Thornton 2007

environmental science & policy 10 (2007) 116–134
available at www.sciencedirect.com
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envsci
The challenge of sustainability: incentives for brownfield

regeneration in Europe
Gareth Thornton a,*, Martin Franz b, David Edwards c, Gernot Pahlen d, Paul Nathanail e
a
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
b
ZEFIR, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Clemensstraße 17-19, Bochum, Germany
c
exSite Research Ltd., Hillcrest, Hillam, Leeds, UK
d
Montan-Grundstücksgesellschaft, Rellinghauserstr. 9, Essen, Germany
e
Land Quality Management Group, School of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
article info abstract
Published on line 15 November 2006 Brownfields are often not economically competitive for regeneration compared with
greenfield sites without public intervention. The economic, environmental and social
Keywords: barriers present at the site frequently hinder returning brownfields to beneficial use. The
Brownfields European Union and its member states provide different public incentives to
Sustainability make brownfield regeneration more attractive but rarely consider their sustainability.
Regeneration Deciding how to regenerate brownfields should involve more than redeveloping the
Incentives site to meet regulations or to meet a predetermined site use. Member states, policy
makers, land owners and developers need to understand all aspects of brownfield
regeneration and how sustainability issues need to be paramount in choosing alternative
site uses. This paper presents the existing incentives on a European Union level, in
Germany, the UK, and France; it discusses the effects and gaps; and makes suggestions
for more effective instruments for the promotion of sustainable brownfield
regeneration.
# 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction which offer immense development potential. For example,

cleaning up environmental hazards, removing neighbour-
The redevelopment of ‘brownfields’ (a term coined in the hood eyesores while, at the same time, creating jobs,
USA) has received a lot of attention in the past few years and providing housing and promoting general economic health
has become a major soil-related problem. In 1994, the in local communities of all sizes. Indeed, strategic brown-
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) started the Brown- field redevelopment can produce win–win scenarios for both
fields Economic Redevelopment Initiative and developed a the economy and the environment. Since its inception in
definition of brownfields. According to that definition, they 1994, EPA’s Brownfields Initiative has blossomed into a
were ‘‘abandoned, idled or underused industrial and major national programme that has literally changed
commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment the way that contaminated property is perceived,
is complicated by real or perceived environmental contam- addressed, and managed in the USA. Until recently this
ination’’ (USEPA, 1996). The Brownfields Initiative was innovative approach gained very little attention in the
meant to promote the regeneration of brownfields, European Union.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1865 610506.

E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Thornton).
1462-9011/$ – see front matter # 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2006.08.008
environmental science & policy 10 (2007) 116–134 117
Since 11 January 2002 the US have the federal Small intervention. The alternatives are long-term ‘hardcore’ sites
Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalisation Act.1 with the ongoing socioeconomic impact on the surrounding
This Act transforms EPA’s policy into law (Guariglia et al., 2002; communities. However, the State can bring about a better
Mitchell, 2002). It contains a new legally determined definition competitive position for brownfields by implementing a wide
of a brownfield site. According to the Act, a ‘‘brownfield site’’ is variety of financial, fiscal, legal, regulatory and policy
now ‘‘real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of incentives. Brownfield redevelopment often requires these
which may be complicated by the presence or potential incentives as the reluctance to redevelop brownfield sites is
presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contami- frequently associated with the uncertainty regarding the risks
nant’’. This updated definition resembles what people in they pose—including wrong location, legacy of redundant
Europe usually understand by the word ‘brownfield’ provided infrastructure, decontamination costs, high rehabilitation
by CABERNET (Concerted Action on Brownfield and Economic costs and reduced real estate value. For the cities and their
Regeneration Network), modifying the work of CLARINET governments tasked with being custodians of the public good,
(Contaminated Land Rehabilitation Network for Environmen- the regeneration of such sites and their surrounding neigh-
tal Technologies): ‘Brownfields are sites that have been bourhoods presents a giant challenge. Success and failure on
affected by the former uses of the site and surrounding land; these sites will leave a deep and long-lasting impact on the
are derelict and underused; may have real or perceived city.
contamination problems; are mainly in developed urban The use of incentives, so-called indirection regulation,
areas; and require intervention to bring them back to instead of direct regulation (command and control) is quite
beneficial use (CABERNET, 2005). The Small Business Liability new. According to Turner, ‘‘until recently, environmental policy in
Relief and Brownfields Revitalisation Act is the most wide- most countries was dominated by direct regulatory measures, that is,
reaching and comprehensive package of CERCLA2 amend- legal instruments by which governing institutions, at all levels of
ments since the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorisation government, impose obligations or constraints on the actions and
Act of 1986 (SARA). Meanwhile, the former definition of EPA, or behaviour of private firms and consumers, in order to protect the
similar variations, came into common usage all over the environment’’ (Turner, 2000). This has changed during the last
world, including several of the European Member States.3 20 years: the bandwidth of forms of regulations has become
There are estimated to be 500,000–1,000,000 brownfields in wider (cf. Mayntz, 1997). This development can be observed in
the US.4 However, brownfields do not only occur in the United the policies for brownfield redevelopment. This includes non-
States, but in every industrialised country or region. At fiscal instruments such as instruments including information
present, both at the EU and national levels, governments disclosure schemes, planning policies, Environmental Impact
are trying to deal with this legacy of industrialisation. The Assessment requirements, project life cycle assessment and
Union contains densely populated and built-up regions, and is related extended producer responsibility procedures (cf.
faced with both historical and recent soil contamination OECD, 1997; Turner, 2000). The fact that brownfield regenera-
where some of the historical contamination dates back to the tion slows down the consumption of greenfields means it is
accelerated industrial development of the 19th century often regarded as sustainable and thus as worthy of public
(Vanheusden, 2003). funding.
On top of that, brownfields, particularly in old industrial Urban development depends on the policy cycle, which
regions, are often economically marginally viable (B sites) or includes identifying a problem, formulating and implement-
even non-viable sites (C sites) (Ferber, 1997) as they are not ing a programme, examining the intended and unintended
competitive compared with greenfield sites without public effects of implementation and continuing with/modifying or
abandoning the programme. The development and use of
1 incentives involves a dynamic process; the target group, users
Public Law 107–118 (H.R. 2869), signed by the President on 11
January 2002. The full title of the Act is ‘‘An Act to provide certain
and context of the incentives evolve in the run up imple-
relief for small businesses from liability under the Comprehensive mentation even if the legal instruments do not change
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, (Majone and Wildvsky, 1984). A typology overview of
and to amend such Act to promote the cleanup and reuse of incentives for brownfield redevelopment is provided in
brownfields, to provide financial assistance for brownfields revi- Table 1.
talization, to enhance State response programs, and for other The European RTD project RESCUE (Regeneration of
purposes’’.
2
European Sites in Cities and Urban Environments)5 defined
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
sustainable brownfield regeneration as: ‘. . . the management,
and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), commonly referred to as Super-
fund. CERCLA was enacted to provide broad federal authority to rehabilitation and return to beneficial use of brownfields in
respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous such a manner as to ensure the attainment and continued
substances that could endanger public health or the environment. satisfaction of human needs for present and future genera-
This Act is typically used to address inactive or abandoned sites. It tions in environmentally sensitive, economically viable,
established a federal fund (the ‘‘Superfund’’) to finance govern-
mental clean-ups of abandoned and other waste disposal sites.
3 5
Although, in the UK, brownfields are usually taken to mean RESCUE is a research project supported by the European Com-
only land previously developed and, so, there does not necessarily mission under the 5th Framework Programme contributing the
have to be (potential) contamination. implementation of the Key Action no. 4: ‘‘The city of tomorrow
4
President Signs Brownfields Bill, The White House, 11 January and cultural heritage’’ within the ‘‘Energy, Environment and Sus-
2002, on http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/ tainable Development’’ programme (see http://www.rescue-eur-
20020111-3.html (accessed 21 November 2004). ope.com).
118 environmental science & policy 10 (2007) 116–134
institutionally robust and socially acceptable ways within the Table 1 – Incentives for brownfield redevelopment: a
particular regional context’ (RESCUE, 2003) This still very typological overview
broad definition was further developed by RESCUE into its own Financial incentives
sustainability criteria.6 The aim is to find out whether the Direct funding Structural policy
Public credit programmes
incentives are sustainable. The Brundtland Report defines
Demonstration/pilot projects
sustainable development as ‘‘development that meets the Indirect funding Tax incentives
needs of the present without compromising the ability of
Legal incentives Obligations
future generations to meet their own needs’’ (WCED, 1987). In
(including spatial Bans
other words, does the competent public authority, when
planning and Political principles/guidelines
enacting new incentives, consider the needs of the present regulatory drivers)
and the future when using methods to redevelop brownfields?
Governmental and private sector pronouncements of a
connection between brownfields and sustainability are not not directly allocate funds to projects chosen by the
hard to find. But are all of the incentives to promote brownfield Commission, the main priorities of a development programme
regeneration really sustainable? Which brownfields programs are defined in cooperation with the Commission and the
will really lead to sustainable cities? As Eisen already stated, choice of projects and their management is solely the
‘‘any argument that all brownfields redevelopment is inherently responsibility of the national and regional authorities (Eur-
sustainable is unjustified’’ (Eisen, 1999). opean Commission, 2004a). ‘‘The Member States bear the main
This paper analyses the benefits and deficiencies of current responsibility for the development of areas in difficulty. The Union
financial, fiscal, legal, regulatory and policy incentives with helps them achieve more and better results than they could if they act
direct or indirect relevance to sustainable brownfield regen- on their own. That is the real added value of the Structural Funds’’
eration. It then provides a set of proposed solutions to address (European Commission, 2002a).
the defined deficits. In the first instance, we look at the For the 2000–2006 programming period, Structural Funds
incentives on the European level. In the second instance, we are being concentrated on three priority objectives:
have a closer look at the incentives in some of the European
Member States, namely Germany, the UK and France. The Development and structural adjustment of regions whose
content of this publication is based on Deliverable 2-5.2: development is lagging behind. The European Regional
Administrative Tools and Incentives for Sustainable Brownfield Development Fund (ERDF) finances it.
Redevelopment of RESCUE, and is a result of considerable team Economic and social conversion of areas facing structural
input. difficulties. The European Regional Development Fund
(ERDF) finances it.
Adaptation and modernisation of national policies and
2. Incentives on the European level systems of education, training and employment (develop-
ment of human resources). The European Social Fund (ESF)
2.1. EU Structural Funding finances it.
The most significant financial incentive in existence for 2.1.1. Objective 1: supporting development in the less
sustainable brownfield development is EU Structural Funding prosperous regions
and without such funding regeneration activity in Europe More than EUR 135 billion (66% of Structural Funds) are
would have been almost exclusively restricted to economic- allocated to help areas where the gross domestic product
ally feasible sites—the so called ‘A’ sites (cf. Ferber, 1997). At (GDP) is below 75% of the Community average (European
present, EU Structural Funds are distributed to support Commission, 2004b). All these regions have a number of ‘red’
brownfield redevelopment without necessarily considering economic signals/indicators:
either whether the development is sustainable, or whether
the methods adopted to redevelop the project site are a higher than average unemployment rate;
sustainable. This may impact negatively at EU, national, lack of services for businesses and individuals;
regional and sub-regional level and also may compromise co- poor basic infrastructure.
financiers who include sustainability in their project evalua-
tion criteria. During the period 2000–2006 some 50 regions, home to 22%
Structural Funds originate at the EU level and are of the EU population, will receive support to help initiate
distributed at the national, regional and sub-regional level economic activities. The regions will be provided with the
by organisations obliged to pursue the same outputs/mea- basic infrastructure they lack, people will receive training to
sures contained in EU priority objectives and supporting improve or adapt their skills, and new business investments
guidance. The process is competitive and proposal evaluation will be encouraged (European Commission, 2002b).
is a critical pre-commitment step. While Structural Funds do
2.1.2. Objective 2: revitalising areas facing structural
6 difficulties
RESCUE has developed 33 sustainability objectives and 61 sus-
tainability indicators, including qualitative as well as quantitative Areas facing structural difficulties (despite being situated in
indicators (some checklists, some yes/no questions, and others regions whose development level is above 75% of the
with quantitatively measurable units). Community average) such as socioeconomic difficulties that
Table 2 – Specific outputs of a UK RDA documented in its SPD

