Research seminar: assignment 4

Assignment
This assignment focuses on the integration of scientific insights from, most notably ecology,
into courtrooms. It asks you to analyse how courts of law, in your own country of origin or,
in case this is not (or no longer) an EU country or in case searching at national level is too
burdensome, at EU level integrate science into legal analysis and rulings. Focus can be on
any aspect of such integration, such as those discussed in the following contributions from the
book ‘Managing Facts and Feelings in Environmental Governance’ (made available to you
by email by Dr. Squintani during the introductory week of the assignment):

 Jan Darpö, Chapter 5: Understanding the nuts and bolts: scientific and technical knowledge
in environmental litigation – national solutions, EU requirements and current challenges
 Merideth Wright, Chapter 6: Scientific facts and litigants feelings: practical innovations from
the Vermont Environmental Court and other jurisdictions
 Mikael Schultz, Chapter 7: Scientific evidence in Swedish courts: the use of technical judges
for better integration of scientific data in environmental decision-making

Steps
- Read the indicated CJEU judgment and the three chapters mentioned under
assignment.
- Listen to the lecture in class
- Develop your own research question within the indicated topic. The research question
should have a minimum level of originality, which means that it has not been
answered before, or it has been answered by means of a different approach or
methodology than the one you propose).
- Find academic articles dealing with the topic to deepen your insights and to understand
how academic papers are written. I expect a minimum of FOUR (4) additional
sources focusing on this topic than those mentioned above. This is the part where you
do the actual research about the context of the problem by reading different views and
formulating your own opinion.
- Find primary sources (case law and law) relevant to answer your research question.
Your paper should be based on a minimum of THREE (3) primary sources on top of
those mentioned in this document.
- Write your paper. Place your arguments in the context of ongoing debates, by referring
to others. Obviously, all direct quotes should be indicated as such and will need a clear
reference to prevent plagiarism.
- The assignment needs to be uploaded before the indicated deadline through Nestor.

Possible sources
- Final dispute resolution by the Dutch administrative courts, K de Graaf en A Marseille
- M.J.H.M. Verhoeven, ``Drie jaar milieurechtspraak in eerste aanleg'' (2014) 18
Tijdschrift voor Milieu en Recht.
- A.A. Freriks, J. Robbe, Vijf jaar STAB; een onderzoek naar de kwaliteit van de
deskundigenadvisering door de Stichting Advisering Bestuursrechtspraak voor Milieu
en Ruimtelijke Ordening gedurende de eerste vijf jaar van haar bestaan, (Boom
Juridische Uitgevers, 2001), p. 104.
- Omgevingswaarde en instructieregels – een combinatie van flexibiliteit en
interbestuurlijke spanningen, W J Bosma
- Op weg naar de Omgevingswet, Stibbe
- Omgevingswaarden, J W van Zundert
- Wegwijs in het nieuwe omgevingsrecht, J W van Zundert
- Organizing Technical Knowledge in Environmental and Planning Law Disputes in the
Netherlands - the Foundation of Independent Court Experts in Environmental and
Planning Law, C Backes
- Art. 20.15 Wet milieubeheer
- Art. 6.5b Wabo
- Art. 8:47-3 Awb
- H16 Omgevingswet: procedures
- H17 Omgevingswet: adviesorganen

- Artikel 16.39 (advies Commissie voor de milieueffectrapportage)

