• English
  • Deutsch
Facebook icon
LinkedIn icon
Twitter icon
YouTube icon
Header image Ecologic

Evaluation of the Strengths, Weaknesses, Threats and Opportunities Associated with EU Efforts to Combat Environmental Crime

Evaluation of the Strengths, Weaknesses, Threats and Opportunities Associated with EU Efforts to Combat Environmental Crime

Evaluation of the role of the EU and SWOT analysis

Eines der Hauptergebnisse des EU-finanzierten EU-Forschungsprojekts zu Umweltkriminalität (EFFACE) ist der Bericht "Evaluation of the strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities (SWOT) associated with EU efforts to combat environmental crime." Diese SWOT-Analyse untersucht die Stärken, Schwächen, Chancen und Risiken des EU-Ansatzes im Kampf gegen Umweltkriminalität. Die Autoren, unter ihnen Mitarbeiter des Ecologic Instituts, bringen die Erkenntnisse der bisherigen EFFACE-Arbeit zusammen und analysieren die Maßnahmen und Ansätze der EU und ihrer Mitgliedsstaaten gegen Umweltkriminalität. Der Bericht steht als Download zur Verfügung.

Der Bericht "Evaluation of the strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities (SWOT) associated with EU efforts to combat environmental crime." zu Stärken, Schwächen, Chancen und Risiken des Vorgehens gegen Umweltkriminalität auf EU- und Mitgliedsstaatenebene bildet die Grundlage für die darauf aufbauenden Politikempfehlungen. Das Projekt identifizierte neun dafür relevante Dimensionen, die von den EFFACE Partnern im Detail untersucht wurden.

Die neun untersuchten Dimensionen sind:

  1. Daten- und Informationsmanagement
  2. Weitere Harmonisierung des Umweltstrafrechts auf EU Ebene (außer Sanktionen)
  3. Sanktionen (administrative, strafrechtliche und zivile Verfahren
  4. Arbeit der Vollzugsbehörden und Kooperation zwischen ihnen
  5. Vertrauens- und kooperations-basierte Ansätze: Opfer von Umweltkriminalität und Zivilgesellschaft
  6. Externe Dimension von Umweltkriminalität – was kann die EU tun?
  7. Nutzung von Umwelthaftung
  8. Organisierte Umweltkriminalität
  9. Unternehmensverantwortung und Haftung für Umweltstraftaten

Jedes Thema wird nach einem einheitlichen Verfahren analysiert, sowohl auf der Ebene der Mitgliedstaaten, der EU und international. Darüber hinaus sind die oben genannten Aspekte eng verzahnt, daher betonen die Autoren die Bedeutung von Politikempfehlungen, die die verschiedenen Aspekte im Zusammenhang und nicht isoliert voneinander betrachten. 

Das Team vom Ecologic Institut hat die Teile zur Arbeit der Vollzugbehörden, der Rolle von Opfern von Umweltkriminalität und der Ziviligesellschaft sowie der Verantwortung und Haftung von Unternehmen für Umweltstraftaten mitverfasst.


Zitiervorschlag

Farmer, A. (Ed.) (2015). Evaluation of the strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities (SWOT) associated with EU efforts to combat environmental crime. Study in the framework of the EFFACE research project.

Sprache
Englisch
Autor(en)
Andrew Farmer, Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) United Kingdom
Valsamis Mitsilegas, Queen Mary University of London United Kingdom
Michael Faure, METRO, Maastricht University Netherlands
Niels Philipsen, METRO, Maastricht University Netherlands
Anna Rita Germani, University of Rome “La Sapienza" Italy
Teresa Fajardo, University of Granada Spain
Grazia Maria Vagliasindi, University of Catania Italy
Nicolas Blanc Ecologic Institute
Finanzierung
Jahr
2015
Umfang
131 S.
Projektnummer
2720
Inhaltsverzeichnis

1. Introduction
2. Methodology
3. Area 1: Data and information management (MS/EU)
3.1     Introduction
3.2     Strengths
3.3     Weaknesses
3.4     Opportunities
3.5     Threats
3.6     Conclusions

4. Area 2: Further harmonisation of substantive environmental criminal law at EU level (excluding sanctions)
4.1     Introduction
4.2     Strengths
4.3     Weaknesses
4.4     Opportunities
4.5     Threats
4.6     Conclusions

