欧盟的环境政策:对进一步发展的见解

M. Vovk, Boris Dziura, Martin Grešš
{"title":"欧盟的环境政策:对进一步发展的见解","authors":"M. Vovk, Boris Dziura, Martin Grešš","doi":"10.31577/GEOGRCAS.2019.71.1.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on researching the cost-effectiveness of environmental policy in the EU and the relationship between the diversity of the system of environmental policy instruments and the economic development of the EU. The cost-effectiveness of environmental policy in the EU is based on the analysis of ex-ante CEAs (CostEffectiveness Assessment), price of activity, use of market-based instruments, the CEA as part of a policy/directive and environmental expenditures. Cost-effectiveness is mainly influenced by policy instrument choice and operational efficiency. The analysis of environmental expenditures in the EU countries as one of the main focuses of cost-effectiveness has shown that, despite increasing standards of environmental regulation, environmental protection expenditures do not place a heavy burden on the economies that is explained by the increased efficiency of sectors in responding to more stringent environmental legislation. We have tested the hypothesis that the system of environmental instruments applied in the developed EU countries is more diverse than in developing and transition economies since developed countries have long established laws and formal governmental structures to address their serious environmental problems. Our finding is that the degree of variety of environmental policy instruments among the EU members is dependent, not only on production development and actual environmental issues, but also on other factors of development, as in not all the countries with a high number of production enterprises is the system of environmental policy instruments diverse. Only in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom is the system of environmental policy instruments the most diverse. These countries joined the EU much earlier than many other member states, thus, they have a sounder institutional framework.","PeriodicalId":35652,"journal":{"name":"GEOGRAFICKY CASOPIS-Geographical Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental policy of the EU: insights for further development\",\"authors\":\"M. Vovk, Boris Dziura, Martin Grešš\",\"doi\":\"10.31577/GEOGRCAS.2019.71.1.02\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article focuses on researching the cost-effectiveness of environmental policy in the EU and the relationship between the diversity of the system of environmental policy instruments and the economic development of the EU. The cost-effectiveness of environmental policy in the EU is based on the analysis of ex-ante CEAs (CostEffectiveness Assessment), price of activity, use of market-based instruments, the CEA as part of a policy/directive and environmental expenditures. Cost-effectiveness is mainly influenced by policy instrument choice and operational efficiency. The analysis of environmental expenditures in the EU countries as one of the main focuses of cost-effectiveness has shown that, despite increasing standards of environmental regulation, environmental protection expenditures do not place a heavy burden on the economies that is explained by the increased efficiency of sectors in responding to more stringent environmental legislation. We have tested the hypothesis that the system of environmental instruments applied in the developed EU countries is more diverse than in developing and transition economies since developed countries have long established laws and formal governmental structures to address their serious environmental problems. Our finding is that the degree of variety of environmental policy instruments among the EU members is dependent, not only on production development and actual environmental issues, but also on other factors of development, as in not all the countries with a high number of production enterprises is the system of environmental policy instruments diverse. Only in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom is the system of environmental policy instruments the most diverse. These countries joined the EU much earlier than many other member states, thus, they have a sounder institutional framework.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35652,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"GEOGRAFICKY CASOPIS-Geographical Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"GEOGRAFICKY CASOPIS-Geographical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31577/GEOGRCAS.2019.71.1.02\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GEOGRAFICKY CASOPIS-Geographical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31577/GEOGRCAS.2019.71.1.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文重点研究了欧盟环境政策的成本效益,以及环境政策工具体系的多样性与欧盟经济发展之间的关系。欧盟环境政策的成本效益是基于对事前成本效益评估、活动价格、市场工具的使用、作为政策/指令一部分的CEA和环境支出的分析。成本效益主要受政策工具选择和运营效率的影响。将欧盟国家的环境支出作为成本效益的主要焦点之一进行的分析表明,尽管环境监管标准不断提高,但环境保护支出并没有给经济带来沉重负担,这可以解释为各部门在应对更严格的环境立法方面效率的提高。我们已经检验了这样一种假设,即欧盟发达国家适用的环境文书体系比发展中国家和转型经济体更为多样,因为发达国家长期以来一直制定法律和正式的政府结构来解决其严重的环境问题。我们的发现是,欧盟成员国环境政策工具的多样性程度不仅取决于生产发展和实际环境问题,还取决于其他发展因素,因为并非所有生产企业数量众多的国家的环境政策工具体系都是多样的。只有奥地利、比利时、丹麦、芬兰、法国、德国、爱尔兰、卢森堡、荷兰、瑞典和联合王国的环境政策文书体系最为多样化。这些国家比许多其他成员国更早加入欧盟,因此,它们有一个更健全的制度框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Environmental policy of the EU: insights for further development
The article focuses on researching the cost-effectiveness of environmental policy in the EU and the relationship between the diversity of the system of environmental policy instruments and the economic development of the EU. The cost-effectiveness of environmental policy in the EU is based on the analysis of ex-ante CEAs (CostEffectiveness Assessment), price of activity, use of market-based instruments, the CEA as part of a policy/directive and environmental expenditures. Cost-effectiveness is mainly influenced by policy instrument choice and operational efficiency. The analysis of environmental expenditures in the EU countries as one of the main focuses of cost-effectiveness has shown that, despite increasing standards of environmental regulation, environmental protection expenditures do not place a heavy burden on the economies that is explained by the increased efficiency of sectors in responding to more stringent environmental legislation. We have tested the hypothesis that the system of environmental instruments applied in the developed EU countries is more diverse than in developing and transition economies since developed countries have long established laws and formal governmental structures to address their serious environmental problems. Our finding is that the degree of variety of environmental policy instruments among the EU members is dependent, not only on production development and actual environmental issues, but also on other factors of development, as in not all the countries with a high number of production enterprises is the system of environmental policy instruments diverse. Only in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom is the system of environmental policy instruments the most diverse. These countries joined the EU much earlier than many other member states, thus, they have a sounder institutional framework.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
22.20%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The journal publishes original and timely scientific articles that advance knowledge in all the fields of geography and significant contributions from the related disciplines. Papers devoted to geographical research of Slovakia and to theoretical and methodological questions of geography are especially welcome. In addition, the journal includes also short research notes, review articles, comments on published papers and reviews of selected publications. Papers are written in the Slovak language with English summary or in English and occasionally in some other world languages.
期刊最新文献
The trade-off between national growth and interregional inequality: Three decades of regional development in Slovakia Development of the geopolitical orientation of the Slovak Republic since 1993 Demographic processes and brief overview of population research in Czechia and Slovakia after dissolution of the common state Land cover changes over the past 30 years in the Demänovka river catchment Evaluation of cross-border cooperation in Czechia since 1993: Euroregions on the way to authentic cross-border regions?
×
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