This article examines the impact of accession to the European Union (EU) on environmental standards in three candidate countries: Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. It argues that we must look beyond adoption of environmental standards to their implementation, and it suggests that there is a “deception gap” between what is said on paper and what is actually done in practice. Two sets of factors internal to the East Central European countries work against closing this deception gap: their historical legacy of environmental practice and the interests of domestic producers and environmental groups. Pressure from the EU is the main force in attempting to close the gap, that is, to foster compliance with environmental standards. Domestic producers in East Central Europe could potentially be a force for closing the gap as well.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baker, S., & Jehlicka, P. (1998, Spring). Dilemmas of transition: The environment, democracy and economic reform in East Central Europe: An introduction.Environmental Politics,7, 1-26.
2.
Bandi, G. (1994). Competence and harmonization problems in Hungary.Connecticut Journal of International Law,9, 607-607.
3.
Bandi, G., & Wajda, S. (1996).Approximation of European Union environmental legislation: Regional overview. Budapest: Regional Environmental Center.
4.
Clean up or clear out. (1999, December 11).The Economist, p. 47-47.
5.
Cohn, J. P. (1992). Central and Eastern Europe aim to protect their ecological backbone:Western conservationists send technical aid.BioScience,42, 810-814.
6.
Cole, D. H. (1995). Poland's progress: Environmental protection in a period of transition. Parker School Journal of East European Law,2, 279-279.
7.
Denmark warns on EU enlargement. (1997, August 26).ENDS Environment Daily [On-line]. Available: http://www.ends.co.uk
8.
Eastern European transport unsustainable. (1997, November 14).ENDS Environment Daily [On-line]. Available: http://www.ends.co.uk
9.
Esty, D. C. (1996). Revitalizing environmental federalism.Michigan Law Review,95, 570-653.
10.
European Commission. (1994, December).White paper: Preparation of the associated countries of Central and Eastern Europe for integration into the internal market of the union (EU DG1A) [On-line]. Available: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/index.htm [Accessed August 17, 1999]
11.
European Commission. (1997).Agenda 2000 (EU DG1A) [On-line]. Available: http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg1a/enlarge/agenda2000_en [Accessed July 16, 1999]
12.
European Commission. (1998a).Accession strategies for environment: Meeting the challenge of enlargement with the candidate countries in Central and Eastern Europe (COM [98]294) [On-line]. Available: http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg11/docum/98294sm.htm [Accessed July 17, 1999]
13.
European Commission. (1998b).Enlarging the environment: Newsletter from the European Commission on Environmental Approximation [On-line]. Available: http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/news/enlarg/news15.pdf [Accessed January 20, 2000]
14.
European Commission. (1999a, October, 13).1999 Regular report from the Commission on Czech Republic's Progress Towards Accession [On-line]. Available: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/docs/index.htm [Accessed November 18, 1999]
15.
European Commission. (1999b, October, 13).1999 Regular report from the Commission on Hungary's Progress Towards Accession [On-line]. Available: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/docs/index.htm [Accessed November 18, 1999]
16.
European Commission. (1999c, October, 13).1999 Regular Report from the Commission on Poland's Progress Towards Accession [On-line]. Available: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/docs/index.htm [Accessed November 18, 1999]
17.
Fagin, A., & Jehlicka, P. (1998, Spring). Sustainable development in the Czech Republic: A doomed process?Environmental Politics,7, 113-128.
18.
Hertzman, C. (1995).Environment and health in Central and Eastern Europe: A report for the Environmental Action Programme for Central and Eastern Europe. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
19.
Hicks, B. (1996).Environmental politics in Poland: Asocial movement between regime and opposition. New York: Columbia University Press.
20.
Jacoby, W. (1999, Winter/Spring). Priest and penitent: The European Union as a force in the domestic politics of Eastern Europe.East European Constitutional Review,8(1-2), 62-67.
21.
Jancar-Webster, B. (Ed.). (1993).Environmental action in Eastern Europe: Responses to crisis. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
22.
Jancar-Webster, B. (1998, Spring). Environmental movement and social change in the transition countries.Environmental Politics,7, 69-90.
23.
Juhasz, F., & Ragno, A. (1993, April/May). The environment in Eastern Europe: From red to green?The OECD Observer,181, 33-36.
24.
Kahler, M. (1998, September).Modeling races to the bottom. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association, Boston.
25.
Leonard, H. J. (1988).Pollution and the struggle for the world product. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
NGOs attack EU biodiversity failures. (1998, May 7).ENDS Environment Daily [On-line]. Available: http://www.ends.co.uk
27.
NGOs debate EU enlargement's green challenge. (1999, September 28).ENDS Environment Daily [On-line]. Available: http://www.ends.co.uk
28.
O'Toole, L., Jr., & Hanf, K. (1998, Spring). Hungary: Political transformation and environ-mental challenge.Environmental Politics,7, 93-112.
29.
Revesz, R. L. (1992). Rehabilitating interstate competition: Rethinking the “race-to-the-bottom” rationale for federal environmental regulation.New York University Law Review,67, 1210-1254.
30.
Simmons, B. (1999).The international politics of harmonization: The case of capital market regulation (Working paper No. 2.77). Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley; Center for German and European Studies.
31.
Slocock, B. (1996). The paradoxes of environmental policy in Eastern Europe: The dynamics of policy-making in the Czech Republic.Environmental Politics,5, 501-521.
32.
Spar, D., & Yoffie, D. B. (2000). A race to the bottom or governance from the top? In A. Prakash & J. A. Hart (Eds.),Coping with globalization (pp. 31-51). London: Routledge.
33.
Swire, P. P. (1996). The race to laxity and the race to undesirability: Explaining failures in competition among jurisdictions in environmental law.Yale Law and Policy Review, 14(2), 67-110.
34.
Vogel, D. (1995).Trading up: Consumer and environmental regulation in a global economy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35.
Waller, M. (1998, Spring). Geopolitics and the environment in Eastern Europe.Environmental Politics,7, 29-52.
36.
Woda zdrowa i bezpieczna? [Healthy and safe water?]. (1997, April).Biuletyn PolskiegoKlubu Ekologicznego [Bulletin of the Polish Ecological Club], 4, 16-17.
