Are Dutch municipalities homogenizing due to institutional
pressures? The implementation of the European Air Quality
Directive 2008/50/EC
University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business
Master Thesis MSc Business Administration: Organizational and Management Control
Laura Lietmeijer (s2186608) l.lietmeijer@student.rug.nl Supervisor: E. van de Mortel Co-assessor: dr. M. P. van der Steen
Date: June 20, 2016 Word Count: 24.609
Abstract: The implementation of the European Air Quality Directive 2008/50/EC by Dutch
municipalities, which is stipulated in the Dutch Environmental Management Act, is researched in light of New Institutional Sociology theory, which emphasizes the influence of isomorphic pressures. The main research question is: How do institutional pressures influence the implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC by Dutch municipalities? A qualitative research process of theory development is employed, including interviews. It was found that coercive and normative isomorphic pressures influence the municipal implementation process of air quality. Moreover, the rural versus urban distinction also strongly influences this implementation process.
Preface
I have always been interested in matters such as the ethical side of doing business (i.e. subject of my previous Master Thesis for MSc International Business and Management) and sustainability in terms of the environment and the economy. Therefore, I decided to write this Master Thesis about the implementation process of air quality policy by Dutch municipalities. It has been very interesting to travel to many different places in the Netherlands and speak with people who are passionate about their work. But most of all it has led to great insights and the ability to combine theory with practice.
Table of content
1. Introduction ... 5
2. Preliminary background information ... 9
2.1 Implementing the European Air Quality Directive in the Netherlands ... 9
2.2 The influence of the EU on the Netherlands ... 10
2.3 The Dutch government and air quality ... 10
2.3.1 Dutch central government ... 11
2.3.2 Municipal Government ... 12
2.4 Environment Services ... 13
2.5 Air pollution in the Netherlands ... 13
3. Literature review ... 17
3.1 Institutional theory ... 17
3.2 New Institutional Sociology ... 18
3.2.1 NIS theory as the theoretical foundation ... 18
3.2.2 Defining NIS ... 19
3.3 New Institutional Sociology applied to the public sector ... 20
3.3.1 Influence of isomorphic pressures on the public sector ... 21
3.4 Environmental sociology ... 24
3.4.1 Defining environmental sociology ... 24
3.4.2 Rural versus urban distinction... 24
3.5 Conceptual model ... 26
4. Methodology ... 27
4.1 Research approach ... 27
4.2 Data collection method ... 27
4.3 Description of the sample ... 28
5. Results ... 31
5.1 Municipal implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC 31 5.1.1 Importance of air quality improvement and the responsible parties ... 31
5.1.2 Main sources of air pollution ... 32
5.1.3 Type of air quality measures ... 33
5.1.5 Common difficulties in the implementation plan ... 35
5.1.6 Enforcement of policy ... 36
5.1.7 Analysis of the findings ... 37
5.2 Influence of coercive isomorphism on the implementation process ... 38
5.2.1 Influence of authorities and institutions ... 38
5.2.2 Sanctions ... 39
5.2.3 Influence of municipal inhabitants ... 41
5.2.4 Analysis of the findings ... 42
5.3 Influence of normative isomorphism on the implementation process ... 43
5.3.1 Influence of professional organizations ... 43
5.3.2 Influence of education ... 44
5.3.3 Influence of networking ... 45
5.3.4 Analysis of the findings ... 46
5.4 Influence of mimetic isomorphism on the implementation process ... 46
5.4.1 Degree of municipal influence ... 47
5.4.2 Degree of uncertainty ... 48
5.4.3 Leading municipalities ... 50
5.4.4 Analysis of the findings ... 51
5.5 Influence of the rural versus urban distinction on the implementation process ... 52
5.5.1 Participation of the municipalities in the NSL ... 52
5.5.2 Cooperation with other municipalities ... 53
5.5.3 Analysis of the findings ... 55
6. Discussion and conclusion ... 57
6.1 Answering the main research question ... 57
6.2 Comparison of findings with literature ... 59
6.3 Limitations and suggestions for future research ... 60
References ... 62
1. Introduction
“Never have the stakes of an international meeting been so high, since what is at stake is the future of the planet, the future of life.”
– President François Hollande of France – (Davenport & Harris, 2015) The great urgency regarding the global warming problem was once again emphasized during the climate conference in Paris in 2015 referred to in the above statement. The Paris deal set a very ambitious target by stating that the global average temperature rise ought to be kept below two degrees Celsius, and that countries should try to limit the warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (Gillis, 2015). How do decisions made at higher levels influence governments on a lower level, particularly, the municipalities within the Netherlands? According to Mudde (2010), Dutch municipalities are to a great degree dependent on European policy, and this influence is only increasing as time passes.
The importance of air quality is a very relevant topic, which is often highlighted in the Dutch media (NOS.nl, 2016). Just recently, a report was published by the Milieudefensie (i.e. Dutch environmental defense organization), which stated that there are eleven locations in the Netherlands that do not adhere to the European air quality norms. These locations are in Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague, and Maastricht. Mileudefensie emphasized that these exceedances above the norms are very harmful, since the European norms are far too lenient to truly protect the health of humans. Moreover, it stated that air quality in the Netherlands has only improved by fractions, which is not nearly enough. Air quality is the third cause of deceases and death, after smoking and obesity (NOS.nl, 2016).
