1. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul Alternatives and Assessment in Large-scale Projects – the Öresund Bridge Eric Markus Blekinge Institute of Technology Sweden eric.markus@bth.se

2. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul Alternatives – what about them? Alternatives are at “the heart of the environmental impact statement” (US Council for Environmental Quality 1978, regulation 1502.14) Search for alternatives one of the core points of EIA (and SEA) Alternatives – different ways to reach the intended goal of the project (or PPP) Alternative technical solutions, alternative locations, the ‘zero alternative’ Difficulties often overlooked or ignored Case-study – Öresund Bridge

3. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul The Öresund Bridge Malmö, Sweden – Copenhagen, Denmark Road & railway link Cable-stayed bridge Artificial island Immersed tunnel Total ~16 km (10 miles) long Decided in 1991/94 Opened year 2000 Cost (1990 prices): USD ~2.35 bn. © Öresundsbro Konsortiet

4. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul © Öresundsbro Konsortiet

5. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul Decision-making background Idea evolved and changed over time: Over 100 years of proposals, ideas for a bridge/tunnel Included in local land-use plans long before formal decision to build Seen as a national project (goods export), then  as a local project (regional development / integration) 1950s onwards: several Government reports 1991 bilateral agreement signed (Denmark-Sweden) Aug 1993 construction of access roads started in Denmark June 1994 agreement gains final approval in Sweden June 1994 final Environmental Impact Assessment published 1995 Bridge construction started

6. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul Alternatives in the EIA No explicit goal/purpose stated in EIA Only a limited number of alternatives considered – unclear selection criteria No discussion of alternative locations or ‘non-structural’ alternatives Limited consideration of connected projects or their cumulative impacts on the environment EIA did result in: –Limits on dredging –Design, location of artificial island changed slightly Heavy public focus and debate for/against bridge –Environmental arguments used by opponents

7. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul Observations The link has significant ‘strategic’ impacts: social, economic; local, national; environmental Old idea – different ‘purposes’ (goals) and alternatives over time ‘Environment’ in Gov’t reports about the bridge: Until 1980s only conservation of agricultural land & conservation of outdoor recreation areas End of 1980s focus shifted to: Water flow (saline water North Sea  Baltic Sea) & some transport/traffic pollution issues

8. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul Alternatives The ‘ideal’: ‘Reasonable alternatives to reach the objective goal of a project’ Assumes clear and unchanging goals Often assumes full understanding of goals and means Assumes consensus of goals and means? ‘The practice’: Difficult to determine the ‘objective goal’ and its alternatives Goals are changing and unclear Only a limited number of goals and means considered Planning recognises that conflicts of interest exist – does EIA/SEA?

9. Eric Markus - IAIA07 - Seoul Thank you for your attention! Eric Markus Spatial Planning Dept Blekinge Institute of Technology (BTH) SE-37179 Karlskrona, Sweden eric.markus@bth.se