Alternatives to International Law – Other Means of Promoting National Site Contamination Law

  • Elizabeth Brandon


This chapter looks at the alternatives to international law that may be pursued in order to promote better site contamination laws at the national level. Specific options for reforming national laws are considered, such as through the aid policies of lending institutions, international standards, voluntary codes of practice, and a possible model law on site contamination. Examples of some of these options are provided in short case studies, and the advantages and disadvantages of each option are discussed with specific reference to site contamination. A comparative evaluation is then made of all options.


United States Environmental Protection Agency United Nations Environment Programme Recipient Country Global Environment Facility United Nations Industrial Development Organization 
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.


  1. Angel DP, Rock MT (2005) Global standards and the environmental performance of industry. Environ Plan 37:1903–1918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asian Development Bank (2004) Project completion report: Anhui environmental improvement project for industrial pollution abatement, Manila, PhilippinesGoogle Scholar
  3. Asian Development Bank (2005) Project completion report: Beijing environmental improvement project. Available at Manila, Philippines
  4. Asian Development Bank (2007) Smokey Mountain remediation and development project, Philippines. Available at, Manila, Philippines
  5. Asian Development Bank (2008) Grant assistance: Federated States of Micronesia: Weno water supply well remediation project. Available at, Manila, Philippines
  6. Asian Development Bank (2009) Safeguard policy statement, Manila, PhilippinesGoogle Scholar
  7. Blacksmith Institute (2012) New global alliance seeks to tackle toxic pollution hotspots. Press release, 30 July 2012, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Connaughton JL (2002) The United States federal government and its uptake of the ISO 14000 series of environmental management standards. Office of the Federal Environmental Executive, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooperative Research Centre for Contamination Assessment and Remediation of the Environment (CRC CARE) (Australia) (2012) Contaminated sites law and policy directory. Available at, Adelaide, Australia
  10. Department of Trade and Industry, Government of the United Kingdom (2006) Study of emerging markets in the environmental industries sector – executive summary, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Eijelkamp Agrisearch Equipment (2008) Soil (remediation). Geijkt Nieuws, 31. Available at, Giesbeek, Netherlands
  12. Embassy of the Netherlands (Canada) (2007) Dutch soil remediation delegation visit in Alberta. Press release, 25 October 2007. Available at, Ottawa
  13. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2000) St Petersburg toxic waste emergency clean-up programme. Project no. 7346. Available at, London
  14. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2007) LUKoil environmental loan. Project no. 36474. Available at, London
  15. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2009a) Patos-Marinza environmental remediation and development project (Albania). Project no. 39368. Available at, London
  16. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2009b) Petrom environmental loan (Romania). Project no. 39977. Available at, London
  17. European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (2008) Environmental and social policy, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Futrell JW (2007) The IUCN sustainable soil project and enforcement failures. Pace Environ Law Rev 24:99–130Google Scholar
  19. Global Environment Facility (2002) Sri Lanka – enabling activities for the Stockholm Convention on persistent organic pollutants: national implementation plan for Sri Lanka. Available at, Washington, DC
  20. Global Environment Facility (2003) Rwanda – enabling activities to facilitate early action on the implementation of the Stockholm Convention. Available at
  21. Global Environment Facility (2012) Chemicals. Available at
  22. Hannam I, Boer B. (2002) Legal and institutional frameworks for sustainable soils – a preliminary report. IUCN Environmental policy and law paper no. 45. International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  23. Hannam I, Boer B (2004) Drafting legislation for sustainable soils: a guide. IUCN environmental policy and law paper no. 52. International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  24. Hurni H, Giger M, Meyer K (eds) (2006) Soils on the global agenda: developing international mechanisms for sustainable land management. International Union of Soil Scientists, BernGoogle Scholar
  25. Industry Canada (2005) Soil remediation technologies: assessment, clean-up, decommissioning, rehabilitation OttawaGoogle Scholar
  26. International Organization for Standardization (2004) Policy and principles statement: global relevance of ISO technical work and publications, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  27. International Union for the Conservation of Nature (2000) Resolution 2.59 on legal aspects of the sustainable use of soils. In: 2nd World Conservation Congress, Amman, Jordan, 4–11 October 2000 (Amman Resolution)Google Scholar
  28. IQLIM Ltd (2008) Report for State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR) Ecological Department, AARP III – large scale oil polluted land cleanup project: environmental management framework, Baku, AzerbaijanGoogle Scholar
  29. Luo Q, Catney P, Lerner D (2009) Risk-based management of contaminated land in the UK: lessons for China? J Environ Manage 90(2):1123–1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ministry of Economic Development, Republic of Azerbaijan (2008) Absheron rehabilitation program. Available at, Baku, Azerbaijan
  31. Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, Government of the Netherlands (2008) Dutch expertise in sustainable soil use to be exported worldwide. Press release, July 2008, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  32. Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (2007) Performance standards on social and environmental sustainability, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  33. Netherlands Soil Partnership (2012a) Introduction to NSP. Available at, Zoetermeer, The Netherlands