It is relevant for Dutch municipalities to find out whether institutional pressures affect their implementation process of EU-legislation. Especially since, as stated by the Association of Dutch Municipalities (Dutch: Vereniging van Nederlandse Gemeenten or VNG), municipalities are increasingly shaping their own urban and regional policy agenda but often EU-legislation is not in line with municipal practice (VNG, 2015). Therefore, it is crucial to research whether these pressures prevent Dutch municipalities from finding innovative solutions to implementing EU-legislation. The urgency of this matter is also high since municipalities could receive sanctions when they do not adhere to limits regarding certain pollutants in the air (Amsterdam.nl, 2013). Research on this topic could show whether homogenization or (partial) localization is the case.
Moreover, is there a need for municipalities to devise different air quality policy for different areas? The environmental sociology literature has documented the differences between urban and rural populations very well (Huddart-Kennedy, Beckley, McFarlane & Nadeau, 2009). Within the discipline of sociology, environmental sociology has become a mature field. It emerged in the 1960s alongside the New Ecology Paradigm (NEP), which was a response to the loss of nonhuman species and ecosystems because of the growth of urbanization and industrialization in Europe and the United States. The fragility of the biosphere is emphasized by the NEP (Pellow & Nyseth Brehm, 2013). It appears to be the case that urban and rural areas exert distinctive influences on participation in environmentally supportive behavior and on other forms of environmental concern (Huddart-Kennedy et al., 2009). Therefore, this Master Thesis will also address possible distinctions between urban and rural municipalities. This will enable practitioners to gain insights into the effects that this distinction has on their implementation process of EU-legislation.
In order to study the mechanism underlying the implementation of EU-legislation by Dutch municipalities, the implementation of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC regarding air quality will be studied. This Directive entered into force on June 11, 2008 and defines objectives for ambient air quality, which are designed to prevent, avoid or reduce harmful effects on the environment as a whole and on human health (European Union, 2008). The European norms for air quality have been stipulated in the Dutch Environmental Management Act (Dutch: Wet Milieubeheer) and have also been linked to the Dutch Spatial Planning Act (Dutch: Wet Ruimtelijke Ordening or WRO) (Wetten.overheid.nl, 2016a).
(PM2,5), and carbon black (i.e. a subpart of PM2,5) (RIVM.nl, 2016a). The question that arises
is whether these norms are true health norms. It appears that the World Health Organization (WHO) defines healthy air in a different manner. Its guideline values for particulate matter are half of the European norms and those for fine particulate are less than halve of the European norms. The guideline for nitrogen dioxide is the same (WHO.int, 2014). One could question why the European norms, as stipulated in Dutch law, are relatively lenient compared to the WHO norms.
Good air quality is of great importance to both ecosystems and humans. Air pollution usually refers to particulate matter and harmful gases such as ozone (smog) and nitrogen dioxide. Traffic, industry, agriculture, and Dutch households all cause air pollution. The government sets limits to the levels of air pollution to contain the harmful effects. In order to do this the government always seeks a balance between the protection of ecosystems, human health, and economic interests (Atlasleefomgeving.nl, 2016).
Keeping in mind the importance of healthy air quality and the crucial role that the implementation of measures on a municipal level play in this matter, the following main research question has been devised:
How do institutional pressures influence the implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC by Dutch municipalities?
This particular research topic has both scientific and social relevance since it combines the relevant and often discussed climate problem with the well-known and often-cited theory of DiMaggio and Powell (1983). Specifically, it discusses the implementation of the European legislative Directive regarding air quality on the municipal level. Moreover, this Master Thesis makes a novel contribution to the literature by combining New Institutional Sociology with environmental sociology.
environmental sociology. This discussion will result in five propositions. The fourth chapter describes the methodology, which includes the research approach, data collection method (i.e. interviews), description of the sample, and the reliability, controllability, and validity of the research. The fifth chapter contains the results of the research and will analyze these in accordance to the five propositions. Finally, in chapter six the main research question will be answered by using the findings from the fifth chapter. Moreover, a comparison of this study’s findings with findings from previous studies will be made. The chapter will close with a discussion of the limitations and suggestions for future research.
2. Preliminary background information
This chapter will provide preliminary background information with regard to the implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC by Dutch municipalities. First, an explanation is provided as the how the European legislative Directive regarding air quality is implemented in the Netherlands. This discussion will result in graphical representation of how the European legislative Directive influences the different government levels in question. Second, the specific role of the government levels with regard to the improvement of air quality will be explained. In this manner, a clear picture of all the different government levels and their interrelationships will emerge. Third, specific attention will be paid to the role and responsibilities of the municipalities since the municipal level is the main level of analysis of this Master Thesis. Finally, some additional information and explanation regarding air pollution in the Netherlands will be provided to support the following chapters.
2.1 Implementing the European Air Quality Directive in the Netherlands
So how does the implementation of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC, regarding air quality, affect the different levels within the Dutch government? As stated in the introduction, the European norms for air quality have been stipulated in the Dutch Environmental Management Act (Wetten.overheid.nl, 2016a). As a result, the Dutch government has devised a program to improve the air quality within the Netherlands: the National Air Quality Cooperation Programme (Dutch: Nationaal Samenwerkingsprogramma Luchtkwaliteit or NSL). The NSL involves three levels within the Dutch government: municipalities, provinces, and the Dutch central government (Rijksoverheid.nl, 2009). However, since this Master Thesis centers around the impact of the European Air Quality Directive on municipalities, the focus will be placed there. The process of implementing the European air quality Directive in the Netherlands is graphically depicted in figure 2 below.
