnder Permanent Embargo    Request a copy

Note: If any of the files in this item are currently embargoed, you can request a copy directly from the author by clicking the padlock icon above. However, this facility is dependent on the depositor still being contactable at their original email address.



This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.