Output Code Description
Core 1 C1(A) Number of new jobs created

C1(B) Number of jobs safeguarded
Core 2 C2 Hectares of brownfield land remediated or recycled

Core 3 C3 Number of learning opportunities created and filled
Core 4 C4 Number of new businesses created/attracted and sustained for at least 12 months
Core 5 C5 Investments benefiting deprived areas: leverage through RDA funding and activity,
of private sector investment benefiting residents of the most deprived wards
are the source of high unemployment, whether industrial, sustainable reuse of soil/construction related waste;
rural, urban or fishery dependent, including: sustainable maintenance of heritage buildings;
sustainable land use and urban design strategies;
the evolution of industrial or service sectors; citizen participation processes.
a decline in traditional activities in rural areas;
a crisis situation in urban areas; The information in Table 2 acts as an illustration that
difficulties affecting fisheries activity (European Commis- although sustainable development is now, apparently,
sion, 2002c). enshrined in all European political policy, it has no status
at the point of local project delivery. This section has
2.1.3. Objective 3: development of human resources illustrated that there are huge faults in the process, which
Objective 3 serves as a reference framework for all measures to need serious attention if the goal of sustainable brownfield
promote human resources in the Member States and covers redevelopment is to be achieved. Structural Funds are the
the entire EU territory outside areas covered by Objective 1. catalyst for most regeneration funding and the rules by
The Regulation takes account of the policies, practices and which they are applied can be a very powerful tool for rapid
needs of the Member States as laid down in their national and durable improvements that can produce benefits in
employment plan. For the 2000–2006 period, Objective 3 will terms of quality of life and good husbandry of natural
support a wide range of measures aiming to: resources. At present, EU Structural Funds are distributed to
support brownfield redevelopment without considering
promote active labour market policies to reduce unemploy- either whether the development is sustainable, or whether
ment; the methods adopted to redevelop the project site are
improve access to the labour market (special emphasis on sustainable. This may impact negatively at EU, national,
social exclusion); regional and sub-regional level and also may compromise
enhance employment opportunities through lifelong edu- co-funders who include sustainability in their project
cation & training programmes; evaluation criteria.
promote measures which enable social and economic Currently new rules for the EU funds for 2007–2013 are
changes to be identified in advance and the necessary being prepared at EU level. The proposals of the European
adaptations to be made; Commission for the new regulations were published in July
promote equal opportunities for men and women (European 2004 (European Commission, 2004c); the plenary vote of the
Commission, 2002d). Parliament is expected to take place in July 2005. The
regulations will be followed by the common EU priorities
These objectives become translated into local action by for which the EU funds should be used in 2007–2013, the so-
means of a Single Programming Document (SPD). The SPD is called Community Strategic Guidelines. They have to be
prepared by the local funding agency that distributes debated and adopted by the Council and the Parliament. At
Structural Funds in the geographic domain and it stipulates the same time the programming process is going on at the
a contractual commitment by the funded party to deliver national and regional levels: authorities are planning how
certain specific predetermined outputs. they will use the incoming funds in 2007–2013. The autho-
Table 2 documents a typical example of the specific outputs rities develop a general National Strategic Reference Frame-
in a SPD used by a UK Regional Development Agency – East work and the more specific Operational Programmes. They
Midlands – in 2003 (extracted from their SPD management will negotiate these documents with the European Commis-
rules) (East Midlands Development Agency, 2003). sion in 2006 (Coalition for Sustainable EU Funds, 2005).
It is clear that there is still little, if any, recognition of Concurrent with these activities, the Economic and Social
the need for sustainable brownfield regeneration practices Committee of the Commission is preparing a revised
and that even now, as in the past, evaluating projects on Sustainable Development Strategy. This is at the prioritisa-
the basis of a quantity of defined ‘‘hard’’ outputs is regarded tion of objectives phase.
as acceptable, but this approach must now be in question. Other EU developments, such as the Landfill Directive,
In the absence of any evaluation of sustainability which seeks to make waste disposal the last resort (particu-
criteria such as those defined by the RESCUE project, the larly contaminated soil), are providing parallel legislative and
current EU-led approach ignores and therefore places no economic drivers that can enable the necessary changes to be
value on: enacted rather than resisted.
2.2. EU legal framework 2.2.2. State aid

Community guidelines on State Aid for environmental
2.2.1. Soil protection strategy protection10 act as an important legal incentive for improved
The EU Soil Protection Strategy is one of seven ‘‘thematic brownfield regeneration. The objectives of the guidelines are
strategies’’ foreseen under the EU’s Sixth Environment Action two-fold: to ensure that state aid allowed for environmental
Programme (EAP).7 As a first step in the development of an purposes complies with the ‘‘polluter pays’’ principle and is
integrated EU policy to protect soils against pollution and consistent with the internal market and EU competition
erosion, the European Commission recently published the policies. The guidelines make a distinction between the
Communication ‘‘Towards a Thematic Strategy for Soil following forms of aid: grants, subsidised loans, guarantees,
Protection’’ (European Commission, 2002e). The purpose of tax relief, reductions in charges and benefits in kind. They
this Communication is to build on the political commitment to serve as guidelines to the Member States when applying for
soil protection in order to achieve it more fully and system- European Commission approval of state aid, but no criteria for
atically in the coming years. It sets out the necessary steps to sustainability are used.
achieve better soil protection. Obviously, the Communication These guidelines contain a specific subsection, E.1.8, which
could have far-reaching impacts on national soil strategies, provides for a clearer regime for state aid granted for the
including brownfield redevelopment. However, it should be rehabilitation of polluted industrial sites, but any aid
realised that many new member states may prioritise payments must be notified to the Commission to check
resources to areas covered by EU law rather than mere whether they fall under the prohibition of Article 87(1).11
communications. However, subsection E.1.8 is very specific and indicates several
With regard to soil contamination, a distinction is made conditions. Firstly, the guidelines only concern interventions
between local and diffuse soil contamination. The Commis- made by firms. Thus, interventions made by public authorities
sion mentions industrial facilities, mines and waste landfills, fall out of its scope. In practice the distinction between firms
both in operation and after closure, as potential sources of and public authorities will not always be obvious. Secondly, no
local contamination (European Commission, 2002e). The state aid may be granted where the person responsible for the
Commission intends to compile, with Member States, a pollution is clearly identified. It is up to the Member States to
complete picture of the extent of soil contamination through- determine who can be identified as ‘‘person responsible for the
out the enlarged EU so that best practices and remedial pollution’’. Nevertheless, these guidelines are merely guide-
techniques can be identified and put into practice. The lines and the Commission has the possibility to adopt a
Commission considers that soil protection can best be different option.
achieved through a strategy based on current initiatives in
environmental policies, integration in other policies, soil 2.2.3. Is contaminated soil waste?
monitoring and the future development of new actions based The ruling of the European Court of Justice in the Van de Walle
on monitoring results. et al. case (Case C-1/03, 7 September 2004) could prove to be a
However, soil has to be distinguished from ‘‘land’’. The very important ruling with regard to the European legal
concept of land is much wider and includes territorial and framework for brownfield redevelopment. In this case, the
spatial dimensions. A separate Communication on ‘‘Plan- Court broadened the definition of waste and decides that soil
ning and Environment—the territorial dimension’’ is under contaminated by fuels leaking from underground tanks
preparation8 and will deal with land issues, such as rational should be regarded as waste under the Waste Framework
land use planning.9 It will take a number of soil-related Directive. The Court says the land is waste despite not having
aspects into account and address inter alia the preservation been excavated or disturbed and the fact that the contamina-
of greenfields and the appropriate re-use of brownfields. It tion was accidental (ENDS Report 356, September 2004, p. 44).
will plead for rational land use planning that takes the This could result in a potentially catastrophic situation for
soil’s capacities into account. Knowledge of soil-related brownfield regeneration. Should all land now be classified as a
problems is clearly increasing in the European Union, but landfill – i.e. a repository of waste – and thus be subject to the
is also necessary in view of the extent of the brownfield rules of the Landfill Directive? We do not believe the Court
issue. intended this interpretation when giving this judgement. The
10
Official Journal, C 37, 3 February 2001.
11
Article 88(3) EC Treaty. There is, however, one exception,
7
Decision no. 1600/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of namely the de minimis rule. Aid up to a certain absolute amount,
the Council of 22 July 2002 laying down the Sixth Community below which Article 87(1) can be said not to apply, is no longer
Environment Action Programme (Official Journal, L 242, 10 Sep- subject to prior notification to the Commission under Article 88(3).
tember 2002). The ceiling for aid covered by the de minimis rule stands at
8
According to drafts of the Communication, ‘‘Planning and s100,000 over a 3-year period beginning when the first de minimis
Environment—the territorial dimension’’ was to be published in aid is granted (Commission Regulation (EC) no. 69/2001 of 12
2003. January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC
9
On the importance of land use planning for brownfield rede- Treaty to de minimis aid, Official Journal, L 10, 13 January 2001). See
velopment, refer to PENDERGRASS, J. (1999): Sustainable Redeve- also Community guidelines on State aid for small and medium-
lopment of Brownfields: Using Institutional Controls to Protect sized enterprises (SMEs), Official Journal, C 213, 19 August 1992
Public Health. In: The Environmental Law Reporter, p. 10243– and Commission notice on the de minimis rule for State aid, Official
10258. Journal, C 68, 6 March 1996.
judgement should only be seen in the specific context of the Amendments and Reauthorisation Act strongly influenced
case, namely the Brussels Capital Region. Until very recently, European legislation. In some Member States soil remediation
the Brussels Capital Region had no specific soil legislation and is a regional or local authority issue, for example, in Belgium,
we have the impression that the Court wanted to rectify the the regions (Flemish, Walloon and Brussels Capital) execute
fact that there was no legal framework for the clean-up of the most environmental competencies. In other Member States,
contaminated land, and that the Waste Framework Directive Italy and Germany, for example, soil remediation is legislated
offered the most logical solution. on the federal level despite the regions having several
However, in our opinion, the Waste Framework Directive environmental competencies. Therefore, depending on a
should not be used to cover soil contamination and should Member State’s regime, we will discuss regional and federal
therefore be ‘decoupled’ for brownfield soil to streamline the legislation.
process for reusing waste from brownfield sites. The legal An evaluation of the currently available financial and legal
definition of waste should be modified to ensure that it does incentives and existing obstacles for brownfield redevelop-
not inadvertently hinder brownfield regeneration. Therefore, ment in the UK, Germany and France has been carried out to
we support the efforts of the European Commission in identify deficits. The evaluation (a series of questions and
developing an integrated EU policy to protect soils against explanations) is divided into sections covering the various
pollution. The Commission should make sure that sustain- aspects encountered during the sustainable brownfield regen-
ability criteria are taken into account because we see that eration process in the UK, Germany and France. Due to the
currently there are no legal incentives at the EU level to space constraints, the analysis of incentives is limited to a
promote sustainable brownfield soil and waste reuse. selection of eight topics.
3.2. Incentives for sustainable brownfield soil and

