uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 11) Show all publications
Josefsson, H. (2018). The Environmental Liability Directive, the Water Framework Directive and the Definition of ‘Water Damage’. Environmental Law Review, 20(3), 151-162
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Environmental Liability Directive, the Water Framework Directive and the Definition of ‘Water Damage’
2018 (English)In: Environmental Law Review, ISSN 14614529, Vol. 20, no 3, p. 151-162Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The Environmental Liability Directive (ELD) focuses on remediating environmental damage. To assess environmental damage it uses existing assessment systems, and the constructs that are at the centre of these systems. One of these is ‘ecological status’ in the context of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The ELD refers to the WFD with respect to what ‘water damage’ concerns, without specifying what it means and it offers no threshold for when deterioration is significant enough to count as ‘water damage’. A definition of ‘water damage’ is developed, based on the European Court of Justice’s latest rulings, which clarify when the deterioration of a body of water is so significant that it passes from ‘deterioration’ under the WFD, to ‘water damage’ under the ELD.

National Category
Law and Society
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-360242 (URN)10.1177/1461452918789814 (DOI)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2015-01437
Available from: 2018-09-11 Created: 2018-09-11 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Josefsson, H. (2018). The Simplification of Biological Diversity in International and EU Law. Sustainability, 10(10), Article ID 3424.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Simplification of Biological Diversity in International and EU Law
2018 (English)In: Sustainability, ISSN 2071-1050, E-ISSN 2071-1050, Vol. 10, no 10, article id 3424Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Every system that manages or assesses biodiversity rests on a simplification of its complexity. The simplification of biodiversity is debatable and difficult; even, for example, regarding the elements on which the assessment and management should focus. Nevertheless, within law, there are assessment and management schemes that are based on a simplified understanding of the meaning of [the construct of] ‘biodiversity’. For example, the Ecosystem Approach, European Union (EU) Habitats Directive, and the EU Water Framework Directive try to assess the status of different biodiversity elements based on their different ‘biodiversity’ simplifications. As the conservation of biodiversity is a vital global question, it is important to include the right elements within the ‘biodiversity’ construct to achieve no net loss. Based on international and EU law, I conceptualize a consistent legal simplification of ‘biodiversity’.

Keywords
convention on biological diversity, ecosystem approach, EU habitats directive, EU water framework directive, no net loss of biodiversity
National Category
Law and Society
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-361642 (URN)10.3390/su10103424 (DOI)000448559400066 ()
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2015-01437
Available from: 2018-09-26 Created: 2018-09-26 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Josefsson, H. (2016). From River Basins to Landscapes: Holistic Legal Constructs and Their Social-Ecological Differentiation’. In: Volker Mauerhofer (Ed.), Legal Aspects of Sustainable Development: Horizontal and Sectorial Policy Issues. Springer
Open this publication in new window or tab >>From River Basins to Landscapes: Holistic Legal Constructs and Their Social-Ecological Differentiation’
2016 (English)In: Legal Aspects of Sustainable Development: Horizontal and Sectorial Policy Issues / [ed] Volker Mauerhofer, Springer, 2016Chapter in book (Refereed)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2016
National Category
Law and Society
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-266878 (URN)10.1007/978-3-319-26021-1 (DOI)978-3-319-26021-1 (ISBN)978-3-319-26019-8 (ISBN)
Available from: 2015-11-12 Created: 2015-11-12 Last updated: 2019-01-14
Josefsson, H. (2016). Good Ecological Potential - A Credible Objective for Water Management?. Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, 13(2), 167-189
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Good Ecological Potential - A Credible Objective for Water Management?
2016 (English)In: Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, ISSN 1613-7272, E-ISSN 1876-0104, Vol. 13, no 2, p. 167-189Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

It is notable that of the environmental objectives of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), good ecological potential has been given less attention. The Weser case has made it possible to establish a more detailed understanding of 'ecological potential'. An analysis indicates that the main approach to implementing 'ecological potential', the non-WFD mitigation-measure approach, creates discontinuity among the environmental objectives, which the WFD reference method does not. Even if the mitigation-measure approach accommodates enhancements, bodies of water are still not classified in accordance with the WFD. If a body of water is incorrectly classified, both good ecological potential and the non-deterioration prohibition should not be binding, as the 'ecological status' has not been determined. Furthermore, two different and uncoordinated forms of 'ecological potential' establish diverging quality standards, and risk legal uncertainty and inconstancy among Member States.

Keywords
WFD, Good Ecological Potential, Common Implementation Strategy, EU Court of Justice, Weser-case
National Category
Law and Society
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-300597 (URN)10.1163/18760104-01302004 (DOI)000379364000003 ()
Available from: 2016-08-10 Created: 2016-08-10 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Josefsson, H. (2015). Assessing Aquatic Spaces of Regulation: Key Issues and Solutions. Nordisk miljörättslig tidskrift, 2014(3), 23-44
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Assessing Aquatic Spaces of Regulation: Key Issues and Solutions
2015 (English)In: Nordisk miljörättslig tidskrift, ISSN 2000-4273, E-ISSN 2000-4273, Vol. 2014, no 3, p. 23-44Article in journal (Refereed) Published
National Category
Law
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-246558 (URN)
Available from: 2015-03-09 Created: 2015-03-09 Last updated: 2019-01-14
Josefsson, H. (2015). Ecological Status as a Legal Construct – Determining its Legal and Ecological Meaning. Journal of environmental law, 27(2), 231-258
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ecological Status as a Legal Construct – Determining its Legal and Ecological Meaning
2015 (English)In: Journal of environmental law, ISSN 0952-8873, E-ISSN 1464-374X, Vol. 27, no 2, p. 231-258Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford: , 2015
Keywords
EU Water Framework Directive, Common Implementation Strategy, Soft Law, Post-regulative Rulemaking, Court of Justice, Environmental Regulations.
National Category
Law and Society
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-247732 (URN)10.1093/jel/eqv009 (DOI)000357520600003 ()
Available from: 2015-03-23 Created: 2015-03-23 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Josefsson, H. (2015). Good Ecological Status: Advancing the Ecology of Law. (Doctoral dissertation). Uppsala: Uppsala University, Department of Law
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Good Ecological Status: Advancing the Ecology of Law
2015 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

