miun.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Missing links: How individual's can contribute to reserve policy enforcement on the example of the European Union
University of Vienna, Austria.
2010 (English)In: Biodiversity and Conservation, ISSN 0960-3115, Vol. 19, no 3, p. 601-618Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This comment looks at opportunities available to individuals alone or as a member of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to enforce reserve policy at the EU level to improve the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation. Based on a literature review, recent developments in certain EU policies (i.e., Nature Conservation Policy, Common Agricultural Policy, Regional Policy, Århus-Public Participation and Access to Justice) are assessed by means of a SEPO analysis. SEPO is a French acronym that stands for the successes (succès), failures (echècs), potentials (potentialités), and obstacles (obstacles). This method aims to analyse a situation from four dimensions of the past (successes and failures) and future (potentials and obstacles). The analysis shows different ways in which individuals can contribute to reserve policy enforcement (i.e., by public interest complaint based on private rights) and identifies public funding opportunities for research and management of reserves. Some of these mechanisms have just recently been introduced (e.g., Århus rights and several funding opportunities). Not surprisingly, the widest set of opportunities is provided by the Nature Conservation Policy. The other three policies (Common Agricultural Policy, Regional Policy, Århus-Public Participation and Access to Justice) touch on reserve conservation only in an additional way, either horizontally or vertically. The analysis also identifies inter-linkages between the different policies with regard to reserve conservation, which may be used by individuals to enforce policy either in a protective or cooperative way. © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 19, no 3, p. 601-618
Keywords [en]
Århus Convention, Access to justice, Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), Direct effect, European Union, Natura 2000, Non-governmental organisations, Protected area, Public participation, Regional Policy, biodiversity, Common Agricultural Policy, environmental justice, law enforcement, nature conservation, nongovernmental organization, participatory approach, policy implementation, public access
National Category
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:miun:diva-38018DOI: 10.1007/s10531-009-9737-9Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-76549086984OAI: oai:DiVA.org:miun-38018DiVA, id: diva2:1377715
Note

Cited By :14; Export Date: 12 December 2019; Article; CODEN: BONSE; Correspondence Address: Mauerhofer, V.; University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, 1030 Vienna, Austria; email: volker.mauerhofer@univie.ac.at

Available from: 2019-12-12 Created: 2019-12-12 Last updated: 2019-12-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Mauerhofer, Volker

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Mauerhofer, Volker
Political Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf