Compare and Contrast Between European Systems and the Mediterranean Countries in the Scope of Environmental Pollution

Introduction

Environmental pollution is a major subject of debate in both European systems and the Mediterranean countries. In both regions, there has been an increase in water pollution, air pollution, and noise pollution. The leading types of pollution in both regions are water and air pollution. In an effort to reduce environmental pollution, both the European systems and the Mediterranean countries have enacted various laws and acts. This essay focuses on environmental conventions that have been entered by countries in the European systems and the Mediterranean individually or in partnership. Such programs and conventions will include the Integrated Pollution Control (IPC), IPPC, Mediterranean Action Plan (MAP phase II and I), and Program for Assessment and Control of Pollution in Mediterranean region (MED POL), Barcelona convention, and several others. The essay will also discuss the similarities that exist in environmental pollution control in both the Mediterranean and the European system before contrasting the same. However, implementation of these laws, acts, covenants, and agreements amongst nations and regions is still challenging. This essay will focus on comparison and contrast of European systems and the Mediterranean countries in the scope of environmental pollution.

Background information

In Europe, water pollution has been a major cause of worry for governments and human rights activists. Engels, Knoll, and Huth observe that it is worrying to note that 70% of the surface water in European countries like Czech Republic is polluted.¹ In the same region, the Baltic Sea located in northern Germany is also heavily polluted and in Hungary, 40% of the tap water is heavily polluted. Engels, Knoll, and Huth further observe that 75% and 30% of rivers in Poland and Czech Republic consecutively cannot be used for industrial purposes due to high levels of contamination.² On the same breath, the majority of European rivers have been highly polluted; for instance, the Sarno River found in Italy is considered the most polluted river across the entire Europe. The major sources of water pollution in Europe include industrial wastes, aerosols, agrochemicals, oil pollutants from water machines, and automobiles. For instance, European waters receive approximately 275 tones of dumped materials from boats and 55,000 tones of fuel are spilled into the seas and oceans. Following this pollution, there has been a high destruction of marine habitats and the fishing industry. Air pollution also remains high in European countries despite many efforts to bring it down. Notably, there has been a considerable decline in air pollution in the last decade. However, 90% of the people in Europe breathe contaminated air; hence, they are at risk of respiratory diseases. Most pollution comes from automobiles, industries, power plants, farming, and combustion of dangerous gases. Air pollution in Europe has resulted in shortened lives, loss of biodiversity, respiratory diseases, reduced visibility, and even acid rain. Based on understanding of the sources and effects of these environmental pollutants, various conventions, Acts, and agreements have been signed by European countries.

In the Mediterranean region, environmental pollution is a major problem. In a similar manner with the European systems, water pollution is rampant in the Mediterranean region. Most water pollutants come from industrial wastes, oil, agrochemicals, and human dumping. Most rivers in the Mediterranean region are also polluted. Ferraro et al. assert that about “320,000 tons of phosphorous, 60,000 tons of washing detergents, 90 tons of pesticides, 3900 tons of lead, 2400 tons of chromium, and 120,000 tons of mineral oils are dumped into the sea or rivers in the Mediterranean annually”³. In the same manner as in European systems, human beings are exposed to these pollutants through consumption of fish and seafoods, bathing in polluted waters, and washing in the same. These people end up suffering from respiratory diseases, cancer, and bacterial and viral infections. Air pollution in the Mediterranean region comes from automobiles, industries, and agricultural activities.

Contrary to the European countries, foreign gases contaminate the atmosphere of the Mediterranean. For example, at about four to eight kilometres in the air, air pollution in this region contains anthropogenic materials, formaldehyde, peroxyacetyl nitrate, and carbon monoxide emitted by automobiles in Asia, North America, West, and East Europe. During summer, the Mediterranean region exceeds the air quality recommendation of 53 nmol/mol. Other pollutants come from aerosols, with sulphate making 30-40%, ammonium pollutants making 10-15%, organic compound making 30-35%, and black carbon contributing 5-10%. Pollutants from fossil fuel and biomass combustion also account for a sizeable source of pollution. Mount affirms that contrary to air pollutants in Europe, which come from industries within the region, the Mediterranean region receives a large amount of air pollutants from Europe through the summer winds.⁴ These winds carry loads of air and water pollutants to the Mediterranean air and sea. The consequences of air pollution in the Mediterranean include respiratory diseases on the residents and anglers, cancer, and eye diseases coupled with reduction of the rate of absorption of solar radiation and the water cycle. Based on the full understanding of sources of environmental pollution in this region and the impact on human beings, animals, and plants, the Mediterranean countries have signed various Act, agreements, and conventions aimed at mitigating the risks of pollution.