3. Deficit analysis waste reuse
3.1. Introduction 3.2.1. Financial incentives

3.2.1.1. France. No direct financial incentives have been
The soil is polluted in many Member States. Although no identified, that would promote sustainable brownfield soil
Community inventory of such contaminated sites exists, some and waste reuse. Regional policy may incite developers to take
Member States have set up national inventories. For example, into account resource management and debris recycling,
in Germany, the number of suspected contaminated sites particularly in those regions where demographic pressure is
registered is about 190,000. This figure does not include high but this is voluntary.
military sites and sites for the production of armaments. The The incentives regarding waste management are effective
total number is thought to be well over 240,000. Austria has a for big projects/less effective for small projects, for which the
list of 2584 contaminated sites, while Finland counts 10,400. In economy generated by choosing alternative solution may not
the UK, estimates run from 50,000 to 100,000, while France significantly counterbalance the cost of implementing the
sometimes quotes a figure of about 1000 contaminated sites solution.
(Krämer, 2000). The European Environment Agency estimates If the project is part of a local plan to redevelop derelict land
that there are between 900,000 and 1.5 million contaminated and impulse new dynamics to a city (either economic
sites in Europe (European Environment Agency, 2000). or environmental), regional or national agencies such as
Furthermore, European soil is polluted in a variety of ways. ADEME (Agence gouvernementale De l’Environnement et de
There are former industrial areas and current industrial sites, la Maı̂trise de l’Énergie), and Water Agencies (regarding
dumps, wrecked cars heaps and river basins. In addition, environment) or economical agencies (regarding economic
many houses, especially in the old city centres, are built in development) may take part in the funding: in general, such
former industrial zones or in areas where polluted soil has funding participation helps upstream studies to be carried
been used for construction work. Smaller cases of soil out (if the expected result is towards improving an existing
pollution occur at petrol stations or have been caused by bad situation).
leaking domestic oil tanks, illegal dumping, etc. (Seerden and At the present stage, we cannot consider that the (few)
Van Rossum, 2000). existing incentives aggravate the implementation of appro-
Soil contamination has long been a consequence – priate sustainable soil and waste reuse. Indeed existing
intended or not – of land use. The historical contamination economic incentives may be at least of minor interest, in
of land has, until recently, not itself been the subject of particular for smaller projects. Non-economic incentives (or
effective, formalised legal attention in many countries. Scot- contractual incentives that have an indirect economic
land did have provisions in the Public Health (Scotland) Act consequence) seem to be more effective. However, they
1897 but only one prosecution was reported until the repeal of would need real development, which would require stronger
the Act in 2000. Several Member States or regions within a political will.
Member State recently introduced legislation on soil remedia-
tion inspired by the American approach. Experiences in the 3.2.1.2. Germany. There are no major financial incentives that
U.S. with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 would promote sustainable brownfield soil and waste reuse.
(RCRA),12 the Superfund legislation, and the Superfund Federal programs are only available for research and demon-
stration projects (e.g. Investitionsprogramm des Bundesmi-
12
This Act is typically used to address active sites. nisteriums für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit
and Umweltforschungsplan). Other funding possibilities (e.g. that landfill materials, but not to projects that reuse soil and
Gemeinschaftsaufgabe ‘‘Verbesserung der regionalen waste.
Wirtschaftsstruktur’’; Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW);
Deutsche Ausgleichsbank (DtA); Deutsche Bundesstiftung 3.2.2. Legal incentives
Umwelt (DBU); Freistellung nach dem Umweltrahmengesetz) 3.2.2.1. France. No specific regulatory incentives have been
that are available for regeneration of contamination do not identified and no specific measures have been implemented
specially support sustainable approaches to brownfield soil regarding short term nuisance management, as the existing
and waste reuse. national and local regulations are deemed sufficient to deal
As prices for waste disposal are quite low in Germany up to with noise and air quality nuisances. Long term nuisances
half of the remediation measures consist of disposal of associated with the management of contamination have been
contaminated soil in landfills. Planned reuses of contaminated dealt with through a regulatory plan since the 1990s. However,
sites very often fail due to high costs (or economic risks) for recent incidents of accidental population exposure to impro-
remediation compared to the potential asset value, as short- perly managed urban sites have caught the attention of project
falls are not generally compensated by external (public) developers and administration representatives who realise
funding or insurance cover. The main obstacles for remedia- that it is counter-productive underestimate the potential long
tion (and brownfield redevelopment) are high costs and lack of term effects of inadequate rehabilitation of derelict lands.
funding. Potential problems include financial, penal, and administra-
tive responsibility for damages, responsibilities for costs of
3.2.1.3. UK. There are no incentives for promoting sustain- repair, plus the irreversible damage to the developer’s
able brownfield soil and waste reuse but the context of this reputation. This situation could trigger a momentum in favour
deficit is set out by a UK Government Select Committee of developing new administrative incentives.
report on ‘‘the need for a new European Regeneration
Framework’’ (ODPM, 2002). One conclusion of the report is 3.2.2.2. Germany. The legal framework and the typical cost
that ‘‘where possible, the State should be a catalyst, using structure leads to a frequent reuse of uncontaminated or
public funds judiciously to lever private capital into deprived slightly contaminated material for landfilling on site or for
neighbourhoods’’. The report goes on to point out that deposition on site. In recent years, several legal improvements
‘‘levering in private sector resources reduces the amount of have enabled a move towards sustainable brownfield regen-
public money required for a project. The gearing ratio can be eration. Among these are updated legal obligation/regulation
as high as 1:4’’. This means that public sector support frameworks (such as the Federal Soil Protection Act (Bundes-
represents only 20% of the total spend, thus illustrating the bodenschutzgesetz, BBodSchG), Energy Efficiency Act
crucial role that financial incentives play in the regeneration (Energieeinsparverordnung, EnEV) and LAGA (Bund/Länder-
of brownfield sites. There are 18 major funding programmes Arbeitsgemeinschaft Abfall) requirements for re-use of
that impact on the extent of brownfield redevelopment in the Mineral Residues and Wastes).
UK (e.g. National Coalfields Programme; Urban Regeneration The ruling in the European Court of Justice (EuGH) in the
Companies; Coalfields Enterprise Fund; Waste Recycling case ‘‘Van de Walle’’, 7 September 2004, questions the German
Action Programme; New deal for communities; Land differentiation of waste and soil conservation legislation. The
Restoration Trust). However, they have their own individual declarative statement of the EuGH suggests ‘‘not excavated
targets, objectives, territorial limits and delivery mechan- contaminated soil is waste in the sense of the European
isms. Although all of the programmes are highly relevant for Framework Directive on Waste’’ and this extends the German
supporting sustainable brownfield redevelopment, no sus- term ‘waste’ to include immobile items. Contaminated soil is
tainability criteria are stipulated for evaluating funding included in the Federal Soil Protection Act (BBodSchG), which
proposals. contains a tiered instrument that means land reclamation is
Tax incentives are powerful financial tools that can not obligatory. However, if contaminated land is classified as
influence the amount of brownfield redevelopment that is waste it has to be decontaminated, disposed or remediated by
carried out. The five predominant tax incentives in use in the definition of the law, and in many cases this counter-
the UK seek to transfer development away from greenfield productive as far as sustainability is concerned.
sites and towards brownfield sites, but they do not differ-
entiate between sustainable and unsustainable remediation 3.2.2.3. UK. The UK has adopted a risk-based approach to
practices. determining whether or not land contamination is posing an
unacceptable risk and therefore requires remediation (ODPM,
Landfill Tax Exemption Scheme (Treasury, 1996); 2004a). This applies to historic contamination for both ongoing
150% Corporation Tax Relief for contaminated land reme- use (DETR, 2000) and change of land use (ODPM, 2004a). New
diation costs (Inland Revenue, 2001); contamination is prevented through a number of legal
Capital Allowances for apartments located over shops instruments. Ex situ management of soil and waste reuse on
(ODPM, 2000); brownfield sites is governed almost exclusively by waste
Stamp Duty Exemption in deprived areas (Treasury, 2001); regulations. This hinders sustainability. The regulations are
VAT reductions on renovation costs of empty residential generally, and appropriately, applied in a precautionary way.
property (ODPM, 2003); However, there are no current legal incentives that promote
furthermore, one of the most significant incentives, the sustainable brownfield soil and waste reuse. The pending
Landfill Tax Exemption Scheme, is only given to projects Comprehensive National Brownfield Strategy, for England,
may seek to redress this but this is in its formative phase and incurred by retaining old buildings cannot be recovered by the
may take some time to develop. Two legal obstacles in the UK end value of land. Because of this, stakeholders often view
(The Waste Management Licensing Regulations, 1994 and The monument preservation as an additional constraint on the
Pollution Prevention and Control Act, 1999) make it very difficult to economical viability of brownfield regeneration projects.
reuse brownfield soil and waste sustainably. The UK DEFRA Despite incentives being available to retain and reuse old
and the Environment Agency of England and Wales believe the infrastructure installations, this is generally not undertaken
European Court of Justice in the Van de Walle et al. case implies as, in most cases, these are in bad condition and do not
most construction sites now legally require waste licences. correspond to the new modern demand. There is a lack of
ODPM has already responded to the ruling with a requirement economic demand to reuse old buildings, especially in the old
for a rapid reappraisal of regeneration permitting (ODPM, industrial region of the Ruhr and in East Germany, thus the
2004b). funding for adequate re-use and modernisation does not exist
and important industrial monuments are under considerable
3.2.2.4. Europe. The ruling in the European Court of Justice in pressure (ICOMOS, 2003).
the Van de Walle et al. (Case C-1/03, 7 September 2004) broadens
the definition of waste and could result in a potentially 3.3.1.3. UK. There are a number of National Lottery related
catastrophic situation for brownfield regeneration (ENDS funding schemes available for projects of national, regional
Report 356, September 2004, p. 44). The UK DEFRA and the and local significance that address cultural, social, environ-
Environment Agency believe the ruling implies most con- mental and heritage aspects. Projects dealing with new
struction sites now legally require waste licences. ODPM has buildings, refurbished buildings, conversions to existing
already responded to the ruling with a requirement for a rapid buildings, new infrastructure, refurbished infrastructure,
reappraisal of regeneration permitting (ODPM, 2004c). and conversions to existing infrastructures can be supported.
These schemes, however, do not focus specifically on
3.3. Incentives for retention/partial reuse of buildings/ brownfield sites and are highly competitive. In contrast, the
infrastructure on sites Dereliction Aid Scheme is fully focused on brownfields, and
funds up to 100% of cost of intervention measures (s147 mpa
3.3.1. Financial incentives available in total) including those related to existing derelict
3.3.1.1. France. The available incentives are insufficient for buildings. The purpose of the scheme is to enable the
the retention or for the total/partial reuse of buildings and remediation of derelict land where this will permit the land
infrastructure on brownfield sites. Until 2002, two main tax to be used for purposes that meet physical, social, environ-
incentives existed – (a) Departmental Tax for the preservation mental and economic regeneration objectives. The scheme
of natural estate (TDENS) – where councils were allowed to also permits payment of aid to help businesses lawfully
levy a specific to preserve the quality of natural estate and carrying out an activity that creates major pollution and
landscapes; and (b) tax credits for using renewable energy, required to move to a more suitable site to relocate to that site
installing heating regulated devices and developing ecologi- The eligible costs are, however, related to buildings, structures
cal/economical technologies. As a consequence, the existing or works that are derelict or otherwise unsuitable for any new
buildings and infrastructure are considered as any other use and where the costs of adapting them are such that it is
mundane buildings and infrastructure and are likely to be more cost-effective for them to be demolished so that the land
demolished. can be re-used. Therefore, demolition of existing derelict
buildings and infrastructures more than retention/restoration
3.3.1.2. Germany. Funding for the preservation of historical is supported. Public bodies can secure government funds to
monuments (Denkmalförderung) is only available for listed remediate historic contamination through Supplementary
buildings with great historic value and offers very limited Credit Approvals. In effect this represents additional funds for
potential to actually support the retention of listed buildings. A the Environment Agency and permission to borrow funds for
special tax depreciation incentive (Denkmalabschreibung) is the local authority.
available for refurbishment investments to retain listed Further funding in the form of speculative/non-speculative
buildings. The valuation basis for property in Germany Gap Funding will shortly be accessible for regeneration
(Einheitswert) results in valuations for tax purposes at about projects. This funding has been designed to fill the gap
20% of market value. Expenses for works and maintenance can between the cost of cleaning contaminated sites and buildings
be reclaimed against income tax. The rate for this is 5% for 20 and the expected returns from the development. A decision on
years. The liability for wealth, inheritance and gift taxes in how the scheme will be funded and administered is expected
respect of historic buildings can be reduced 10% on condition from the Deputy Prime Minister in 2004, and then the real
of proper maintenance, 10 years continuity of ownership and potential it can offer to support the retention or partial reuse of
reasonable public access. On the conditions of reasonable buildings in brownfield sites will become clearer.
access for research or education the liability for wealth,
inheritance and gift taxes can even be reduced by 60% (Sell, 3.3.2. Legal incentives
2003). 3.3.2.1. France. There is no specific legislation or incentive
Apart from this, no financial incentives are available to dealing with existing buildings and infrastructures on brown-
support the retention of unlisted buildings and infrastruc- field or with reusing construction components on brownfield
tures, therefore, market forces whether to retain buildings. In sites. This means that, if these buildings and infrastructure are
a difficult market environment, high redevelopment costs not classified or listed as historic monuments and if they do
not exist in registered or listed site or in the surroundings of tion’ (Freiwillige Vereinbarung zur Halbierung bisher depo-
historic monuments, there are no legal incentives or legisla- nierter, verwertbarer Baurestmassen) to reduce dumped
tion concerning the total or partial reuse of existing buildings waste from building activities by half by 2005 (BDI, 2004, 9).
and infrastructure on brownfields.
3.4.1.3. UK. The UK’s ‘Waste Strategy 2000’ clearly classified
3.3.2.2. Germany. Like in France there is no specific legislation ‘‘Construction and Demolition Wastes’’ (DEFRA, 2000), and
dealing with existing buildings and infrastructures on brown- the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister carried out a survey
field sites in Germany. For listed buildings the Denkmalschutz- into their use in 2001 (ODPM, 2001). Total construction and
gesetze (DSchG) are relevant but differs considerably from demolition waste for England and Wales was estimated at
Länder to Länder—the protection of historical buildings and 93.91 million tonnes (of which 48% was recycled, a further
monuments falls under the jurisdiction of the 16 Länder. 48% was re-used and the remaining 4% was sent to landfill
However, strict restrictions that ban changes of buildings as waste). However, since the 48% that was reused was
declared as monuments are seen as a major obstacle to reuse. used mainly for layering or topping at landfill sites and
In general, altering buildings are a matter of negotiation backfilling quarries, it could be argued that it was actually
between stakeholders interested in a reuse (e.g. proprietor, disposed of.
planner) and the monument protection authority. In recent The Landfill Tax, which has increased landfill disposal
weak market periods, the monument protection authorities charges, and the Aggregates Levy, which has added £1.60 per -
have seemed to favour reuse and are more open for structural tonne to the cost of new aggregates for construction, promote
changes rather than see the unused buildings decay and be the recycling of construction materials. Apart from this, there
removed. is no public funding to support the reuse/recycling of materials
of buildings and infrastructure and the market essentially
3.3.2.3. UK. The UK government has indicated that all its drives this process. As a result, the Waste & Resources Action
policies have sustainable development as an objective—the Programme (WRAP) was established to promote sustainable
constitution of Wales actually includes the concept of waste management and create stable and efficient markets for
sustainable development as a separate overarching goal. recycled materials and products. The Programme does not
However, there are no current legal incentives that specifically provide incentives but a unique ‘one-stop’ source of practical
promote the sustainable reuse of brownfield buildings and information on the use of recycled aggregates. Likewise, the
infrastructure. The pending Comprehensive National Brown- Building Research Establishment Ltd. (BRE) evaluates best
field Strategy for England (authored by English Partnerships) practice in construction and demolition waste management,
may seek to redress this, but it is currently in its formative and the use of recycled and reclaimed building materials in
phase and the authors are not privy to its contents. construction (BRE, 2004).
3.4. Incentives for reuse/recycling of buildings/ 3.4.2. Legal incentives

