Coping with EU environmental legislation: transposition principles and practices
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Coping with EU environmental legislation : transposition principles and practices. / Anker, Helle Tegner; de Graaf, Kars; Purdy, Ray; Squintani, Lorenzo .
In: Journal of Environmental Law, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2015, p. 17-44.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Coping with EU environmental legislation
T2 - transposition principles and practices
AU - Anker, Helle Tegner
AU - de Graaf, Kars
AU - Purdy, Ray
AU - Squintani, Lorenzo
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - A ‘burden reducing’ agenda has spurred an increased interest in how EU environmental legislation is transposed into national legislation—most prominently reflected in the principle of ‘no gold-plating’. Yet, an important question is to what extent transposition principles and practices may ensure a coherent and accessible body of environmental legislation, while at the same time ensuring adequate transposition of EU environmental legislation. This article analyses the existence, or emergence, of transposition principles and practices in three Member States—the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Denmark. It also examines how EU initiatives may influence these principles and practices. The article concludes that the steering of transposition processes by general transposition principles and objectives alone, and in particular those dominated by a ‘burden reducing’ agenda, has a limited focus on coherence and accessibility with respect to environmental legislation and that such issues deserve more attention in the transposition process.
AB - A ‘burden reducing’ agenda has spurred an increased interest in how EU environmental legislation is transposed into national legislation—most prominently reflected in the principle of ‘no gold-plating’. Yet, an important question is to what extent transposition principles and practices may ensure a coherent and accessible body of environmental legislation, while at the same time ensuring adequate transposition of EU environmental legislation. This article analyses the existence, or emergence, of transposition principles and practices in three Member States—the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Denmark. It also examines how EU initiatives may influence these principles and practices. The article concludes that the steering of transposition processes by general transposition principles and objectives alone, and in particular those dominated by a ‘burden reducing’ agenda, has a limited focus on coherence and accessibility with respect to environmental legislation and that such issues deserve more attention in the transposition process.
U2 - 10.1093/jel/equ033
DO - 10.1093/jel/equ033
M3 - Journal article
VL - 27
SP - 17
EP - 44
JO - Journal of Environmental Law
JF - Journal of Environmental Law
SN - 0952-8873
IS - 1
ER -
ID: 130479278