Similarities of European and Mediterranean conventions on environmental pollution

There are various similarities between European and Mediterranean conventions on environmental pollution. Over the years, many nations and regions have signed bilateral and multilateral agreements on environmental pollution. These agreements have drawn interest from various agencies of the United Nations. In Europe and the Mediterranean region, environmental concerns have attracted the Commission of the European Communities. The Council of Europe has also signed various agreements concerning environmental pollution⁵. One of the conventions that serve the Mediterranean region is ‘The Mediterranean Action Plan’ of 1975, which was formulated by the United Nations Intergovernmental Working Group on Marine Pollution. This Act is adopted by all the states with a coastline along the Mediterranean region. This convention prevents dumping into the Mediterranean Sea. The convention bars countries from dumping wastes into the sea. The Mediterranean countries thus observe the terms enshrined in this convention in a bid to reduce water pollution. The Mediterranean convention also calls for cooperation during the time of pollution emergencies of the countries that have a coastline along the Mediterranean Sea.

Countries in the Mediterranean regions have had to cooperate in the elimination of water pollution especially due to the nature of the sea. The Mediterranean countries have put in place measures to regulate treatment of wastes before discharging; for example, they have adopted the use of end-pipe filtering. Pollution in one area may result in dangerous circumstances in another region due to the movement of water. Countries in various parts along the Mediterranean have thus cooperated in a similar way in fighting water pollution in the Mediterranean Sea. Coleman affirms that the Mediterranean Action Plan also makes the Mediterranean countries similar in fighting water contamination from land-based sources.⁶ The Mediterranean system has thus focused on the elimination of water pollution from land-based pollutants. For example, the systems have established laws to regulate disposal of agrochemicals from agricultural farms. In the region, it is illegal to channel fertiliser wastes, pesticide containers, and other chemicals used for farming into the sea and other water bodies. Coleman adds that the other program that has been adopted by the Mediterranean region is the Pollution Monitoring and Research in Mediterranean Sea of 1982.⁷ This program proposes that proper and clear researches should be conducted on environmental pollution. Information regarding environmental pollution, its prevention, and control measures should be provide through research. Laboratories in the Mediterranean region are supposed to carry out researches on environmental pollution and make the necessary recommendation to the countries within the region. These programs also recommend complementary sub-regional research projects. The sub-regional researchers focus on management of water resources, soil protection, settlements, and aquaculture.

In addition, the conventions and agreements adopted by the Mediterranean region are similar to the European systems. The European region has over the years sought to establish a proper and effective mechanism for environmental pollution control. European countries have been looking for ways and means of ensuring that the most appropriate method is adopted to ensure that the least damage on environments is caused by the preferred method of control, viz. Best practicable Environmental Option (BPEO). Mount affirms that the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution of 1976 recommended that the method of pollution control adopted should have the least damage on the environment.⁸ This requirement resulted in the formation of the ‘Integrated Pollution Control (IPC). Just like the Mediterranean Action Plan (MEP), the convention aims at controlling and preventing environmental pollution. The IPC does not only focus on industrial emissions, but it also focuses on agricultural production, extraction, and disposal of various pollutants to the environment. Rostron asserts that integrated Pollution Control (IPC) is based on the premise that most pollutants do not remain in one form, but they keep on transcending from air, land, water, and so on.⁹ It is thus important for the program adopted in controlling pollution to address the problem in totality.

Bollino and Micheli affirm that another similarity between the Mediterranean Action Plan and the Integrated Pollution Control is that both of them seek to find cooperation between various stakeholders in fighting environmental pollution.¹⁰ In both programs, cooperation is crucial. Various countries in the Mediterranean have to work together in ensuring that there are concerted efforts in controlling pollution. Control of pollution, for instance air or water pollution, in one region may not be successful due to the failure of the neighbouring regions. Air and water are mobile mediums and they can quickly shift from one point to another. Similarly, IPC aims at controlling and managing environmental pollution completely. According to this program, controlling pollution in one form only may not be effective.

