Why There Is No Southern Problem - on Environmental Leaders and Laggards in the EU - Essay Example

?Analytical Paper about the Article "Why There Is No 'Southern Problem'. On Environmental Leaders and Laggards in the European Union" Table of Contents Introduction 3 Thesis Statement 3 A Brief Analysis of the Argument 4 Use of Evidence to Support the Argument 5 Conclusion 8 Work Cited 9 Introduction Non-adherence with European Union (EU) based environmental laws has been often considered to be a ‘southern problem’. The problem generally occurred due to the changing features as well as the systemic deficiencies in the political along with administrative institutions belonging to the different southern member provinces of EU. Moreover, the different aspects which include lack of a civic culture, managerial capacity, increased level of corruption and most importantly party-dominated legislative procedures are strongly believed to be the major causes of non-compliance with EU based environmental laws (Borzel, “Why There Is No ‘Southern Problem’. On Environmental Leaders and Laggards in the European Union”). Thesis Statement This discussion intends to identify the argument which is made by the author relating to the article that is principally based upon the non-compliance with the EU based environmental laws. Moreover, the evidences which are used by the author in supporting the argument will be discussed. Various significant aspects which comprise the judgment about the evidence, whether, it is strong or weak and the grounds of agreeing or not agreeing with the argument will also be portrayed in the discussion. A Brief Analysis of the Argument In relation to the article, it has been viewed that the author made several arguments focusing upon the reality that non-adherence with the environmental laws belonging to EU is considered to be a ‘southern problem’. The difficulty regarding protecting the environment is considered to be a ‘southern problem’ as certain southern member provinces of EU strongly believed that they were incapable to implement the EU environmental law effectively. The author considered the ‘southern problem’ as the “Mediterranean syndrome” in his article due to a broad assortment of reasons. According to the author, the problem generally occurred due to the weaker role performed by the Ministry of the Environment belonging to the different southern provinces of EU. Moreover, the author also argued that the problem took place due to shortage in the administrative capacities for effectually implementing EU based environmental policies. It has been viewed in the article that the southern member provinces of EU did not possess adequate technical know-how, potential working staffs and well-structured infrastructures for applying as well as enforcing EU environmental based legislative policies. The author suggested that the southern member provinces belonging to EU should implement environmental policies competently for the purpose of developing their financial progression, increasing economic interests and most significantly generating employment. The effective execution of the EU environmental schemes or policies would ultimately promote the economic advancement of the different southern member provinces belonging to EU as well as enhance their environmental quality level by a greater extent. The author identified a significant reason which eventually restricted the southern member provinces of EU to implement EU environmental based policies effectively. The significant reason was that the southern member provinces belonging to EU possessed the political systems which were conventionally dominated by clientelism, disrespect and patronage for the public authority. On the basis of the article, the author argued that there lays significant disparities in meeting with the EU environmental laws throughout the different European member provinces which cannot be escorted by a simple north-south separation. The other argument which is made by the author in the article is that the relative study of the execution of the different environmental policies belonging to EU particularly in Spain and Germany revealed that compliance can differ across various policies within one country. The author also made the argument in the article affirming that the problems relating to compliance can be expected if there lies significant ‘misfit’ between the policies of the EU and a corresponding national policy. Amongst the aforementioned arguments which were made by the author in the article, the argument regarding policy misfit between a corresponding national policy and an EU policy is one of the essential causes of non-compliance, is quite an interesting one (Borzel, “Why There Is No ‘Southern Problem’. On Environmental Leaders And Laggards In The European Union”). Use of Evidence to Support the Argument The author used significant evidences in order to support the argument that the feature of policy misfit is an essential reason of non-compliance which ultimately raises crucial problems. According to the author, the difficulties relating to compliance can be anticipated if there lies a misfit between the EU environmental policies and a corresponding national policy. In supporting the argument, the author used the evidence of external and domestic pressure for adaptation. From the perspective of external pressure for adaptation, it can be presumed that the execution and the compliance difficulties generally take place if the policies belonging to EU form the basis of pressure for adaptation. It has been apparently observed that more the policies belonging to EU opposes any corresponding policies at national level, the higher the requirement for a member state of EU to adapt legal as well as a managerial structures. These legal and the managerial structures involve huge costs and thus cause the problem of non-compliance. The policy misfit which causes non-compliance relating to external adaptation pressure can be measured by contrasting the corresponding national policies with an EU policy with regard to their implementation of policy instruments, policy standards and problem-solving approaches. Conversely, it can be believed that policy misfit which causes non-compliance relating to domestic pressure can be exercised or measured through the execution of different channels which include the political parties, various environmental organizations and powerful interest groups. These channels ultimately draw attention of the public opinions regarding the events of non-compliance with the environmental legislation belonging to EU. On the basis of the aforesaid evidences used by the author in the article, it has generated an important hypothesis affirming that the greater the adaptation pressure along with a low domestic mobilization level, the more likely the occurrence of non-compliance. Thus, it can be stated that non-compliances can occur due to policy misfit by taking into concern the practical implications of both external and domestic adaptation pressures (Borzel, “Why There Is No ‘Southern Problem’. On Environmental Leaders And Laggards In The European Union”). The observed evidences can be considered to be quite strong as they pointed out the reality that policy misfits are among the crucial reasons for causing compliance problem. The origin of the compliance problem due to the result of significant policy misfit concerning the external and domestic pressure for adaptation had ultimately made the evidence more strong. The argument regarding policy misfit which is considered to be one of the leading causes for occurrence of non-compliances can be agreed by a greater extent. This argument can be agreed because the policy misfit authentically generates the problem of compliance with EU policy measures. This is due to the reason of prevailing incompatibilities between the various policy instruments in different member states of EU. Besides, the EU member states are not able to influence the various environmental norms of EU due to the presence of incompatibility in their policy directives (Borzel, “Why There Is No ‘Southern Problem’. On Environmental Leaders And Laggards In The European Union”). Conclusion The author considered the ‘southern problem’ as “Mediterranean syndrome” due to various reasons which include deficiency in the administrative capacities and absence of well-structured technical expertise among others. The evidences which are used by the author in the article that include the aspect of external as well as domestic pressure for adaptation explicitly indicated that there would be increased problem of compliance if a particular EU policy does not fit in managerial as well as in legal structures. It is the different member states of EU that have to discard the incompatibilities which are present in their respective policy instruments and styles for minimizing the problem of non-compliance by a considerable level. Work Cited Borzel, Tanja A. “Why There Is No ‘Southern Problem’. On Environmental Leaders And Laggards In The European Union”. Journal of European Public Policy 7:1 (2000): 141-162. Print. Read More