EU environmental policy: can free trade and environment go together?

Book abstract:

This publication on EU environmental policy is an edited translation of a book issued in Denmark in 1998, and is written from a Danish point of view, although it will be of interest to all readers interested in the debate over environmental policy. At the time of publication, Denmark has had five referendums on the EU, and the environment has played a major role in these with concerns that the EU will force Denmark to adopt a less powerful environmental policy. On the other hand, there is also the central argument that a higher level of environmental protection can be achieved by Denmark being part of a common environmental policy. This book is about EU environmental policy in relation to trans-boundary trade of goods used in households and industry. This has become a major issue in environmental policy, since this is where a preventative environmental policy can be introduced. It covers the environmental legislation concerning products, but does not cover other parts of environmental policy such as nature conservation, emission standards, integration of environment in the common agricultural policy, structural funds and other policy sectors.

The first part of the book focuses on the Single Market and the environment. It covers the effects of the various treaties, such as the Single Act, Maastricht and Amsterdam; policies in areas such as subsidiarity, agriculture, taxes and public procurement and looks at the relationship between the EU and the World Trade Organisation and how free trade impacts upon environmental concerns. The second part looks at developments in individual sectors, covering chemicals, heavy metals, labelling, toys, imports and exports of hazardous chemicals, ozone depleting substances, pesticides, the greenhouse effect, genetic engineering, packaging, PVC and automobiles. The argument is made that EU legislation aimed at achieving total harmonisation could curb environmental advances and hold back countries who wish to introduce more stringent environmental rules. More dynamic development might be achieved by directives aimed at achieving minimum standards leaving member states with the option to introduce more radical measures where they think necessary. The onus would then be on Commission and Court to prove that the state had introduced the measure purely to serve as a restrictive trade practice.