2007: Verhältnismäßigkeit der Maßnahmenkosten im Sinne der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie – komplementäre Kriterien zur Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse. Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung – UFZ/Ecologic, Institut für Internationale und Europäische Umweltpolitik/ Universität Leipzig, Institut für Infrastruktur und Ressourcenmanagement, Stiftungsprofessur für Umwelttechnik/Umweltmanagement. Leipzig/Berlin.

The impact of climate change on Europe's water resources is a critical issue for people's lives and the economy. Even if emissions of greenhouse gases were stabilised today, increases in temperature and the associated impacts, including water availability and flooding, will continue for many decades to come. This report, which was published by the European Environment Agency (EEA) in February 2007 and co-authored by Ecologic, shows that there is a need to adapt to climate change for water resource policy and regulation across Europe. The report assesses the strengths and weaknesses of current policies and regulations, and describes progress and activities in European countries.

Martinez G., Shordt, K., Reducing corruption in the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) sector. Contribution of Netherlands' development assistance to risk assessment and mitigation of corruption in the WASH sector. Final report, 08 February 2007 (unpublished). At request at the Directorate-General for International Cooperation of the Netherlands (DGIS).

The heads of state of the eight major industrialised nations recently reinforced that the United Nations will remain “the appropriate forum for negotiating future global action on climate change.” Within the U.N., however, a number of concurrent “tracks” have emerged for negotiations and discussions, accompanied by a certain degree of overlap, and giving rise to questions on the mandate, scope and limitations of each track as a pathway to a future climate regime. Options for global climate governance beyond 2012 have been addressed in formal negotiations based on Article 3 (9) and 9 of the Kyoto Protocol, while parties to the UNFCCC have initiated an open and non-binding dialogue on future co-operative action under the Convention. In this article Dr. Camilla Bausch and Michael Mehling provide an overview of these developments.

Bowyer, Catherine; Peter Hjerp; Alexander Neubauer 2006: The Proposed Directive on Waste. An assessment of the Impact Assessment and the Implications of the Integration of the Hazardous Waste Directive into the existing Waste Framework Directive. Brussels.

Bakkes, J.A.; I. Bräuer; P. ten Brink et. al. 2006: Cost of Policy Inaction. Scoping study for DG Environment.

Between 1990 and 2000 alone, more than 800,000 hectares were built on in Europe. This phenomenon is due to changing lifestyles more than increased population. The amount of space consumed per person has more than doubled over the past 50 years. Today, more than a quarter of the EU's territory has been directly affected by urban sprawl, according to a study by the European Environment Agency, which also suggests potential policies to combat the trend. R. Andreas Kraemer, Director Ecologic, was consulted as an external expert throughout the development of the report.

This OECD-report analyses selected public expenditure programmes supporting environmental investments in water supply and sanitation in four OECD countries (Austria, Belgium, France and the German New Länder) with the goal of illustrating a variety of possible institutional arrangements for the management of water sector public expenditure programmes in transition economies.

Kessler, Peter; Michael Mehling; Dora Schaffrin 2006: Assignment: Support the SEPA legislation department in strengthening the legal framework of public interest litigation in China. Berlin.

Nocker, Leo De 2007: Costs and Benefits Associated with the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive, with a Special Focus on Agriculture: Final Report.

Bräuer, Ingo; Rainer Müssner, Katrina Marsden 2006: The Use of Market Incentives to Preserve Biodiversity. Final report for the European Commission. Ecologic Institute, Berlin, Germany.

Herbke, Nadine; Zbigniew Karaczun; Ruta Landgrebe-Trinkunaite and Thomas Dworak 2006: Deliverable 15 - WFD and Agriculture Linkages at the EU Level – Beyond 2007: Further Research Needs at EU level. Ecologic – Institute for International and European Environmental Policy, Berlin.

The objective of this study was to compare different waste management technologies. The most appropriate technologies were defined, as well as the best ways for their implementation. Furthermore, policy instruments for promotion of these technologies were evaluated.

Kettunen, M. & ten Brink, P. 2006. Value of biodiversity- Documenting EU examples where biodiversity loss has led to the loss of ecosystem services. Final report for the European Commission. Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP), Brussels, Belgium. 131 pp.

The focus of this brief report is on EU environmental policy and environmentally relevant aspects of EU energy policy. A brief description of the initial situation in both policy areas is followed by examples of possible areas of application of differentiated integration. The first section discusses the potential benefits of differentiated integration in different areas of EU environmental policy, while the second section focuses more on implementation options. For the examples from the EU energy policy, advantages and implementation possibilities are discussed directly one after the other in one section for presentation reasons. The short report is available for download.