This text is a commentary on Council Directive 96/61/EC concerning pollution prevention and control (IPPC), which is to be implemented in EU member states in October 1999. The authors aim to analyse key provisions of the Directive.

It is a commonplace that pollution knows no borders, and that environmental law must allow for cross-border implementation. The European Union specifies this principle in EC directives on integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC), on environmental impact assessment (EIA), and on the control of major accident hazards involving dangerous substances (Seveso II). This is the first book to investigate from both empirical and normative perspectives the effectiveness of these directives at the national level. It provides by far the most extensive comparative analysis and evaluation of the industrial permitting and inspections, EIA, and major accident prevention in the EU. Offering an in-depth study of the transposition and implementation of EC environmental directives in eight EU member states (Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom), the author who has played a significant role in the formulation of environmental legislation and regulation at both the national (German) and EU levelsand¿provides a stable base for an assessment of the benefits and costs of the integrated approach to environmental protection. Among the factors considered are the following: key features of national constitutional, administraand¬tive, and judicial systems which provide the framework for environand¬mental regulations and their implementation in the eight countries under study; procedures and substantive requirements transposing the IPPC, EIA and Seveso II directives into national laws; and evaluation of national deficiencies and the extent of muddling through. The empirical part of Dr Bohne's analysis draws on 138 expert interviews with public and private actors, a survey of 178 public authorities, and document analyses of selected industrial permits and environmental impact statements. His comparative analysis of procedural, organizational, and substantive integration makes it possible to identify and compare national accomplishments in regulatory integration, and offers new insights into the effectiveness and limits of EC law. The study concludes with a discussion of the implications of the findings for European governance and better regulation after the enlargement of the EU. This thoroughly researched, rigorous, and insightful study will be of great interest and value to policymakers, regulators, business people, environmental NGOs, consultants, and lawyers, as well as to students of environmental policies and European governance.

In light of the European Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC Directive), traditional environmental regulation can be improved using the framework of industrial ecology. The objective of the IPPC Directive is to achieve a high level of protection of the environment as a whole (Article 1) by applying the best available techniques (BAT). In essence, the IPPC Directive obliges member states of the European Union to include considerations such as resources, energy, waste, and multimedia emissions when permitting industrial installations. This is a marked contrast to traditional environmental regulation that focuses on individual media of an individual site. In order to take all considerations into account, an integrated assessment of technologies is needed, for which a standard method is currently lacking. In this article, a systematic approach is introduced for the integrated assessment of IPPC technologies using life-cycle assessment (LCA), a form of environmental assessment that can be broadened to an overall assessment of environmental, economic, and social aspects. This systematic approach has proven to be successful for the environmental assessment of the described cases. It is suggested here that weighting can be omitted for the evaluation of IPPC technologies. Leaving the weighting step to competent authorities of member states and allowing them to consider local issues provides maximum opportunity for the subsidiarity and flexibility principles of the IPPC Directive.