Advertisement

Strategic policy making: Four soil protection cases

Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)

Abstract

This chapter analyses four cases of soil protection policy making that took place around the new millennium.

Keywords

Soil Protection Network Governance Market Governance European Governance Decentred Government 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 531.
    Christie and Teeuw (2000: 25): Policy and administration of contaminated land within the EU.Google Scholar
  2. 532.
    Kern et al. (2002): The diffusion of environmental policy innovation.Google Scholar
  3. 533.
    Weale, Albert (1992): The new politics of pollution.Google Scholar
  4. 534.
    Christie and Teeuw (2000: 25): Policy and administration of contaminated land within the EU.Google Scholar
  5. 535.
    European Parliament and Council (2002): Sixth Community Environment Action Programme. In the 6th EAP, a thematic strategy on soil protection is announced.Google Scholar
  6. 536.
    Schoof and Meuleman (1983): Experiences with comprehensive regional environmental planning in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  7. 537.
    Christie and Teeuw (1998: 9): Contaminated land policy within the European Union.Google Scholar
  8. 538.
    Jörgensen (2002): Ökologisch nachhaltige Entwicklung im föderativen Staat. Das Beispiel der deutschen Bundesländer.Google Scholar
  9. 539.
    Zito (2001): Patters of innovation in ‘new’ environmental policy instruments: The case of the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  10. 540.
    Zito (2001: 12–14): Patters of innovation in ‘new’ environmental policy instruments: The case of the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  11. 541.
    Knill and Lenschow (2003): Modes of regulation in the governance of the EU.Google Scholar
  12. 542.
    Zito (2001: 25): Patters of innovation in ‘new’ environmental policy instruments: The case of the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  13. 543.
    Driessen (2005: 20): Sturen op kwaliteit. Over veranderende ambities en strategieën in het omgevingsbeleid.Google Scholar
  14. 544.
    Ministry of VROM (2003): Beleidsbrief Bodem, 24-12-2003.Google Scholar
  15. 545.
    Heuser (2005: 363): Europäisches Bodenschutzrecht.Google Scholar
  16. 546.
    Souren (2006: 15): Standards, soil, science and policy.Google Scholar
  17. 548.
    Ministry of VROM (2001): National Environment Policy Plan 4.Google Scholar
  18. 549.
    Kickert (2002: 1473): Public governance in small continental European States.Google Scholar
  19. 550.
    Lijphart (1999: 31): Patterns of democracy.Google Scholar
  20. 551.
    Kickert (2003: 127): Beneath consensual corporatism: Traditions of governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  21. 552.
    Kleinfeldt (1993): Verbände und Verbandssysteme in Westeuropa: Niederlande.Google Scholar
  22. 553.
    Toonen (1996: 618): On the administrative condition of politics: Administrative reform in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  23. 554.
    Kickert (2002: 1477): Public governance in small continental European States.Google Scholar
  24. 555.
    Kickert (2004: 94–95): History of governance in the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  25. 558.
    Christie and Teeuw (2000: 28): Policy and administration of contaminated land within the EU.Google Scholar
  26. 559.
    Vrakking et al. (1998: 19): Evaluatie project Milieu & Ruimte.Google Scholar
  27. 560.
    E.g. deregulation of environmental legislation and stimulating self-regulation: VROM/EZ (1983): Actieprogramma DROM.Google Scholar
  28. 561.
    In ‘t Veld et al (1996): Rapportage onderzoek Besturingsconcepten VROM. (This advice was implemented with the Pegasus Programme, see Ch. 3.2.6).Google Scholar
  29. 562.
    VROM-Raad (1998: 21–25): De sturing van een duurzame samenleving.Google Scholar
  30. 563.
    Judd and Nathanail (1999): Protecting Europe’s groundwater: legislative approaches and policy initiatives.Google Scholar
  31. 571.
    VROM (2003): ‘Beleidsbrief Bodem’. The Hague, 24-12-2003.Google Scholar
  32. 574.
    Tiktak et al. (2004): Ex-ante evaluatie van de Beleidsbrief Bodem.Google Scholar
  33. 579.
