Policy evaluation

Environmental Policy in the EU: Actors, Institutions and Processes, Third Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 267-286

  Mickwitz, Per ^a  

^a FINNISH ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84918854679     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203109823     Document Type: Chapter

References (37)

1. Binbaum, M. and Mickwitz, P. (eds) (2009) ‘Environmental program and policy evaluation: addressing methodological challenges’, New Directions for Evaluation, vol. 122, Summer, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
2. CEC (2005) Better Regulation for Growth and Jobs in the European Union, Communication of the Commission to the European Parliament, Commission of the European Communities (COM (2005) 97), European Commission, Brussels.
3. CEC (2007) Responding to Strategic Needs: Reinforcing the Use of Evaluation (SEC (2007) 213), European Commission, Brussels.
4. CEC (2008) Financial Regulation and Implementing Rules Applicable to the General Budget of the European Communities: Synoptic Presentation, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
5. CEC (2009) Impact Assessment Guidelines (SEC (2009) 92), European Commission, Brussels.
6. CEC (2010a) Smart Regulation in the European Union (COM (2010) 543), European Commission, Brussels.
7. CEC (2010b) Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Under Article 14(2) of Directive 2004/35/CE on the Environmental Liability with Regard to the Prevention and Remedying of Environmental Damage (COM (2010) 581), European Commission, Brussels.
8. CEC (2011) ‘Quality assessment form’, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/evaluation/docs/quality_asses_form_en.pdf (accessed at 18 September 2011).
9. Crabbé, A. and Leroy, P. (2008) The Handbook of Environmental Policy Evaluation, Earthscan, London.
10. EC (2002) ‘Decision No. 1600/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 July 2002 laying down the Sixth Community Environment Action Programme’, Official Journal of the European Communities, L242(45), pp. 1-15.
11. EC (2004) ‘Decision No. 280/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 concerning a mechanism for monitoring Community greenhouse gas emissions and for implementing the Kyoto Protocol’, Official Journal of the European Communities, L49(47), pp. 1-8.
12. EC (2009) ‘Regulation (EC) No. 401/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network’, Official Journal of the European Communities, L126(52), pp. 13-22.
13. Ecologic (2011) ‘Final report for the assessment of the 6th Environmental Action Programme’, 21 February 2011, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/newprg/ pdf/Ecologic_6EAP_Report.pdf (accessed 9 August 2011).
14. EEA (European Environmental Agency) (2001) Reporting on Environmental Measures: Are We Being Effective?, Environmental Issue Report No. 25, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
15. EEA (2004) EEA Strategy 2004-2008, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
16. EEA (2005) Policy Effectiveness Evaluation: The Effectiveness of Urban Wastewater Treatment and Packaging Waste Management Systems, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
17. EEA (2009) Diverting Waste from Landfill: Effectiveness of Waste-Management Policies in the European Union, EEA Report No. 7/2009, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
18. Ferraro, P. J. (2009). ‘Counterfactual thinking and impact evaluation in environmental policy’, in M. Birnbaum and P. Mickwitz (eds) Environmental Program and Policy Evaluation: New Directions for Evaluation, vol. 122, Summer, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 75-84.
19. Furubo, J.-E. and Sandahl, R. (2002) ‘Introduction: A diffusion perspective on global developments in evaluation’, in J.E. Furubo, R.C. Rist and Sandahl, R. (eds) International Atlas of Evaluation, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ, pp. 1-23.
20. Hansen, M.B. and Vedung, E. (2010) ‘Theory-based stakeholder evaluation’, American Journal of Evaluation, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 295-313.
21. Hildén, M. (2011) ‘The evolution of climate policies: the role of learning and evaluations’, Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 19, no. 16, pp. 1798-1811.
22. Hildén, M., Lepola, J., Mickwitz, P., Mulders, A., Palosaari, M., Similä, J., Sjöblom, S. and Vedung, E. (2002) Evaluation of Environmental Policy Instruments: A Case Study of the Finnish Pulp and Paper and Chemical Industries, Monographs of the Boreal Environment Research, vol. 21, Helsinki.
23. Hoogerwerf, A. (1990) ‘Reconstructing policy theory’, Evaluation and Program Planning, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 285-291.
24. Huitema, D., Jordan, A., Massey, E., Rayner, T., van Asselt, H., Haug, C., Hildingsson, R., Monni, S. and Stripple, J. (2011) ‘The evaluation of climate policy: theory and emerging practice in Europe’, Policy Sciences, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 179-198.
25. Mickwitz, P. (2003) ‘A framework for evaluating environmental policy instruments, context and key concepts’, Evaluation, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 415-436.
26. Mickwitz, P., Ollikka, K., Sjöblom, S. and von Troil, C. (2003) ‘The decisions according to the Environmental Protection Act during the two first years’, Ympäristöjuridiikka, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 27-47 (in Finnish).
27. Patton, M.Q. (2008) Utilization-Focused Evaluation, 4th edition, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
28. Popper, K. (2003) The Open Society and Its Enemies, Volume Two: Hegel and Marx, Routledge Classics, London.
29. Porter, M. and van der Linde, C. (1995) ‘Toward a new conception of the environment competitiveness relationship’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 97-118.
30. Rogers, P.J., Petrosino, A., Huebner, T.A. and Hacsi, T.A. (2000) ‘Program theory evaluation: practice, promise, and problems’, in P.J. Rogers, T.A. Hacsi, A. Petrosino and T.A. Huebner (eds) Program Theory in Evaluation: Challenges and Opportunities, New Directions for Evaluation, vol. 87, Fall, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 5-13.
31. Sanderson, I. (2002) ‘Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making’, Public Administration, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 1-22.
32. Scriven, M. (1991) Evaluation Thesaurus, 4th edition, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
33. Stern, E. (2009) ‘Evaluation policy in the European Union and its institutions’, in W.M.K. Trochim, M. M. Mark and L.J. Cooksy (eds) Evaluation Policy and Evaluation Practice, New Directions for Evaluation, vol. 123, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 67-85.
34. Technopolis (2008) ‘Effectiveness evaluation of the European Environment Agency: revised final report’, available at: www.eea.europa.eu/about-us/documents/effectivenessevaluations/ 2008/effectiveness-evaluation-of-the-european-environment-agency.pdf (accessed 3 August 2011).
35. Vedung, E. (1997) Public Policy and Program Evaluation, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ.
36. Vedung, E. (2010) ‘Four waves of evaluation diffusion’, Evaluation, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 263-277.
37. Weiss, C.H. (2000) ‘Which links in which theories shall we evaluate?’, in P.J. Rogers, T.A. Hacsi, A. Petrosino and T.A. Huebner (eds) Program Theory in Evaluation: Challenges and Opportunities, New Directions for Evaluation, vol. 87, Fall, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 35-45.