In this paper we seek to advance current understanding of uneven convergence in the context of EU environmental policy, and specifically, the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). Using a large-sample, quantitative methodology, we examine three broad sets of determinants hypothesised to influence geographic patterns of policy convergence: (1) cross-national market integration; (2) compatibility between the domestic regulatory context and European policy requirements; and (3) bottom-up pressure from market and societal actors. Our analysis provides empirical support for all three hypothesised determinants. Measures of import–export ties, regulatory burden, past policy adoptions, environmental demand from civil society, and levels of economic productivity are all found to be statistically significant predictors of national EMAS counts. Against a backdrop of geographically diverse regulatory institutions, societal conditions, and trading relationships, we conclude that unevenness is an inevitable feature of Europeanisation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamsonE, 1996, “Management fashion”Academy of Management Review21254–285
2.
AriasM EGuillénM F, 1998, “The transfer of organizational techniques across borders: Combining neo-institutional and comparative perspectives”, in Diffusion and Consumption of Business Knowledge Ed. AlvarezJ L (Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hants) pp 110–137
3.
ArthurW B, 1989, “Competing technologies, increasing returns and lock-in by historical events”Economic Journal99116–131
4.
BaileyI, 2002, “National adaptation to European integration: Institutional vetoes and goodness-of-fit”Journal of European Public Policy9791–811
5.
BansalPBognerW C, 2002, “Deciding on ISO 14001: Economics, institutions and context”Long Range Planning35269–290
6.
BeckNKatzJ K, 1995, “What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section date”American Political Science Review89634–647
7.
BennettC J, 1991, “Review article: What is policy convergence and what causes it?”British Journal of Political Science21215–233
8.
BörzelT A, 2003Environmental Leaders and Laggards in Europe: Why There Is (Not) a ‘Southern Problem’ (Ashgate, Aldershot, Hants)
9.
ClappJ, 2001Toxic Exports: The Transfer of Hazardous Wastes and Technologies from Rich to Poor Countries (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY)
10.
ClausenJKeilMJungwirthM, 2002The State of EMAS in the EU: Literature StudyInstitute for Ecological Economy Research and Ecologic—Institute for International and European Environmental Policy, Berlin
11.
CorbettC JKirschD A, 2000, “ISO 14000: An agnostic's report from the front line”ISO 9000 + ISO 14000 News94–17
12.
CornelisseP AGoudswaardK P, 2002, “On the convergence of social protection systems in the European Union”International Social Security Review553–17
13.
DavidP A, 1985, “Clio and the economics of QWERTY”American Economic Review75332–337
14.
DelmasM A, 2002, “The diffusion of environmental management standards in Europe and the United States: An institutional perspective”Policy Sciences3591–119
15.
DelmasM ATerlaakA, 2002, “Regulatory commitment to negotiated agreements: Evidence from the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, and France”Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis45–29
16.
DiMaggioP JPowellW W, 1983, “The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields”American Sociological Review48147–160
17.
DreznerD W, 2001, “Globalization and policy convergence”International Studies Review3153–78
18.
EORG, 2002Eurobarometer 58.0: The Attitudes of Europeans Towards the Environment (The European Opinion Research Group, Brussels)
ForayD, 1997, “The dynamic implications of increasing returns: Technological change and path dependent inefficiency”International Journal of Industrial Organization15733–752
22.
GlachantMSchuchtSBültmannAWätzoldF, 2002, “Companies' participation in EMAS: The influence of the public regulator”Business Strategy and the Environment11254–266
23.
GouldsonAMurphyJ, 1998Regulatory Realities: The Implementation and Impact of Industrial Environmental Regulation (Earthscan Publications, London)
24.
GranovetterM, 1973, “The strength of weak ties”American Journal of Sociology781360–1380
25.
GrolinJ, 1998, “Corporate legitimacy in risk society: The case of Brent Spar”Business Strategy and the Environment7213–222
26.
GulerIGuillénM FMacphersonJ M, 2002, “Global competition, institutions, and the diffusion of organizational practices: The international spread of ISO 9000 quality certificates”Administrative Science Quarterly47207–232
27.
Heritage Foundation, 2003The Index of Economic Freedom (Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC)
28.
HonkasaloA, 1998, “The EMAS scheme: A management tool and instrument of environmental policy”Journal of Cleaner Production6119–128
29.
IngelhartR, 1990Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ)
30.
ISO, 2002The ISO Survey of ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 Certificates. Eleventh Cycle: Up To and Including 31 December 2001 (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva)
31.
JordanAWurzelR K WZitoA R, 2003, “‘New’ instruments of environmental governance: Patterns and pathways of change”Environmental Politics103–24
32.