  34. Netherlands Soil Partnership (2012b) NSP in China. Available at, Zoetermeer, The Netherlands
  35. PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2004) Audit of the environmental legislation and policy project (PROLEGIS), funded by the Government of Switzerland, represented by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (COSUDE)Google Scholar
  36. Stringer L (2008) Can the UN Convention to Combat Desertification guide sustainable use of the world’s soils? Front Ecol Environ 6(3):138–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. United Nations Environment Programme (2008) Report of the meeting of senior government officials expert in environmental law to prepare a fourth programme for the development and periodic review of environmental law (Montevideo Programme IV). UN Doc UNEP/Env.Law/MTV4/IG/2/2, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  38. United Nations Environment Programme (2009) Fourth programme for the development and periodic review of environmental law: report by the executive director. UN Doc UNEP/GC.25/11, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  39. United Nations Environment Programme/International Council on Metals and the Environment (2002) International cyanide management code for the manufacture, transport and use of cyanide in the production of gold. International Cyanide Management Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  40. United Nations Industrial Development Organization (2010) UNIDO contaminated site investigation and management toolkit. Available at, Vienna
  41. United States Agency for International Development (2004) Program assessment of the regional environmental program (PROARCA-II) – final report, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  42. United States Agency for International Development (2007) USAID regional environmental program for Central America (PROARCA), Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  43. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2009a) EPA discusses site remediation and brownfields with Chinese officials. Available at, Washington, DC
  44. United States Environmental Protection Agency (2009b) International cooperation on Chinese environmental law. Available at, Washington, DC
  45. United States International Trade Commission (2004) Remediation and nature and landscape protection services: an examination of US and foreign markets, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  46. World Bank (2004) Nepal: approach to mitigation of groundwater arsenic contamination including new groundwater legislation. Case profile collection no. 12, World Bank Global Water Partnership Associate Programme, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  47. World Bank (2006) Groundwater legislation and regulatory provision: from customary rules to integrated catchment planning, 2002–2006. Briefing note series no. 4, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  48. World Bank (2007) Report on the Ust-Kamenogorsk environmental remediation project. Report no. 38325-KZ,Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  49. World Bank (2008a) Absheron rehabilitation program – minutes of public consultations – second round, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  50. World Bank (2008b) Argentina mining environmental restoration project. Report no. 44469, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  51. World Bank (2008c) Azerbaijan: World Bank approves $164 million for Absheron environmental clean-up program. Press release no. 2008/382/ECA, 17 June 2008, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  52. World Bank (2008d) India: capacity building for industrial pollution management. Report no. AC3752, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  53. World Bank (2008e) Project appraisal document on a proposed loan in the amount of US$74.5 million to the Republic of Azerbaijan for an Absheron rehabilitation program – ARP I: contaminated sites rehabilitation project. Report no. 42526-AZ, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  54. World Bank (2009) Project performance assessment report: Bulgaria – environmental remediation pilot project. Report no. 48810, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  55. World Bank (2010) The management of brownfields redevelopment – a guidance note. Europe and Central Asia Region (Sustainable Development Department), Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  56. World Bank (2011) Helping countries tackle ‘orphaned’ toxic pollution sites – the focus of World Bank grant to Blacksmith Institute. Press release, 12 December 2011, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  57. World Bank Group (2007) Environmental, health and safety general guidelines, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  58. World Bank Group (2012a) Getting to green: a sourcebook of pollution management policy tools for growth and competitiveness, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  59. World Bank Group (2012b) Toward a clean, green and resilient world for all: a World Bank Group environment strategy 2012–2022, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar

Legal Materials

  1. Memorandum of Understanding between the Environmental Protection Agency of the United States of America and the State Environmental Protection Administration of the People’s Republic of China on Scientific and Technical Cooperation in the Field of Environment (2008)Google Scholar
  2. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2005) Paris Declaration on aid effectivenessGoogle Scholar
  3. Regulation No. 1080/2006 on the European Regional Development Fund (2006) OJ L 210/1 (European Union)Google Scholar
  4. United Nations Environment Programme (2001) Montevideo programme III – programme for the development and periodic review of environmental law for the first decade of the twenty-first century. UNEP GC Decision 21/23Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TanundaAustralia

Personalised recommendations