Both the IPC and MEP are also similar to the Best Available Technology (BAT) in the sense that BAT aims at complete elimination of a particular medium of pollution. BAT will check through various methods of environmental pollution control before settling on one and the best technology. Similarly, the Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) also seeks to control environmental pollution by elimination of pollutant the least levels. LEAR and MEP have a similarity in that they appreciate that environmental pollution cannot be completely stopped, but it can be minimised to the least levels. For example, MEP proposes that industries should filter their waste or treat it before releasing it into the atmosphere. The Lowest Achievable Emission Rate also aims at releasing pollutants to the environment when they have their contents reduced to the minimal levels. Like in MEP where all the nations with a coastline should come together in fighting pollution, IPC brings together various methods of pollution control in fighting environmental pollution.

Both the European systems and the Mediterranean countries have a common interest in fighting against discharge of hydrocarbons into the water bodies especially the sea. For example, Ferraro et al. observe that after the Amaco-Cadiz oil tanker shipwreck, which caused serious water pollution, countries across the two regions came together and set up a program for all European communities to control sea pollution.¹¹ The countries also came up with methods of reducing hydrocarbons in seawater. Erickson notes that under the directive 2005/35, countries came up with rules on how individuals, organisations, and countries were to take responsibility for sea pollution whether accidental or deliberate discharge.¹² Ferraro et al. further note that pollution directive 2005/35 was also to impact on tank cleaning and any oil spillage or disposal into the waters.¹³ Heavy penalties for violation of the set regulations were spelled out in this directive.

Hakapää argue that the Mediterranean and the European region also have similarities in monitoring sea pollution by ships.¹⁴ For example, the rules set up by the European Union and the Mediterranean is bidding to shipping vessels from their regions and to vessels flying foreign flags. According to Bollino and Micheli, directives in both regions hold that shipping vessels have to be inspected for environmental pollution, while old and sub-standard ships have to be withdrawn from their waters and ships must have the necessary equipments for ensuring safety precaution.¹⁵ In the quest to control water pollution, the European Union and the Mediterranean systems also ensure that they identify the environmental pollution prone areas and put the necessary restrictions on them.

Both of these regions also subscribe to the International Maritime organisation (IMO) in controlling water pollution. It is also clear that control of water and air pollution cannot be done exhaustively by a single nation or region. Similarities in the methods of pollution control that one region adopt should also be witnessed in the neighbouring regions. This understanding has brought about the similarities in agreements that the Northern Sea region and the Mediterranean regions have entered into; for example, the European systems and the Mediterranean countries are part of various environmental pollution control agreements. Erickson further notes that the Mediterranean and European countries are part of the Bonn Agreement, which control pollution of the sea by oil spillage, tank cleaning, vessel leakage, and other substances that are harmful to sea lives.¹⁶ The European Union and the Mediterranean countries also entered into the Barcelona convention of 1995, which regulates protocols on water pollution and sustainable development in control of sea pollution. Both regions have also signed the International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage of 2004.

Both regions have similar needs in compensation especially in case their waters are polluted. According to Altamirano-Cabrera and Finus, the Mediterranean and the European countries are also part of the Maritime Strategy Framework Directive.¹⁷ This directive ensures that every member state takes the necessary procedures that are geared towards the realisation of better marine environments by the beginning of year 2020.

Contrast (differences) of European and Mediterranean conventions on environmental pollution

Despite the many similarities between pollution policies across Europe and the Mediterranean region, there are various differences between various conventions, agreements, and policy programs. For example, the MEP endeavours to eliminate a one by one medium of environmental pollutants. The program defines and gives a clear path to follow in order to eliminate water pollution by agrochemicals. On the other hand, Rostron asserts that IPC seeks to eliminate all media of environmental pollution available at a certain point.¹⁸ For instance, instead of filtering gases only to be left with a solid waste of the same chemical composition to dispose, IPC pushed for the structuring of an end solution to the problem. What is eliminated by filtering gas is then disposed into the water as solid gas and thus the two programs have a different focus. The MEP focuses on how a certain medium of pollution can be carried from one point of the sea or air to another while IPC focuses on how one form of environmental pollution can be changed from one form to another, but with similar effects. This aspect means that the methods of control of pollutants in different levels are likely to focus their attention on different areas. In the MEP, control is in one medium, for example water at both points, while in IPC control changes as the pollutant changes in form.