KahlenbornWDal MasoD, 2001The Eco-management and Audit Scheme: A New Opportunity for Financial Institutions (European Commission, DG Environment, Brussels)
33.
KernKKissling-NäfILandmannUMauchCLöffelsendT, 2001, “Policy convergence and policy diffusion by governmental and non-governmental institutions—an international comparison of eco-labeling systems”, DP FS 11 01–302, Social Science Research Centre, Berlin
34.
KhannaMAntonW R Q, 2002, “Corporate environmental management: Regulatory and market-based incentives”Land Economics78539–558
35.
KnillC, 2001The Europeanisation of National Administrations: Patterns of Institutional Change and Persistence (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
36.
KnillCLehmkuhlD, 2002, “The national impact of European Union regulatory policy: Three Europeanization mechanisms”European Journal of Political Research41255–280
37.
KnillCLenschowA, 1998, “Coping with Europe: The impact of British and German administration on the implementation of EU environmental policy”Journal of European Public Policy5595–614
38.
KollmanKPrakashA, 2001, “Green by choice? Cross-national variations in firms' responses to EMS-based environmental regimes”World Politics53399–430
39.
KollmanKPrakashA, 2002, “EMS-based environmental regimes as club goods: Examining variations in firm-level adoption of ISO 14001 and EMAS in UK, US and Germany”Policy Sciences3543–67
40.
LiefferinkDJordanA, 2002, “An ‘ever closer union’ of national policy? The convergence of national environmental policy in the European Union”, Queen's Papers on Europeanisation, Institute of European Studies, Queen's University of Belfast, Belfast
41.
MarchJ GOlsenJ P, 1979Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics (Free Press, New York)
42.
MarginsonPSissonK, 2002, “European integration and industrial relations: A case of convergence and divergence?”Journal of Common Market Studies40671–692
43.
MendelP J, 2002, “International standardisation and global governance: The spread of quality and environmental management standards”, in Organizations, Policy and the Natural Environment Eds HoffmanA JVentrescaM J (Standford University Press, Standford, CA) pp 407–424
44.
MeyerJ WRowanB, 1977, “Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony”American Sociological Review83340–363
45.
MorrowDRondinelliD, 2002, “Adopting corporate environmental management systems: Motivations and results of ISO 14001 and EMAS certification”European Management Journal20159–171
46.
NeumayerEPerkinsR, 2004a, “What explains the uneven take-up of ISO 14001 at the global level? A panel data analysis”Environment and Planning A36823–839
47.
NeumayerEPerkinsR, 2004b, “Uneven geographies of organizational practice: Explaining the cross-national transfer and adoption of ISO 9000”, working paper, Department of Geography and Environment, London School of Economics, London, and School of Geography, University of Plymouth, Plymouth
OlsenJ PPetersB G (Eds), 1996Lessons from Experience: Experiential Learning in Administrative Reforms in Eight Democracies (Scandinavian University Press, Oslo)
50.
PorterM Evan der LindeC, 1995, “Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate”Harvard Business Review73120–137
51.
PotoskiMPrakashA, 2004, “Regulatory convergence in non-governmental regimes? Cross-national adoption of ISO 14001 certifications”The Journal of Politics66885–905
52.
RainesS S, 2002, “Implementing ISO 14001—an international survey assessing the benefits of certification”Corporate Environmental Strategy9418–426
53.
RogersE M, 1995Diffusion of Innovations (Free Press, New York)
54.
RosenkopfLAbrahamsonE, 1999, “Modeling reputational and informational influences in threshold models of bandwagon innovation diffusion”Computational and Mathematical Organizational Theory5361–384
55.
StegerU, 2000, “Environmental management systems: Empirical evidence and further perspectives”European Management Journal1823–37
56.
StegerUSchindelCKrapfH, 2002, “The experience of EMAS in three European countries: A cultural and competitive analysis”Business Strategy and the Environment1132–42
57.
SzarkaJ, 2003, “The politics of bounded innovation: ‘new’ environmental policy instruments in France”Environmental Politics1293–114
58.
TewsKBuschP-OJörgensH, 2003, “The diffusion of new environmental policy instruments”European Journal of Political Research42569–600
59.
VogelD, 1997, “Trading up and governing across: Transnational governance and environmental protection”Journal of European Public Policy4556–571
60.
WealeAPridhamGCiniMKonstadakopulosDPorterMFlynnB, 2000Environmental Governance in Europe: An Ever Closer Ecological Union? (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
61.
WilsonG K, 2002, “Regulatory reform on the world stage”, in Environmental Governance: A Report on the Next Generation of Environmental Policy Ed. KettlD F (Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC) pp 118–145
