Research suggests that NEPI co-exists because of regulations as they need a rigid structure for exerting an effect on the countries (Hoberg, 2001).Another puzzling finding of the research suggests that Green Parties and the Social Democrats have actually tried to adopt more market oriented instruments than the Liberals, Conservatives/Christian and Democratic parties when in government. The traditional wisdom suggests that the center right government does support the use of the market forces. This finding therefore reveals that their oratorical commitment has not been followed by the important changes in the policy instruments (Jänicke & Jörgens, 2000).Many British companies showed interest in taking part in the Britain’s national tradable permit scheme that was launched in the year 2002. However the companies do show preferences for the non-regulatory tools and the voluntary agreements. The environmental groups are seen preferring the traditional regulation and the eco-taxes, whereas the industrialist-environmentalist divide is becoming a bit less distinct (Jörgens, 2001).Focusing on each of the instruments, there is evidence that EU has stimulated the placement of eco-tax as their national agenda. Thus in all the member countries elements of the “double dividend” discussion factored into the late 1900’s, although it was quite implicated and limited in some of the cases e. in the case of UK. However the overall development of NEPI in the member states and on the level of EU suggests that most of the learning was internal to the member states (OECD, 2001).UK is considered to be one of the countries that are seen exploring this option. On the other hand one must also be aware of the fact that EU may also impose negative impact on the design of instruments and on member state selection. When Australia joined the EU it abandoned its natural fertilizer tax because of fears that it might get judged by the European court of Justice for constituting a barrier in the trade occurring in the internal market.The findings suggest that the adoption of new and innovative policies is more likely if the policies are figure prominently on the global environmental agenda. The societal and political linkage between the nation states and the actors present across and within the state offer channel for diffusion enabling the transfer of innovation idea, perception and policies
Botcheva, L. & Martin, L., 2001. Institutional effects on state behavior: Convergence and Diver-gence. International Studies Quarterly, Volume 45, pp. 1-26.
Dolowitz & Marsh, 2001. Learning form Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Pol-icy Making. Governance, 13(1), pp. 5-24.
Drezner, D. W., 2001. Globalization and Policy Convergence. International Studies Review, Volume 3, pp. 53-78.
EEA, 2000. Environmental Taxes: recent developments in tools for integration. Environmental Issue Se-ries No. 18. Copenhagen: s.n.
Hoberg, G., 2001. Globalization and Policy Convergence: Symposium Overview. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, pp. 127-132.
Jänicke, A. & Jörgens, H., 2000. Strategic Environmental Planning and Uncertainty: A Cross-National Comparison of Green Plans in Industrialised Countries. Policy Studies Journal, 28(3), pp. 612-632.
Jordan, A., 2001. ‘New’ Environmental Policy Instruments in the UK: Policy Innovation or ‘Muddling Through’? Paper prepared for the ECPR Joint Session of Workshops. s.l.:s.n.
Jörgens, A., 2001. The Diffusion of Environmental Policy Innovations. Findings From an International Workshop, Environmental Politics, 10(2), pp. 122-127.
Knill & Lenschow, 2000. Implementing EU environmental policy. New directions and old problems. Manchester and New York: s.n.
OECD, 2001. Environmentally Related Taxes in OECD Countries. Issues and Strategies. Paris: s.n.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples