Abstract The aim of this paper is to test the broader utility of the sustainability assessment effectiveness framework of Bond et al. (2015) by applying it to a controversial strategic assessment case study. The effectiveness framework comprises six dimensions: procedural effectiveness, substantive effectiveness, transactive effectiveness, normative effectiveness, pluralism, and knowledge and learning. It was originally developed to evaluate sustainability assessment at a system-wide level and it has not been previously applied to a specific case study. The analysis was conducted through document review and the first-hand experience of two of the authors who were involved in the case study in different capacities. The case study selected was the strategic assessment of the proposed Browse Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Precinct in Western Australia, which was conducted over the period 2007–2015 under the strategic assessment provisions of both the Western Australian and Australian Commonwealth environmental legislation. The framework provided a useful structure within which this complex case study could be explored, its strengths and weaknesses brought to light, and the interactions between the dimensions highlighted. We also found opportunities for refinement of the framework. As a result of this analysis we propose to replace the final three dimensions of the framework with legitimacy, where a legitimate process is one which all stakeholders agree is fair and which delivers an acceptable outcome for all parties, though we acknowledge the need for further conceptualisation of this dimension. We also suggest that the concept of substantive effectiveness should be expanded to incorporate the unintended consequences of impact assessment. Our research thus makes both a useful addition to the literature already published on the Browse case study, as well as to the literature on impact assessment effectiveness.

中文翻译：

---

当前的有效性标准是否符合目的？使用有争议的战略评估作为测试案例

摘要 本文的目的是测试 Bond 等人的可持续性评估有效性框架的更广泛效用。(2015) 将其应用于有争议的战略评估案例研究。有效性框架包括六个维度：程序有效性、实质性有效性、交易有效性、规范有效性、多元化以及知识和学习。它最初是为了在系统范围内评估可持续性评估而开发的，之前并未应用于特定案例研究。分析是通过文件审查和两位以不同身份参与案例研究的作者的第一手经验进行的。选择的案例研究是对西澳大利亚拟议的 Browse 液化天然气 (LNG) 区的战略评估，这是在 2007-2015 年期间根据西澳大利亚州和澳大利亚联邦环境立法的战略评估规定进行的。该框架提供了一个有用的结构，可以在其中探索这个复杂的案例研究，揭示其优势和劣势，并突出显示维度之间的相互作用。我们还发现了改进框架的机会。作为这一分析的结果，我们建议用合法性取代框架的最后三个维度，其中合法的过程是所有利益相关者都认为是公平的，并为所有各方提供可接受的结果，尽管我们承认需要进一步概念化这个维度的。我们还建议应扩大实质性有效性的概念，以纳入影响评估的意外后果。因此，我们的研究既是对浏览案例研究中已经发表的文献的有益补充，也是对影响评估有效性的文献的有益补充。