Abstract SEA spread around the world as has SEA effectiveness research. International SEA evaluations show mixed findings on SEA effectiveness. In this article, the quality and procedural effectiveness of SEA in Germany is analysed pursuing the hypothesis that SEA is influenced by planning and administrative traditions that tend to counteract to more ambitious SEA approaches. Three SEA case studies were analysed according to a set of criteria and indicators based on international research outcomes involving SEA integration into decision-making, scoping, selection and assessment of alternatives, cumulative effects assessment, tiering, public participation, and monitoring. The analysis draws on documents analysis and interviews with representatives from responsible agencies and involved SEA consultancies. The analysis shows that SEA is facilitating informed decision-making as the responsible agencies used the SEA, the interaction with consultancies, and the participation processes as a source of information. However, the case studies show various degrees of SEA quality in Germany based on the evaluated criteria and indicators. Results demonstrate that procedural effectiveness is limited. Unclear legal regulations, an expert-based planning approach instead of a collaborative approach, and organisational constraints limit the SEA quality. Furthermore, SEA performance is highly influenced by administrations' legalistic tradition, the expert-based planning culture, the home-grown planning system, and the bounded importance of SEA consultancies in the era of staff cuts and under-resourced agencies. Thus, the recommendations aim to strengthen a more collaborative planning approach, to build SEA capacity within SEA responsible agencies, and to clarify SEA regulations. The overall question for SEA evaluation research and practice may be how more collaborative planning approaches can effectively be implemented in planning and SEA practice through institutional learning.

中文翻译：

---

SEA 表现不佳的艺术——来自德国的症状叙述

摘要 SEA 传播到世界各地，SEA 有效性研究也是如此。国际 SEA 评估显示了关于 SEA 有效性的混合结果。在本文中，我们分析了德国 SEA 的质量和程序有效性，并假设 SEA 受到规划和行政传统的影响，而这些传统往往会抵消更雄心勃勃的 SEA 方法。根据一系列基于国际研究成果的标准和指标分析了三个 SEA 案例研究，这些研究成果涉及 SEA 融入决策、范围界定、替代方案的选择和评估、累积影响评估、分层、公众参与和监测。该分析利用文件分析和与负责机构和相关 SEA 咨询公司代表的访谈。分析表明，SEA 正在促进知情决策，因为负责机构使用 SEA、与咨询公司的互动以及参与过程作为信息来源。然而，案例研究显示了基于评估标准和指标的德国 SEA 质量的不同程度。结果表明程序的有效性是有限的。不明确的法律规定、基于专家的规划方法而不是协作方法以及组织约束限制了 SEA 的质量。此外，在裁员和资源不足的时代，SEA 的表现受到政府的法制传统、基于专家的规划文化、本土规划系统以及 SEA 咨询的有限重要性的高度影响。因此，这些建议旨在加强更具协作性的规划方法，在 SEA 负责机构内建立 SEA 能力，并澄清 SEA 法规。SEA 评估研究和实践的总体问题可能是如何通过机构学习在规划和 SEA 实践中有效地实施更多的协作规划方法。