Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
development of the internal market than on issues of raising environmental and human
health protection standards (McCormick, 2001). Nevertheless, some environmental
policy developments were initiated in the late 1960s and 1970s, and the Commission also
became increasingly active in monitoring and enforcing implementation of environmen-
tal provisions (Jans and Vedder, 2008).
By the end of the 1970s, the Commission had initiated several infringement procedures
against member states for their failure to implement environmental policy. Reviewing
these cases, the Court con
rmed the legal legitimacy of Community environmental policy
and determined that environmental protection measures fell within the sphere of compe-
tence of the Community even if the environment was not mentioned in the Treaty of
Rome. Speci
fi
cally, the Court stated in an infringement case against Italy in 1980 that
competition on the internal market might be 'appreciably distorted' if national environ-
mental provisions were not harmonized. In 1982, the Court in an infringement case
against Belgium further argued that environmental measures might be necessary to
achieve the fundamental objectives of 'an accelerated raising of the standard of living' as
listed in Article 2 of the original Treaty of Rome (Koppen, 1993; Jans and Vedder, 2008).
fi
Trade and environment law after the Single European Act
The Single European Act established formal legal authority for Community environmen-
tal policy-making covering environmental issues under two sets of articles (Axelrod et al.,
2005). Article 100a authorized the adoption of harmonization measures to expand the
internal market. Articles 130r, 130s and 130t focused on the need for environmental pro-
tection. Whether an issue was decided under Article 100a or Articles 130r, 130s and 130t
had initially important implications for decision-making in the Council; decisions under
Articles 130r, 130s and 130t were taken unanimously whereas decisions under Article 100a
required only a quali
ed majority voting
was expanded to almost all environmental issues with a few remaining exceptions: envi-
ronmental measures with
fi
ed majority. In subsequent treaty reforms quali
fi
scal implications; energy supply issues; land use; town and
country planning; and quantitative management of water resources.
As EU policy-making was greatly expanded beginning in the late 1980s, it became
increasingly necessary for EU organizations and member states to strike a balance
between the functioning of the internal market and the right of member states to adopt
their own environmental standards. Many of these cases directly intersected with e
fi
orts
to develop the internal market and reduce remaining barriers to trade. Under EU law,
the room for introducing or maintaining strict national (environmental) legislation is
limited by the e
ff
ects of such measures on the functioning of the internal market.
Member states may develop domestic environmental policy in areas where there is no
common policy, but must be mindful of how it interacts with the internal market. If EU
policy is in place, member states may apply stricter national provisions for environmen-
tal and human health protection in certain cases.
Court rulings have established two guiding principles for addressing trade and envi-
ronment issues: domestic restrictions on environmental grounds may be justi
ff
ed as long
as they are non-discriminatory and proportional (Koppen, 1993; Jans and Vedder, 2008).
As such, a member state may in the absence of common EU marketing rules restrict the
import and use of a particular product in order to meet domestic environmental stan-
dards as long as such restrictions apply equally to domestic and imported products. In
fi