infrastructure materials on sites 3.4.2.1. France. The available incentives are insufficient for
the recycling of materials of buildings and infrastructure on
3.4.1. Financial incentives brownfield sites because:
3.4.1.1. France. The cost of recycling techniques increases
every year because recycling techniques are still considered 1. The definition of demolition waste remains unclear (not
more expensive than putting construction and demolition clearly identified by the usual classification which distin-
waste in landfill. In addition, the cost of redevelopment using guishes domestic, industrial and special waste).
former materials requires heavy initial investment and the 2. When considering waste management, this category of
available financial incentives in France are insufficient. The waste ‘‘is often forgotten’’ by the legal texts (i.e. there is a
nearest to a financial incentive is contained in the Code of gap in the law on this subject).
Construction and Housing (code de la construction et de 3. On the institutional level, the responsibility of local
l’habitation), which includes financial provisions for works authorities concerning collection and elimination of
that lead to the safety of existing buildings and infrastructures domestic waste does not extend to demolition waste.
(solidity and stability) and ‘healthy’ reuse of existing buildings
and infrastructures. 3.4.2.2. Germany. Components of listed buildings have to be
reused by legal obligation. In accordance with the German
3.4.1.2. Germany. Public incentives for the reuse/recycling of Recycling and Waste Management Act, waste must firstly be
construction materials of buildings and infrastructure are not avoided or, secondly subjected to recycling (including burning
available. For example, the costs of dismantling carefully and to obtain energy). Recovery has priority over disposal. This has
storing safely for reuse exceed the costs of purchasing new to be met to the extent that it is economically reasonable and
material. However, items will be salvaged and sold where technically possible. As a separate ordinance on construction
there is a commercial demand for components. In the same waste does not exist these regulations are also decisive for
way, recycling these materials is market driven. Recycling and construction waste.
reusing material means saving both landfill disposal charges In addition, the ban preventing mixed construction and
and acquisition costs for other material. The association of the demolition wastes being sent to landfill (‘‘Ordinance on the
German building industry (Hauptverband der Deutschen Management of Municipal Wastes of Commercial Origin
Bauindustrie e.V.) committed in 1996 to a ‘voluntary obliga- and Certain Construction and Demolition Wastes’’,
Gewerbeabfallverordnung) presents a strong legal incentive 3.5.1.3. UK. In recent years, the UK Government has set up
for recycling material from buildings and infrastructures. This several initiatives to promote both energy saving and renew-
Ordinance came into force in January 2003. able energy use, but none of them focuses specifically on
While the Closed Substance Cycle and Waste Management brownfield sites. Action Energy is one of the main govern-
Act (Kreislaufwirtschafts-und Abfallgesetz, KrW-/AbfG) states ment-funded programme that helps businesses and public
that waste shall be avoided as much as possible and as much sector organisations save money through energy saving. In
waste as possible shall be reused or recycled to reduce particular, it provides Action Energy loans (interest-free loans
dumping of valuable material. Therefore, the cost effective- of between £5000 and £50,000 for small and medium-sized
ness of reusing and recycling waste from existing buildings enterprises for investment in energy-saving equipment) and
and infrastructure has significantly improved since the an Enhanced Capital Allowance scheme (a tax-break on
introduction of new legislations for soil and waste. investments in energy-saving technologies and products).
Other incentives include: the Major Photovoltaics Demonstra-
3.4.2.3. UK. Certain structures are protected for their heri- tion programme (grants of between 40 and 60% to house-
tage value and regeneration of these structures would have to holders, the public sector and businesses towards the
be sensitive to their heritage significance. The relocation of installation of solar electricity equipment); and the Renew-
listed gasometers during the construction of the new Eurostar ables Obligation (introduction of taxes and penalties indirectly
rail terminal at St. Pancras is one example. There are no promoting adoption of renewable energy technologies by
current legal incentives that promote sustainable reuse of requiring a growing proportion – at least 10.4% by 2010 – of
materials per se stemming from brownfield buildings and electricity to come from renewable sources).
infrastructure but the pending Comprehensive National
Brownfield Strategy for England may seek to redress this, 3.5.2. Legal incentives
but it is currently in its formative phase and the authors are 3.5.2.1. France. Legislation in France permits the use of
not privy to its contents. rainwater for certain uses and under certain conditions—
untreated water can be used for external water uses, such as
3.5. Incentives for saving resources in existing buildings/ irrigation and automobile washing, or if there is separate
infrastructure on sites plumbing, toilet flushing, However, on the whole, the available
legal incentives for saving resources and reducing their
3.5.1. Financial incentives consumption in buildings and infrastructure on brownfield
3.5.1.1. France. There are several financial incentives to sites are insufficient.
encourage people into buying their own renewable energy
equipment. A subsidy scheme is being introduced with 3.5.2.2. Germany. The introduction of the German Energy
systems less common in France, such as the solar thermal Efficiency Act for new buildings and building modernisations
systems for domestic hot water and space heating with the (Energieeinsparverordnung, EnEVin 2002) made some former
aim of increasing the number of combined solar systems to economic incentives on the federal level redundant. The
1500 by 2006. There is also a subsidy scheme for investment in Renewable Energy Sources Act (Erneuerbare-Energien-
photovoltaic (PV) systems (which can contribute to up to 50– Gesetz, EEG) supports a small extra fee on electricity
60% of investment costs including installation and VAT). consumption costs to enable investment in electricity from
However, as the electricity price is the same everywhere renewable sources. This was an important step in the
independent of whether its derived from renewable sources or development of sustainable energy provision. A novel water
not, the available incentives are currently insufficient. In law (Wasserhaushaltsgesetz §32a) means rainwater/grey
addition, the French nuclear program consumes public water is allowed to infiltrate without requiring approval
funding, overproduces electricity and is perceived as ‘clean’, instead of having to be discharged as waste water. None of the
which all go towards discouraging an active Renewable energy laws that should promote the saving of resources is brown-
policy. field specific.
3.5.1.2. Germany. There are several economic incentives for 3.5.2.3. UK. There are no current legal incentives that
saving energy and using renewable energies available from promote saving resources per se in brownfield buildings and
federal level, states and others, but none of them are infrastructure.
brownfield specific. Some of them are preference loans (with
little or no interest), while others are allowances. The public 3.6. Incentives in leading spatial development to
credit programme of the KfW (Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau) brownfield instead of greenfield land
is focussed on residential buildings (KfW-CO2-Gebäudesa-
nierungsprogramm, KfW-Wohnraum-Modernisierungspro- In order to evaluate the current incentives, we propose the
gramm), which means the loans cannot be used for the following hypothesis:
majority of refurbishment activities on brownfield sites, and
as, in general, there is no water scarcity in Germany there are ‘On the whole, the available financial and legal incentives
no direct incentives concerning water supply. The use of fail to adequately encourage spatial development on
rainwater and ‘‘grey water’’ (reuse of used but not very dirty brownfield sites. Low restrictions on the ready availability
water) is generally possible but under present conditions its of greenfield sites and financial incentives for greenfield
not economical. projects, being competitors to brownfield regeneration,
contribute to a lack of brownfield regeneration. Moreover, within the wider goal of achieving sustainable development.
existing incentives and initiatives may often provide the The main policy targets are:
‘starting point’, but actual redevelopment depends on
attracting (additional) private investment on brownfield nationally, 60% (minimum) of new homes should be
sites.’ developed on PDL by 2008;
similar regional targets should be developed by regional
3.6.1. France planning bodies;
Current/new space-related policies in France promote urban regional development agencies should reclaim PDL at a rate
regeneration with the following targets: of 1400 ha per year;
nationally, 10% (5770 ha) of PDL should be reclaimed by 2008;
support directly brownfield projects within specific districts nationally, 20% (11,540 ha) of PDL should be reclaimed by
in social difficulty; 2010.
promote the regional integration of brownfield problem and
to implement a regional land management; A Comprehensive National Brownfield Strategy (authored
encourage the creation of the agglomeration authority. This by English partnerships), involving all levels of government, is
level of authority might be able to provide projects to control currently in its formative phase and may take some time to
the urban sprawl. develop. Although the authors are not privy to its contents,
this strategy may include, but is not limited to: (a) definition of
Financial incentives in France are mainly relevant for the roles and responsibilities of local, regional, national govern-
most degraded sites with spectacular social and environments; (b) roles of the respective governmental ministries; (c)
mental impacts. The treatment of other kinds of brownfield fiscal measures and incentives; (d) legal framework; (e)
sites often depends on the local initiatives and funding where development of environmental legislation; (f) a public process
public funding dominates and private involvement is lacking. for the achievement of sustainable and mutual goals; and (g)
In addition, the slowness and inflexibility of the French rules and incentives for public private partnerships.
administration due to pyramidal organisation means many
financial incentives are ineffective by the time they come to 3.7. Incentives to encourage development where
fruition. brownfields are highly contaminated and/or where there is a
weak real estate market
3.6.2. Germany
The average daily greenfield land consumption in Germany In order to evaluate the current incentives, we propose the
was 93 ha in 2003 (Dosch and Schultz, 2005) The Federal following hypothesis:
Environmental Agency discovered that more than 80% of this
land consumption is used for human settlements (UBA, 2004, ‘Brownfield related policies have to take in account regional
4). At the same time, the number and extent of brownfields conditions, especially in regions with a large stock of highly
(approximately 128,000 ha (CABERNET, 2004)) is still growing. contaminated brownfields and or a weak real estate market
The national sustainability strategy includes; the target to where brownfield regeneration will require a higher level of
reduce the Greenfield consumption to 30 ha per day by 2020, incentives.’
an increased priority for the tasks of internal development and
brownfield redevelopment, the introduction of brownfield 3.7.1. France
management approaches on local and regional levels (Bun- In the former industrial regions in difficulty like Nord-Pas-de-
desregierung, 2004). Calais, a stronger concentration of spatial development on to
In Germany there is a strong incentive that is supporting brownfield is implemented thanks to a concentration of public
the suburbanisation process—and due to this leading spatial funding. The objective is to change the spatial image of these
development to greenfield land instead of brownfield sites: the backwardness regions in order to attract some new economic
Entfernungspauschale: it supportes commuters by giving activities.
them the possibility to reclaim taxes (Einkommensteuerge-
setz). The Entfernungspauschale was narrowed at the begin- 3.7.2. Germany
ning of 2004 (30 ct/km) and will be narrowed again at the Especially in regions like the Ruhr, a stronger concentration of
beginning of 2007 (commuters distance minimum 21 km). spatial development on brownfields is necessary for environ-
Furthermore, until recently the Eigenheimzulage was a strong mental as well as for economic and social reasons. Previously
incentive for suburbanisation. It is a subsidy for building unabated greenfield consumption in these regions means
homes. With the beginning of 2006 the Eigenheimzulage was there is a high priority for brownfield redevelopment.
abolished. However, there are no national incentives to encourage
development where brownfields are highly contaminated
3.6.3. UK and/or where there is a weak real estate market.
Greenfield consumption is currently 16 ha per day, while the
extent of brownfields (currently approx 66,000 ha) is still 3.7.3. UK
growing at 7 ha per day. Current space-related policies/ In areas where housing demand is weak, house prices are low
strategies in the UK (English Partnerships, 2003; ODPM, and homes have been abandoned. In the areas where these
2004b) promote the achievement of an ‘urban renaissance’ problems are greatest, the ODPM have set up programmes of
public and private investment. For example, in Salford 1000 ated orientation towards immediate economic follow up use
new homes have been constructed and occupied; 13,400 (e.g. ERDF, German Economic Promotion Funds) means that
homes have been refurbished, repaired or improved; and 1700 many brownfield regeneration projects do not come to
redundant and obsolete properties have been cleared (ODPM, fruition.
2004d). Conversely, in areas where housing demand and
house prices are high, the ODPM have set up a programme to 3.7.6. UK
develop affordable housing for ‘Key Workers’ such as in There are financial incentives available but the general
education, health, and community safety. For example, 9000 problems of them are:
key workers in London and the South East became home
owners in the financial year 2003–2004 thanks to the scheme not targeted on sustainable methods of delivering brown-
(ODPM, 2004e). Former coalfield communities have also been field redevelopment;
specifically targeted and nearly 6200 jobs have been created limited applicability. Incentives are not attractive enough to
and over 280,000 m2 of new floor space have been built (ODPM, outweigh ‘costs’ of redevelopment—resulting in B and C
2004d). (Fig. 1) sites not being redeveloped;
A second hypothesis we propose is the following: lengthiness and competitiveness of the application process.
Many incentives are highly competitive and have lengthy/
‘Various structural deficits of many existing financial expensive bidding processes in order to apply for funds;
incentives limit their effectiveness for brownfield regen- predominance of public funding (i.e. not market driven).
eration, especially the lengthiness and competitiveness of Finance provided is for ‘pump priming’, as the finance would
the application process.’ never have become available from purely private sources
thus questioning the market viability of such schemes;
3.7.4. France biased orientation in economic and political terms. Pro-
The financial incentives are mainly relevant for the most grammes/incentives will change regularly based on the
degraded sites with spectacular social and environmental political will/economic success of the government in charge.
impacts. The treatment of other kinds of brownfield sites often
depends on the local initiatives and funding so there is often a 3.8. Incentives for implementing appropriate sustainable
limited spatial applicability of incentives. The lack of flexibility land use on particular sites
due to the pyramidal organisation of the French administra-
tion (Agence Nationale pour la Rénovation Urbaine) means 3.8.1. France
there is no coherent consistent message given state-by-state The incentives seem to prioritise a land use adapted to a social
and project-by-project. integration of the site and its surrounding districts: social
housings, schools and leisure infrastructure. However, some
3.7.5. Germany incentives also depend on the regional strategy. The regional
Against the background of the structural crisis of public planning provides the framework of development with
households, those brownfield sites with high remediation specific targets, e.g. a development of the leisure infrastruc-
costs but a limited possible revenue – the B and C sites (see tures (which affect the land use).
Fig. 1) (Ferber, 1997; Dennison, 1998) – can often not be Legal incentives often take part in a local scale and the PLU
redeveloped due to a lack of public (co-)funding. A strong (Urban Development Plan) is still the most important docu-
orientation towards public land owners and partly exagger- ment for planning. Nevertheless, the environmental aspects
do not respect the boundaries of the Local PLU and some
environmental problems have often been ignored. Further-
more, the legal framework of the PLU allows a development of
projects within the greenfield lands (N/A Zone) without
relevant restrictions.
The very strict rules for the protection of neighbouring
property against negative impacts (especially noise): make the
industrial reuse of formally industrial used brownfields very
difficult. This contributes to a further spatial separation of
land uses and suburbanisation of business and industrial land
uses.
Biotopes that develop on a brownfield site are as protected
as any other biotope. Therefore, interventions are necessary to
prevent the development of biotopes on brownfield sites,
which results in higher costs to maintain the unused site,
restrictions for interim landscaping and prevents a temporary
development of biotopes.
Fig. 1 – Enabling or impeding effect of currently available Currently, the available incentives do not lead a sustainable
incentives for the implementation of an appropriate planning process for brownfield project. But, a range of new
sustainable land use on particular brownfield sites (after incentives is still in development and should promote a new
English Partnerships, 2003). more integrated vision of planning.
3.8.2. Germany participation differ strongly in the different Länder and also in
The soil protection act (Bundes-Bodenschutzgesetz, BBodSchG the different communes. Incentives for citizen participation
1998) is very much an instrument of a technical orientated are often part of special programmes that are spatial and
environmental protection (especially setting limits for allow- temporally limited—for example, the German Federal Länder
able contaminant concentrations). However, the obligation for program ‘‘Socially Integrative Cities’’ (Soziale Stadt) or the
remediation has not lead to substantial improvement in non-governmental programme ‘‘Changing Places’’ in the UK.
regeneration activities. In addition, the protection of neigh- The available national incentives for citizen participation
bouring property against negative impacts make the industrial in brownfield projects do not guarantee that stakeholders are
reuse of former industrial brownfields very difficult thus integrated into the implementation process. In Germany, UK
contributing to further suburbanisation of business and and France, the legislation covers only a level of citizen
industrial land uses. participation that is not adequate to achieve a planning
Incentives for implementing appropriate sustainable land process that fulfils RESCUEs sustainability criteria (RESCUE,
use on particular sites are only working at federal state level— 2003). However, there are good examples for projects in which
for example, the International Building Exhibition Emscher authorities implement citizen participation far beyond the
Park (Internationale Bauausstellung Emscher Park 1989–1999) legal requirements, but sometimes the issue is more one of
and the Grundstücksfond NRW in North-Rhine Westphalia. lack of engagement by citizens rather than a lack of
Another example of the regionality of the incentives is the opportunity for them to be engaged. For example, during
‘‘Grundstücksfonds Ruhr’’ and latterly the ‘‘Grundstücksfonds the Heathrow Terminal 5 planning enquiry, which lasted
NRW’’, which was set up by the federal state government of almost 4 years, local citizens were given plenty of opportunity
North Rhine-Westphalia as a financing instrument to pur- to engage but often did not. Many lessons were learnt about
chase a pool of sites for redevelopment. Most of the sites are how to engage citizens during this arduous enquiry—
large and important for the urban redevelopment of the area Heathrow airport is an economy in itself with 68,000 people
and/or could not be redeveloped profitably by the private currently being employed there.14
sector (Öko-Zentrum, 2005). The future of the Grundstücks- On the whole, in these countries there is a lack of
fond NRW is unclear at the moment as there is a political permanent possibilities for the funding of citizen participa-
debate about abolishing it. tion. Those authorities and investors that are willing to
implement a strong citizen participation in their projects need
3.8.3. UK a stronger support.
Nature conservancy: biotopes that develop on a brownfield
site are as protected as any other biotope under legislation
such as the Countryside and Wildlife Act and the Environ- 4. Proposed solutions
mental Protection Act. Therefore, interventions are necessary
to prevent the development of biotopes on brownfield sites, Some solutions addressing the deficits identified in the
which results in higher costs to maintain the unused site, currently available financial and legal incentives for brown-
restrictions for interim landscaping and prevents a temporary field redevelopment from EU, UK, German and French
development of biotopes. perspectives are proposed.
3.9. Incentives in citizen participation on brownfield 4.1. General problem: sustainable brownfield
projects redevelopment is neither promoted, enabled or facilitated in
Europe by currently applied incentives
The conceptual efforts on citizen participation have pro-
gressed over the last decade in the EU. The implementation of Much site activity that takes place on many brownfield
these concepts is lagging behind, as the development of redevelopment projects in Europe is subsidised by the
concrete incentives did not keep up with cultural and political European Commission through the application of Structural
changes. Sustainable development policies have often lacked Funding support. Structural Funds are allocated at the point of
substantive participation by impacted communities (Shaw delivery (regional/sub-regional) on a competitive basis. Suc-
and Murray, 1999). cessful proposals are evaluated in terms of their potential to
The evaluation of incentives for citizen participation on a deliver more ‘‘outputs’’ (measured numerically) such as
national level is a difficult task. In Germany, the approach to number of jobs created, area of land reclaimed, etc. No
citizen participation on a national level – apart from some consideration is made of the methods used to create these
national regulations13 – is to give the responsibilities for this outputs (i.e. sustainable proposals are not differentiated from
topic to the lower levels. Thus the approaches to citizen unsustainable proposals). This is obviously untenable in an
era when all policy is supposedly being driven by sustainable
development principles.
13
Environmental Information Act 16/7/94 (Umweltinformationsge- The European Commission should give urgent attention to
setz), Federal Building Act and the Urban Construction (Promotion)
introducing a set of sustainability criteria to guide Structural
Act, §10 of the Federal Immission Control Act, §3 of the Building
Funding towards sustainable brownfield projects. The criteria
Statute Book (Baugesetzbuch), Waste Avoidance and Waste
Management Act, §29 of the Federal Nature Conservation Act
14
(Bundesnaturschutzgesetz), Environmental Impact Assessment Act For more information see: http://www.baa.co.uk/main/air-
(UVP-Gesetz). ports/heathrow/terminal_5_frame.html (accessed 10 June 2005].
should explicitly require applicants to declare how the 4.2.3.1. Proposal. The German Government should ensure
principles of sustainable brownfield redevelopment are that adequate financial incentive(s) should avoid giving
considered in the project. This will require an additional tier financial advantages indiscriminately to any remediation/
of evaluation criteria to adapt the current process: RESCUE’s redevelopment project—it/they should rather consider the
Sustainability Assessment Tool would be one option (RESCUE, sustainability of land use, including the social, environmental
2004). and economical benefits and disadvantages. In order to be
attractive for investors, the application processes and report-
4.2. Brownfield soil and waste recycling is neither ing systems of these incentives should avoid being too
promoted, enabled nor facilitated in Europe by currently bureaucratic, complicated, slow and time-consuming. They
applied incentives should also operate up front and not be retrospective tax
allowances or rebates.
4.2.1. European union perspective
Unsustainable soil and waste disposal creates very significant 4.2.4. UK perspective
impacts on human health, safety and the ecosystem. Better The advent of the ‘Comprehensive National Brownfield
options to enable an increase in soil and waste reuse need, and Strategy’ for England in 2006 provides an opportunity for
deserve, support. addressing the weaknesses in the linkages between sustain-
able development policy and sustainable development prac-
4.2.1.1. Proposal. The European Commission should give tice related to brownfield reuse and the steps that are taken to
urgent attention to increasing the resources invested in achieve it. The same constraints that apply at the EU level
research, technology development and demonstration to apply at the UK level, but it is not necessary for the UK to wait
increase the available soil and waste reuse options to enable for the EU to act.
the sustainable reclamation of brownfield sites. This could be
linked to, and support, the Environmental Technologies 4.2.4.1. Proposal. The UK Government should give urgent
Action Plan. There are currently no real legal incentives at attention to introduce a set of sustainability criteria to guide
the EU level to promote sustainable brownfield soil and waste Structural Funding towards sustainable brownfield projects, in
reuse. The only incentive that could do this is contained parallel with the development of the Comprehensive National
(potentially) in EU waste legislation. However, the waste Brownfield Strategy for England and similar initiatives in other
legislation should be ‘decoupled’ for brownfield soil to parts of the country. The criteria should explicitly require
streamline the process for reusing waste from brownfield applicants for Structural Funding to declare how they intend
sites. The legal definition of waste should be modified to to reclaim their land, the alternatives considered for soil and
ensure that it does not inadvertently hinder brownfield waste reuse, the decisions made, the reasons for decisions,
regeneration. concluding in an overall assessment of the benefits and
impacts of their proposed project and therefore a statement of
4.2.2. French perspective its relative sustainability impact. This documentation is
The French Government needs to set up an initiative that encouraged by the Model Procedures (Environment Agency,
enables brownfield soil and waste recycling to be included into 2004). This will require an additional tier of evaluation criteria
regional waste management plans. There can be corporate to adapt the current process. Despite the UK’s diverse research
advantages in co-operation between private enterprise and base for science and technology, brownfield related research
administrations in areas of public interest. projects, pilot projects and demonstration projects are carried
out with little, in some cases no, national strategic focus and
4.2.2.1. Proposal. The French Government should consider practical applicability. There is an opportunity to co-ordinate
facilitating corporate initiatives to promote recycling and brownfield research activities in soil and waste reuse towards
reuse, including brownfield soils and wastes. In this case, a common goals and taking advantage of possibilities for
charter could be signed between waste management compa- collaboration, within the pending ‘‘Comprehensive National
nies, the representative of the administration (Prefect) and Brownfield Strategy’’.
regional authorities (Department, Region). This charter would
be a sort of memorandum of understanding where all parties 4.2.4.2. Proposal. The UK Government should phase out the
commit themselves to promote waste minimisation, recy- Landfill Tax Exemption scheme for contaminated soils and
cling, and extensive reuse of material. should, in parallel, increase the Corporation Tax relief
through the Finance Act 2000 to compensate those funding
4.2.3. German perspective voluntary remediation. However, Corporation tax relief
Within the political discussion there is a general consensus should be structured so that it favours sustainable soil and
that the incentives needed in Germany to foster brownfield waste reuse techniques, and disfavours landfill disposal. In
reuse should focus on eliminating the discrepancy between addition, the use of the ‘‘Waste Management Licensing
the economic disadvantages of remediation measures for site Regulations 1994’’ to regulate the fate of materials excavated
owners/investors and the sustainability advantages for the from brownfield sites has been problematic as the legal and
society. The decision whether this can be realised by regulatory barriers are often too daunting hence most
respective tax reductions for investors or by funding is material is still consigned to landfill. Therefore, the UK
generally irrelevant and may be subject to further political Government should streamline the process and produce a
discussions. harmonised, user-friendlier regulatory process—such as the
Environmental Permit. This has been recognised by the UK 4.3.4. UK perspective