Another difference is that while similar environmental laws and Acts in IPC may cover pollution control under MEP, the laws and Acts regulating a certain pollution medium may differ as the pollutant change in form. Matisoff asserts that the difference between IPC and MEP is that IPC aims at cutting the cost incurred by organisations especially in complying with different regulations, for example air, water, land, and noise all at once, while MEP does not focus at cost, but on individual forms of pollution and elimination.¹⁹ In MEP, once certain pollution, for example, poisonous gas is removed through scrubbing then the problem is solved. However, IPC aims at not transferring the pollutant to another form, but eliminating the pollutant completely from existence. Rostron asserts that IPC analyses cross media transfers of pollutants in order to prevent shifting the blame of pollution from one form to another while BAT and MEP focus on the current mediums of pollution and their impacts.²⁰ In addition, IPC is a unifying medium for various programs and laws aimed at eliminating various forms of environmental pollution. Instead of having programs for individual forms of environmental pollution and different media of pollution, IPC integrates them into one major program where elimination of a particular form of pollution is done at one point. In the IPC program, the medium is not allowed to change in form. Elimination of a particular pollutant must be done comprehensively.

Comparison (similarities) of European and Mediterranean means of protection against environmental pollution

Various similarities between the European system and Mediterranean countries exist in the way they carry out protection and control environmental pollution. According to Altamirano-Cabrera and Finus, the Mediterranean and the European systems concentrate on three major areas, viz. management and control of emissions from industries, management and control of major accidents, and proper audit of the environment and also eco-labelling.²¹ These programs for control and management of pollution in the European region follow the stipulations laid out in the Integrated Pollution Control (IPC). In the same way, the Mediterranean region through the Mediterranean Action Plan has established the Program for Assessment and Control of Pollution in Mediterranean region (MED POL). The underlying factors of monitoring and control that guides MED POL focus on management of pollution, control, and implementation of protocols to control pollution.

In both areas, the methods of controlling pollution that the conventions adopt are geared towards elimination of major sources of environmental pollution. For example, Delmas and Montes-Sancho observe that the programme for the Assessment and Control of Pollution in the Mediterranean region (MED POL) aims at the elimination of untreated dumping.²² The region thus concentrates on monitoring the entire process of sewage collection from all industries along the region. The program also recommends the monitoring of the process of sewage treatment. In addition, Hakapää argues that disposal of sewage is also controlled, regulated, and monitored in the region in a bid to prevent dumping into the sea.²³ All the Mediterranean cities have to abide by the regulations on collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage. In the same way, the European system of environmental pollution control, under the guidance of the Integrated Pollution Control (IPC), directs that all the industries in the region should be licensed to release treated wastes into the environment. Delmas and Montes-Sancho observe that the IPC directs that industries in Europe should observe the Emission Limit Values (ELVs).²⁴

This aspect means that every industry must ensure that the entire process of collection, treatment, and release of wastes observes the minimum limit values. The Integrated Pollution Control adopts the Best Available techniques (BAT) in treating wastes. Technologically advanced means and methods of waste treatment should be adopted in ensuring that what goes into the environment has the least harm to human beings, animals, and plants. Rostron asserts that exchange of information on waste treatment and disposal is permissible and regulated in the European Union in a bid to ensure that all the countries persuade their industries to adopt the best technology of collection, treatment, and release of wastes into the environment.²⁵ Just as MEDPOL monitors every step that industries in the Mediterranean undertake in the treatment of pollutants, the BAT ensures that industries in Europe adopt the technology that reduces harmful effects of the industrial emissions to the minimum. Both regions aim at ensuring that what industries release into the environment has the least effects. Both systems clearly appreciate that it is not possible to do away with pollution and its sources entirely.

Another similarity between the European system and the Mediterranean is that both systems adopt pollution control methods that aim at promoting human health. Oberndorfer and Rennings argue that the European system under the IPC aims at ensuring that the amount of pollution in the air, water, and the larger environment does not pose a threat to human life.²⁶ In the European region, many people suffer from respiratory diseases and cancer due to environmental pollution. In the same way, in the Mediterranean region, many people suffer from cancer and respiratory disease after bathing in contaminated water or even after consuming it. Human health is a major focus for both systems of environment prevention. Both the European and the Mediterranean regions aim at reducing the current levels of environmental pollution and promote a healthy environment for all forms of lives.

Conclusion

From the points put across in this paper, it is clear that the European systems and the Mediterranean countries have both common and differing scopes of protecting the environment from pollution. Environmental pollution is a major subject of discussion across every part of the contemporary world. Countries have signed agreements, conventions, and memorandums of understanding in a bid to reduce pollution. The European systems and the Mediterranean countries have also been on the verge of eliminating the problem of environmental pollution. These two regions have set rules within their boundaries and with other international nations and forums. There are various acts and conventions that countries in these regions have entered or ratified. Some of these conventions include the IPPC, IPC, MAP, MAP LOG, the Barcelona Convention, and many others. All these conventions are aimed at reducing the effect of pollution across the world. The influence of various mediums of pollution on human beings, animals, and plants has been far reaching.

Some people have suffered and died out of respiratory diseases, others have developed cancer, and others have lost their hearing, while others have contracted skin diseases. The aquatic life has also been destroyed through water pollution. The majority of their efforts are thus focused on sea pollution and methods of preventing the same. The European systems are more focused on air pollutions. The systems of environmental pollution control that are adopted by this region also aim at complete termination of the harmful impacts of a particular medium of pollution and not turning it into another form. The region thus fosters the best technology in pollution control in a bid to ensure that the material released into the environment contains the least possible harmful effect on the environment. Nevertheless, pollution of the environment remains a big issue that requires the full participation of all the nations of the world. Realisation that conversion of a pollutant medium from one form to another does not result in the total destruction of that medium should direct the world towards exchange of information and technology on pollution.

Contrast (differences) of European and Mediterranean means of protection against environmental pollution-agreements, and conventions on protection

Although there are many similarities in the means of protection against environmental pollution-agreements and conventions that the European and Mediterranean countries have adopted, there are eminent differences between the two systems. One of the major differences in the means of environmental pollution control in Europe and Mediterranean is that the conventions adopted by the Mediterranean region like MEP and the Barcelona conventions are mainly aimed at preventing and controlling pollution in the Mediterranean sea. On the other hand, Matisoff asserts that the IPC convention that the European systems adopt is aimed at eliminating all forms of pollution in water, air, sound, and so on.²⁷ The scopes of the two methods of environmental pollution control that are adopted by these regions bring out the differences. The Mediterranean region focuses more on how to eliminate disposal of toxic material into the Mediterranean Sea. The focus on pollution control in this region is directed on one area, viz. water pollution. However, the European region under the IPC focuses on how one form of pollution can be done away with in a bid to ensure that it does not turn to another form and harm the environment.

The other major difference in means of environmental pollution that the two regions focus on is that the Mediterranean region has all its focus geared towards elimination of one form of pollution and not another at a certain point. For example, the system of MAP phase II endeavours to eliminate industrial disposal to the Mediterranean Sea. After elimination of a particular form of pollution, the system does not follow the second phase. However, Matisoff asserts that the IPC program adopted by the European system endeavours to solve a pollution problem completely in a way that it will not recur in the future or develop into another form.²⁸ The IPC applies all the possible technologies in ensuring that a pollution problem that is solved in one form will not become a problem even in its other forms. Application of the Best Available Technology ensures that the method of controlling a certain source or form of pollution is the best that can be applied. Moreover, the method ensures that the harmful effects of the pollutant are reduced to its least form.

The other major difference between the means of pollution control in European systems and the Mediterranean is on their focus on media of pollution. In the Mediterranean region, major causes of environmental pollution are land-based. On the other hand, most causes of pollution in the European Union are industrial-based. The European region has also experienced high rates of air pollution in the past. For example, Oberndorfer and Rennings argue that Europe has had high rates of cancer and respiratory diseases both of which have been associated with air pollution.²⁹ Therefore, it is clear that the efforts that the Mediterranean region puts in control of sea pollution may be considerably higher than that of the European systems. The European systems also realised that the elimination of pollutant media from one form may not be a permanent solution since the next media may also be equally harmful. The region thus embarks on integrated waste management. Matisoff asserts that Mediterranean countries embark on fighting the release of industrial wastes into the lakes through supervision, while the European systems embark on inspecting the method of waste treatment to ensure that pollutants that have been eliminated from one form are not capable of turning to another harmful form.³⁰ Shifting the media of pollution from one form to another does not serve the purpose of pollution control. For example Dvarioniene et al. argue that shifting pollutant media from gas to solid and then into the water only leaves the aquatic life in a serious problem.³¹ The effect of feeding on contaminated fish and aquatic food will still affect human beings in the same way as when they breathe contaminated air by the same chemicals. This observation holds true in industrial wastes.

The enforcement laws that affect the European systems are different from those affecting the Mediterranean. Every country or region has its own laws that regulate environmental pollution. The only point of cooperation that may bring different systems together is where international laws are applicable. The European systems are keen on inspecting the implementation of technology specific methods of environmental pollution control. For example, during compliance inspection in the European systems, the major areas of concentration are on application of the Best Available technology (BAT) in waste management, treatment, and disposal. On the other hand, in the Mediterranean countries, the type of technology applied does not matter, as what is important is compliance with the regulatory standards of waste treatment and disposal. Hedberg affirms that inspection of pollution management and control in the European region considers the Maximum Achievable Control technology (MACT).³² The aim of this concept is to ensure that the company or industry releasing a certain treated waste has utilised all its abilities in waste control and management before releasing it to the environment. The here implication is that larger and more developed industries should put in place advanced methods of waste management. The technology adopted in controlling the media of pollution should be the best in times to ensure that the company has no other better ways of reducing the would-be pollution.

The European region is also keen on ensuring that industries in both land and along the coast adhere to the Lowest Achievable Emissions Rate (LAER). The purpose of this directive is to ensure that no company releases wastes into the environment with traces of highly destructive contents. Every medium of pollution, whether gas, solid, or liquid should be treated with finality without shifting it to other forms. On the other hand, the Mediterranean countries have a particular standard that their industries have to achieve in order to ensure proper control of sea pollution. Hedberg points out to the view that researches have also shown that about 40% of the hydrocarbon pollutants that dissolve in the Mediterranean does not come from countries within the coastline.³³ The majority of these pollutants come by the wind and they are blown from northern Europe and other places. Therefore, it follows that unlike in the European systems; the Mediterranean countries have to get into agreements and conventions that will promote reduction of various forms of pollution in other parts of the world.

Hedberg affirms that pollution control agreements ensure that the countries from which emissions come from minimise air pollution through scrubbing and proper waste disposal.³⁴ Some of the pollution that drains into the Mediterranean comes from the land. Some countries in the Mediterranean region receive contaminated water from the landlocked countries that release wastes into their rivers. This waste then flows down the rivers into the Mediterranean region. The Mediterranean countries thus have to ensure that they get into international agreements that regulate the conduct of their neighbouring countries in matters of waste disposal. Although the impact of releasing waste materials into the water may have reduced impact on countries that do not have a coastline, their effects are highly felt by countries along the coastline. For instance, in these countries, the populations consume the highest amount of seafood and fish. In addition, the populations bathe in the contaminated water, hence contracting respiratory and skin diseases. It is thus necessary that the Mediterranean countries cooperate with other countries in the fight against environmental pollution. Worse still is the pollution of water in the sea. Oil spillage, agrochemical depositions, washing of oil tanks, and oil leakages from faulty vessels from one country may result in very dangerous impacts on another country.

Common ground

Despite the differences and similarities in the process of fighting and preventing environmental pollution in the Mediterranean and the European countries, various basic steps are necessary for environmental pollution for both regions. In every part of the world, there exist particular forms of pollution. It is thus necessary for all parts of the world (Mediterranean and Europe included) to put in place proper and right vehicles for unifying best approaches. Dvarioniene et al. argue that mediums of pollution like water and air are mobile and they may cause harm far from their countries of production.³⁵ It is thus necessary for nations in Europe, Mediterranean, and other parts of the world to adopt the best methods of management and control what leaves the least or no traces of the pollutant. Enforcement of environmental pollution law has also been a problem across nations of the world. Differences in statutes may make it difficult to control pollution in transnational mediums like water, air, and even noise. However, the right international statutes should be put in place to enhance the implementation of international agreements on environmental laws. Dawson and Segerson recommend the coordination of various key players in environmental pollution control, which is important in ensuring that the sources of pollution, for example automobiles, industries, national parks, agriculture, and others are fully involved in developing appropriate methods of controlling pollution.³⁶

