Adapting Hydropower to European Union Water Law: Flexible Governance versus Legal Effectiveness in Sweden and Finland

IF 2.6 1区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Transnational Environmental Law Pub Date : 2024-02-13 DOI:10.1017/s2047102523000249
Suvi-Tuuli Puharinen, Antti Belinskij, Niko Soininen
{"title":"Adapting Hydropower to European Union Water Law: Flexible Governance versus Legal Effectiveness in Sweden and Finland","authors":"Suvi-Tuuli Puharinen, Antti Belinskij, Niko Soininen","doi":"10.1017/s2047102523000249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In both Sweden and Finland, water law has traditionally provided strong protection for hydropower operations by issuing permanent environmental licences. This national protection has started to erode as a result of the requirement of the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (WFD) for permit reviews to improve the ecological status of rivers. In the light of this dynamic between European and national frameworks, this article compares the Swedish and Finnish implementation of the WFD regarding existing hydropower operations. Whereas Sweden has adopted comprehensive legislative and policy reforms that embrace a systemic perspective on reconciling hydropower with the current societal and ecological circumstances, Finland has relied on bottom-up collaborative processes at the grassroots level. The article shows that both approaches are problematic in so far as they push the boundaries of proper implementation of the WFD and, by extension, the achievement of the ecological objectives of the WFD in waters affected by hydropower. Our comparison highlights tensions between EU law requirements for formal legal effectiveness in national implementation, and the WFD's aspirations for adaptive river basin-based governance.","PeriodicalId":45716,"journal":{"name":"Transnational Environmental Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transnational Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s2047102523000249","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In both Sweden and Finland, water law has traditionally provided strong protection for hydropower operations by issuing permanent environmental licences. This national protection has started to erode as a result of the requirement of the European Union (EU) Water Framework Directive (WFD) for permit reviews to improve the ecological status of rivers. In the light of this dynamic between European and national frameworks, this article compares the Swedish and Finnish implementation of the WFD regarding existing hydropower operations. Whereas Sweden has adopted comprehensive legislative and policy reforms that embrace a systemic perspective on reconciling hydropower with the current societal and ecological circumstances, Finland has relied on bottom-up collaborative processes at the grassroots level. The article shows that both approaches are problematic in so far as they push the boundaries of proper implementation of the WFD and, by extension, the achievement of the ecological objectives of the WFD in waters affected by hydropower. Our comparison highlights tensions between EU law requirements for formal legal effectiveness in national implementation, and the WFD's aspirations for adaptive river basin-based governance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使水电适应欧盟水法:瑞典和芬兰的灵活治理与法律效力
在瑞典和芬兰,水法传统上通过颁发永久性环境许可证为水电运营提供强有力的保护。由于欧盟(EU)《水框架指令》(WFD)要求对许可证进行审查,以改善河流的生态状况,这种国家保护已开始削弱。鉴于欧洲和国家框架之间的这种动态关系,本文比较了瑞典和芬兰在现有水电运营方面对 WFD 的执行情况。瑞典采取了全面的立法和政策改革,从系统的角度协调水电与当前社会和生态环境的关系,而芬兰则依赖于基层自下而上的合作过程。文章表明,这两种方法都存在问题,因为它们都突破了《世界水论坛》适当实施的界限,并进而在受水电影响的水域实现了《世界水论坛》的生态目标。我们的比较凸显了欧盟法律对国家实施的正式法律效力的要求与《世界水论坛》对基于流域的适应性治理的期望之间的矛盾。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
16.30%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
Hope-Bearing Legislation? The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 Transnational Governance of Soybean Land Use in South America: A Polycentric Approach Value Chains and Environmental Impact Assessments: Lessons from Two French Legal Cases on Bioenergy Facilities Looking to Livestock: Gauging the Evolution of the EU's Agri-Climate Law and Policy A Critical Review of the Energy Charter Treaty from an Earth System Law Perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1