government as also being a way to circumvent the con- The reuse of previously developed land has been a central
straints posed by the Van de Walle case. Government policy. In fact, more than 60% of new housing
developments are being built on such land and through
4.3. Preservation of buildings and infrastructures on conversion of existing buildings. The retention and refurb-
brownfield sites is neither promoted, enabled nor facilitated in ishment of existing buildings is additionally supported by
Europe by currently applied incentives several funding schemes but none of them are specifically
focused on brownfields. However, developers are in fact
4.3.1. European union perspective encouraged more to demolish than to preserve and reuse due
4.3.1.1. Proposal. The European Commission should more to all the remediation issues likely to be involved in
explicitly promote the inclusion of industrial buildings within brownfields. The ‘demolition option’ is moreover promoted
listings of cultural heritage monuments to enable and by the only scheme clearly focusing on brownfields: the
facilitate preservation of industrial buildings and infrastruc- Dereliction Aid Scheme, which funds brownfield regenera-
tures. tion projects in terms of remediation as well as demolition
costs.
4.3.2. French perspective
Legal incentives and regulations are needed to encourage 4.3.4.1. Proposal. The Historic Environment Regeneration
the retention and the refurbishment of existing scheme (European Commission, 2003) is likely to support
buildings and infrastructures on brownfield. Direct and the refurbishment of buildings that are listed as historic
indirect financial incentives should be developed for this monuments and therefore offer limited potential application
purpose. for brownfields sites. Therefore, speculative/non-speculative
gap funding, should be used to fill the gap between the cost of
4.3.2.1. Proposal. A new code for historic buildings, which remediating contaminated sites and buildings, and the
includes a level of flexibility with regard to the rehabilitation of expected returns from the development potential. In addition,
historic buildings should be developed. In addition, there is a a scheme specifically set up for brownfields to support the
need to support building maintenance by developing a retention and reuse of existing buildings and structures would
Building Maintenance Manual. This would need to provide be advisable. A lack of public financial incentives exists for the
documentation on building systems, facilities management reuse of components or recycling of materials of buildings and
programs to record important information on the operation of infrastructures and the reuse and recycling of these materials
a building or property, schedules for cyclical maintenance, is mainly market driven.
custodial procedures and for regular inspections of important
features. 4.4. Sustainable land use and urban design on brownfield
Legal incentives and regulations should be developed that sites is neither promoted, enabled or facilitated in Europe by
encourage planners and investors to reuse recycled demoli- currently applied incentives
tion arisings on brownfield projects.
4.4.1. French perspective
4.3.3. German perspective 4.4.1.1. Proposal. A range of legal and financial incentives
Monument preservation, refurbishment and maintenance are should be introduced to promote the construction of a relevant
often seen as an immense economic constraint in brownfield territory for conversion. Actually, brownfield sites are located
regeneration. At the same time, the financial support that is into real ‘‘geographical basin’’ regrouping the main functions
available for listed buildings is rather small and the oppor- of services, employment, housing . . . Within the urban areas, a
tunities for follow-up uses are limited due to the mismatch relevant conversion and land management takes place at the
with modern uses. Therefore, the philosophy of ‘‘preservation agglomeration scale.
at any price’’ is not fruitful. Some legal and financial incentives could encourage the
definition of a relevant concept of conversion at the
4.3.3.1. Proposal. Financial support should be made available agglomeration scale. A legal incentive by the form of a
for the retention of heritage buildings as the overall amount of contract with the National Authorities would include:
money that is available for direct funding is very small. This
should be concentrated in order to generate better support for The definition of a perimeter where appear similar problem
funded projects. In terms of indirect funding (e.g. tax of conversion (social difficulties, environmental degrada-
incentives): tions . . .).
The carrying out of a diagnosis of the relevant perimeter.
tax depreciation should be made applicable for unlisted Propositions of measures highlighting a conversion of the
buildings; brownfield sites and also the integration of the surrounding
thermal insulation activities should be tax exempt and green areas, housing . . . The aim is to provide a relevant
made eligible for funding; framework of conversion within the agglomeration area.
the competitiveness of reuse and recycling should be
improved through tax breaks; Moreover, a new structure could be in charge of these tasks, for
the investment costs that are eligible for tax depreciation each agglomeration authority. For example, an assessment
should be defined more flexibly. office for the brownfield sites would be able to federate the
experiences in term of brownfield, clarify the administrative Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC. The Member
procedures and implement a research section. States have to implement the Directive by 25 June 2005 at
the latest.
4.4.2. German perspective
4.4.2.1. Proposal. Development and implementation of incen- 4.5.1.1. Proposal. To illustrate the feasibility of Citizen Parti-
tives that lead spatial development and private money into cipation, the European commission should encourage and
brownfield sites such as: support pilot projects in each of the affected EU-countries. A
European local authority sustainable brownfield regenera-
Tax incentives, like abolition of purchase tax for public tion network, or networks, should be established. Target
purchase of brownfield sites and a tax on new surface group and joint conferences for all four interested groups
sealing at greenfield sites. (politicians, citizens, authorities and developers) should be
An obligation for creating financial reserves for remediation organised to promote more pro-active approaches to Citizen
during the useful site use should be introduced for all Participation.
industrial use sites.
Improving legal conditions for interim use and facilitating 4.5.2. French perspective
interim green uses on brownfield sites by allowing the Project developers or local authorities see the citizens having a
destruction of biotopes that have developed. limited role as actors in the regeneration process, which also
reveals a strong lack of know-how in project management
4.4.3. UK perspective staffs or local authorities.
4.4.3.1. Proposal. Direct and indirect financial incentives for
spatial development projects should be at a national scale, but 4.5.2.1. Proposal. The French Government should promote
there should be greater ability to focus them on previously and support training, dissemination exchange of good
developed land at a regional scale (especially in areas that practices activities and events. Trust laws in France dis-
have a large stock of brownfield land). In UK, certain courage the replication of best practice regeneration initia-
initiatives/programmes have their foundations in the national tives from elsewhere in Europe, therefore, French Trust
approach but are area targeted, for example: urban regenera- legislation should be adapted to allow the creation of
tion companies; new deal for communities; Millennium environmental charities in line with the Groundwork model
Communities Programme; National Coalfields Programme; in the UK.
‘Key worker living’ Programme.
4.5.3. German perspective
4.5. Adequate citizen participation on brownfield sites is Incentives are needed to encourage participation by an
neither promoted, enabled nor facilitated in Europe by appropriate variety and number of citizens to:
currently applied incentives
Mobilise innovative ideas.
4.5.1. European union perspective Maintain, develop or create a cohesive community.
There is a widespread lack of knowledge and understanding Improve the local institutional learning process.
among developers, authorities and politicians regarding the
potential added value that Citizen Participation can provide. Citizen Participation can only be an offer from munici-
This deficiency applies to authorities, developers, financiers palities and developers to citizens and it is sensible to restrict
and professional advisors and manifests itself in fear of legal and/or financial incentives to municipalities and devel-
compromising budgets and development programmes. The opers.
recent Directive 2003/35/EC,15 adopted under influence of
the Aarhus Convention,16 forms an important improvement 4.5.3.1. Proposal. An obligation should be placed on devel-
with regard to public participation. The objective of this opers to justify the quality of Citizen Participation
Directive is to contribute to the implementation of the adopted in their proposals and to link public funding to
obligations arising under the Aarhus Convention, in parti- this quality. For this purpose a standardised tool is required,
cular by (a) providing for public participation in respect of which will enable assessment of (minimum) participation
the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating quality.
to the environment; (b) improving the public participation
and providing for provisions on access to justice within 4.5.4. UK perspective
A combination of market-led incentives (not strong on citizen
15 participation) and public intervention (very strong on citizen
Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in participation) could provide the basis for guiding principles for
respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes relat- policies of citizen participation in brownfields.
ing to the environment and amending with regard to public par-
ticipation and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC and
4.5.4.1. Proposal. Incentives are needed to encourage partici-
96/61/EC (Official Journal, L 156, 25 June 2003).
16 pation so UK policy makers should consider:
UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participa-
tion in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental
Matters, adopted on 25 June 1998 (http://www.unece.org/env/pp/ Creating legal incentives/regulations to encourage proper
welcome.html). citizen participation in brownfield development.
Providing direct and indirect financial incentives to devel- reduce public opposition to ‘derelict land’ by educating
opers to encourage citizen participation in brownfield public on the benefits of reusing brownfield sites.
development.
Discouraging development where no/little citizen participa-
tion has taken place by placing a high ‘tax’/rejecting Acknowledgements
planning permission on projects that do not properly
adequately/effectively/sufficiently cover citizen participa- From March 2002 to May 2005, this project was funded within
tion in their development plan. the Fifth Framework Research Programme of the European
Reducing public opposition to ‘derelict land’ by actively Commission and contributes to Key Action 4 ‘‘The City of
encouraging citizen participation and educating public on Tomorrow and the Cultural Heritage’’. Their financial support
the benefits of reusing brownfield sites. is acknowledged with thanks. The paper is presented by the
authors on behalf of the RESCUE partners, in particular the
members of the editorial board. (More information and
5. Conclusions full contacts can be found on the website: www.rescue-
europe.com.)
This publication has analysed the benefits and deficiencies of
the current financial, fiscal, legal, regulatory and policy
references
incentives with direct or indirect relevance to sustainable
brownfield development and provided a set of problem related
proposals to address the defined deficits. The results of the
deficit analysis, carried out under the RESCUE project, showed BDI (Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie e.V.), 2004.
‘Freiwillige Vereinbarungen und Selbstverpflichtungen.’
that the incentives are only partially effective in facilitating or
Online on the Internet: http://www.bdi-online.de/
delivering sustainable brownfield regeneration through reuse sbrecherche/Dokumente/Umweltpolitik/FWSV.pdf
of soil/construction waste, maintenance of heritage buildings, (downloaded: October 5, 2005).
land use/urban design and citizen participation processes. We BRE (Building Research Establishment Ltd.), 2004. ‘Waste and
proposed solutions for these deficits, based on the work under Recycling’. Online on the Internet: http://projects.bre.co.uk/
the RESCUE project. These proposals are intended to stimulate ConDiv/deconstruction/default.html (downloaded: June 4,
2005).
policy makers responsible for facilitating or delivering
Bundesregierung, 2004. ‘Perspektiven für Deutschland—Unsere
sustainable brownfield regeneration to consider changes to
Strategie für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung’. Online on the
current policy and practice. Internet: http://www.bundesregierung.de/Anlage585668/
Much of the work that takes place on most B and C site pdf_datei.pdf (downloaded: May 17, 2005).
brownfield regeneration projects in Europe is subsidised by CABERNET (Concerted Action on Brownfield and Economic
the European Commission through the application of Regeneration Network), 2004. Scale of brownfields. Online
Structural Funding support. However, little consideration is on the internet: http://www.cabernet.org.uk/
index.asp?c=1315 (downloaded: October 5, 2005).
given to the sustainability of the methods used to regenerate
CABERNET, 2005. ‘Brownfield definition’ Online on the internet:
brownfield sites. Often successful proposals use unsustain- http://www.cabernet.org.uk/index.asp?c=1134
able methods—something obviously untenable in an era (downloaded: May 17, 2005).
when supposedly all policy is being driven by sustainable Coalition for sustainable EU funds, 2005. ‘Coalition for
development principles. The European Commission should sustainable EU funds’. Online on the internet: http://
