Steering through Complexity: EU Environmental Regulation in the International Context

Abstract

The nature of governance in the European Union (EU) and its member states is continuing to evolve as the EU develops. This paper focuses on the challenges to this governance process in the sector of environmental policy, and particularly the role of external organizations and states in providing alternate policy fora. The policy impact of these institutions and organizations leads to more actor participation in a way that EU players may not be able to anticipate or control since the EU is only one of several arenas involved. Both states and non-governmental actors actively seek to shift issues to arenas that provide them advantages. Consequently, developments in other arenas shape and are shaped by EU issues as actors pursue forum shopping. The paper presents two cases, the amendment of the Basel Convention to ban hazardous wastes export and the EU regulation of chemical risk, which demonstrate how external players can shape EU regulation.

Circuits of Regulation: Transatlantic Perspectives on Persistent Organic Pollutants and Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals

“…It also encourages member states to forge their own regulatory paths. Sweden, for instance, has traditionally sought to upload its pioneering chemicals policies via third party arenas, including the Nordic Council or the POPs-related conventions (Kellow & Zito 2002); the same Nordic states have sometimes used international institutions to influence EU policy, illustrated by the late 1990s discussions surrounding the establishment of an "EcoSchengen" (McCormick 1998). Countries concerned with the competitiveness of their chemicals industries, on the other hand, may align themselves with DG Enterprise rather than DG Environment (Pesendorfer 2006).…”

“…Kelemen (2007) has argued that the EU's global push results from a "race to the top" on environmental standards within the EU, which incentivized Europe to "internationalize" its standards at the global level. Kellow and Zito (2002) further suggest that the attractiveness of linking EU regulation to international policy-making results from EU members' desire to ensure compatibility and delegate technical matters, particularly when international institutions have access to a wider range of information than that available to individual EU members.…”

Leading the way? The European Union at the WSSD

“…The international nature of many environmental problems 'forces the EU policy process to interact with other political structures and actors' (Kellow and Zito, 2002) with, for example, the EU participating in 31 major multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) (see Vogler, 1999). However, the shift of policy focus from environmental protection measures to the promotion of an international sustainability agenda that has evolved during the ten years from Rio to Johannesburg presents a potentially important aspect in the development of the EU's international role.…”

Compliance-as-a-Service in Information Technology Manufacturing Organizations: An Exploratory Case Study

“…Over the last two years, Korea, Australia, Canada, and U.S. states such as California have introduced legislation similar to the RoHS and WEEE directives, while in China, a similar directive known as the China RoHS, or the Methods for the Control of Pollution by Electronic Information Products Directive, came into force in March 2007. The need to address compliance legislation in different geographical locations adds complexity for global IT manufacturing organizations; however, determining the applicable regulation for a given geographical area can be complicated by the problem of understanding which products are covered by, or are exempt from, sets of seemingly conflicting regulations (Kellow 2002).…”

“…In recent times, however, environmental concerns have led to a growing emphasis on compliance issues surrounding issues of energy consumption by, and the use of hazardous substances in, products across all industry sectors (Hristev 2006;Kellow 2002). The influence of environmentally oriented regulatory and social pressures are especially evident in the information technology sector (Murugesan 2007), particularly as shorter product life cycles, and longer product lines, have increased the use of materials that are deemed hazardous to the environment and, ultimately, to human health (Avila 2006;Brown 2006).…”