5. Area 3: System of sanctions (administrative vs. criminal vs. civil proceedings at MS/EU level)
5.1     Introduction
5.2     Strengths
5.2.1   More administrative sanctions in the instrument mix
5.2.2   Often effective sanctions in statutes
5.2.3   Often complementary sanctions
5.3     Weaknesses
5.3.1   Enforcement instrument mix not always optimal
5.3.2   Lacking information on proportionality in practice
5.3.3   Complementary sanctions insufficiently developed?
5.4     Opportunities
5.4.1   Procedural: actions at different levels
5.4.2   Increasing the use of administrative and civil sanctions
5.4.3   Guidelines to increase the effectiveness of sanctions
5.4.4   Increasing use of complementary sanctions
5.5     Threats
5.5.1   Insufficient support and budget cuts
5.5.2   Lacking data on enforcement practice
5.6     Conclusions

6. Area 4: Functioning of enforcement institutions and cooperation between them (MS/EU level)
6.1     Introduction
6.2     Strengths
6.2.1   Criminal enforcement institutions (Member State level)
6.2.2   Cooperation between criminal and administrative institutions (Member State level)
6.2.3   Trans-boundary cooperation
6.3     Weaknesses
6.3.1   Criminal enforcement institutions (Member State level)
6.3.2   Cooperation between criminal and administrative institutions (Member State level)
6.3.3   Trans-boundary cooperation
6.4     Opportunities
6.5     Threats
6.6     Conclusions

7. Area 5: The role of the victims of environmental crime and civil society
7.1     Introduction
7.2     Strengths
7.3     Weaknesses
7.4     Opportunities
7.5     Threats
7.6     Conclusions

8. Area 6: External dimension of environmental crime – what can EU do (EU only)
8.1     Introduction
8.2     Strengths
8.2.1   International Instruments and their Enforcement
8.2.2   Actors and Institutions
8.2.3   Toolbox: Information, Databases, Legal Assistance and Judicial Cooperation Instruments, Cooperation to development
8.3     Weaknesses
8.3.1   International Instruments and their enforcement
8.3.2   Actors and Institutions
8.3.3   Toolbox: Databases, Legal Assistance and Judicial Cooperation Instruments, Cooperation to development
8.4     Opportunities
8.4.1   International Instruments and their enforcement
8.4.2   Actors and Institutions
8.4.3   Toolbox: Databases, Legal Assistance and Judicial Cooperation Instruments, Cooperation to development
8.5     Threats
8.5.1   International Instruments and their enforcement
8.5.2   Actors and Institutions
8.5.3   Toolbox
8.6     Conclusions

9. Area 7: Use of environmental liability (EU/MS)
9.1     Introduction
9.2     Strengths
9.3     Weaknesses
9.4     Opportunities
9.5     Threats
9.6     Conclusions

10. Area 8: Organised environmental crime
10.1   Introduction
10.2   Strengths
10.3   Weaknesses
10.4   Opportunities
10.5   Threats
10.6   Conclusions

11. Area 9: Corporate responsibility and liability in relation to environmental crime
11.1   Introduction
11.1.1 Corporate Social Responsibility
11.1.2 Market incentives
11.1.3 Binding approaches indirectly preventing environmental crime
11.1.4 Corporate liability for damages directly linked to environmental crimes (civil-like)
11.1.5 Criminal liability for environmental crimes
11.1.6 Civil liability for crimes that occurred outside the EU
11.2   Strengths
11.2.1 Voluntary CSR initiatives can help reinforcing compliance with existing law
11.2.2 Existing approximation at EU level on liability for environmental crime
11.2.3 Some actions for human rights violations committed abroad
11.3   Weaknesses
11.3.1 No explicit mention of environmental crime within existing CSR initiatives
11.3.2 CSR standards do not include certification by opposition to other voluntary initiatives
11.3.3 It remains very difficult for victims from outside the EU to sue EU corporations for environmental crimes also committed outside the EU
11.4   Opportunities
11.4.1 Renewal of the EU strategy for CSR
11.4.2 The EMAS Regulation goes further than CSR initiatives
11.4.3 The new Public Procurement Directives contain new clauses relating to compliance with environmental law
11.4.4 There are initiatives to create binding provisions associated with liability and linked to CSR
11.4.5 Existing examples in certain countries widening the liability of corporations for crimes committed abroad
11.5   Threats
11.5.1 Risk of “creative compliance” regarding environmental laws
11.5.2 Balance of interests may not play in favour of measures reinforcing liability
11.5.3 Difficulties linked to the extension of jurisdiction
11.6   Conclusions

12. Conclusions
12.1   Introduction
12.2   Taking the SWOT analysis forward
12.2.1 Key opportunities
12.2.2 EU level
12.2.3 Member State level
12.2.4 International level

13. References

Schlüsselwörter
Umweltkriminalität, Richtlinie über den strafrechtlichen Schutz der Umwelt, ECD, Umweltstrafrecht, Sanktionen, Vollzug, grenzüberschreitende Kooperation, Umwelthaftung, Organisierte Kriminalität, Unternehmensverantwortung, CSR, EU, Europa, SWOT Analyse