Skip Navigation


Journal of Environmental Law Advance Access originally published online on August 28, 2008
Journal of Environmental Law 2008 20(3):391-416; doi:10.1093/jel/eqn021
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/3/391    most recent
eqn021v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Similä, J.
Right arrow Articles by Tritter, J. Q.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2008]. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Public Participation by Appeal—Insights from Empirical Evaluation in Finland{dagger}

Jukka Similä*, Aino Inkinen** and Jonathan Q. Tritter***

*Doctor of Laws, Senior researcher, Finnish Environment Institute, 00250 Helsinki, Finland (Jukka.Simila{at}ymparisto.fi).
**Master of Science, Researcher, Finnish Environment Institute, 00250 Helsinki, Finland.
***Professor, The NHS Centre for Involvement, University of Warwick, UK.


  Abstract

Environmental law increasingly provides for participatory rights, including appeal rights, to ensure informed, legitimate decision-making. Despite consensus around the general need for participatory rights, including strong ones such as a right to appeal, public participation in environmental decision-making is often criticised. The critics’ main argument is that the negative side effects resulting particularly from the use of strong participatory rights outweigh their benefits. Recent regulatory trends arising from better regulation policy to make environmental decision-making more cost-efficient tend to pay special attention to such arguments despite limited empirical evidence. This article provides evidence using material-concerning appeals against pollution permits in Finland and suggests that judicial review is a necessary and effective process for both protecting citizens’ rights and improving the quality of environmental protection.

Key Words: participation • regulation • pollution control • appeal

{dagger}This article is based on work done within the EMLE project (Effective Environmental Management: law, public participation and environmental decision making), which is a collaboration between the Finnish Environment Institute, Åbo Akademi and the University of Turku funded by the Finnish Academy through the Environment and Law research programme and a study commissioned by the Finnish Ministry of Environment, and reported in: Jukka Similä et al., ‘Muutoksenhaku Ympäristölupasioissa’ in Suomen Ympäristökeskus (ed), SYKE Raportteja (Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki 2006).


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.