2.2 The influence of the EU on the Netherlands
The Netherlands is one of 28 member states of the EU. The decisions of the EU have a great impact on daily life in the Netherlands and, as a member state, the Netherlands can exert influence over the EU’s decision-making. Among others, the EU consists of: the Council of the European Union (legislative body), the European Commission (executive body), and the European Parliament (legislative function and directly elected parliamentary institution) (ProDemos, 2012).
Since the late 1970s air pollution has been one of Europe’s primary concerns. The EU policy on air quality revolves around the development and implementation of appropriate instruments that will improve the quality of air. Several aims of the EU are: improving fuel quality, integrating and promoting environmental protection requirements into the energy and transport sector, and controlling emissions from mobile sources (Europa.eu, 2015a). The EU creates legislation regarding air quality on certain principles. Member States have to divide their territory in a number of agglomerations and zones. In these areas, Member States are advised to assess the air pollution levels by using modeling, measurements and additional empirical techniques. When levels of air pollution are elevated, Member States should develop an air quality program or plan, which ensures compliance with the air pollution limits. Moreover, Member States should provide information on air quality to the public (Europa.eu, 2015b). As stated in the introduction, the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of May 21, 2008 went into force on June 11, 2008. It defines objectives for ambient air quality, which are designed to prevent, avoid or reduce harmful effects on the environment as a whole and on human health (European Union, 2008).
Recently, the Council for Public Administration (Dutch: Raad voor het Openbaar Bestuur) has stated that the impact of the EU on Dutch municipalities has increased. On the one hand, the Dutch government gained increasingly more obligations, as evidenced by the increasing laws and regulation. On the other hand, the EU offers opportunities in terms of knowledge development, finance, and cooperation. In short, municipalities become more and more connected with the EU (PBLQ.nl, 2013).
2.3 The Dutch government and air quality
Through the Parliament, the citizens can exert their influence on government policy (ProDemos, 2012). This section will discuss three levels within the Dutch government: the Dutch central government, municipal government, and to a lesser degree, the provincial government. Extensive attention is paid to the tasks and responsibilities of the municipal government. 2.3.1 Dutch central government
A long tradition of cooperation and consultation of government bodies, citizens, and stakeholder organizations has been and is present in the Netherlands. Policy on international and national issues is prepared by the central government, which is the basis for legislation ratified by the Dutch Parliament. Policy specifically related to municipalities and provinces is delegated to these levels, taking into account the important principle of promoting public participation in a democracy (Government.nl, 2016a).
As stated above, the European norms for air quality have been stipulated in the Dutch Environmental Management Act (Wetten.overheid.nl, 2016a). As a result, the Dutch government has devised a program to improve the air quality within the Netherlands: the NSL (Rijksoverheid.nl, 2009). The NSL is a cooperation program of the Dutch central government, which includes the provincial and municipal governments. The ultimate goal is improvement of the air quality for the benefit of public health. The NSL went into force on August 1, 2009. Since 2010 a yearly monitoring has taken place, which enables all the involved government levels to track the development of air quality. The instrument that governments use for monitoring is called the NSL Monitoring Tool, which is controlled by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (Dutch: Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu or RIVM). One of its components, the Audit Tool, performs calculations. If the objectives of the NSL are not met, additional measures may be taken by the authorities. Finally, governments record the implementation of projects and measures that are included in the NSL (NSL-monitoring.nl, 2016).
19, 2009 instated temporarily elevated air pollution limits for large areas in the Netherlands. This meant a postponement of the deadline for municipalities to adhere to the air pollution limits. Initially these areas had to adhere to the air pollution limits by 2010. However, by means of the European derogation, they now had to adhere to the limits by 1 January 2015 (Wetten.overheid.nl, 2016b).
Source: Rijksoverheid.nl (2009)
Figure 3 Location of zones and agglomerations (colored areas) and RSL-regions (black lines)
2.3.2 Municipal Government
In 2016 the Netherlands consists of 390 municipalities. The municipal level is the level within the Dutch government, which is closest to the citizens. Both municipalities and provinces are increasingly performing tasks that were previously carried out by the central government (Government.nl, 2016b). Most importantly, municipalities are autonomous and have the authority to regulate and govern their own affairs, as stipulated in chapter seven, article 124 of the Dutch Constitution (Wetten.overheid.nl, 2016c).
the City Council is establishing the guidelines for the policy of the Council of Mayor and Aldermen. The City Council is directly elected by the inhabitants of the municipality in question. This occurs every four years at the municipal elections. The members of the City Council usually belong to a political party. The council members belonging to the same political party form a fraction. Every fraction chooses its own chairman (Ramkema, 2009).
The Council of Mayor and Aldermen (Dutch: College van burgemeester en wethouders) is the executive board of the municipality. This council has its own administrative powers, which come forth out of national laws and regulations such as the Dutch Environmental Management Act. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Council of Mayor and Aldermen to ensure the proper implementation and execution of these laws and regulations within their municipality. Moreover, the Council of Mayor and Aldermen has to prepare the City Council’s decisions and execution of these decisions (Ramkema, 2009).
Contrary to the City Council members and Aldermen, the Mayor is not elected but appointed by the national government for a period of six years. The Mayor chairs the City Council and the Council of Mayor and Aldermen. It is the responsibility of the Mayor to oversee the relation between the City Council and the municipality’s inhabitants (Ramkema, 2009). Moreover, the mayor holds responsibility for safety and public order within the municipality (Government.nl, 2016b).