Information exchange amongst the stakeholders should be facilitated in order to ensure that all the countries abide by the same rules and use the best available methods of controlling pollution. Environmental studies should be conducted for purposes of developing the best practices coupled with carrying out continuous researches on pollution in the European and Mediterranean countries. Environmental pollution should be more reliant on researches and modern technology to ensure that there is complete control of pollution across the region. The standards of pollution control and pollutant release should also be standardised in the two regions because the regions are dependant on each other and environmental pollution in the Northern Sea is likely to affect the Mediterranean. Industrial aerosols from industries in European countries will move by wind and dissolve in the Mediterranean, thus causing more harm to the Mediterranean countries than in European nations. Matisoff holds that regular environmental auditing programs should be put in place to ensure that the environmental pollutions are detected in their early stages before causing considerable harm on the environment.³⁷ Dawson and Segerson posit that governments and non-governmental actors should be encouraged to monitor the conduct of industries, individual businesses, farms, national parks, water vessels and other human activities concerning environmental pollution.³⁸ Various mediums of inspection should be put in place in both the Mediterranean and the European countries. The countries should also have an effective means of enforcement of the penalties spelt out in different statutes and conventions.

References

Altamirano-Cabrera, J & M Finus, ‘Permit Trading and Stability of International Climate Agreements’, Journal of Applied Economics, vol. 9, no.1, 2006, pp.19-47.

Bollino, C & S Micheli, ‘On the Relative Optimality of Environmental Policy Instruments: An Application of the Work of Alberto Alesina’, Atlantic Economic Journal, vol. 40,no. 4, 2012, pp.385-399.

Coleman, Y, ‘International Environmental Agreements and Associations’, Costa Rica Country Review, vol. 1, no.1, 2013, pp.209-223.

Dawson, L & K Segerson, ‘Voluntary Agreements with Industries: Participation Incentives with Industry-Wide Targets’, Land Economics, vol. 84, no.1, 2008, pp.97-114.

Delmas, A & J Montes-Sancho, ‘Voluntary agreements to improve environmental quality: symbolic and substantive cooperation’, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 31, no.6, 2010, pp.575-601.

Dvarioniene, J, G Zobe laite, J Kruopiene & Z Stasisˇkiene, ‘Application of the Life-Cycle Assessment Method for Pollution Prevention in Klaipéda Sea Port, Lithuania’, Journal of Coastal Research, vol. 29, no, 5, 2013, pp.1083-1091.

Engels, A, L Knoll & M Huth, ‘Preparing for the ‘real’ market: national patterns of institutional learning and company behaviour in the European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS)’, The Journal of European Environmental Policy, vol. 18, no. 5, 2008, pp. 276-297.

Erickson, E, ‘Handbook of environment and waste management: v.1: Air and water pollution control’, Current Reviews for Academic Libraries, vol. 50, no. 2, 2012, pp.312-312.

Ferraro, G, S Meyer-Roux, O Muellenhoff, M Pavliha, J Svetak, D Tarchi & K Topouzelis, ‘Long term monitoring of oil spills in European seas’, International Journal of Remote Sensing, vol. 30 no. 3, 2009, pp.627-645.

Hakapää, K, ‘Foreign Ships in Vulnerable Waters: Coastal Jurisdiction over Vessel-Source Pollution with Special Reference to the Baltic Sea’, International Journal of Legal Information, vol. 33, no.2, 2005, pp.256-266.

Hedberg, J, ‘Airborne pollutants’, College & Research Libraries News, vol. 65, no. 6, 2004, pp.334-334.

Matisoff, C, ‘Are international environmental agreements enforceable? implications for institutional design’, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law & Economics, vol. 10, no. 3, 2010, pp.165-186.

Mount, E, ‘Advanced air and noise pollution control’, Sci-Tech News, vol. 59 no. 2, 2005, pp.47-47.

