The authors examine the implementation of environmental regulation and demonstrate that path dependency, created largely by resource constraints, narrows the range of options for implementing regulation. It also magnifies the impact of the institutional history of the regulatory body and the impact of the disciplinary commitments of those working within the regulatory body on the implementation process. It is shown that the result is that those involved in the implementation process are unable to consider all possible routes to implementation but, rather, only a relatively few ‘manageable’ options for the regulation of particular activities. The arguments are examined in the context of implementation of the Water Framework Directive 2000 (WFD) in Scotland. In particular the authors focus on the regulation of diffuse pollution under the WFD and on the role played by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency in that regulation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArthurWB, 1989, “Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events”Economic Journal99116–131
2.
ArthurWB, 1994Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy (University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI)
3.
BaumgartnerFRJonesBD, 1991, “Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems”The Journal of Politics531044–1074
4.
BaumgartnerFRJonesBD, 1993Agendas and Instability in American Politics (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL)
5.
BlackstockKKirkEAReevesAD, 2005, “Sociology, science and sustainability: Developing relationships in Scotland”Sociological Research Online10(2)
6.
Boehmer-ChristiansenSA, 1994, “A scientific agenda for climate policy?”Nature372400–402
7.
CollinsHM, 1985Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice (Sage, Beverley Hills, CA)
8.
ConnorRDoversS, 2004Institutional Change for Sustainable Development (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Glos)
9.
Control of Pollution Act1974Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 40 (HMSO, London)
10.
DavidPA, 1985, “Clio and the economics of QWERTY”American Economic Review75332–336
EdmunsonWA, 2002, “Social meaning, compliance conditions and law's claim to authority”Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence1551–67
13.
Environmental Protection Act1990Public General Acts—Elizabeth II chapter 43 (HMSO, London)
14.
FeldmanSM, 1991, “An interpretation of Max Weber's theory of law: Metaphysics, economics, and the iron cage of constitutional law”Law and Social Inquiry16205–248
15.
FuntowiczSORavetzJR, 1992, “Three types of risk assessment and the emergence of post-normal science”, in Social Theories of Risk Eds KrimskySGoldingD, (Praeger, Westport, CT) pp 251–273
16.
GalliganDJ, 1986Discretionary Powers: A Legal Study of Official Discretion (Clarendon Press, Oxford)
17.
GouldsonAMurphyJ, 1998Regulatory Realities: The Implementation and Impact of Industrial Environmental Regulation (Earthscan, London)
18.
HaasPM, 1992, “Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination”International Organisation461–35
19.
HawkinsK, 1984Environment and Enforcement: Regulation and the Social Definition of Pollution (Clarendon Press, Oxford)
20.
HolderJElworthyS, 1998, “The BSE crisis: A study of the precautionary principle and the politics of science in law”, in Current Legal Issues Volume 1 Law and Science Ed. ReeceH, (Clarendon Press, Oxford) pp 129–151
21.
IrwinARothsteinHYearleySMcCarthyE, 1997, “Regulatory science—towards a sociological framework”Futures2917–31
22.
JasanoffS, 1990The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policy Makers (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
23.
JasanoffS, 1995, “Procedural choices in regulatory science”Technology in Society17279–293
24.
JasanoffS, 1999, “Cross national differences in policy implementation”, in A Reader in Environmental Law Ed. HuttonBM, (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 142–158
25.
JohnPMargettsH, 2003, “Policy punctuations in the UK: Fluctuations and equilibria in central government expenditure since 1951”Public Administration81411–432
26.
KatesRWClarkWCCorellRHallJMJaegerCCLoweIMcCarthyJJSchellnhuberHJBolinBDicksonNMFaucheuxSGallopinGCGrüblerAHuntleyBJägerJJodhaNSKaspersonREMabogungeAMatsonPMooneyHMooreBIIIO'RiordanTSvedinU, 2001, “Environment and development: ‘sustainability science’”Science292(5517) 641–642
27.
KirkEASherlockKReevesAD, 2004, “SUDS law: Non-state actors and the haphazard route to implementation of international obligations”Journal of Non-State Actors and International Law487–109
28.
KuhnT, 1970The Structure of Scientific Revolutions2nd edition (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL)
29.
LandesmanC, 1997An Introduction to Epistemology (Blackwell, Oxford)
30.
LeeKNLawrenceJ, 1986, “Adaptive management: Learning from the Columbia river basin fish and wildlife program”Environmental Law16431–460
31.
LessigL, 1996, “Social meaning and social norms”University of Pennsylvania Law Review1442181–2189
32.
LiberatoreA, 1994, “Facing global warming: The interactions between science and policy-making in the European Community”, in Social Theory and the Global Environment Eds RedcliftMBentonT, (Routledge, London) pp 190–204
33.
LiebowitzSJMargolisSE, 1994, “Network externality: An uncommon tragedy”Journal of Economic Perspectives8133–150
34.
LindblomCE, 1959, “The science of muddling through”Public Administration Review1979–88
LuhmannN, 1988, “The utility of the legal system”, in Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society Ed. TeubnerG, (Walter de Gruyter, Berlin) pp 12–35
37.
LustickJ, 1980, “Explaining the variable utility of disjointed incrementalism: Four propositions”American Political Science Review74342–353
38.
MarsdenMWMackayDW, 2001, “Water quality in Scotland: The view of the regulator”The Science of the Total Environment265369–386
39.
MooneyC, 2005The Republican War on Science (Basic Books, New York)
40.
NorthDC, 1990Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
41.
NovotnyV, 1999, “Diffuse pollution from agriculture—a worldwide outlook”Water Science and Technology391–13
42.
OgusAI, 1994Regulation: Legal Form and Economic Theory (Clarendon Press, Oxford)
43.
PickerRC, 1997, “Simple games in a complex world: A generative approach to the adoption of norms”University of Chicago Law Review641225–1288
44.
RaittFZeedykMS, 2000The Implicit Relation of Psychology and Law: Women and Syndrome Evidence (Routledge, London)
45.
RavetzJR, 1999, “What is post-normal science?”Futures31647–654
46.
RavetzJR, 2002, “Food safety, quality and ethics—a post normal perspective”Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics15255–265
47.
RCEP, 1998Setting Environmental Standards: Twenty-first Report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution Cm 4053, Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (The Stationery Office, London)
48.
ReevesADKirkEASherlockK, 2003, “Disciplinary interactions: Science and the law”; unpublished ESRC report (R000223838), University of Dundee, Dundee
49.
SalorantaTM, 2001, “Post normal science and the global climate change issue”Climatic Change50395–404
50.
Scottish Executive Environment Group, 2005, “Diffuse water pollution from rural land use”, Paper 2005/35, Scottish Executive, Edinburgh
SEPA, Scottish Environment Protection Agency1999bState of the Environment: Improving Scotland's Water Environment Report
54.
SEPA, Scottish Environment Protection Agency2005aScotland River Basin District Characterisation and Impacts Analyses Required by Article 5 of the Water Framework Directive
55.
SEPA, Scottish Environment Protection Agency2005bSolway Tweed River Basin District Characterisation and Impacts Analysis Required by Article 5 of the Water Framework Directive
56.
SherlockKLKirkEAReevesAD, 2004, “Just the usual suspects? Partnerships and environmental regulation”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy22651–666
57.
SimonHA, 1957Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-making Processes in Administrative Organization2nd edition (Macmillan, New York)
58.
SimonHA, 1982Models of Bounded Rationality (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
59.
SunsteinCR, 1996, “Social norms and social roles”Columbia Law Review96903–968
60.
TeubnerG, 1988Autopoietic Law: A New Approach to Law and Society (Walter de Gruyter, Berlin)
61.
TeubnerG, 1993Law as an Autopoietic System Ed. BankowskiZ, (translated by BankowskaAAdlerR) (Blackwell, Oxford)
62.
TrueJLJonesBDBaumgartnerF, 2006, “Punctuated-equilibrium theory explaining stability and change in American policymaking”, in Theories of the Policy Process2nd edition, Ed. SabatierP, (Westview Press, Boulder, CO) forthcoming
63.
WagnerW, 2003, “The “bad science” fiction: Reclaiming the debate over the role of science in public health and regulation”Law and Contemporary Problems6663–134
64.
Water Environment and Water Services Act2003, asp 3 (The Stationery Office, Edinburgh)
65.
Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC OJ L 327 2000
66.
WeberM, 1947Max Weber on Law in Economy and Society Ed. RheinsteinM, (Harvard University Press, Cambridge)
67.
WeberM, 1968The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation Ed. ParsonsT, (Collier-Macmillan, London)
68.
WoerdmanE, 2004, “Path-dependent climate policy: The history and future of emission trading in Europe”European Environment14261–275
69.
WynneB, 1994, “Scientific knowledge and the global environment”, in Social Theory and the Global Environment Eds RedcliftMBentonT, (Routledge, London) pp 169–189
