Mitigation and screening for environmental assessment

This article considers how, as a matter of law and policy, mitigation measures should be taken into account in determining whether a project will have significant environmental effects and therefore be subject to assessment under the EU Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive. This is not straightforward: it is problematic to distinguish clearly between an activity and the measures proposed to minimise or mitigate for the adverse consequences of the activity. The issue is a salient one in impact assessment law, but under-explored in the literature and handled with some difficulty by the courts. I argue that there is an unnecessarily and undesirably narrow approach currently taken under the EIA Directive, which could be improved upon by taking a more adaptive approach; alternatively a heightened standard of review of ‘significance’, and within this of the scope for mitigation measures to bring projects beneath the significance threshold, may also be desirable

Law, Environment, and the “Nondismal” Social Sciences

Over the past 30 years, the influence of economics over the study of environmental law and policy has expanded considerably, becoming in the process the predominant framework for analyzing regulations that address pollution, natural resource use, and other environmental issues. This review seeks to complement the expansion of economic reasoning and methodology within the field of environmental law and policy by identifying insights to be gleaned from various “nondismal” social sciences. In particular, three areas of inquiry are highlighted as illustrative of interdisciplinary work that might help to complement law and economics and, in some cases, compensate for it: the study of how human individuals perceive, judge, and decide; the observation and interpretation of how knowledge schemes are created, used, and regulated; and the analysis of how states and other actors coordinate through international and global regulatory regimes. The hope is to provide some examples of how environmental law and policy research can be improved by deeper and more diverse engagement with social science

Access and allocation in earth system governance: Water and climate change compared

A significant percentage of the global population does not yet have access to safe drinking water, sufficient food or energy to live in dignity. There is a continuous struggle to allocate the earth's resources among users and uses. This article argues that distributional problems have two faces: access to basic resources or ecospace; and, the allocation of environmental resources, risks, burdens, and responsibilities for causing problems. Furthermore, addressing problems of access and allocation often requires access to social processes (science, movements and law). Analysts, however, have tended to take a narrow, disciplinary approach although an integrated conceptual approach may yield better answers. This article proposes a multi-disciplinary perspective to the problem of access and allocation and illustrates its application to water management and climate change. © The Author(s) 2010

Sticks and carrots for reducing property-level risks from floods: an EU-US comparative perspective

In discussing legal and policy frameworks for flood risk management, the attention is often put on increasing resilience in public spaces. In terms of private properties, discussions are geared toward enhancing the adaptive capacity of future developments. This paper focuses on the instruments associated with resilience of existing privately owned residential buildings mainly from the perspective of post-flood policies and compensation regimes. The paper scrutinizes the relevant legal and policy landscapes in the United States, the European Union and two Member States – the UK and the Netherlands. The goal is to provide mutual lessons learned between the EU, its Member States, and the US and to set forth generally applicable recommendations for improving post-flood policies for existing buildings

Water Resource Management

This casebook remains the most comprehensive available on water law. It gives extensive coverage to both Eastern and Western common law, customary and statutory allocation systems, Indian water rights, and interstate allocation law and the historical forces that produced these systems. It also covers the federal government’s historic role in constructing irrigation, flood control and navigation projects and the changing roles of local water supply organizations. All chapters emphasize the challenges that states and the federal water resources agencies are facing such as climate change adaptation, environmental restoration and the reallocation of existing entitlements.https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/law_facbookdisplay/1032/thumbnail.jp