give urgent attention to introducing a set of sustainability www.coalition-on-eufunds.org/ (downloaded: May 17,
criteria to guide Structural Funding towards sustainable 2005).
Dennison, Mark S., 1998. Brownfield Redevelopment. Programs
brownfield projects.
and Strategies for Rehabilitating Contaminated Real Estate,
Integrated urban land management policies related to Rockville.
brownfield regeneration policies should focus on market-led Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA),
incentives (indirect incentives, gap-funding, etc.) but enable 2000. ‘Waste Strategy 2000 for England and Wales’. Online
public intervention (direct funding and public driven devel- on the Internet: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/
opment) where necessary. For example, public intervention is waste/strategy/cm4693/03.htm (downloaded: March 4,
2005).
especially necessary for ‘C-sites’, whereas, ‘A-sites’ only
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
require privately funded intervention. Therefore, policies
(DETR), 2000. ‘Guidelines for environmental risk assessment
should be explicitly designed to: and management,. Online on the Internet: http://
www.defra.gov.uk/environment/risk/eramguide/
eliminate present legal obstacles to brownfield redevelop- (downloaded: June 4, 2005).
ment (i.e. clarify previously ambiguous legal liability); Dosch, F., Schultz, B., 2005. ‘Trends der
provide legal incentives/regulations to encourage brown- Siedlungsflächenentwicklung und ihre Steuerung in der
Schweiz und Deutschland’. In: Netzwerk Stadt und
field development and discourage Greenfield development;
Landschaft (Ed.): DISP 160. Zürich.
provide direct and indirect financial incentives to encourage East Midlands Development Agency, 2003. ‘EMDA Project
brownfield development and discourage Greenfield devel- Appraisal and Monitoring Guidance Manual, Appendix A,
opment; Tier 3 Output Definitions’. Online on the Internet: http://go-
discourage greenfield development by placing a high ‘tax’ on em.gov.uk/european/obj2/spd.php?x=0 (downloaded: June
its development; 4, 2005).
Eisen, J., 1999. Brownfields policies for sustainable cities. Duke Krämer, L., 2000. EC Environmental Law. Sweet & Maxwell,
Environ. Law Policy Forum 9 (2), 187–229. London.
English Partnerships, 2003. ‘Towards a National Brownfield Majone, G., Wildvsky, A., 1984. In: Pressman, J.L., Wildawsky, A.
Strategy’. Online on the Internet: http:// (Eds.), Implementation as Evolution. 3rd ed.
www.englishpartnerships.co.uk/images/ Implementation, Berkeley, pp. 163–180.
D8B222B7AC3A43299A6A0D072F0674D8.pdf (downloaded: Mayntz, R., 1997. ‘‘Soziale Dynamik und politische Steuerung’’.
June 12, 2005). In: Theoretische und methodologische, Überlegungen,
Environment Agency, 2004. ‘Model procedures for the Campus – Schriften des Max Planck Instituts für
management of land contamination’. Online on the Gesellschaftsforschung, Band 29, Frankfurt am, Main.
Internet: http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/ Mitchell, D., 2002. Brownfields’ and small business superfund
commondata/105385/model_procedures_881483.pdf amendments: important new changes in real estate
(downloaded: June 15, 2005). practice and in liability relief. Environ. Liabil. 4, 147–152.
European Commission, 2002. ‘Regional Policy—At the service of Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2000. ‘Our towns
the regions’. Online on the Internet: http://europa.eu.int/ and cities: the future’. Online on the Internet: http://
comm/regional_policy/intro/regions7_en.htm (downloaded: www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_urbanpolicy/
June 16, 2005). documents/page/odpm_urbpol_608358-06.hcsp
European Commission, 2002. ‘Objective 1—Supporting (downloaded: June 8, 2005).
development in the less prosperous regions’. Online on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2001. ‘Construction
Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/ and demolition waste survey: England and Wales 1999/
objective1/index_en.htm (downloaded: June 4, 2005). 2000’. Online on the Internet: http://www.odpm.gov.uk/
European Commission, 2002. ‘Objective 2—Revitalising areas stellent/groups/odpm_planning/documents/page/
facing structural difficulties’. Online on the Internet: http:// odpm_plan_606686.hcsp (downloaded: June 12, 2005).
europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/objective2/ Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2002. ‘The
index_en.htm (downloaded: June 4, 2005). Government’s Response to the Transport, Local
European Commission, 2002. ‘2000–2006: Objective 3— Government and the Regions Select Committee Report: The
Development of human resources’. Online on the Internet: Need for a New European Regeneration Framework’. Online
http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/funds/prord/ on the Internet: http://www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/
obj3_en.htm (downloaded: June 4, 2005). odpm_urbanpolicy/documents/page/
European Commission, 2002. ‘Towards a Thematic Strategy for odpm_urbpol_608062.pdf (downloaded: June 5, 2005).
Soil Protection’. Online on the Internet: http://europa.eu.int/ Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2003. ‘Evaluation
eur-lex/en/com/pdf/2002/com2002_0179en01.pdf issues for the urban white paper fiscal measures—Final
(downloaded: May 21, 2005). report’. Online on the Internet: http://www.odpm.gov.uk/
European Commission, 2003. ‘State aid NN 95/2002—United stellent/groups/odpm_urbanpolicy/documents/pdf/
Kingdom: Individual cases of application based on the odpm_urbpol_pdf_608646.pdf (downloaded: June 8, 2005).
Historic Environment Regeneration scheme’. Online on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2004. ‘Planning
Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/ Policy Guidance 3: Housing’. Online on the Internet: http://
sgb/state_aids/comp-2002/nn095-02.pdf (downloaded: June www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_planning/
2, 2005). documents/page/odpm_plan_606933.hcsp (downloaded:
European Commission, 2004. ‘Working for the regions’. Online June 12, 2005).
on the Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/ Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2004. Brownfield
intro/working5_en.htm (downloaded: June 6, 2005). Briefing e-Bulletin (October 1, 2004).
European Commission, 2004. ‘Working for the regions’. Online Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2004. ‘Creating
on the Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/ Sustainable Communities’. Online on the Internet: http://
intro/working4_en.htm (downloaded: June 6, 2005). www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_communities/
European Commission, 2004. New regulations for renewed documents/sectionhomepage/
Structural Funds and instruments. Online on the Internet: odpm_communities_page.hcsp (downloaded: June 12, 2005).
http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/sources/ Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2004. ‘Making it
docoffic/official/regulation/intronewregl0713_en.htm happen: The Northern Way’. Online on the Internet: http://
(downloaded June 12, 2006). www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_communities/
European Environment Agency, 2000. ‘Management of documents/page/odpm_comm_027118.pdf (downloaded:
contaminated sites in Western Europe’, Topic report no. 13/ June 10, 2005).
1999. Online on the Internet: http://reports.eea.eu.int/ Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2004. ‘Key Worker
Topic_report_No_131999/en (downloaded: May 29, 2005). living—settle for more’. Online on the Internet: http://
Ferber, U., 1997. ‘Brachflächen-Revitalisierung, internationale www.odpm.gov.uk/stellent/groups/odpm_housing/
Erfahrungen und mögliche Lösungskonzeptionen’. In: documents/page/odpm_house_027913.pdf (downloaded:
Sächsisches Staatsministerium für Umwelt u. June 12, 2005).
Landesentwicklung (Hg). Materialien zur OECD, 1997. Reforming Industrial Regulation in OECD Countries.
Altlastenbehandlung, 2/1997, Dresden. Paris.
Guariglia, D., Ford, M., Darosa, G., 2002. The small business Öko-Zentrum, N.R.W., 2005. ‘Arbeiten im Park’. Materialien zur
liability relief and brownfields revitalisation act: real relief Raumordnung 65; Bochum.
or prolonged pain? Environ. Law Report. 32, 10505–10511. RESCUE, 2003. ‘Development of an Analytical Sustainability
ICOMOS (International Council of Monuments and sites), 2003. Framework for the Context of Brownfield Regeneration in
‘Germany’. Online on the internet: http:// France, Germany, Poland and the United Kingdom’. Online
www.international.icomos.org/risk/2001/germ2001.htm on the Internet: http://www.rescue-europe.com/download/
(downloaded: October 5, 2005). reports/1_Analytical%20sustainability%20framework.pdf
Inland Revenue, 2001. ‘Remediation of contaminated land: Land (downloaded: October 12, 2005).
remediation tax credit’. Online on the Internet: http:// RESCUE, 2004. ‘Administrative Tools and Incentives for
www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/cirdmanual/CIRD60070.htm Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment’. Online on the
(downloaded: June 4, 2005). Internet: http://www.rescue-europe.com/download/reports/
2_5_2_Administrative%20tools%20and%20incentives%20- Gareth Thornton is associate director for skills transfer & disse-
%20SAT.pdf (downloaded October 12, 2005). mination for IPM-Net (formerly FIRST Faraday), www.ipm-
Seerden, R., Van Rossum, M., 2000. Legal aspects of soil ktn.com. Prior to working on sustainable approaches to brownfield
pollution and decontamination in the Netherlands. In: regeneration and management with RESCUE, he held a number of
Seerden, R., Deketelaere, K. (Eds.), Legal Aspects of Soil research positions at universities including Swansea, Edinburgh,
Pollution and Decontamination in the EU Member States Nottingham and The Open University. During this time he carried
and the United States. Antwerpen–Groningen, Intersentia, out research into the effects of acid deposition in the UK, Japan
pp. 289–340. and the Himalayas, as well as investigating heavy metal pollution
Sell, John, 2003. ‘Briefing note on taxation and historic in former industrial sites in Wales and pristine river catchments in
buildings’. Online on the internet: http://assembly.coe.int/ the mountains of Scotland.
Documents/WorkingDocs/doc03/EDOC9913.htm
(downloaded: October 5, 2005). Martin Franz is a research assistant based at the University of
Shaw, E., Murray, K., 1999. Introduction. Duke Environ. Law Bochum, Germany. After working for RESCUE, he moved onto
Policy Forum 9 (2), 147–152. work for the EU funded project ‘Netsfield’ (Networking and Train-
Treasury, H.M., 1996. ‘The Landfill Tax Regulations’. Online on ing in Sustainable Brownfield Redevelopment). He is a PhD student
the Internet: http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si1996/ researching human resources management and structural change
Uksi_19961527_en_1.htm (downloaded: June 5, 2005). in the mining industry at the Deutsche Steinkohle AG (German
Treasury, H.M., 2001. ‘Pre-Budget 2001 Press Notices: Enterprise in Coal Mining Company) and on industrial heritage tourism for the
disadvantaged communities’. Online on the Internet: http:// Ruhrgebiet Tourismus GmbH (Ruhr Tourism Ltd.).
www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pre_budget_report/prebud_pbr01/
press_notices/prebud_pbr01_presshmtrev2.cfm
David Edwards is international project director for CL:AIRE (Con-
(downloaded: June 5, 2005).
taminated Land in Real Environments). Before joining CL:AIRE,
Turner, R.K., 2000. In: Clark, G.L., Feldmann, M.P., Gertler, M.S.
he established exSite (an applied research organisation) to fund
(Eds.), Markets and Environmental Quality. The Oxford
the field scale demonstration of sustainable solutions to rein-
Handbook of Economic Geography Oxford, New York, pp.
force the UK’s determination to bring Brownfield sites back into
585–606.
use.
UBA (Umweltbundesamt), 2004. ‘Hintergrundpapier:
Flächenverbrauch, ein Umweltproblem mit
Gernot Pahlen is project manager at Montan-Grundstücksge-
wirtschaftlichen Folgen’. Online on the internet: http://
sellschaft mbH. Where he works on International and National
www.umweltdaten.de/uba-info-presse/hintergrund/
research projects on brownfield regeneration; Develops the MGG
flaechenverbrauch.pdf.
marketing strategy; and Market analysis and economic feasibility
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1996.
studies for brownfield regeneration projects. Gernot was the co-
‘Support of Regional Efforts to Negotiate Prospective
ordinator of the RESCUE project.
Purchaser Agreements (PPAs) at Superfund Sites and
Clarification of PPA Guidance’ Online on the Internet: http://
www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/reforms/docs/ Paul Nathanail is senior lecturer at the University of Nottingham.
ppa_clar.pdf (downloaded: June 12, 2005). He is a specialist in Land Condition and a Chartered Geologist and
Vanheusden, B., 2003. Towards a legal framework in the EU for has worked in both academia and industry simultaneously for the
brownfield redevelopment. Eur. Environ. Law Rev. 6, 178– past 15 years. He runs a masters course in contaminated land
186. management; heads the Land Quality Management research team
World Commission on Environment and development (WCED), and is managing director of Land Quality Management Ltd., a
1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford. consultancy company.

Thornton 2007

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thornton 2007

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thornton 2007

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

environmental science & policy 10 (2007) 116–134

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envsci

The challenge of sustainability: incentives for brownfield

article info abstract

1. Introduction which offer immense development potential. For example,

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1865 610506.

Table 2 – Specific outputs of a UK RDA documented in its SPD

Core 1 C1(A) Number of new jobs created

Core 2 C2 Hectares of brownfield land remediated or recycled

2.2. EU legal framework 2.2.2. State aid

3.2. Incentives for sustainable brownfield soil and

3.1. Introduction 3.2.1. Financial incentives

3.4. Incentives for reuse/recycling of buildings/ 3.4.2. Legal incentives

Environmental Permit. This has been recognised by the UK 4.3.4. UK perspective

You might also like