Does it take three to tango? The practitioner's viewpoint to three EU governance instruments addressing the agricultural runoff dilemma

Peer reviewe

Tieteelliset ja oikeudelliset mekanismit tarttumassa mallien epävarmuuksiin: : Suomalainen oikeuskäytäntö tasapainoa etsimässä

Environmental models are ubiquitous in assessing the environmental impacts of planned projects. Modelling is an inferential process and includes various mechanisms to address the uncertainty of the outcome. In this article, we acknowledge the continuum of uncertainty assessments and identify the legal mechanisms with which Finnish judicial review—characterised by broad scope of review and in-house expert judges—has encountered model uncertainty. Closely examining 10 waters-related cases heard by the Supreme Administrative Court of Finland, we explain the porous yet substantial boundary between science and law revealed by the cases. The cases demonstrate the elegance with which courts can strike a balance between the contingent precautionary principle, gradually decreasing scientific uncertainty, and the procedural constraints under which they operate. We conclude by analysing the traces towards reciprocality and adaptivity the cases reveal, encouraged by the iterative modelling mechanism and challenged by the constitutional restrictions on the scope of review.Peer reviewe

Tavoitesäännökset : ja kuinka oikeusekologia vaikuttaa oikeudellisen ratkaisutoimintaan

Peer reviewe

From Top–Down Regulation to Bottom–Up Solutions: Reconfiguring Governance of Agricultural Nutrient Loading to Waters

Animal agriculture is shifting toward larger farms and regional agglomerations in many countries. In step with this development, manure nutrients have started accumulating regionally, and are leading to increasing eutrophication problems. Nevertheless, the same trend may also prompt innovations in manure treatment. For example, Valio Ltd (the largest dairy processer in Finland) is planning a network of facilities that would remove water from manure, fraction the nutrients in it, and produce biogas from the excess methane. One of the main hurdles in developing this technology is that the current regulatory framework does not support a shift from diffuse loading, which is seen in the traditional application of manure on fields, to point-source loading; the regulations may even prevent such a change. This article analyzes a governance framework that addresses this dilemma in EU–Finland, and discusses how the governance described could curtail the nutrient loading of agriculture to waters. The approach is based on adaptive governance theory. We argue that traditional top–down regulation, which emphasizes food security, contains serious shortcomings when it comes to managing agricultural nutrient loading to waters, and that the current regulatory framework does not necessarily have the adaptive capacity to facilitate new, bottom–up solutions for manure treatment. Interestingly, the strict water quality requirements of the EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) open new windows of opportunity for such solutions, and thus for improving the overall sustainability of animal agriculture

Securing Scientific Understanding : Expert Judges in Finnish Environmental Administrative Judicial Review

Peer reviewe

Foreword: Scientific Knowledge in Environmental Judicial Review : Safeguarding Effective Judicial Protection in the EU Member States?

Non peer reviewe

Immediate political actions need to be prioritised in the sustainability crises

The current political actions towards sustainability are insufficient and not in line with the urgency of the intertwined climate crisis and biodiversity loss. Instead of far-reaching future objectives, which shift the responsibility away from the current decision-makers, actions need to be implemented right now. We immediately need to: - Shift away from economic values and business-as-usual practices - Prioritize multi-stakeholder inclusion in decision-making and policies - Define terms and clarify the objectives within legal and political systems - Prevent lobbying of polluting companies - Regulate overconsumption and improve citizens’ education - Improve the independence of environmental agencies - Reinforce inspection authorities in charge of monitoring and enforcing regulationsNon peer reviewe

Kestävyysmurros ja rakenteet

Peer reviewe

Law, ecology, and the management of complex systems : the case of water governance

This book addresses the role of law in the adaptive management of socioecological systems. Recent years have witnessed a rise in discussion over the relation between adaptivity and law; as if after decades of insouciance, legal scholars have finally started to understand the impacts of the scientific paradigm called adaptive management to the legal sphere. Even though the complicated relations between law and the adaptive management of socioecological systems have become more debated, a thorough examination of the scientific and theoretical fundamentals of such endeavours has yet to be presented. Using the illustrative example of European Union water governance and its path towards embracing adaptive management, this book emphasises the legal significance of properly understanding the manner in which scientific knowledge of the environment is produced. Though always pivotal, rigorously apprehending science is especially crucial when dealing with the management of complex ecosystems as the 'normative' is created gradually before law begins to examine the 'facts' of the matter. After examining the roots of adaptive management, this book argues that the legal needs to understand itself as an integral part of the process of the socioecological management of complex systems, and not merely an external umpire resolving disputes. As whole the book offers new insights into the Union regulator's approaches to scientific realities, making it an interesting read not only to academics and legal scholars but also to regulators striving to deepen their understanding or pondering which approach to adopt in the face of new regulatory challenges, and to scientists interested in the science and law aspects of their work.This title is published in Open Access with the support of the University of Helsinki.peerReviewe

Sopivatko mukautuva hallinta ja oikeus yhteen? : Maatalouden vesistöpäästöjen sääntely EU:ssa