- 1. Het bevoegd gezag stelt de Commissie voor de milieueffectrapportage in de gelegenheid
om over het milieueffectrapport te adviseren.
2. Bij algemene maatregel van bestuur kunnen regels worden gesteld over de procedure
voor de advisering.
- Artikel 16.42 (inhoud plan-MER)
- Bij algemene maatregel van bestuur worden regels gesteld over de inhoud van het
milieueffectrapport.
- Artikel 16.47 (advies Commissie voor de milieueffectrapportage)
- 1. Het bevoegd gezag kan de Commissie voor de milieueffectrapportage in de gelegenheid
stellen advies uit te brengen over het milieueffectrapport.
2. Bij algemene maatregel van bestuur kunnen regels worden gesteld over de procedure
voor de advisering.
The integration of scientific data in the upcoming Environmental and Planning Act
(Omgevingswet)
Dutch environmental and planning law has long been fragmented and divided into dozens of
different acts, decrees, and regulations. In order to make this field of law more transparent and
more comprehensive, Dutch parliament adopted the Environmental and Planning Act
(Omgevingswet, hereafter EPA) in 2016.1 This act will consolidate almost all environmental
and planning law and drastically reduce the number of decrees and regulations. Due to the
coronavirus the entry into force of the act has been delayed and it is now expected to come
into force on the 1st of January 2022.2 This paper will analyze the manner in which scientific
data and expertise are integrated in the EPA. In order to do this, the paper explain the concept
of environment and planning values, their application and finally a brief assessment of the
StAB. This will lead to the conclusion that scientific data and technical expertise is highly
integrated in Dutch environmental and planning law.

The concept of environmental and planning values (Omgevingswaarden, hereafter: EPV) is

codified in article 2.9 EPA. EPV’s are, however, not a novel concept, as they are already
present in the form of EU directives which are implemented in the fragmented domestic
environmental legislation.3 Article 2.9 stipulates that an EPV provides for the physical
environment: (a) the desired state or quality, (b) the allowed stress/load due to activities, or (c)
the allowed concentration or deposition of substances.4 The EPV is constituted by the sum of
(a) natural processes, (b) the influence of activities by civilians and companies, and (c) the
choices made by the administration regarding the management of the physical environment. 5
It is clear that these criteria remain vague and need to be materialized in order to assess their
functionality in practice. The next section will provide an assessment of how these criteria are
materialized in lower legislation.

The administration (national, provincial, and municipal governments) has a substantial

amount of discretion with regard to if, and how, an EPV should be established. 6 There are,
however, certain fields in which the administration is required to establish an EPV. 7 This is
mainly due to obligations following from European legislation. 8 On a national level, the
values are codified in the Decree quality physical environment (Besluit kwaliteit
leefomgeving, or Bkl).9 The Bkl provides for multiple values but this paper will, for reasons of
conciseness and clarity, limit itself to the requirements for surface water following from the

1
Co van Zundert,‘Wegwijs in het nieuwe omgevingsrecht’, (2020) 4(22) Tijdschrift voor Bouwrecht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id9bcd4ee29e3a43c18976a9b59bd3f234?ctx=WKNL_CSL_23> accessed
19 April 2021 para 1.
2
Van Zundert (n 1) para 1.
3
Co van Zundert J, ‘Omgevingswaarden’ (2016) 9(67) Tijdschrift voor Bouwrecht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id96a02db921984c56b2f5b1d312ce8cea?ctx=WKNL_CSL_23> accessed
19 April 2021 para 1.
4
Article 2.9 Omgevingswet (Stb. 2016, 156).
5
Co van Zundert, ‘Omgevingswaarden’ (2016) 9(67) Tijdschrift voor Bouwrecht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id96a02db921984c56b2f5b1d312ce8cea?ctx=WKNL_CSL_23> accessed
19 April 2021.
6
Willem Bosma, ‘Omgevingswaarde en instructieregels – een combinatie van flexibiliteit en interbestuurlijke
spanningen’, (2014) 8(119) Tijdschrift voor Milieu en Recht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id16fb674b14f54c87ad535a9bb7294aef?ctx=WKNL_CSL_78> accessed
19 April 2021.
7
Articles 2.13, 2.13a and 2.15 Omgevingswet (n 4).
8
Van Zundert (n 5) para 2.
9
Besluit kwaliteit leefomgeving (Stb. 2018, 292).
EU Water Framework Directive. 10 The regime for groundwater and protected areas is,
however, quite similar.11 The requirements for surface water are twofold: first, a good
chemical status is required; second, a good ecological status.12

It is clear that these two requirements as such offer little guidance. What is then to be
regarded as a good chemical or ecological status? This is where the environment and planning
values come into play. Article 2.10, paragraph 1, of the Bkl lays down the criteria which need
to be met in order to consider the chemical status of the surface water to be good. These
criteria are essentially the allowed maximum concentration of chemicals in μg/l. 13 It will
probably not raise too many eyebrows that the chemical status of surface water is determined
by the quantity of chemicals in it. But how is the ecological status of the water to be
determined? Science comes into play here once again, as annex V of the Water Framework
Directive lays down definitions of a good ecological status.14 In the Netherlands, the question
whether the surface water meets these definitions is answered by scientific research done by
the Stowa, the Foundation for Applied Water Research. In its report on the references and
standards of natural water types, the Stowa describes that good ecological status in to be
defined in terms of the quality of the biological community, the hydrological characteristics
and the chemical characteristics.15

The foregoing provides an example of how science influences law in a very specific field.
This final section will zoom out and provide an assessment of the functioning of the more
general StAB, a foundation of independent court experts in environmental and planning law
(Stichting Advisering Bestuursrechtspraak voor Milieu en Ruimtelijke Ordening), which
provides advisory opinions to administrative judges. This is, in the European Union, a rather
uncommon way of safeguarding technical and scientific expertise in environmental and
planning law.16 The StAB is an independent and impartial advisory organ, 17 subsidized by the
Dutch national government.18 The objectivity of its advisors is guaranteed by the fact that they
are barred from employments or functions which might compromise their impartiality and
independence.19 The foundation was originally most commonly asked to provide advice by
the highest administrative court, the Council of State,20 but this has changed in recent years

10
Council and Parliament Directive 2000/60/EC of 22 December 2000 establishing a framework for the
Community action in the field of water policy (Water Framework Directive) [2000] OJ L 327.
11
Ernst Plambeck and Lorenzo Squintani, ‘De bescherming en verbetering van de waterkwaliteit in Nederland,
of: een troebele implementatie van de KRW’, (2017) 2 Tijdschrift voor Milieu en Recht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id29c481d63a514b2ab7d0c51555982488?ctx=WKNL_CSL_78> accessed
19 April 2021 para 2.1.
12
Articles 2.10 paragraph 1 and 2.11 paragraph 1 Besluit kwaliteit leefomgeving (n 9).
13
See to that effect: Annex III Besluit kwaliteit leefomgeving (n 9).
14
Annex V, para 1.2, table 1.2.1 through 1.2.4 Water Framework Directive (n 10)
15
2018 Referenties en Maatlatten Watertypen voor de Kaderrichtlijn Water 2021-2027. [online] Amersfoort:
Stichting Toegepast Onderzoek Waterbeheer. Available at:
<https://www.stowa.nl/sites/default/files/assets/PUBLICATIES/Publicaties%202018/STOWA%202018-
49%20Maatlatten%20-%202020v4.pdf> accessed 19 April 2021 para 1.4 and 1.5.
16
Chris Backes, ‘Organizing Technical Knowledge in Environmental and Planning Disputes in the Netherlands –
the Foundation of Independent Court Experts in Environmental and Planning Law’ (2018) 27 European Energy
and Environmental Law Review 143.
17
Backes (n 16) 148.
18
Backes (n 16) 144
19
Article 17.10 paragraph 3 Ondernemingswet (n 4)
20
Gie van den Broek, Toon de Gier and Aster Veldkamp, ‘De StAB en de rechter: een onderzoek naar de huidige
en de toekomstige rol van de StAB als adviseur van de bestuursrechter’, (2007) 2(25) Tijdschrift voor Bouwrecht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/inod3f9e6c7bbc1c7c2985545a3d45b1b0f1?ctx=WKNL_CSL_23>
with district courts asking for advice more often. 21 It will also play a role in the upcoming
Environmental and Planning Act as the StAB will be legally required to advise the
administrative judge, upon request, on appeals within the scope of the Act, as well as appeals
within the scope of other laws as long as the physical environment is involved. 22 It is likely
that district courts will not hesitate to involve the StAB in the procedure under the
Environmental and Planning Act, as there is a great level of confidence in its expertise and
courts have done so already on the basis of current legislation.23

In conclusion, the concept of environmental and planning values in the upcoming EPA will
offer possibilities to integrate scientific data, research, and expertise into the field of
environmental and planning law. The harmony between the two can be seen in the field of
surface water. Zooming out, there is the StAB, which provides administrative courts with
technical expertise in environmental cases. Its legal basis is now firmly established in the
EPA. The foregoing shows that the use of scientific data and technical expertise is to a high
degree integrated in Dutch environmental law and will be for years to come.

Bibliography

Primary sources
Council and Parliament Directive 2000/60/EC of 22 December 2000 establishing a framework
for the Community action in the field of water policy [2000] OJ L 327

Omgevingswet (Stb. 2016, 156)

Besluit kwaliteit leefomgeving (Stb. 2018, 292)

Secondary sources
2018 Referenties en Maatlatten Watertypen voor de Kaderrichtlijn Water 2021-2027. [online]
Amersfoort: Stichting Toegepast Onderzoek Waterbeheer. Available at:
<https://www.stowa.nl/sites/default/files/assets/PUBLICATIES/Publicaties%202018/
STOWA%202018-49%20Maatlatten%20-%202020v4.pdf> accessed 19 April 2021

Backes C, ‘Organizing Technical Knowledge in Environmental and Planning Disputes in the

Netherlands – the Foundation of Independent Court Experts in Environmental and Planning
Law’ (2018) 27 European Energy and Environmental Law Review 143

Bosma W, ‘Omgevingswaarde en instructieregels – een combinatie van flexibiliteit en

interbestuurlijke spanningen’, (2014) 8(119) Tijdschrift voor Milieu en Recht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id16fb674b14f54c87ad535a9bb7294aef?
ctx=WKNL_CSL_78> accessed 19 April 2021

Plambeck E and Squintani L, ‘De bescherming en verbetering van de waterkwaliteit in

Nederland, of: een troebele implementatie van de KRW’, (2017) 2 Tijdschrift voor Milieu en
Recht

accessed 19 April 2021 para 2.

21
Backes, p. 145
22
Article 17.10 paragraph 2 Omgevingswet (n 4).
23
Matthieu Verhoeven, ‘Drie jaar milieurechtspraak in eerste aanleg’, (2014) 2(18) Tijdschrift voor Milieu en
Recht <https://www.navigator.nl/document/id5450a4348b544224b523f9fa4c9583b3?ctx=WKNL_CSL_78>
accessed 19 April 2021 para. 5.3.
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id29c481d63a514b2ab7d0c51555982488?
ctx=WKNL_CSL_78> accessed 19 April 2021

Van den Broek G, De Gier A and Veldkamp A, ‘De StAB en de rechter: een onderzoek naar
de huidige en de toekomstige rol van de StAB als adviseur van de bestuursrechter’, (2007)
2(25) Tijdschrift voor Bouwrecht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/inod3f9e6c7bbc1c7c2985545a3d45b1b0f1?
ctx=WKNL_CSL_23> accessed 19 April 2021

Verhoeven M, ‘Drie jaar milieurechtspraak in eerste aanleg’, (2014) 2(18) Tijdschrift voor
Milieu en Recht
<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id5450a4348b544224b523f9fa4c9583b3?
ctx=WKNL_CSL_78> accessed 19 April 2021

Van Zundert J, ‘Omgevingswaarden’ (2016) 9(67) Tijdschrift voor Bouwrecht

<https://www.navigator.nl/document/id96a02db921984c56b2f5b1d312ce8cea?
ctx=WKNL_CSL_23> accessed 19 April 2021

Van Zundert J, ‘Wegwijs in het nieuwe omgevingsrecht’, (2020) 4(22) Tijdschrift voor
Bouwrecht <https://www.navigator.nl/document/id9bcd4ee29e3a43c18976a9b59bd3f234?
ctx=WKNL_CSL_23> accessed 19 April 2021