2.4 Environment Services
The Netherlands has a system of 28 Environment Services (Dutch: Omgevingsdiensten), which are regional agencies that hold the responsibility for implementing tasks with regard to the field of environmental law (Omgevingsdienst.nl, 2016). An example of these Environment Services is Environment Service the Valley (Dutch: Omgevingsdienst de Vallei or OddV). This is a cooperation between the province Gelderland and five municipalities: Barneveld, Ede, Nijkerk, Scherpenzeel and Wageningen. The Environment Service the Valley works closely together with other Environment Services in the province Gelderland and the fire department (Oddevallei.nl, 2016). It is important to keep in mind that this is only one example, and that there is an entire system of collaborations present in the Netherlands.
2.5 Air pollution in the Netherlands
of air pollution in the Netherlands will provide a better insight into improvements made by the Netherlands in terms of air quality.
The Netherlands adheres to most of the norms for air pollutants as stipulated in EU-legislation, but the main focus lies on particulate matter (PM10), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), fine particulates
(PM2,5), and carbon black (i.e. a subpart of PM2,5) (RIVM.nl, 2016a). The air pollution limit for
PM10 is a yearly average of 40 microgram per m3, and a daily average of 50 microgram per m3,
which may only be exceeded 35 times per year at maximum. The air pollution limit of PM2,5 is
a yearly average of 25 microgram per m3. The air pollution limit for NO2 is a yearly average of
40 microgram per m3 and a hourly average of 200 microgram per m3, which may only be exceeded 18 times per year at maximum (Wetten.overheid.nl, 2016a).
As stated before, the question that arises is whether these norms are true health norms. It seems that the WHO defines healthy air in a different manner. It indicates guideline values for PM10
to be 20 μg/m3 (annual mean) and 50 μg/m3 (24-hour mean) and for PM2,5 to be 10
μg/m3 (annual mean) and 25 μg/m3 (24-hour mean). Moreover, the guideline value for NO 2 is
40 μg/m3 (annual mean) and 200 μg/m3 (1-hour mean). This means that the guideline values for particulate matter and fine particulate are significantly lower than the European norms. The guideline for nitrogen dioxide, however, is the same (WHO.int, 2014).
Figures 4-6 below indicate the background concentrations (Dutch: achtergrondconcentraties) of particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide and fine particulates in the Netherlands. The most recent data is compared to the earliest data available, which is 2015 and 2011 (Geodata.rivm.nl, 2016). As becomes clear, great progress has already been made since 2011.
It is important to note that these figures show the background concentrations of certain areas. Background concentrations are the concentrations that are present due to urban and industrial emissions, foreign sources, and sea salt (particulate matter). On top of that, the emissions of road traffic and agriculture are added. This means the background concentration is the concentration minus the contribution of road traffic and agriculture (RIVM.nl, 2016b).
Figure 5 Nitrogen dioxide concentrations in the Netherlands
Moreover, the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment has also produced a map of carbon black concentrations for the first time (see figure 7). They indicated that the national carbon black map closely resembles the Dutch road map (RIVM.nl, 2016a).
3. Literature review
This chapter will start with a brief discussion of several different streams within institutional theory, since it is important to emphasize that the chosen stream (i.e. New Institutional Sociology) does not represent institutional theory in its entirety. Second, the discussion of the streams within institutional theory will help in providing arguments as to why DiMaggio and Powell’s (1983) stream of NIS is adopted for this Master Thesis. This will be accompanied by an extensive explanation of the theory. Third, research applying NIS theory to the public sector is reviewed and discussed. This will lead to the development of three propositions. Fourth, the literature regarding environmental sociology will be discussed with a particular focus on the distinction between rural and urban areas. This will lead to two additional propositions. Finally, the propositions will be graphically depicted in a conceptual model at the end of this chapter.
3.1 Institutional theory
Institutional theory can be viewed as a development that considers organizations as ‘open systems’. It has become a leading lens through which organizational processes of change and continuity are understood and interpreted (e.g. Pfeffer & Salancik, 1978; Silverman, 1970). Institutional theory places an emphasis on the importance of cultural and social aspects of organizational environments. This in contrast to the focus on technical and task elements under the resource dependence theory and contingency theory (Donaldson, 1995; Oliver, 1991). Three main streams within the field of institutional theory are: Old Institutional Economics (OIE) (Scapens, 1994), New Institutional Economics (NIE) (Walker, 1998), and New Institutional Sociology (NIS) (Carruthers, 1995). These three theories share an interest in institutions and institutional change, but they do have different intellectual roots and origins (Burns & Scapens, 2000). The streams will be discussed shortly to highlight the variety of differing perspectives that are taken within the field of institutional theory.
has been debated in recent years in the social sciences (e.g. Bhaskar, 1975; Giddens, 1984; Archer, 1995).
Second, NIE is a micro-analytical approach with regard to the study of economic organizations (Kelly, Doyle & O’Donohoe, 2015) such as hierarchies, multidivisionals, franchises, holding companies, conglomerates (Williamson, 1975), networks (Jarillo, 1988), market-hierarchy hybrids (Williamson, 1991), and clans (Ouchi, 1980). It states that the rationale for the existence of any type of organizational design is its efficiency in comparison to the set of available alternatives, including the market (Winter, 1991). Moreover, it shows how the combination of opportunism and bounded rationality creates the prospect that expensive monitoring and negotiating costs could accompany market exchanges. Consequently, the chosen governance structure is the one that economizes on bounded rationality, while minimizing opportunity costs (Roberts & Greenwood, 1997).
