ABSTRACT

The Netherlands’ Environmental Assessment (EA) system has continuously been discussed with calls for streamlining and simplifying. This paper aims to provide an overview and to examine these discussions, including their more fundamental background. To this end, we discuss the origins of the Dutch EA-system, its practice, the critique, the regulator’s reaction by changing institutional arrangements, and the consequences. We conclude that politically, EA is blamed for cumbersome planning and decision-making, while professionals are more nuanced. We see a process of persistent cumbersome planning and decision-making about plans and projects in a country in which environment and nature are under pressure. This situation is resulting in impromptu ‘escape routes’ and evermore detailed EA-studies that are costly, time-consuming, lack quality, are contested, and often fail before court. This process is observed for a long time. Although most studies stressed that streamlining and simplifying will not help in accelerating the planning process, nevertheless regulatory changes aimed at this because of political pressure. Overall, as a consequence of the simplification of regulations and the reduction of safeguards, the advanced and comprehensive nature of the original Dutch EIA-system has been called into question. EA as a messenger intrinsically will always be subject to critique.

摘要

荷兰的环境评估 (EA) 系统不断受到讨论，并呼吁精简和简化。本文旨在提供一个概述并检查这些讨论，包括它们更基本的背景。为此，我们讨论了荷兰 EA 系统的起源、它的实践、批评、监管机构对改变制度安排的反应，以及后果。我们得出的结论是，从政治上讲，EA 因繁琐的计划和决策制定而受到指责，而专业人士则更为微妙。在一个环境和自然面临压力的国家，我们看到了一个持续繁琐的计划和决策过程。这种情况导致即兴的“逃生路线”和越来越详细的 EA 研究，这些研究既昂贵又费时，质量低下，有争议，并且经常在法庭上失败。这个过程被观察了很长时间。尽管大多数研究都强调精简和简化无助于加速规划过程，但由于政治压力，监管变化旨在实现这一目标。总的来说，由于法规的简化和保障措施的减少，荷兰原 EIA 系统的先进性和综合性受到质疑。EA 作为信使本质上总是会受到批评。由于法规的简化和保障措施的减少，荷兰最初的 EIA 系统的先进性和综合性受到质疑。EA 作为信使本质上总是会受到批评。由于法规的简化和保障措施的减少，荷兰最初的 EIA 系统的先进性和综合性受到质疑。EA 作为信使本质上总是会受到批评。