Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Environmental Law and Economics in Europe

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Environmental Law and Economics

Part of the book series: Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship ((EALELS,volume 4))

  • 1315 Accesses

Abstract

For decades, the discipline of law and economics in the U.S. has offered a broader perspective to the analysis of legislation and jurisdiction compared to the European countries. While this is due to number of reasons, this article emphasizes the importance of the different legal cultures, offering analyses of the British, French, German and European legal framework. Although these differences seem to be rooted in structural differences and thus may persist for some time, there are areas of overlapping interests and similar approaches of applying methods of law and economics. The article focuses on these tendencies and offers a deeper analysis in the area of environmental protection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Coase 1960, pp. 3.

  2. 2.

    Calabrese 1961, pp. 499.

  3. 3.

    Gelter and Kristoffel 2014, p. 3.

  4. 4.

    Michael Rodi 2014, Kapitel 7 Umweltökonomik.

  5. 5.

    Dau-Schmidt and Brun 2006, pp. 602.

  6. 6.

    Posner 2003, Economic Analysis of Law, p. 4.

  7. 7.

    Locke 1690, The Second Treaties on Government, p. 64.

  8. 8.

    Dau-Schmidt and Brun 2006, 606; Posner 2003, p. 3.

  9. 9.

    Watson 1980, pp. 235.

  10. 10.

    Dau-Schmidt and Brun 2006, p. 606.

  11. 11.

    John Rawls 1971, p. 1.

  12. 12.

    Kiska, pp. 107.

  13. 13.

    For Germany see the Reports of the German Federal Constitutional Court, BVerfGE 10, 4 (12); BVerfGE 60, 374 (380).

  14. 14.

    Dau-Schmidt and Brun 2006, p. 610.

  15. 15.

    With a focus on constitutional law Creutzburg 2006, pp. 399.

  16. 16.

    See R (HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport [2014] UKSC 3.

  17. 17.

    Burke 1987, Reflections on the Revolution in France pp. 27.

  18. 18.

    Guardian online, Oct. 13th 2016, Court battle looms over Brexit legality, available at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/13/court-case-battle-looms-over-brexit-legality-article-50

  19. 19.

    Roussaeu 1987.

  20. 20.

    Fikentscher 1993, p. 167.

  21. 21.

    Loi organique n° 1/2003 of Jan. 17th 2003 portant organisation et fonctionnement de la Cour Constitutionelle, and Loi organique n° 13/026 of Oct. 15th 2013 portant organisation et fonctionnement de la Cour Constitutionnelle.

  22. 22.

    Cohen-Eliya and Porat 2010, pp. 263.

  23. 23.

    Reports of the German Federal Constitutional Court, 39 BVerfGE 1 (1975).

  24. 24.

    Hegel 1821, § 258.

  25. 25.

    German Federal Constitutional Court, Applications for a Preliminary Injunction in the “CETA” Proceedings Unsuccessful, Press Release No. 71/2016 of 13 October 2016; Reference: 2 BvR 1368/16, 2 BvR 1444/16, 2 BvR 1823/16, 2 BvR 1482/16, 2 BvE 3/16, available at http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/EN/2016/bvg16-071.html;jsessionid=B7F24C3ADA9070396A53490FA58788B4.2_cid394.

  26. 26.

    Reports of the German Federal Constitutional Court, Februar 2006 – 1 BvR 357/05 – (BVerfGE 115, 118).

  27. 27.

    BVerfG, 16.05.1990 (1 BvR 450/90), GewArch 1990, p. 275.

  28. 28.

    Revesz and Stavins 2003, p. 2.

  29. 29.

    Coase 1960, pp. 3.

  30. 30.

    Eidenmüller 2015, p. 107.

  31. 31.

    Kennedy 1981, p. 397.

  32. 32.

    Revesz and Stavins 2003, pp. 33.

  33. 33.

    Böhm 1989.

  34. 34.

    Art. 31 Swiss Federal Law on the Reduction of CO2-Emissions, SR 641.71.

  35. 35.

    Art. 4, 6 and 9 UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention) Aarhus Convention.

  36. 36.

    Cabinet Office (United Kingdom), Better Policy Making: A Guide to Regulatory Impact Assessment, 2003, available at http://www.dei.gov.ba/bih_i_eu/RIA_u_BiH/default.aspx?id=6595&langTag=bs-BA

  37. 37.

    OECD, Better Regulation in the Netherlands, 2009, available at https://www.oecd.org/netherlands/43307757.pdf

  38. 38.

    The Federal (German) Government, Guidelines on the Identification and Presentation of Compliance Cost available at http://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/Buerokratieabbau/2013-01-02-erfuellungsaufwand.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

  39. 39.

    European Court of Justice, Judgment of Sept. 20th, 1988, Case 302/86 – Commission/Denmark (Containers for beers and soft drinks), [ECLI:EU:1988:421].

  40. 40.

    European Court of Justice , Judgment of March 12, 1987, Case 178/84, Commission/Germany (Beer Purity), ECLI:EU:1987:126.

  41. 41.

    European Court of Justice, Judgment of Nov. 11th 2014, Case C-333/13 – Dano, [ECLI:EU:C:2014:2358].

  42. 42.

    See Albers, Michael, Der “more economic approach” bei Verdrängungsmissbräuchen. Zum Stand der ̈Überlegungen der Europäischen Kommission. Available at: www.ec.europa.eu/ competition/antitrust/art82/albers.pdf.

  43. 43.

    Art. 298(1) TFEU.

  44. 44.

    European Commission, Better Regulation Guidelines, Risk Assessment and Management, available at http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/guidelines/tool_12_en.htm

  45. 45.

    Regulation 1907/2006, OJ EU 2006, L136, p. 13.

  46. 46.

    European Commission, Circular Economy Strategy, available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/index_en.htm

  47. 47.

    Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OF 1992, L 206, 7.

  48. 48.

    Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and the Council on industrial emissions (the Industrial Emissions Directive or IED) OF 2010, L 334, 17.

  49. 49.

    Wagner Pfeiffer 2013, at. pp. 137 with references to Swiss jurisdiction.

  50. 50.

    German Federal Administrative Court, Judgment of June 30th, 2016, BVerwG 7 C 4.15 [ECLI:DE:BVerwG:2016:300616U7C4.15.0].

  51. 51.

    Art. 3 lit. a Ordinance on the prevention and removal of waste, VVEA, SR 814.600.

  52. 52.

    Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC, OJ 2003, L 275, 32.

  53. 53.

    Sachverständigenrat für Umweltfragen, Sondergutachten, Emissionshandel, 2008.

Bibliography

  • Böhm, Monika. 1989. Die Wirksamkeit von Umweltlenkungsabgaben: am Beispiel des Abwasserabgabengesetzes. Düsseldorf: Werner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, Edmund. 1987. In Reflections on the Revolution in France, ed. J.G.A. Pocock. Dover Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese, Guido. 1961. Some Thoughts on Risk Distribution and the Law of Tort. 70 Yale L.J. 499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, Ronald H. 1960. The Problem of Social Cost, 3 J.L. & Econ. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Eliya, Moshe, and Iddo Porat. 2010. American Balancing and German Proportionality: The Historical Origins. International Journal of Constitutional Law 8: 263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creutzburg, Claudia. 2006. Deutungsmacht und ungeschriebene Verfassung: England. In Die Deutungsmacht der Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit, ed. Hans Vorländer, 339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dau-Schmidt, Kenneth G., and Carmen L. Brun. 2006. Lost in Translation: The Economic Analysis of Law in the United States and Europe. Maurer School of Law: Indiana University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eidenmüller, Horst. 2015. Effizienz als Rechtsprinzip. 4th ed. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fikentscher, Wolfgang. 1993. Recht und wirtschaftliche Freiheit II. Transnationales Marktrecht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelter, Martin, and Grechenig Kristoffel. 2014. History of Law and Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegel, G.W.F. 1821. Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts oder Naturrecht und Staatswissenschaft im Grundrisse, ed. Moldenhauer, Michel. 1986. Leipzig: Reclam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, Duncan. 1981. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Entitlement Problems: A Critique. Stanford Law Review 33: 387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiska, Roger. 2016. Hate Speech: A Comparison Between the European Court of Human Rights and the United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence. Regent University Law Review 25: 107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, John. 1690. The Second Treatise of Government. An Essay Concerning the True Original, Extent and End Civil Government. Watchmaker Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, Richard. 2003. Economic Analysis of Law, 6th ed. Harcourt Professional Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Belknap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Revesz, Richard L., and Robert N. Stavins. 2003. Environmental Law and Policy. Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodi, Michael. 2014. Ökonomische Analyse des Öffentlichen Rechts. Springer Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1987. On the Social Contract. Ed and Trans. Donald A. Cress. Hackett Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner Pfeifer, Beatrice. 2013. Umweltrecht. Besondere Regelungsbereiche – Handbuch zu Chemikalien, GVO, Altlasten, Gewässerschutz, Energie u.a. Zürich: Dike.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, K.P. 1980. 32 Baylor L. Rev. 235. Regulating Commercial Speech: A Conceptual Framework for Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland

    Sebastian Heselhaus

Authors
  1. Sebastian Heselhaus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Heselhaus .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland

    Klaus Mathis

  2. Notre Dame Law School, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA

    Bruce R. Huber

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Heselhaus, S. (2017). Environmental Law and Economics in Europe. In: Mathis, K., Huber, B. (eds) Environmental Law and Economics. Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship, vol 4. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50932-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50932-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50931-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50932-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation