The contaminated land regime and austerity

Brown, L A (2016) The contaminated land regime and austerity. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 8(3), pp. 210-225. ISSN 1756-1450

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate how the remediation of contaminated land has been damaged, perhaps immeasurably, in a period of devastating and crushing austerity. Design/methodology/approach A legal doctrinal and regulatory analysis of the contaminated land regime under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1990 was used to investigate the extent to which austerity changes have affected future contaminated land identification and remediation. Findings Austerity changes have impacted upon Part 2A of the EPA 1990, the planning system and development incentives. The recent changes are going to contribute to the problem of the under-resourcing of local authorities and are likely to reduce voluntary remediation by developers. As a result, future contaminated land clean-up is going to decrease. Originality/value Originality/value is assured because, as far as the author is aware, there is no other literature in this research area dealing specifically with the coalition’s adverse impact on Part 2A; this paper fills the knowledge gap that existed in the research field.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: austerity; coalition government; contaminated land regime; Environmental Protection Act 1990; land pollution
Index terms: methodology, contaminated land regime, local authority, land pollution, austerity, environmental protection, contaminated land, Environmental Protection Act 1990, coalition government
Subjects: political science, environmental engineering, environmental health, sociology, research methods, statutes, economic analysis, environmental policy, environmental issues
Topics: Legal Issues, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Governance
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here