    The high conflict potential in the relation between internal units such as financial and legal units, and policy units, has been mentioned as an important cause of policy-making failures. See Meuleman (2003: 89): The Pegasus Principle.Google Scholar
  34. 582.
    Simon (1997: 13): Administrative behaviour.Google Scholar
  35. 583.
    Tweede Kamer, vergaderjaar 2003–2004, 28199 nr. 7, p. 7.: Verslag van een algemeen overleg op 10 juni 2004.Google Scholar
  36. 585.
    VROM (2004: 2): Letter Minister of VROM to Parliament of 26-3-2004.Google Scholar
  37. 586.
    VROM (2004): Internal dossier for the Minister of VROM, in preparation of the Parliament Committee meeting of 10-6-2004.Google Scholar
  38. 588.
    Sørensen (2006: 101–102): Metagovernance: The changing roles of politicians in processes of democratic governance.Google Scholar
  39. 589.
    In ‘t Veld (1996: 42): Rapportage onderzoek Besturingsconcepten VROM.Google Scholar
  40. 591.
    Arentsen (2001: 512, Negotiated environmental governance in the Netherlands: Logic and illustration), does not consider this as the result of a ‘paradigm shift’ but as a typical characteristic of the Dutch corporatist culture; he assumes that the Dutch have always preferred market governance above network and hierarchical governance.Google Scholar
  41. 592.
    See Scharpf (1997: 172): Games real actors play.Google Scholar
  42. 593.
    For a USA example see Hesse et al. (2003: 14): Paradoxes in Public Sector Reform. An International Comparison.Google Scholar
  43. 594.
    Davis and Rhodes (2000: 21): From hierarchy to contracts and back again: Reforming the Australian public service.Google Scholar
  44. 597.
    Heuser (2005: 377, 387): Europäisches Bodenschutzrecht.Google Scholar
  45. 598.
    Heuser (2005:387): Europäisches Bodenschutzrecht.Google Scholar
  46. 599.
    Raadschelders and Rutgers (1996: 76): The evolution of civil service systems.Google Scholar
  47. 600.
    Mayntz (1997: 23–25): Soziologie der öffentlichen Verwaltung.Google Scholar
  48. 601.
    Wollmann (2000: 2): Comparing institutional development in Britain and Germany.Google Scholar
  49. 602.
    Jann (2003: 98): State, administration and governance in Germany.Google Scholar
  50. 603.
    Raadschelders and Rutgers (1996: 88): The evolution of civil service systems.Google Scholar
  51. 604.
    Jann (2003: 99): State, administration and governance in Germany.Google Scholar
  52. 605.
    Jann (2003: 97–104): State, administration and governance in Germany.Google Scholar
  53. 606.
    Mayntz (1997: 90): Soziologie der öffentlichen Verwaltung.Google Scholar
  54. 607.
    Reichard (2003: 346): Local public management reforms in Germany.Google Scholar
  55. 608.
    Mayntz (1997: 91): Soziologie der öffentlichen Verwaltung.Google Scholar
  56. 609.
    Not their parliaments, which is a unique situation (Ismayr, 2003: 454, Das politische System Deutschlands).Google Scholar
  57. 610.
    Toonen and Raadschelders (1997): Public sector reform in Western Europe.Google Scholar
  58. 612.
    Wollmann (2003): Public-sector reform in Germany between continuity and change — in international perspective. Oppen (2002): From ‘New Public Management’ to ‘New Public Governance’.Google Scholar
  59. 613.
    Knox (2002): Review of public administration.Google Scholar
  60. 614.
    Oppen (2002): From ‘New Public Management’ to ‘New Public Governance’. Reichard (2003: 345): Local public management reforms in Germany.Google Scholar
  61. 615.
    Lüscher (2002: 14): New Public Management. Ursprünge, Entwicklung, heutiger Stand, Zukunft.Google Scholar
  62. 616.
    König (2000: 61): The administrative state in Germany.Google Scholar
  63. 617.
    Jann (2003: 110): State, administration and governance in Germany.Google Scholar
  64. 618.