Finally, NIS emphasizes the elaboration of symbols, rules and beliefs, as well as an organization’s wider environment (Scott, 1987; Scott & Meyer, 1994; Selznick, 1996). NIS raises awareness that organizations legitimize their existence by their need to conform to norms and rules (Meyer & Rowan, 1977; DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). NIS provides explanations for changes in organizational practices, which is referred to as institutional isomorphism (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983, 1991).
In conclusion, one cannot simply refer to institutional theory in its entirety when conducting research, since the streams all have different intellectual roots and origins. By referring to institutional theory in its entirety it becomes more difficult to draw conclusions and this, in turn, makes further research challenging. Therefore, arguments are provided below as to why NIS is chosen as the leading theory for this Master Thesis. This is accompanied by a more thorough explanation of the theory itself.
3.2 New Institutional Sociology
3.2.1 NIS theory as the theoretical foundation
Investigating the influence of this European Union Directive is similar to the one discussed in this Master Thesis. NIE (Roberts & Greenwood, 1997), on the other hand, is more suitable for research with regard to economic organizations. Finally, OIE focuses on organizational routines (Burns & Scapens, 2000), which are not the focus of this Master Thesis. The remainder of this section will further elaborate upon NIS theory.
3.2.2 Defining NIS
NIS theory focuses on the effect of external environmental factors on the procedures and structure of the organization (Kelly et al., 2015). DiMaggio and Powell (1983) state that structural change in organizations seems to be driven less and less by the need for efficiency or by competition. Instead, bureaucratization and other forms of organizational change arise because of processes that make organizations more similar without making them automatically more efficient. Bureaucratization and other forms of homogenization develop out of the structuration (Giddens, 1979) of organizational fields. DiMaggio and Powell (1983) explain that this process is greatly affected by the professions and the state. They conclude that highly structured organizational fields provide the context where individual efforts to deal rationally with constraints and uncertainty usually lead to homogeneity in culture, output, and structure. Isomorphism can be defined as a constraining process, which forces one organization in a population to resemble other organizations that face the same environmental conditions (Hawley, 1968). DiMaggio and Powell (1983) provide an analytic typology (i.e. it is not always possible to distinguish the types empirically) of the three mechanisms through which isomorphic change occurs:
1. Mimetic isomorphism results from standard responses to uncertainty. When the environment creates symbolic uncertainty, when goals are ambiguous, or when organizational technologies are poorly understood (March & Olson, 1976), organizations might mimic other organizations which they perceive to be more successful or legitimate (Tsamenyi et al., 2006).
2. Normative isomorphism stems primarily from professionalization. According to Larson (1977) and Collins (1979), professionalization can be interpreted as the collective struggle of members of an occupation to establish legitimation and a cognitive base for their occupational autonomy, to define the conditions and methods of their work, and to control ‘the production of producers’ (Larson, 1977: 49-52).
by other organizations on which they are dependent (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). This entails, for example, that organizations adopt particular practices due to pressures exerted by those they are externally dependent upon such as the state or credit markets (Tsamenyi et al., 2006).
Every theory has its limitations and NIS is also not without criticism. NIS has been criticized for its minimal attention to the role of agency and interest in shaping action and for its focus on homogeneity (DiMaggio, 1988). This criticism has been addressed in recent work on NIS (Oliver, 1991; Powell, 1991; Goodstein, 1994; Goodrick & Salancik, 1996; Kostova & Kendall, 2002; Dillard, Rigsby & Goodman, 2004; Hopper & Major, 2007; Lounsbury, 2008). Consequently, institutional change is not only viewed as arising out of pressures from the external environment of an organization, but also from actions of organizational agents (Tsamenyi et al., 2006).
Beckert (2010) explains that NIS has focused on the process of isomorphism over the last thirty years. He argues that this perspective is very one-sided and that it leaves out multiple insights from other macro-sociological and institutional approaches. He continues by stating that this perspective does not do justice to the actual social change that takes place because it overlooks the role that divergent institutional development plays. Beckert (2010) shows that the mechanisms identified by DiMaggio and Powell (1983) can support processes of divergence as well, instead of functioning only as sources of isomorphic change. He points to the theoretical challenge of identifying under which conditions mechanisms push institutional change toward divergence or homogenization.
The criticism of Beckert (2010) will be taken into consideration in this Master Thesis by critically reflecting on all the available information. However, no matter which theoretical perspective is taken, there will always be an omission of variables. No theory can take every variable into account, and if it does, it would be quite difficult to test in practice. By taking one or a few theoretical perspectives, it is possible to focus the research efforts in order to give it a clear purpose.
3.3 New Institutional Sociology applied to the public sector
propositions. Moreover, there is some indication that mimetic isomorphism could also influence the public sector, which leads to the third proposition.
3.3.1 Influence of isomorphic pressures on the public sector
Ashworth, Boyne and Delbridge (2009) explain that, according to institutional theory, organizations pursue legitimacy by conforming to environmental isomorphic pressures. They extend previous research regarding institutional theory by taking a comprehensive view of organizational characteristics that may be subject to isomorphic pressures and by making a distinction between two definitions of conformity (convergence and compliance). They applied this framework to a change in internal characteristics of 101 public organizations in England between 2001 and 2004. It was found that the impact of isomorphic pressures was stronger on culture and organizational strategies than on processes and structures. Also, substantial evidence was found of compliance but more limited support for convergence. It was concluded that the relevance of institutional theory to change in the public sector depends on the organizational characteristics that are included in the research and on the definition of conformity.