For a meaningful discussion of the effectiveness of ecological objectives and ecological quality standards, their terms and purposes must be examined and clarified. This study explores the terms and content of ecological quality objectives and ecological quality standards, based on the Water Framework Directive’s legal conceptualization of ‘ecological status’. This exploration is accomplished by analysing and describing the Water Framework Directive’s ‘ecological status’ aspect from a legal-ecological perspective. The analysis of ‘ecological status’ and its main constructs forms the basis for a possible alternative form of regulation, which addresses the shortcomings identified in the analysis.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Uppsala University, Department of Law, 2015. p. 115
Keywords
EU Water Framework Directive, Environmental Regulations.
National Category
Law
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-246561 (URN)978-91-506-2450-2 (ISBN)
Public defence
2015-05-13, Sal IV Universitetshuset, Uppsala, 10:15 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2015-04-20 Created: 2015-03-09 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Josefsson, H. (2012). Achieving Ecological Objectives. Laws, 1(1), 39-63
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Achieving Ecological Objectives
2012 (English)In: Laws, ISSN 2075-471X, Vol. 1, no 1, p. 39-63Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The legal objective for surface water in the EU is ‘good ecological status’, as established by the Water Framework Directive, with a timeframe of 15, 21 or 27 years. To reach this objective, suitable legal instruments are needed, and quality standards are among the instruments intended to improve the ecological status. However, both the Directive and quality standards are founded on reductionism, risking an over-application of over-simplified concepts, probably reducing biological diversity. A realistic and more appropriate timeframe for river basin rehabilitation would be around 100 years, emphasizing several concerns, such as the importance of encompassing the entire life history of species, the shift in human perceptions, the systemic unity of humans and ecosystems, environmental irreducibility, site-specific reference points, and the divergence of the assessment of water quality and the general ecological status of a river basin. From a legal standpoint, a century emphasizes a temporal agreement and a normative commitment to the generations to come. Ecologically, a century time-scale gives enough time for the processes of evolution, dispersal and recolonization and succession to re-establish stable, more diverse biological communities in physically rehabilitated habitats and river basins, whereas the present timetable for achievement of the ecological objectives does not.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Basel: M D P I AG, 2012
Keywords
EU water framework directive, ecological objectives, ecological quality standards, environmental quality standards, ecological standards, reductionism, holism, ecosystem management
National Category
Law
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-246556 (URN)10.3390/laws1010039 (DOI)
Available from: 2015-03-09 Created: 2015-03-09 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Josefsson, H. & Baaner, L. (2011). The Water Framework Directive: A Directive for the Twenty-First Century?. Journal of environmental law, 23(3), 463-486
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Water Framework Directive: A Directive for the Twenty-First Century?
2011 (English)In: Journal of environmental law, ISSN 0952-8873, E-ISSN 1464-374X, Vol. 23, no 3, p. 463-486Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This article addresses the Water Framework Directive and the legal norm of ‘good ecological status’, which refers to the structure and function of ecosystems. In terms of ecology, the concepts of good structure and function reflect a resilient ecosystem with a high level of adaptive capacity. However, the legal provisions of the Directive compromise this concept. The Directive's approach assumes that by quantifying certain fixed biological elements it is possible to accurately assess the structure and function of ecosystems. This approach is highly contestable, and undermines the possibility of attaining the objective of ‘good ecological status’. To improve the possibility of achieving ‘good ecological status’, we emphasise the need to first redefine ‘high ecological status’ as a state wherein the ecosystems maintain themselves independently of management; secondly, that the hydrological regime be addressed when assessing the bodies of water; and, thirdly, that traits, rather than the current ‘quality elements’ be used as variables.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011
Keywords
EU Water Framework Directive, biological classification systems, biological quality elements, ecosystem services, traits, ecosystem management
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-158074 (URN)10.1093/jel/eqr018 (DOI)000296744000005 ()
Projects
Legal Conditions for a Sustainable Water Management
Available from: 2011-08-29 Created: 2011-08-29 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Josefsson, H. (2010). Likvärdig miljöbalkstillämpning – myt eller sanning?: en miljörättslig studie.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Likvärdig miljöbalkstillämpning – myt eller sanning?: en miljörättslig studie
2010 (Swedish)Report (Other academic)
Publisher
p. 41
Keywords
Avgift, Tillsyn, Prövning
National Category
Law and Society
Research subject
Environmental Law
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-144859 (URN)
Available from: 2011-02-03 Created: 2011-02-03 Last updated: 2019-01-14Bibliographically approved
Projects
Ramvattendirektivets Grundläggande Åtgärder - En rättslig belysning av art. 11 i ramvattendirektivet och Sveriges genomförande; Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Law, Department of Law
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-0548-9007

Search in DiVA

Show all publications