    Kickert (2000: 1486): Public governance in small continental European states.Google Scholar
  65. 619.
    König (2000: 60): The administrative state in Germany.Google Scholar
  66. 620.
    Bundesregierung (1999): Moderner Staat — moderne Verwaltung.Google Scholar
  67. 621.
    Bundesregierung (1999: 2): Moderner Staat — moderne Verwaltung.Google Scholar
  68. 622.
    Jann (2003: 112): State, administration and governance in Germany.Google Scholar
  69. 623.
    Bundesministerium des Innern (2005): Fortschrittbericht 2005 des Regierungsprogramms ‘Moderne Staat — moderne Verwaltung’ im Bereich Modernes Verwaltungsmanagement.Google Scholar
  70. 624.
    Oppen (2002: 9): From ‘New Public Management’ to ‘New Public Governance’.Google Scholar
  71. 625.
    Bauer et al. (2007): Modernisierung der Umweltverwaltung. Reformstrategieen und Effekte in den Bundesländern.Google Scholar
  72. 626.
    SRU (2007): Umweltverwaltungen unter Reformdruck. Herausforderungen, Strategien, Perspektiven. Sondergutachten.Google Scholar
  73. 629.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002:121): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  74. 630.
    Christie and Teeuw (2000: 28): Policy and administration of contaminated land within the EU.Google Scholar
  75. 632.
    Bundesregierung (1985: 17): Bodenschutzkonzeption der Bundesregierung.Google Scholar
  76. 633.
    Bundesregierung (1985): Bodenschutzkonzeption der Bundesregierung.Google Scholar
  77. 635.
    Holzwarth (1998: 14): Bodes-Bodenschutzgesetz. Handkommentar.Google Scholar
  78. 637.
    E.g. Saarland (1987), Baden-Württenberg (1991); Bayern had regulated contaminated soil remediation in its Water Act.Google Scholar
  79. 638.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 133–134): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  80. 639.
    Müller (2001: 23): Ministerialverwaltung im Prozess der Normgenese am Beispiel des Bodenschutzes.Google Scholar
  81. 640.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 212): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  82. 641.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 68): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  83. 642.
    Bundesregierung (1998): Bodenschutzverordnung.Google Scholar
  84. 643.
    Heuser (2005: 386): Europäisches Bodenschutzrecht. Entwicklungslinien und Maßstäbe der Gestaltung.Google Scholar
  85. 644.
    E.g. NRW Environment Minister Höhn, in: Höhn (2005): Etablierung des Bodenschutzes auf kommunaler Ebene.Google Scholar
  86. 646.
    Bund/Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Boden (LABO), established in 1991 by the Environment Ministers Conference of the German Länder and the federal government. (Bundesregierung, 2002: 12, Bodenschutzbericht der Bundesregierung).Google Scholar
  87. 648.
    WBB (2000): Wege zum vorsorgenden Bodenschutz.Google Scholar
  88. 649.
    BMU (2001): Handlungskonzeption zum vorsorgenden Bodenschutz.Google Scholar
  89. 650.
    UBA (2001): Reiseführer zu den Böden Deutschlands.Google Scholar
  90. 651.
    UBA (2004): Die abenteuerliche Reise von Fridolin dem Regenwurm.Google Scholar
  91. 654.
    Mayntz and Scharf (1975): Policy-making in the German federal bureaucracy.Google Scholar
  92. 655.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 211): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  93. 656.
    Müller (2001: 25): Ministerialverwaltung im Prozess der Normgenese am Beispiel des Bodenschutzes.Google Scholar
  94. 657.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 220): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  95. 659.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 132): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  96. 663.
    Bachmann (2005: 32): Die Nationale Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie und die Kommunen: Ein Spannungsfeld.Google Scholar
  97. 665.
    Germany has a wide organised stakeholder landscape, with over 30 environmental NGOs active on the federal level, and more than 1000 federally registered organisations from the social and economic dimensions (Reutter, 2001: 83–90, Verbände und Verbandssysteme in Westeuropa: Deutschland).Google Scholar
  98. 666.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 294): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  99. 667.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 165, 219): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  100. 669.
    Ismayr (2003: 459): Das politische System Deutschlands.Google Scholar
  101. 670.
    Müller (1986: 12): Die Innenwelt der Umweltpolitik.Google Scholar
  102. 671.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 321): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  103. 672.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 215): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  104. 674.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 322): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  105. 675.
    BMU (2001): Handlungskonzeption zum vorsorgenden Bodenschutz.Google Scholar
  106. 677.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 220, 257): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  107. 679.
    Smeddinck and Tils (2002: 330): Normgenese und Handlungslogiken.Google Scholar
  108. 681.
    Jörgensen (2002: 5): Ökologisch nachhaltige Entwicklung im föderativen Staat.Google Scholar
  109. 682.
    E.g. the aforementioned North Rhine Westphalia’s Environment Minister Höhn (Höhn, 2005: Etablierung des Bodenschutzes auf kommunaler Ebene).Google Scholar
  110. 683.
    Lijphart (1999: 7): Patterns of democracy.Google Scholar
  111. 684.
    Lijphart (1999: 17): Patterns of democracy.Google Scholar
  112. 686.
    Hood (2003: 145): From Public Bureaucracy State to Re-regulated Public Service: The Paradox of British Public Sector Reform.Google Scholar
  113. 687.
    Johnson (2000: 30): State and society in Britain: Some contrasts with German experience.Google Scholar
  114. 691.
    Plöhn (2001: 179): Verbände und Verbandssysteme in Westeuropa: Grossbritanien.Google Scholar
  115. 692.
    RCEP (1996): Sustainable use of soil.Google Scholar
  116. 694.
    RCEP (1996): Sustainable use of soil.Google Scholar
  117. 695.
    DEFRA (2004): The First Soil Action Plan for England: 2004–2006.Google Scholar
  118. 696.
    DEFRA (2005): First Soil Action Plan for England: 2004–2006 — Annual Report May 2005. DEFRA (2006): First Soil Action Plan for England: 2004–2006 — Second Annual Report (July 2006).Google Scholar
  119. 700.
    Sturm (2003: 236): Das politische System Grossbritanniens.Google Scholar
  120. 705.
    Rhodes (1997: 47): Understanding governance.Google Scholar
  121. 706.
    DEFRA (2006): First Soil Action Plan for England: 2004–2006 — Second Annual Report (July 2006).Google Scholar
  122. 707.
    Hedetoft (2000: 43): Cultures of states and informal governance in the EU.Google Scholar
  123. 708.
    E.g. Hesse et al. (2003): Paradoxes in Public Sector reform. Pollit and Bouckaert (2000: 56): Public Management Reform. Ismayr (ed.)(2003): Die politische Systeme Westeuropas.Google Scholar
  124. 709.
    Wessels (2003: 811): Das politische System der Europäischen Union.Google Scholar
  125. 710.
    Christianen (1996: 86), cited in Malek and Hilkermeijer (2001): The European Commission as a learning organization?Google Scholar
  126. 713.
    Dimitriakopoulos (2003: 317): Paradoxes in EU Administration.Google Scholar
  127. 714.
    Dimitriakopoulos (2003: 317): Paradoxes in EU Administration.Google Scholar
  128. 715.
    Stevens (2002: 7): Europeanisation and the administration of the EU: A comparative perspective.Google Scholar
  129. 716.
    European Commission (2000): Reforming the Commission — A White Paper. COM (2000) 200 final/2.Google Scholar
  130. 717.
    European Commission (2000): Reforming the Commission — Consultative document, 18 January 2000.Google Scholar
  131. 718.
    European Commission (2000: 3): Reforming the Commission — A White Paper. Part 1.Google Scholar
  132. 719.
    This is reflected by the choice of the three central themes, all with a managerial background: better priority setting and resources allocation, better human resources management, and overhaul of financial management. See Cini (2001: 13): The politics of reform: Responsibility and Good Governance in the European Commission.Google Scholar
  133. 721.
    Levy (2003: 556–557): Critical success factors in public management reform: The case of the European Commission.Google Scholar
  134. 722.
