Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States

Simone Schucht, Alexandra Bültman, Malcolm Eames, Kristiaan R.D. Lulofs

Research output: Book/ReportReportOther research output

30 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Researchers and policy-makers accept that implementation decisively influences the effectiveness of European (EU) environmental policy. Some Member States lead the development of EU policy and implement Directives with little problem. Others follow a variety of compliance (or non-compliance) paths. Implementation gaps and policy failures are prevalent. Policy outcomes often differ radically between even neighbouring Member States. What are the reasons for these differences? Why do Member States follow different compliance paths? Why do implementation gaps and policy failures occur? What factors can explain the different policy outcomes achieved? Is it only 'classical' implementation variables i.e. the monitoring and enforcement actions of public authorities that count? What lessons can we draw for the future? This paper addresses these questions through a comparative analysis of the implementation of the European Directive on the reduction of air pollution from existing municipal waste incineration plants (89/429/EEC) in Germany, the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom: four neighbouring Member States that exhibit quite divergent compliance paths and policy outcomes. Monitoring and enforcement are found to have only limited explanatory power. In practice national contextual variables, such as: public and political environmental awareness; interactions both with environmental and non-environmental policies; regulatory anticipation and uncertainty; the degree of autonomy and scope of regulatory agencies; and, industrial and market structure of the regulated industry, must also be considered.
Original languageUndefined
Place of PublicationParis
PublisherCERNA, Centre d’économie industrielle Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris
Number of pages25
Publication statusPublished - 2000

Publication series

NameCERNA working paper
PublisherCERNA, Centre d’économie industrielle Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris
No.2001-4

Keywords

  • IR-60761

Cite this

Schucht, S., Bültman, A., Eames, M., & Lulofs, K. R. D. (2000). Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States. (CERNA working paper; No. 2001-4). Paris: CERNA, Centre d’économie industrielle Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris.
Schucht, Simone ; Bültman, Alexandra ; Eames, Malcolm ; Lulofs, Kristiaan R.D. / Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States. Paris : CERNA, Centre d’économie industrielle Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris, 2000. 25 p. (CERNA working paper; 2001-4).
@book{95f95808ed104367a00a15d766fba9cf,
title = "Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States",
abstract = "Researchers and policy-makers accept that implementation decisively influences the effectiveness of European (EU) environmental policy. Some Member States lead the development of EU policy and implement Directives with little problem. Others follow a variety of compliance (or non-compliance) paths. Implementation gaps and policy failures are prevalent. Policy outcomes often differ radically between even neighbouring Member States. What are the reasons for these differences? Why do Member States follow different compliance paths? Why do implementation gaps and policy failures occur? What factors can explain the different policy outcomes achieved? Is it only 'classical' implementation variables i.e. the monitoring and enforcement actions of public authorities that count? What lessons can we draw for the future? This paper addresses these questions through a comparative analysis of the implementation of the European Directive on the reduction of air pollution from existing municipal waste incineration plants (89/429/EEC) in Germany, the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom: four neighbouring Member States that exhibit quite divergent compliance paths and policy outcomes. Monitoring and enforcement are found to have only limited explanatory power. In practice national contextual variables, such as: public and political environmental awareness; interactions both with environmental and non-environmental policies; regulatory anticipation and uncertainty; the degree of autonomy and scope of regulatory agencies; and, industrial and market structure of the regulated industry, must also be considered.",
keywords = "IR-60761",
author = "Simone Schucht and Alexandra B{\"u}ltman and Malcolm Eames and Lulofs, {Kristiaan R.D.}",
year = "2000",
language = "Undefined",
series = "CERNA working paper",
publisher = "CERNA, Centre d’{\'e}conomie industrielle Ecole Nationale Sup{\'e}rieure des Mines de Paris",
number = "2001-4",

}

Schucht, S, Bültman, A, Eames, M & Lulofs, KRD 2000, Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States. CERNA working paper, no. 2001-4, CERNA, Centre d’économie industrielle Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris, Paris.

Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States. / Schucht, Simone; Bültman, Alexandra; Eames, Malcolm; Lulofs, Kristiaan R.D.

Paris : CERNA, Centre d’économie industrielle Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris, 2000. 25 p. (CERNA working paper; No. 2001-4).

Research output: Book/ReportReportOther research output

TY - BOOK

T1 - Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States

AU - Schucht, Simone

AU - Bültman, Alexandra

AU - Eames, Malcolm

AU - Lulofs, Kristiaan R.D.

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - Researchers and policy-makers accept that implementation decisively influences the effectiveness of European (EU) environmental policy. Some Member States lead the development of EU policy and implement Directives with little problem. Others follow a variety of compliance (or non-compliance) paths. Implementation gaps and policy failures are prevalent. Policy outcomes often differ radically between even neighbouring Member States. What are the reasons for these differences? Why do Member States follow different compliance paths? Why do implementation gaps and policy failures occur? What factors can explain the different policy outcomes achieved? Is it only 'classical' implementation variables i.e. the monitoring and enforcement actions of public authorities that count? What lessons can we draw for the future? This paper addresses these questions through a comparative analysis of the implementation of the European Directive on the reduction of air pollution from existing municipal waste incineration plants (89/429/EEC) in Germany, the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom: four neighbouring Member States that exhibit quite divergent compliance paths and policy outcomes. Monitoring and enforcement are found to have only limited explanatory power. In practice national contextual variables, such as: public and political environmental awareness; interactions both with environmental and non-environmental policies; regulatory anticipation and uncertainty; the degree of autonomy and scope of regulatory agencies; and, industrial and market structure of the regulated industry, must also be considered.

AB - Researchers and policy-makers accept that implementation decisively influences the effectiveness of European (EU) environmental policy. Some Member States lead the development of EU policy and implement Directives with little problem. Others follow a variety of compliance (or non-compliance) paths. Implementation gaps and policy failures are prevalent. Policy outcomes often differ radically between even neighbouring Member States. What are the reasons for these differences? Why do Member States follow different compliance paths? Why do implementation gaps and policy failures occur? What factors can explain the different policy outcomes achieved? Is it only 'classical' implementation variables i.e. the monitoring and enforcement actions of public authorities that count? What lessons can we draw for the future? This paper addresses these questions through a comparative analysis of the implementation of the European Directive on the reduction of air pollution from existing municipal waste incineration plants (89/429/EEC) in Germany, the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom: four neighbouring Member States that exhibit quite divergent compliance paths and policy outcomes. Monitoring and enforcement are found to have only limited explanatory power. In practice national contextual variables, such as: public and political environmental awareness; interactions both with environmental and non-environmental policies; regulatory anticipation and uncertainty; the degree of autonomy and scope of regulatory agencies; and, industrial and market structure of the regulated industry, must also be considered.

KW - IR-60761

M3 - Report

T3 - CERNA working paper

BT - Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States

PB - CERNA, Centre d’économie industrielle Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris

CY - Paris

ER -

Schucht S, Bültman A, Eames M, Lulofs KRD. Implementation - More than Monitoring and Enforcement: Evidence from the Implementation of the 1989 Municipal Waste Incineration Directive (89/429/EEC) in Four Member States. Paris: CERNA, Centre d’économie industrielle Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris, 2000. 25 p. (CERNA working paper; 2001-4).