EU Environmental Policy under Pressure: Chemicals Policy Change between Antagonistic Goals?

Until now, chemicals policy was unable to find a method to establish a sound balance between the benefits and risks of chemical substances. Policy learning within the European Union (EU) resulted in the formulation of an alternative approach to future chemicals policy in some quarters. The Commission's proposal for new chemicals legislation - presented as 'paradigmatic' policy change - led to a highly controversial lobbying debate. This paper deals in particular with the influence of structures, policy networks, multi-level governance and the influence of new modes of governance on chemicals policy-making. It argues that future policy will not represent the paradigmatic change announced by the Commission but only one incremental, cost-effective step towards such a reform. The final proposal is criticised as a neo-liberal interpretation of the Lisbon strategy which includes a dangerous shift in environmental policy making.

A Holistic vs. an Attribute-based Approach to Agri-Environmental Policy Valuation: Do Welfare Estimates Differ?

Different economic valuation methodologies can be used to value the non-market benefits of an agri-environmental scheme. In particular, the non-market value can be examined by assessing the public's willingness to pay for the policy outputs as a whole or by modelling the preferences of society for the component attributes of the rural landscape that result from the implementation of the policy. In this article we examine whether the welfare values estimated for an agri-environmental policy are significantly different between an holistic valuation methodology (using contingent valuation) and an attribute-based valuation methodology (choice experiment). It is argued that the valuation methodology chosen should be based on whether or not the overall objective is the valuation of the agri-environment policy package in its entirety or the valuation of each of the policy's distinct environmental outputs.

Strategic Environmental Assessment

The objectives of the text are to take stock of the international experience with SEA; to highlight the key aspects and areas of the process development and application and to probe issues related to the quality and the effectiveness of SEA practice. These are successfully weaved together as each theme is unpacked and the individual authors apply their own interpretations and experiences to current thinking.

From the Land to Sea and Back Again? Using Terrestrial Planning to Understand the Process of Marine Spatial Planning

Over the last 5–10 years, marine spatial planning (MSP) has emerged as a new management regime for national and international waters and has already attracted a substantial body of multi-disciplinary research on its goals and policy processes. This paper argues that this literature has generally lacked deeper reflexive engagement with the emerging system of governance for our seas that has meant that many of MSP’s core concepts, assumptions and institutional arrangements have not been subject rigorous intellectual debate. In an attempt to initiate such an approach, this article explores the relationship between MSP and its land-based cousin, terrestrial spatial planning (TSP). While it is recognized that there are inherent limitations to a comparison of these two systems, it is argued that the tradition of social science debate over the purpose and processes of TSP can be used as a useful stimulus for a more rigorous reflection of such issues as they relate to MSP. The article therefore explores some of the parallels between MSP and TSP and then discusses some of the key intellectual traditions that have shaped TSP and the implications these may have for future marine planning practice. The article concludes with a number of potentially useful new avenues that may form the basis of a critical research agenda for MSP.