Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
governments and domestic
fi
rms share an interest in exporting domestic regulations even
if the same
rst
place. For example, new Community requirements under the 1988 Large Combustion
Plant Directive pioneered by Germany created an increased demand for abatement tech-
nologies that were largely produced by German
fi
rms were against the domestic introduction of those regulations in the
fi
rms (Börzel, 2002). More recently,
German and other leader states, together with domestic industries, have used market har-
monization rules to upload domestic recycling mandates for electronic waste (e-waste)
into EU law (Selin and VanDeveer, 2006).
fi
Concluding remarks
Over the past two decades the EU has greatly expanded its body of environment and
human-health-related legislation while at the same time reducing barriers to trade on the
internal market. However, sometimes domestic policy making clashes with e
orts on
regional harmonization. In addition, member states often struggle with transposing EU
environmental law into domestic practice, or sometimes even elect to ignore EU policy for
domestic political reasons. As such, EU organizations and member states will have to con-
tinue to
ff
nd ways to balance trade and environment concerns as member-state environ-
mental policy-making and implementation may signi
fi
fi
cantly a
ff
ect the free trade of
products on the internal market.
EU e
orts to continue to deepen regional political and economic integration, expand
trade, raise standards for environment and human health protection, and promote sus-
tainable development are guided by a series of strategies, action programs and policies. Yet
these e
ff
orts are not necessarily compatible (Carmin and VanDeveer, 2005; Pesendorfer,
2006). For example, EU economic and trade policies typically promote continuing con-
sumption while EU environmental policy supports waste minimization and recycling. In
this respect, EU organizations and member states face the critical challenge of formulat-
ing and implementing a more coherent strategy for promoting socially and environmen-
tally sustainable economic growth throughout the internal market.
Its growing membership, economic size and population have also increased the EU's
international in
ff
uent population of nearly 500 million and an
annual market of about $11 trillion, there are few large multinational companies that do
not operate or sell their products in the EU. In this respect, regulatory standards set in
Brussels can have signi
fl
uence. With a relatively a
cant implications for international production and trade. In fact,
the EU is increasingly replacing the USA as the
de facto
setter of global product stan-
dards. New EU policies - and similar policies being enacted in response in other parts of
the world - are also engendering responses in international markets (Selin and VanDeveer,
2006; Buck, 2007).
With the adoption of higher EU standards in a multitude of areas, EU organizations,
public o
fi
rms share interests in exporting EU standards to other countries and in
uploading such standards into international agreements (Vogel, 1995). EU e
cials and
fi
ff
orts to shape
international policy and standards have a long history. As early as in the
fi
rst Environment
Action Programme in 1973, European political leaders identi
ed it as critical to be active
in international forums to achieve goals that cannot be obtained solely at a regional level
(Weale et al., 2003). The growing actions of the EU in global politics of trade and envi-
ronment are seen in a host of cases, including GM crops, hazardous substances and e-waste
(Ansell and Vogel, 2006; Selin and VanDeveer, 2006; Vogler and Bretherton, 2006).
fi