Villadsen (2011) explains that Ashworth et al. (2009) make a particularly useful distinction between convergence (i.e. change toward the norm of the field) and compliance (i.e. change in the direction of a coercive pressure) with regard to organizations’ responses to institutional pressures. Ashworth et al.’s (2009) distinction emphasizes the difference between normative and coercive pressures and shows how these do not necessarily have to be aligned. Their research indicates that most changes are convergent as well as compliant.
compare the vulnerability to institutional forces. He found that coercive pressures are the weakest on for-profits and the strongest on municipalities. Exposure to mimetic pressures tended to be stronger for business establishments in comparison with both nonprofits and municipalities. In general, for-profits encounter weaker normative forces relative to nonprofits and municipalities. The difference with regard to the intensity of normative pressures between nonprofits and municipalities was found not to be relevant. Taken together, it appears that normative pressures cause the strongest impact on municipalities.
Frumkin and Galaskiewicz (2004) investigated the susceptibility of public sector organizations to institutional pressures. They found that particularly coercive and, to a lesser degree, normative isomorphic pressures broke down the differences among nonprofit, for-profit, and governmental agencies, leading to the adoption of hybrid structural patterns of control. Being exposed to these institutional isomorphic pressures homogenized organizational structures across the entire population of organizations. Exposure to normative as well as coercive isomorphic pressures made government organizations more like nonprofits and for-profits and less like traditional bureaucracies.
Ashworth et al. (2009) point to Scott (1987: 502) who says: ‘an institutional perspective gives special emphasis to authority relations: the ability of organizations, especially public organizations, to rely on legitimate coercion’. From the above, it appears that the public sector is primarily facing coercive and/or normative isomorphic pressures. This indicates that the same may hold for municipalities. This results in the first two propositions of this Master Thesis. Proposition 1: Coercive isomorphic pressures will exert influence on the implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC of Dutch municipalities.
With regard to the pressures possibly influencing the implementation process of the European air quality regulation, it may be perceived as stating the obvious when proposing that coercive pressures influence the implementation process. The European legislative Directive itself is a coercive pressure, however, the research might uncover additional coercive pressures (e.g. from central or provincial government) on municipalities. Therefore, it is crucial to include this proposition in the research.
Possible normative isomorphic pressures influencing the implementation process of the European air quality regulation by municipalities could come from professional bodies which are able to provide advice, based on research, to the municipalities regarding the type of measures they should take. An example is the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, which carries out independent research and provides policy advice to government authorities at all levels from local to international. It collects information and knowledge from multiple sources, both international and national. They process this knowledge and place it at the disposal of researchers, policy-makers, the general public, and regulatory authorities. Moreover, it produces yearly reports on all aspects of nature and the environment (RIVM.nl, 2016c).
Even though the literature strongly points to the presence of coercive and normative isomorphism in the public sector, it is important to not exclude other possible influences beforehand. Pollitt (2001), for example, investigates the divergence of views regarding the degree of international convergence in public management reforms. He aims to achieve this by combining different theoretical approaches regarding the concept of convergence. In his research, Pollitt (2001) points to mimetic isomorphism where local authorities, departments, health authorities or agencies that do not know how to deal with uncertainty copy from other organizations in their peer group what they perceive as well-received innovations. He illustrates this with reference to Halligan (1996) and Premfors (1998) who find that numerous foreign delegations travel all the way to New Zealand to investigate their reforms. Moreover, the spreading of UK / US / New Zealand / Australian models through the Public Management Committee (PUMA) or the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) are examples of trends that developed in a climate of uncertainty. This leads to the third proposition of this Master Thesis.
Proposition 3: Mimetic isomorphic pressures will exert influence on the implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC of Dutch municipalities.
Finally, during this literature review concerning the influence of isomorphic pressures, mention has been made of the distinction between compliance and convergence. Even though there is no proposition covering this matter, it will nevertheless be discussed in section 6.2, which will make a comparison between this study’s findings and the findings from other studies.
3.4 Environmental sociology
This section will discuss the literature field of environmental sociology and develop propositions regarding the possible influence of the rural versus urban distinction on the implementation process.
3.4.1 Defining environmental sociology
Within the discipline of sociology, environmental sociology has become a mature field. It emerged in the 1960s alongside the New Ecology Paradigm (NEP), which was a response to the loss of nonhuman species and ecosystems because of the growth of urbanization and industrialization in Europe and the United States. The fragility of the biosphere is emphasized by the NEP. Moreover, it points to the extraordinary harm that humans have put on the biosphere via industrial pollution and material extraction (Pellow & Nyseth Brehm, 2013). Environmental sociology as a literature field has matured by building forth on earlier research the challenges constructed boundaries among nonhuman natures, the built environment, and human society (Catton, 1982; Freudenberg, Frickel & Gramling, 1995; Canan, 1996; Tierney, 1999; Goldman & Schurman, 2000). Sociologists have been at the center of research with regard to the ways that socially marginalized populations live in communities with disproportionate environmental risks, which results in a redefinition of the environment to one that includes social and built environments (Bullard & Wright, 2012).
As a consequence of various methodological approaches, geographical locations, types of hazards, and sources of data, researchers have debated the degree to which environmental inequality exists in different communities (Pellow & Nyseth Brehm, 2013). The focus of this Master Thesis will lie on one part of the environmental sociology literature, namely, the influence of the rural versus urban distinction on the implementation process. In the next subsection it will become clear that it is very likely that this distinction influences the implementation process regarding air quality measures.
