IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/jeapmx/v14y2012i04ns1464333212500214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Between Governance And Government: Danish Eia In Uncharted Waters

Author

Listed:
  • PER CHRISTENSEN

    (The Danish Center for Environmental Assessment, Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University, Skibbrogade 5.1, B9000 Aalborg, Denmark)

  • LONE KØRNØV

    (The Danish Center for Environmental Assessment, Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University, Skibbrogade 5.1, B9000 Aalborg, Denmark)

  • ESKILD HOLM NIELSEN

    (The Danish Center for Environmental Assessment, Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University, Skibbrogade 5.1, B9000 Aalborg, Denmark)

Abstract

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has now passed its first 25 years and looking back it becomes clear that it has changed its direction. In this article we will look closer at how different pressures have pushed it in the direction of decentralisation and deliberative democracy, while other forces have pushed it in the direction of more centralised, top-down government. Different developments during this period can thus be perceived as in accordance with a system of governance based upon framework legislation and characterised by flexibility, coordination and participation. Reflecting on some of the manifest developments encountered in Danish EIA legislation, this article shows that the development of governance structures is followed by developments in the direction of more government. By studying EIA screenings of livestock projects, which is the dominating Danish EIA practice, it becomes obvious that governance as well as government has changed its role often at one and the same time. Although there was scepticism about the efficacy of the EIA instrument at the beginning, this changed from the mid-1990s primarily because it was realised, that EIA screening could address the overwhelming problem of agricultural production, but also that it opened the door for more public participation and broader assessment of projects than found previously under environmental regulation. This can be interpreted as an example of a shift away from government to governance, but the story turns out to be more complex than that as the opposite trend is also encountered. In our empirical work on EIA screening in Denmark, we find that two major changes have taken place. These changes all relate to the problem of livestock production. In all cases, we find that the way EIA is used in Denmark is innovative, but also that pressure from the newly introduced Natura 2000 as well as the Water Framework Directive increases the pressure to return to more traditional top-down measures. Using these examples, this paper offers important insights into the dynamic between governance and government.

Suggested Citation

  • Per Christensen & Lone Kørnøv & Eskild Holm Nielsen, 2012. "Between Governance And Government: Danish Eia In Uncharted Waters," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(04), pages 1-18.
  • Handle: RePEc:wsi:jeapmx:v:14:y:2012:i:04:n:s1464333212500214
    DOI: 10.1142/S1464333212500214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1464333212500214
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S1464333212500214?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lorenz Kammermann & Karin Ingold, 2019. "Going beyond technocratic and democratic principles: stakeholder acceptance of instruments in Swiss energy policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 43-65, March.

    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:wsi:jeapmx:v:14:y:2012:i:04:n:s1464333212500214. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/jeapm/jeapm.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.