IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i8p2886-d163712.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying Gaps between the Legislative Tools of Soil Protection in the EU Member States for a Common European Soil Protection Legislation

Author

Listed:
  • Petra Stankovics

    (Department of Crop Production and Land Use, University of Pannonia Georgikon Faculty, 8360 Keszthely, Hungary)

  • Gergely Tóth

    (Department of Soil Science and Environmental Informatics, University of Pannonia, 8360 Keszthely, Hungary
    Institute for Soil Sciences and Agricultural Chemistry, Centre for Agricultural Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1022 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Zoltán Tóth

    (Department of Crop Production and Land Use, University of Pannonia Georgikon Faculty, 8360 Keszthely, Hungary)

Abstract

To ensure an adequate level of protection in the European Union (EU), the European Commission (EC) adopted the Soil Thematic Strategy in 2006, including a proposal for a Soil Framework Directive (the Directive). However, a minority of Member States (United Kingdom, Germany, France, Austria, and The Netherlands) could not agree on the text of the proposed Directive. Consequently, the EC decided to withdraw the proposal in 2014. In the more than 10 years that have passed since the initial proposal, a great number of new evidences on soil degradation and its negative consequences, have proved the necessity of a common European soil protection Directive. This study is aimed at specifying the possible obstacles, differences, and gaps in legislature and administration in the countries that formed the blocking minority, which resulted in the refusal of the Directive. The individual legislations of the opposing countries on the matter, were summarized and compared with the goals set by the Directive, in three highlighted aspects: (1) soil-dependent threats, (2) contamination, and (3) sealing. We designed a simple schematic evaluation system to show the basic levels of differences and similarities. We found that the legislative regulations concerning soil-dependent degradation and contamination issues in the above countries were generally well defined, complementary, and thorough. A common European legislation can be based on harmonised approaches between them, focusing on technical implementations. In the aspect of sealing we found recommendations, principles, and good practices rather than binding regulations in the scrutinised countries. Soil sealing is an issue where the proposed Directive’s measures, could have exceeded those of the Member States.

Suggested Citation

  • Petra Stankovics & Gergely Tóth & Zoltán Tóth, 2018. "Identifying Gaps between the Legislative Tools of Soil Protection in the EU Member States for a Common European Soil Protection Legislation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2886-:d:163712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2886/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2886/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirk Vrebos & Francesca Bampa & Rachel E. Creamer & Ciro Gardi & Bhim Bahadur Ghaley & Arwyn Jones & Michiel Rutgers & Taru Sandén & Jan Staes & Patrick Meire, 2017. "The Impact of Policy Instruments on Soil Multifunctionality in the European Union," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Zhuyi Liu & Yuhan Yin & Yun Zhang & Shangeng Shi, 2023. "Legal System of Soil Pollution Remediation in China and Its Regulation and Guidance to Soil Pollution Remediation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-16, July.
    2. Katharina Helming & Katrin Daedlow & Bernd Hansjürgens & Thomas Koellner, 2018. "Assessment and Governance of Sustainable Soil Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Guillaume Jacek & Anne Rozan & Isabelle Combroux, 2022. "Are Mechanical and Biological Techniques Efficient in Restoring Soil and Associated Biodiversity in a Brownfield Site?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, November.
    4. Philippos Karipidis & Sotiria Karypidou, 2021. "Factors that Impact Farmers’ Organic Conversion Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, April.
    5. Radu Lucian Pânzaru & Daniela Firoiu & George H. Ionescu & Andi Ciobanu & Dragoș Mihai Medelete & Ramona Pîrvu, 2023. "Organic Agriculture in the Context of 2030 Agenda Implementation in European Union Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-31, July.
    6. Stankovics, Petra & Montanarella, Luca & Kassai, Piroska & Tóth, Gergely & Tóth, Zoltán, 2020. "The interrelations of land ownership, soil protection and privileges of capital in the aspect of land take," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    7. Francesca Peroni & Guglielmo Pristeri & Daniele Codato & Salvatore Eugenio Pappalardo & Massimo De Marchi, 2019. "Biotope Area Factor: An Ecological Urban Index to Geovisualize Soil Sealing in Padua, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Lucia Palšová & Katarína Melichová & Ina Melišková, 2019. "Modelling Development, Territorial and Legislative Factors Impacting the Changes in Use of Agricultural Land in Slovakia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-19, July.

    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. Katharina Helming & Katrin Daedlow & Bernd Hansjürgens & Thomas Koellner, 2018. "Assessment and Governance of Sustainable Soil Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, November.
    2. Bartosz Bartkowski & Nils Droste & Mareike Lie{ss} & William Sidemo-Holm & Ulrich Weller & Mark V. Brady, 2019. "Implementing result-based agri-environmental payments by means of modelling," Papers 1908.08219, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2020.
    3. Rudi Hessel & Guido Wyseure & Ioanna S. Panagea & Abdallah Alaoui & Mark S. Reed & Hedwig van Delden & Melanie Muro & Jane Mills & Oene Oenema & Francisco Areal & Erik van den Elsen & Simone Verzandvo, 2022. "Soil-Improving Cropping Systems for Sustainable and Profitable Farming in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-27, May.
    4. Jiang, Fei & Drohan, Patrick J. & Cibin, Raj & Preisendanz, Heather E. & White, Charles M. & Veith, Tamie L., 2021. "Reallocating crop rotation patterns improves water quality and maintains crop yield," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    5. Iker Etxano & Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Oihana Garcia, 2018. "Conflicting Values in Rural Planning: A Multifunctionality Approach through Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-29, May.
    6. Bartkowski, Bartosz & Droste, Nils & Ließ, Mareike & Sidemo-Holm, William & Weller, Ulrich & Brady, Mark V., 2021. "Payments by modelled results: A novel design for agri-environmental schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    7. Riccardo Testa & Salvatore Tudisca & Giorgio Schifani & Anna Maria Di Trapani & Giuseppina Migliore, 2018. "Tropical Fruits as an Opportunity for Sustainable Development in Rural Areas: The Case of Mango in Small-Sized Sicilian Farms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    8. Cabini, Emanuele & Fontana, Luca & Malavasi, Pierluigi & Iavicoli, Ivo, 2018. "Land use: The perception of risk by the citizens and local administrators in the North of Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 553-564.
    9. Bartosz Bartkowski & Bernd Hansjürgens & Stefan Möckel & Stephan Bartke, 2018. "Institutional Economics of Agricultural Soil Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-14, July.
    10. Jia Gao & Yaohui Zhu & Rongrong Zhao & Hongjun Sui, 2022. "The Use of Cultivated Land for Multiple Functions in Major Grain-Producing Areas in Northeast China: Spatial-Temporal Pattern and Driving Forces," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, September.
    11. Katrin Daedlow & Nahleen Lemke & Katharina Helming, 2018. "Arable Land Tenancy and Soil Quality in Germany: Contesting Theory with Empirics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    12. Tiankui Li & Yi Liu & Sijie Lin & Yangze Liu & Yunfeng Xie, 2019. "Soil Pollution Management in China: A Brief Introduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, January.
    13. Julie Ingram & Jane Mills & Jasmine E. Black & Charlotte-Anne Chivers & José A. Aznar-Sánchez & Annemie Elsen & Magdalena Frac & Belén López-Felices & Paula Mayer-Gruner & Kamilla Skaalsveen & Jannes , 2022. "Do Agricultural Advisory Services in Europe Have the Capacity to Support the Transition to Healthy Soils?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-26, April.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2886-:d:163712. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.