3.4.2 Rural versus urban distinction
urban and rural areas exert distinctive influences on participation in environmentally supportive behavior and on other forms of environmental concern. They found that rural residents scored higher than urban residents on altruistic values, they reported higher participation in stewardship behaviors and recycling, and they placed a higher priority on the environment. In their investigation regarding 20 municipal climate action plans in the USA, Bassett and Shandas (2010) also found that the presence of a receptive community was a crucial internal determinant of both the resultant process and the decision to plan. This suggests that the municipal community is able to exert influence over the implementation process of EU-legislation through their position on environmental concern. As will become clear below, there are certain rural-urban differences with regard to environmental concerns, attitudes, and actions. According to Berenguer, Corraliza and Martín (2005), one of the primary referents of modern culture is pro-environmental orientation. Berenguer et al. (2005) compared the attitudes, behaviors, and values of a rural sample and an urban sample, both located in Spain. They found that those living in cities take on a large number of environmental responsibility values. However, they do show less pro-environmental orientation in terms of behavior and attitude. On the other hand, people living in rural areas show greater consistency in expressing behavioral intentions with regard to environmental protection and also show more attitudes of environmental responsibility.
Proposition 4: The rural versus urban distinction will influence the municipal implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC.
carried out by Leiden University, in cooperation with PBLQ (Dutch Institute for Public Administration), has shown that certain municipalities’ features influence the way they deal with the EU. For example, rural municipalities often have a less ‘European-like’ strategy and they also find it more difficult to obtain European subsidies. Bigger (often non-rural) municipalities can more easily obtain European subsidies, they are more informed about the European laws and regulations, and in their strategy they focus more on the EU (PBLQ.nl, 2013). Since the rural versus urban distinction seems to influence the degree to which municipalities adopt a ‘European-like’ strategy it is expected that this distinction acts as a moderating influence on the relationship between isomorphic pressures and the implementation process.
Proposition 5: The rural versus urban distinction will moderate the relationship between isomorphic pressures and the municipal implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC.
3.5 Conceptual model
The literature review, which resulted in five propositions, is graphically depicted in a conceptual model in figure 8 below. The arrows indicate the proposed influence of institutional pressures on the municipal implementation process. The strength of this influence is unclear as of yet. It is crucial to keep in mind the novelty of the phenomenon researched and its very specific context (i.e. implementation of air quality measures by Dutch municipalities). In-depth semi-structured interviews will shed more light on this issue, as explained in the next chapter.
4. Methodology
This section describes how the main research question will be answered. It includes the overall research approach, data collection method, description of the sample, and the study’s controllability, validity and reliability.
4.1 Research approach
The research’s aim is to produce descriptive and explanatory knowledge (i.e. describing and explaining the implementation process of EU-legislation by Dutch municipalities). Therefore, the empirical cycle will be followed (De Groot, 1969; Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2007; Blumberg, Cooper & Schindler, 2011). The research approach that will be employed is theory development, which describes the first two steps of the empirical cycle: observation and induction (i.e. developing theory). The first step of ‘observation’ revolves around comparing phenomena in the real world with the literature regarding this phenomena. The second step of ‘induction’ entails searching for possible explanations of the issue at hand (Van Aken, Berends & Van der Bij, 2012). This research approach has been chosen because, even though the literature field of institutional theory as a whole is quite mature, the field with regard to the combination of institutional theory and environmental sociology is quite immature. The goal is to find interesting relationships between phenomena (i.e. isomorphic pressures and implementation of EU-legislation) and to discover where these relationships (do not) hold and why. This will possibly lead to discovery of patterns and an enrichment of the literature field (Van Aken et al., 2012).
4.2 Data collection method
Controllability is ensured by providing a detailed description of each step that has been taken in the research so that other researchers can replicate the study (Van Aken et al., 2012). A controllable research also requires results to be presented as precisely as possible (Swanborn, 1996). This section will ensure the controllability of the research.
The main data collection method is in-depth, semi-structured interviews. This specific type of interview was chosen because it allows for a combination of structure and flexibility (Maruster & Gijsberg, 2013). The on-site interviews, which lasted approximately one and a half hour, were audio-recorded and transcribed.
and his/her function are posed. The second section pertains to the implementation process itself, and includes questions regarding the type of measures that are taken by the municipality, the importance of air quality improvement and the difficulties they encounter. The third, fourth and fifth sections deal with the first three propositions, which is the influence of the three isomorphic pressures on the implementation process. The sixth section deals with questions concerning the fourth proposition, which focuses on the direct influence of the rural versus urban distinction on the implementation process. These questions will center around whether the interviewees see an increasing trend of homogenization with regard to all municipalities or whether they see a distinction between small rural and big urban municipalities. The seventh section closes the interview and contains questions on whether the interviewee has any additional remarks that are important considering the nature of the research. The results of the interviews will be analyzed in chapter five based on the structure of sections described above. Finally, secondary data regarding the Dutch municipalities will be used. This secondary data contains, for example, documents about projects and/or plans concerning the type of measures the municipality intends to take in order to improve the quality of air. This will aid the internal validity of the research. Internal validity entails making sure that the conclusions drawn are justified and complete (Van Aken et al., 2012). This highlights the importance of continuously being open-minded for conflicting views and to substantiate each claim with evidence and sound theoretical reasoning.