Oberndorfer, U & K Rennings, ‘Costs and competitiveness effects of the European Union emissions trading scheme’, The Journal of European Environmental Policy, vol. 17, no.1, 2007, pp.1-17.

Rostron, J, ‘Integrated pollution prevention and control: A review of English and European Union Law and Regulation’, Environmental Quality Management, vol. 16, no.2, 2006, pp.61-72.

Footnotes

1. A Engels, L Knoll & M Huth, ‘Preparing for the ‘real’ market: national patterns of institutional learning and company behaviour in the European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS)’, The Journal of European Environmental Policy, vol. 18, no. 5, 2008, pp. 276-297.
2. Ibid, p. 1076.
3. G Ferraro, S Meyer-Roux, O Muellenhoff, M Pavliha, J Svetak, D Tarchi & K Topouzelis, ‘Long term monitoring of oil spills in European seas’, International Journal of Remote Sensing, vol. 30 no. 3, 2009, pp.627-645.
4. E Mount, ‘Advanced air and noise pollution control’, Sci-Tech News, vol. 59 no. 2, 2005, pp.47-47.
5. C Bollino & S Micheli, ‘On the Relative Optimality of Environmental Policy Instruments: An Application of the Work of Alberto Alesina’, Atlantic Economic Journal, vol. 40,no. 4, 2012, pp.385-399.
6. Y Coleman, ‘International Environmental Agreements and Associations’, Costa Rica Country Review, vol. 1, no.1, 2013, pp.209-223.
7. Ibid, p.213.
8. Mount, p.49.
9. J Rostron, ‘Integrated pollution prevention and control: A review of English and European Union Law and Regulation’, Environmental Quality Management, vol. 16, no.2, 2006, pp.61-72.
10. Bollino and Micheli, p.385.
11. Ferraro et al. p.627.
12. E Erickson, ‘Handbook of environment and waste management: v.1: Air and water pollution control’, Current Reviews for Academic Libraries, vol. 50, no. 2, 2012, pp.312-312.
13. Ferraro et al., p.627).
14. K Hakapää, ‘Foreign Ships in Vulnerable Waters: Coastal Jurisdiction over Vessel-Source Pollution with Special Reference to the Baltic Sea’, International Journal of Legal Information, vol. 33, no.2, 2005, pp.256-266.
15. Bollino and Micheli, p.386.
16. Erickson, p.312.
17. J Altamirano-Cabrera & M Finus, ‘Permit Trading and Stability of International Climate Agreements’, Journal of Applied Economics, vol. 9, no.1, 2006, pp.19-47.
18. Rostron, p.66.
19. C Matisoff, ‘Are international environmental agreements enforceable? implications for institutional design’, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law & Economics, vol. 10, no. 3, 2010, pp.165-186.
20. Rostron, p.68.
21. Altamirano-Cabrera and Finus, p.34.
22. A Delmas & J Montes-Sancho, ‘Voluntary agreements to improve environmental quality: symbolic and substantive cooperation’, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 31, no.6, 2010, pp.575-601.
23. Hakapää, p.256.
24. Delmas and Montes-Sancho, p. 576
25. Rostron, p.70.
26. U Oberndorfer & K Rennings, ‘Costs and competitiveness effects of the European Union emissions trading scheme’, The Journal of European Environmental Policy, vol. 17, no.1, 2007, pp.1-17.
27. Matisoff, p.169.
28. Ibid, p. 177.
29. Oberndorfer and Rennings, p.11.
30. Matisoff, p.183.
31. J Dvarioniene, J, G Zobe laite, J Kruopiene & Z Stasisˇkiene, ‘Application of the Life-Cycle Assessment Method for Pollution Prevention in Klaipéda Sea Port, Lithuania’, Journal of Coastal Research, vol. 29, no, 5, 2013, pp.1083-1091.
32. J Hedberg, ‘Airborne pollutants’, College & Research Libraries News, vol. 65, no. 6, 2004, pp.334-334.
33. Ibid, p.334.
34. Ibid, p. 336.
35. Dvarioniene et al. p. 1083.
36. L Dawson & K Segerson, ‘Voluntary Agreements with Industries: Participation Incentives with Industry-Wide Targets’, Land Economics, vol. 84, no.1, 2008, pp.97-114.
37. Matisoff, p.178.
38. Dawson and Segerson, p. 97.