Strategies of the 'green' member states in EU environmental policy-making

Liefferink, Duncan; Andersen, Mikael Skou

doi:10.1080/135017698343974

Cited by 163 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…After the Community enlargement in 1995, Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands were joined by three more environmental leader states; Austria, Finland, and Sweden. Since 1995, these six countries have sought to initiate stronger Community legislation in multiple environmental areas (Andersen and Liefferink 1997;Liefferink and Andersen 1998;McCormick 2001). In particular, Sweden has prioritized chemicals policy (Kronsell 1997).…”

Section: Community Chemicals Management and The Precautionary Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

All talk, little action: precaution and European chemicals regulation

Eckley

Selin

2004

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union has chosen the precautionary principle as a key guiding principle to achieve more effective policy-making on risks, by moving away from preventive regulation towards more precautionary regulation. Precautionary language has been a part of European Community law for over a decade; however, whether its establishment has had any real effect on European policymaking and regulations is more unclear. This article examines whether the introduction of precautionary language in Community texts has had an effect on the process by which potential risks associated with hazardous chemicals are managed. The article focuses on the two cases of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and brominated flame retardants (BFRs), and covers the time before, during, and after the Community introduction of the precautionary principle. The article finds that there has been a marked change in the way environmental risks are conceptualized and discussed, but a clear effect in regulatory practice has yet to be seen. Current proposals to revise Community chemicals management, however, contain elements that could enhance precautionary regulation.

show abstract

Section: Community Chemicals Management and The Precautionary Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

All talk, little action: precaution and European chemicals regulation

Eckley

Selin

2004

Journal of European Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, while the energy area is both highly regulated-since the 1970s as part of the first environmental policy wave-and exerts considerable impact on mitigation [50], this "loophole" area of private housing could be regarded as an exception in this broader context. It demonstrates the interacting complexities of a difficult-to-regulate subarea, difficult-to-reach individual actors, and soft regulation.…”

Section: Examples Of Implementation In the Nordic Context: Crowding Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing Local Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Actions: The Role of Various Policy Instruments in a Multi-Level Governance Context

Keskitalo¹,

Juhola²,

Baron³

et al. 2017

Sustainable Cities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Recently, considerable focus, e.g., in the fifth IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Assessment Report (2014) has been trained on why adaptation and mitigation have not been developed more than at present, with relatively few local government actions taken compared with, for example, more discursive policy agreement on the importance of the issue of climate change. Going beyond a focus on general limits and barriers, this comment suggests that one important issue is that climate change has not yet been sufficiently integrated into the state regulative structure of legislation and policy-making. A comparison between three cases suggests that local developments that are not supported in particular by binding regulation are unlikely to achieve the same general level of implementation as issues for which such regulative demands (and thereby also requirements for prioritization) exist. This constitutes an important consideration for the development of adaptation and mitigation as policy areas, including on the local level.Keywords: climate change; adaptation; mitigation; local government; municipality; Finland; Norway; Denmark Challenges of Climate PolicyWhile increasing focus is placed on policy development in relation to climate change, it is yet unclear as to how successful or efficient these efforts developed so far are in terms of tackling climate change, both mitigation and adaptation. In reviewing the progress of adaptation, the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change notes that implementation has so far been relatively limited [1] and discusses multiple potential limitations and barriers to this. With regard to mitigation, the need for further development within international commitments, as well as national and sub-national development, is highlighted. To a large extent, then, the social complexity of implementation and gaining political will for the development in the face of multiple stressors may be regarded as limiting progress towards managing climate change [2][3][4]. This limitation means that there is a need to problematize the structure of implementation further.

show abstract

“…The mechanism of bottom-up Europeanization has been thoroughly explored in the literature on the role, influence and strategies of environmental forerunner states (Andersen and Liefferink, 1997;Liefferink and Andersen, 1998). In general terms, this literature on leaders (as well as laggards) assumes a rational behaviour on the part of the member states.…”

Section: Bottom-up Europeanizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first strategy, 'pacesetting', is about pushing those policies at the European level that reflect a member state's policy preferences in order to minimize the subsequent implementation costs. For some time, this strategy was used mainly by the classic 'green' member states (Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland and Austria) (Liefferink and Andersen, 1998). The second strategy, 'foot-dragging', consists of blocking or delaying costly policies in an effort to prevent them altogether, or at least to achieve some compensation for the expected implementation costs.…”

Section: Bottom-up Europeanizationmentioning

confidence: 99%