The EU-U.S. Summit on 30 April 2007 passed a statement on energy security, efficiency, and climate change that is strong on rhetoric but weak on substance. Sascha Müller-Kraenner, Director of the Europe program at the Nature Conservancy and Senior Policy Advisor to Ecologic Institute, provides some critical commentary on the substance of the summit.

First methodological ideas on how to proceed with the cost-effectiveness analysis under the EU Water Framework Directive have already been developed by a number of European Member States. Yet, important methodological challenges remain, in particular with regard to a scale adapted procedure. This paper takes up the current debate and develops ideas on how to address the problem of interlinking bottom-up and top-down approaches for the selection of cost-effective sets of measures under the Directive.

Since the Kyoto Protocol came into force, the U.S. has been effectively pushed onto the sidelines in the area of international climate change politics. In fact, U.S. initiatives so far have by and large been limited to bilateral and regional partnerships to combat climate change through technological innovation. Interestingly, activities at the regional, state, and local levels indicate considerable potential within the American political framework, to develop policies at the subnational level that respond to the challenge of climate change. Senior Researchers, Markus Knigge and Camilla Bausch, published a discussion paper which identifies subnational activities and analyses their impacts on greenhouse gas emissions and policymaking at the federal level. The discussion paper is available for download.

Kranz, Nicole et al. 2005: NeWater deliverable 1.3.2 Adaptive Water Management in Transboundary contexts. Common Research Agenda. Ecologic, RBA, RIZA, Berlin.

2005: Literature Review on Ex-post Assessment of Costs to Business of Environmental Policies and Legislation. Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM)/Ecologic Institute, Amsterdam/Berlin.

The rise in the number of environmental institutions at the international level can be seen as a source of inconsistency within the implementation, enforcement, and rule-making processes of the environmental governance system. In this discussion paper, Ecologic Institute provides background information and several detailed maps to illustrate the spatial dispersion of the various institutions. The publication is available for download.

The expert opinion outlines the current status of the modernisation efforts within the German water sector against the background of sustainable water management principles. Furthermore, it evaluates the current discussion on plans of the European Commission towards increasing competition in the field of "services of general economic interest" related to water service issues. It additionally highlights the risks and potentials of these developments for the German water sector.

This paper analyses to what extent the new EC Directive on Environmental Liability sets an incentive for the potentially liable parties to invest in measures to minimise risk and through a system of strict liability triggers precautionary measures that go beyond the existing legal requirements. The paper is available for download.

Hansen, Wenke; Tanja Dräger and Ruta Landgrebe 2004: Capacity Building on the Community's Environmental Policy. EU Legislation on river basin management and the reduction of nutrient pollution. Ecologic - Institute for International and European Environmental Policy, Berlin.

Dworak, Thomas 2003: Legal and policy framework for flood prevention and remediation in Germany. Review of laws, policies and instruments. For the Séminaire EPR "aspects of flood risk management in Europe". Comparison of six national practices in vulnerability reduction and compensations: Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Netherlands, Switzerland. Berlin.

In dieser Studie untersucht Ecologic die Anwendbarkeit der Pieters' "Checkliste" zur Ermittlung umweltschädigender Subventionen auf den Wassersektor.

As state and local governments in the U.S. respond to demanding and complex environmental challenges, environmental policies and best practices from overseas are serving as important models. The reasons are clear – countries such as Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and Australia have addressed similar environmental challenges by developing and implementing creative and often highly successful solutions. The adaptation of international best practices and innovation in environmental policies represents an important and powerful paradigm shift – from one of exporting environmental expertise and dollars, to one of importing good ideas from around the globe. The paper is available for download.

Businesses, cities, states, universities and churches are striving to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to protect the Earth's climate. A new transatlantic survey by Michael Northrop reveals a multitude of initiatives, both in the U.S. and in Europe. Michael Northrop directs the Sustainable Development grantmaking program at the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF) in New York City and is the author of this paper.

Kokott, Juliane; Axel Klaphake; Simon Marr et al. 2002: Ausgestaltung der Umwelthaftung in internationalen, europäischen und nationalen Haftungsregimen sowie Methoden der Schadensberechnung. [Gutachten im Auftrag des Umweltbundesamts entstanden im Rahmen des Forschungsvorhabens FKZ 201 18 101]. St. Gallen: Universität St. Gallen.

Keya Choudhury; Darla Nickel, and R. Andreas Kraemer 2001: Klärschlammentsorgung in Europa. Ecologic Institute, Berlin.