Skip to main content

The Proportionate Impact Assessment of the European Commission – Towards More Formalism to Backup “The Environment”

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The paper reflects main findings from a presentation on “Problems and challenges of the EU impact assessment with emphasis on environmental aspects” presented on the International Workshop “Improving the integrated European impact assessment?” from 15th to 17th September 2008 in Berlin. The discussion concentrates on an analysis of the EC communication and guidelines on IA on the consideration of environmental issues and draws a conclusion with recommendations for an assessment tool, which supports a more transparent assessment of environmental impacts in the future. This addresses particularly Directorate Generals of non-environmental policy such as the DG Trade, where desk officers have limited experience in the selection of methods to assess environmental impacts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts, signed on 2 October, OJ C 340, p. 1.

  2. 2.

    “The impact assessment will be conducted according to the principle of proportionate analysis, i.e. varying the degree of detail to the likely impacts of the proposal. This means that the depth of the analysis will be proportionate to the significance of the likely impacts” (EC 2002, p.8).

References

  • Bizer, K., Lechner, S., & Führ, M. (2008a). Improving the Integrated European Impact Assessment? Society for Institutional Analysis, sofia, University of Göttingen, University of Applied Sciences Darmstadt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bizer, K., Lechner, S., & Führ, M. (2008b). Improving the Integrated European Impact Assessment? Executive Summary of the International Workshop 15th–17th September 2008 in Berlin, on behalf of the German Federal Environment Agency (Project No 3707 11 100) and financed by the Federal Environmental Research Programme. University of Göttingen, University of Applied Sciences Darmstadt, Society for Institutional Analysis, sofia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callies, C.2007Commentary on Art. 6 and of Art. 174 EC Treaty, In: Callies C., Ruffert M. (Ed.) EUV/EGV (EU Treaty/EC) Treaty Munich:Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, C., (2007). Enhancing Impact Assessment. European Commission Impact Assessment – Discussion with Stakeholders 28 June 2007. Closing speech by Catherine Day, Secretary General of the European Commission. Brussels: Centre Borschette.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donelan, E., (2006). RIA in the context of Better Regulation: a policy for improving governance and achieving economic growth and development. Ankara: Conference on Regulatory Impact Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC − European Commission (2002). Communication from the Commission on Impact Assessment, COM (2002) 276 final. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC – European Commission (2005). Impact Assessment Guidelines, SEC (2005) 791, 15 June 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC – European Commission (2006). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A strategic review of Better Regulation in the European Union, COM (2006) 689 final, Brussels, 14.11.2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC – European Commission (2007). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Extension of the major trans-European transport axes to the neighbouring countries. Guidelines for transport in Europe and neighbouring regions, COM (2007) 32 final, Brussels, 31.1.2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC – European Commission (2009). Impact Assessment Guidelines, SEC (2009) 92, 15 January 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, R. (2004). EUV/EGV (EC Treaty/EU Treaty), 4th ed, Beck Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertin, J. (2005). The Environmental Dimension of Impact Assessment − Learning from Experiences. In: Volkery A., Jacob K. (eds.) The Environmental Dimension of Impact Assessment, pp 22–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertin, J., Bartolomeo, M., Giugni, P., Jacob, K., Volkery, A., Wilkinson, D., et al. (2004). Review of 2003 Extended Impact Assessments - Preliminary conclusions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, K. (2008). Instrumente zur Verbesserung der Wirksamkeit von Nachhaltigkeitsstrategien - Ergebnisse aus der Evaluationsforschung. Fachgespräch des RNE „Governance – wie lässt sich Verbindlichkeit und Wirksamkeit von Nachhaltigkeitsstrategien verbessern“ am 9.4.2008, Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik Freie Universität Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam-Webster Dictionary Online (2009). Web address: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/, last accessed on 25.03.2009.

  • Schmidt M., Glasson J., Emmelin L., Helbron H. (eds.) (2008). Standards and Thresholds for Impact Assessment. Environmental Protection in the European Union, Vol. 3. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt M., João E., Albrecht E. (eds.) (2005). Implementing Strategic Environmental Assessment. Environmental Protection in the European Union, Vol. 2HeidelbergSpringer Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkery A., Jacob K. (eds.) (2005). The Environmental Dimension of Impact Assessment. Documentation of a Workshop organised together with the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, 17–18 June 2004, Berlin, Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik report 01–2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • WB − The World Bank (2004). Case Studies of Policy SEA: Final Report. 27 September 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, D., Fergusson, M., Bowyer, C., Brown, J., Ladefoged, A., Monkhouse, C., et al. (2004). Sustainable development in the European Commission’s integrated Impact Assessments for 2003 – Final report, April 2004, London.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Schmidt .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schmidt, M., Albrecht, E., Helbron, H., Palekhov, D. (2010). The Proportionate Impact Assessment of the European Commission – Towards More Formalism to Backup “The Environment”. In: Bizer, K., Lechner, S., Führ, M. (eds) The European Impact Assessment and the Environment. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-11670-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-11670-4_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-11669-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-11670-4

  • eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics