IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/loceco/v25y2010i5-6p510-522.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Policy under New Labour

Author

Listed:
  • Tony Jackson

Abstract

New Labour's efforts to shape development practice to incorporate sustainable precepts and deliver low carbon outcomes are reviewed. A failure to promote integrated environmental policies within government and to subject these to statutory environmental assessment has severely constrained the realisation of sustainable development pathways. Climate change policy initiatives have generated a greater degree of cross-departmental commitment. Yet one of its short-lived initiatives, the Infrastructure Planning Commission, would have struggled to deliver a low carbon economy, because its deliberations were exempt from statutory forms of environmental assessment that quantify the carbon footprints of alternative development scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • Tony Jackson, 2010. "Environmental Policy under New Labour," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 25(5-6), pages 510-522, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:loceco:v:25:y:2010:i:5-6:p:510-522
    DOI: 10.1080/02690942.2010.525990
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/02690942.2010.525990
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/02690942.2010.525990?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Duncan Russel & Andrew Jordan, 2007. "Gearing-up governance for sustainable development: Patterns of policy appraisal in UK central government," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(1), pages 1-21.
    2. Tony Jackson & Barbara Illsley, 2006. "Strategic environmental assessment as a tool of environmental governance: Scotland's extension of the European Union SEA Directive," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(3), pages 361-383.
    3. Ron Martin, 2008. "National growth versus spatial equality? A cautionary note on the new ‘trade-off’ thinking in regional policy discourse," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 3-13, November.
    4. Steven Smith & William Sheate, 2001. "Sustainability Appraisals of Regional Planning Guidance and Regional Economic Strategies in England: An Assessment," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(5), pages 735-755.
    5. Susan Owens & Tim Rayner & Olivia Bina, 2004. "New Agendas for Appraisal: Reflections on Theory, Practice, and Research," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(11), pages 1943-1959, November.
    6. Peter Roberts & Tony Jackson, 2002. "Sustainable development and the management of the Scottish environment: stringing the beads," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(3), pages 179-186.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Duncan Russel & John Turnpenny & Andrew Jordan, 2018. "Mainstreaming the environment through appraisal: Integrative governance or logics of disintegration?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(8), pages 1355-1370, December.
    2. Tony Jackson, 2007. "Mainstreaming Sustainability in Local Economic Development Practice," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 22(1), pages 12-26, February.
    3. Vinko Muštra & Blanka Šimundić & Zvonimir Kuliš, 2020. "Does innovation matter for regional labour resilience? The case of EU regions," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(5), pages 955-970, October.
    4. Sue Kidd & Thomas B Fischer, 2007. "Towards Sustainability: Is Integrated Appraisal a Step in the Right Direction?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 25(2), pages 233-249, April.
    5. Vargas, Andrés & Sarmiento Erazo, Juan Pablo & Diaz, David, 2020. "Has Cost Benefit Analysis Improved Decisions in Colombia? Evidence from the Environmental Licensing Process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    6. Roberto Ganau & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2022. "Does urban concentration matter for changes in country economic performance?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(6), pages 1275-1299, May.
    7. Pike, Andy & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés & Torrisi, Gianpiero & Tselios, Vassilis & Tomaney, John, 2010. "In search of the ‘economic dividend’ of devolution: spatial disparities, spatial economic policy and decentralisation in the UK," DEMQ Working Paper Series 2010/9, University of Catania, Department of Economics and Quantitative Methods.
    8. Seyed Peyman Asadi & Ahmad Jafari Samimi, 2019. "Lagging-behind Areas as a Challenge to the Regional Development Strategy: What Insights can New and Evolutionary Economic Geography Offer?," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1923, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2019.
    9. Stilianos Alexiadis & Konstantinos Eleftheriou, 2011. "A note on the relation between inter-regional inequality and economic efficiency: evidence from the US states," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(1), pages 37-44, March.
    10. Camilla Adelle & Andrew Jordan & John Turnpenny, 2012. "Proceeding in Parallel or Drifting Apart? A Systematic Review of Policy Appraisal Research and Practices," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 30(3), pages 401-415, June.
    11. Backlund, Ann-Katrin & Adamowicz, Mieczyslaw & Jozefecka, Magdalena & Macombe, Catherine & Zemek, F., 2007. "An Institutional Analysis of European Systems for Impact Assessment," Reports 57471, Wageningen University, SEAMLESS: System for Environmental and Agricultural Modelling; Linking European Science and Society.
    12. Simon Marsden, 2018. "Protecting wild land from wind farms in a post-EU Scotland," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 295-314, April.
    13. Isabella M. Lami & Stefano Moroni, 2020. "How Can I Help You? Questioning the Role of Evaluation Techniques in Democratic Decision-Making Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Golobic, Mojca & Marot, Naja, 2011. "Territorial impact assessment: Integrating territorial aspects in sectoral policies," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 163-173, August.
    15. Betsy Donald & Mia Gray & Centre for Business Research, 2018. "The Double Crisis: In What Sense A Regional Problem?," Working Papers wp507, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    16. Ingrid J Visseren-Hamakers, 2018. "Integrative governance: The relationships between governance instruments taking center stage," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(8), pages 1341-1354, December.
    17. Mikko Weckroth & Sami Moisio, 2020. "Territorial Cohesion of What and Why? The Challenge of Spatial Justice for EU’s Cohesion Policy," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(4), pages 183-193.
    18. Frick, Susanne A. & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés, 2018. "Change in urban concentration and economic growth," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 156-170.
    19. Iritié, B. G. Jean-Jacques, 2014. "Enjeux des politiques industrielles basées sur les clusters d'innovation: cas des pôles de compétitivité [Issues of Innovative Clusters-based Industrial Policy: Case of Pole of Competitiveness]," MPRA Paper 54429, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Richard Cowell & Susan Owens, 2006. "Governing Space: Planning Reform and the Politics of Sustainability," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(3), pages 403-421, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:loceco:v:25:y:2010:i:5-6:p:510-522. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/index.shtml .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.