    Bauer (2002: 2): Reforming the European Commission: A (missed) Academic opportunity.Google Scholar
  135. 723.
    Levy (2006: 435): European Commission overload and the pathology of management reform: Garbage cans, rationality and risk aversion.Google Scholar
  136. 724.
    European Commission (2000: 5): Reforming the Commission — A White Paper. Part 1.Google Scholar
  137. 725.
    European Commission (2001): European Governance. A White Paper.Google Scholar
  138. 726.
    Schout and Jordan (2004: 207. Coordinated European Governance.) point at the fact that the English version refers to ‘good governance’, whereas in the Dutch version of the White Paper the broader term ‘governance’ is used.Google Scholar
  139. 727.
    European Commission (2002: 23): Report from the Commission on European Governance.Google Scholar
  140. 728.
    See Metcalfe (2001): More green than blue: positioning the Governance White Paper. Follesdal (2003): The political theory of the White paper on Governance: Hidden and fascinating. Schout and Jordan (2005): Coordinated European Governance.Google Scholar
  141. 729.
    Laffan and Shaw (2004: 31–32): Classifying and mapping OMC in different policy areas.Google Scholar
  142. 730.
    Ward and Williams (1997: 439): From hierarchy to networks? Sub-central government and EU urban environment policy.Google Scholar
  143. 731.
    Héritier (2002: 8): New Modes of Governance in Europe: policy making without legislating?Google Scholar
  144. 732.
    Kraemer et al. (2004: 20–21): EU Soil protection policy: Current status and the way forward.Google Scholar
  145. 733.
    European Commission (2006: 17): Soil protection. The story behind the Strategy.Google Scholar
  146. 734.
    Van Calster (2004:13): Will the EC get a finger in each pie? EC law and policy developments in soil protection and brownfields development.Google Scholar
  147. 735.
    European Commission (2006: 13): Soil protection. The story behind the Strategy.Google Scholar
  148. 737.
    European Commission (2002): Towards a Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection. COM (2002) 179.Google Scholar
  149. 738.
    Van Calster (2004: 14): Will the EC get a finger in each pie? EC law and policy developments in soil protection and brownfields development.Google Scholar
  150. 740.
    European Commission (2006): COM (2006) 231.Google Scholar
  151. 741.
    European Commission (2006): COM (2006) 232.Google Scholar
  152. 742.
    European Commission (2006): SEC (2006) 1165 and SEC(2006)620.Google Scholar
  153. 744.
    Beyers and Kerremans (2004: 119): Bureaucrats, politicians and societal interests. How is European policy making politicized?Google Scholar
  154. 748.
    Levy (2003: 563): Critical success factors in public management reform: The case of the European Commission.Google Scholar
  155. 749.
    Simon (1997: 13): Administrative Behaviour (Fourth Edition).Google Scholar
  156. 750.
    Tömmel (2007: 19): Modes of Governance in the EU.Google Scholar
  157. 753.
    Jessop (2004: 229): The political economy of scale and European Governance.Google Scholar
  158. 754.
    Jessop (2004: 228): The political economy of scale and European Governance.Google Scholar
  159. 755.
    Schout and Jordan (2005: 218): Coordinated European Governance.Google Scholar
  160. 756.
    Hey et al. (2006: 27): Better regulation by new governance hybdrids?Google Scholar
  161. 758.
    The two main determinants of the policy game, according to Scharpf (1997): Games real actors play.Google Scholar
  162. 760.
    Robert (2001: 8): The European Commission and its relationship to politics. How and why doing politics and pretending not to?Google Scholar
  163. 761.
    VROM (2003: Beleidsbrief Bodem (Soil protection policy letter); BMU (2001: Handlungskonzeption zum vorsorgenden Bodenschutz). European Commission (2006: Thematic Strategy for Soil Protection).Google Scholar
  164. 762.
    Ringeling (2002): An instrument is not a tool.Google Scholar
  165. 763.
    Koffijberg (2006): Getijden van beleid: omslagpunten in de volkshuisvesting.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2008

Personalised recommendations