The EU has taken a multi-faceted approach in addressing agricultural runoff, specifically with regards to the eutrophication of the Baltic Sea. The approaches are studied in this thesis resulting in the outcome that when the deliberate regulative attempts fail, the issue in all its complexity is left for the scientists to untangle. The work abides by Martin and Craig’s epistemology of environmental law, and consists of policy analysis, doctrinal research, and jurisprudential examination. When required, the administrative-legal system of Finland is used as an example. The first three instruments examined are the Common Agricultural Policy (the erratic regulator), the Nitrates Directive (the naïve regulator) and the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (the candid regulator). The closest examination is given to the ambitious regulator who takes the demands for adaptive and integrated water management seriously and issues the Water Framework Directive, which was vested with new normative clout by the CJEU in 2015 (the Weser ruling). The suggested reading of the post-Weserian Directive distinguishes between its internal and external influence, the latter extending to all undertakings with water impacts. The assessment of forbidden derogation partly draws on meticulous scientific analysis that encompasses axiological considerations. Thus in the absence of a determinate and efficient regulator the decision-making territory is conquered by the scientists, whose considerations shirk judicial review—even in the example country where the scope of review is otherwise broad and scientific expertise readily available. The example emphasizes the significance for the legal to properly understand the manner in which scientific knowledge of the environment is produced. When it comes to the predominant paradigm of environmental studies, adaptive management, what is legally speaking normative may have already been decided upon when the legal begins to examine the ‘facts‘ and ’norms’ of the matter. The thesis analyses the relevance and consequences of adaptive management’s socio-ecological aspects from the viewpoint of the regulator / the adjudicator after which the examination continues to the legal sphere, scrutinizing the requirements the scientific reality presents for the legal. The conclusion is that rational natural resources governance only begins when administrative-legal systems are considered contingent on the scientific examination: successful regulation is to be anticipated only when the legal acknowledges the socio-ecological management of complex systems as it is and understands itself as a part of the adaptive cycles, not as a separate decision-making entity.Ympäristösääntelyn kiivaasta kehityksestä huolimatta hajakuormitus on osoittautunut hallinnan haasteeksi myös EU:ssa, myös silloin kun kyse on maatalouden vesistöpäästöjen kontrolloimisesta. Tutkimuksen kohteena on neljä sääntelyinstrumenttia, joilla unioni on pyrkinyt puuttumaan maatalouslähtöisiin, rehevöitymistä aiheuttaviin vesistöpäästöihin. Työssä ymmärretään ympäristöoikeuden epistemologia Martinin ja Craigin esittämällä tavalla; tutkimussuuntauksista työ sisältää oikeusteoriaa, lainoppia sekä politiikka-analyysia. Instumentteja tarkasteltaessa unionin yhteisessä maatalouspolitiikassa ilmenevä hallinnoija on saanut lempinimen satunnainen sääntelijä, nitraattidirektiivissä naiivi sääntelijä ja Itämeri-strategiassa vilpitön sääntelijä. Neljättä, kunnianhimoista sääntelijää, on tutkittu tarkimmin. Vesipolitiikan puitedirektiivissä (VPD) on pyritty ottamaan todesta yhteensovittavan ja mukautuvan vesienhoidon vaatimukset. Direktiivin tavoite hyvästä ja ei-heikkenevästä vesien tilasta selkeytyi oikeudellisesti kesällä 2015, kun EU-tuomioistuin antoi ratkaisun ns. Weserin tapauksessa. Työssä jaotellaan Weserin jälkeinen EU-vesioikeus ratkaisun VPD:n järjestelmän sisäisten ja sille ulkoisten vaikutusten mukaan ja päädytään huomaamaan, että jos lainsäätäjä on onnistunut kunnianhimoisessa tavoitteessaan vähemmän kiitettävästi, saattaa oikeudellisesti sitovien ratkaisujen teko jäädä luonnontieteellisen tiedon tuottajien varaan. Heidän työnsä voi sisältää arvovalintoja, joihin ei asian oikeudellisessa tarkastelussa päästä enää käsiksi, niin kattavaa ja luonnontieteellistä osaamista vaivatta hyödyntävää kuin suomalainen hallintoprosessi eri vaiheissaan onkin. VPD:n esimerkki kuvaa hyvin niitä ongelmia, mihin oikeuden kenttä ajautuu, jos se valitsee olla huomioimatta luonnontieteellisen tiedon tuottamistavat: jo vuosikymmenet vallalla olleessa tutkimustavassa, mukautuvassa hallinnassa, oikeudellisesti relevantteja asioita on jo hyvinkin voitu päättää asian tullessa juristin pöydälle ‘faktojen’ ja ‘normien’ tarkasteluun. Tämän vuoksi työssä analysoidaan mukautuvan hallinnan ekologista ja yhteiskunnallista puolta se, mitä niistä on oikeudelliselle kentälle relevanttia. Sen jälkeen tutkitaan, millaisia muutoksia luonnontieteellinen todellisuus edellyttää oikeuden alalta. Johtopäätöksenä esitetään järkevän luonnonvarojen hallinnan alkavan siitä, kun oikeus ymmärtää olevansa alisteinen mukautuvan hallinnan teorialle, olevansa osa sen mukautuvia syklejä, ei niistä erillään oleva päätöksentekijä