4.3 Description of the sample
Municipalities covered in the interview
Number of inhabitants*
Interviewee Urban versus rural distinction 1. Environment Service the Valley
(Dutch: Omgevingsdienst de Vallei) - Barneveld - Ede - Nijkerk - Scherpenzeel - Wageningen 54.703 111.575 40.870 9.522 37.786 Anonymous (M) Rural Interview questions were answered for all municipalities (with a special focus on Ede)
2. Nijmegen 170.681 Henk Nijhuis
(M)
Urban
3. The Hague 514.861 Han Robanus
Maandag (M)
Urban
4. Environment Service West-Holland (Dutch: Omgevingsdienst
West-Holland)
- Alphen aan den Rijn - Hillegom - Kaag en Braassem - Katwijk - Leiden - Leiderdorp - Lisse - Nieuwkoop - Noordwijk - Noordwijkerhout - Oegstgeest - Teylingen - Voorschoten - Zoeterwoude 107.396 21.101 25.844 63.633 121.562 26.853 22.539 27.114 25.604 16.063 22.997 35.646 25.150 8.114 Bodes de Vries (M) Urban - Leiden - Leiderdorp - Oegstgeest - Katwijk Rural (i.e. the remaining municipalities) Interview questions were answered for Leiden, since it is the only municipality with air quality policy
5. Utrecht 334.176 Bertien Oude
Groote Beverborg (F) Urban 6. Venray 43.202 Anonymous (M) Rural
7. Rotterdam 623.652 Anonymous (F) Urban
8. Amsterdam 821.752 Harry van
Bergen (M)
Urban
* Number of inhabitants in 2015; Source: Waarstaatjegemeente.nl (2016) Table 1 Description of sample
5. Results
This chapter is divided in five sections in accordance to the five main themes in which the interview questions are divided (a) the implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC on a municipal level, influence of (b) coercive, (c) mimetic, and (d) normative isomorphism on the implementation process, and (e) the influence of the rural versus urban distinction. Each section is divided into subsections, in line with the interview questions that were asked. Each section will close with a subsection that analyzes the findings from the interviews in light of the propositions that were posed in chapter 3.
5.1 Municipal implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC
This section describes the findings from the interviews for the first theme ‘the municipal implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC’. Quotes will be used to highlight some of the most interesting findings. The first six subsections focus on the different questions that were asked during the interview, ranging from the importance of air quality measures and the responsible parties to the type of air quality measures taken and the most common difficulties encountered by municipalities during the implementation process. The final subsection analyzes the findings regarding the first theme.
5.1.1 Importance of air quality improvement and the responsible parties
the municipalities are responsible for taking measures if air pollution limits are exceeded. The City Council of the municipality was indicated as the responsible party for approving the implementation plan. However, the daily execution is done by the Council of Mayor and Aldermen. This Council has to answer to the City Council in terms of their proceedings. 5.1.2 Main sources of air pollution
Figure 9 below indicates the main sources of air pollution and the number of interviews during which these were identified. As becomes clear from the figure, six (out of eight) interviewees indicated that traffic is the main source of air pollution. Interestingly, these six interviewees were all from urban municipalities. Rural municipalities did not indicate road traffic as a main source. Poultry farms were indicated during both interviews with rural municipalities to be the main source of air pollution. The remaining sources of air pollution (i.e. shipping, households, electricity plant and industry) were mentioned by interviewees from urban municipalities.
Figure 9 Main sources of air pollution
A very interesting finding was the contradictory image that was provided by two urban municipalities with regard to households as a main source of air pollution:
“According to the forecasts, emissions from road traffic have declined to such an extent that the emissions from woodstoves are just as big, according to the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. And those from carbon black are going to decline significantly the next couple of years, which means domestic woodstoves will by far be the biggest source of carbon black in the Netherlands.” (The Hague)
“Woodstoves are mostly seen as a nuisance problem. So yes, neighbors have complaints, but it is not approached as an air quality problem as those included in the NSL because it is very local. This involves one woodstove or sometimes companies that burn wood.” (Environment Service West-Holland) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Poultry farms Road traffic Shipping Households Electricty plant Industry
Num ber o f inte rv iew s
Main sources of air pollution
5.1.3 Type of air quality measures
This subsection discusses the type of air quality measures that municipalities take. Table 2 below provides an overview of the specific air quality measures that the municipalities or Environment Services listed during the interview. Moreover, municipal documents and other information sources are used to supplement these results. The air quality measures have been classified in main themes.
Air quality measures
Traffic
Use of electric vehicles
Subsidy program for e-scooters
Filling stations with natural gas for public use
Improvement of traffic flows (e.g. P+R, traffic circulation) Use of natural gas for vehicles (e.g. garbage trucks)
Transport management: subsidy program for industrial trucks (i.e. Euro 6 trucks) Electric charging stations
City distribution (i.e. packages are delivered to the city border and transported further with clean vehicles or bicycles)
Introduction of a Low Emission Zone (Dutch: Milieuzone) Scrapping regulation for old cars
Public transportation and cycling
Encouragement of cycling and use of public transportation Use of natural gas for vehicles (e.g. public transportation) Subsidy program for cabs on natural gas
Shipping
Shore power (Dutch: walstroom) for ships Subsidy program for ‘clean’ ships
Encouragement of LNG (liquefied natural gas) for ships Education
Educating people (i.e. about air pollution from woodstoves, barbecues, vehicles) Arranging dialogues with inhabitants
Farms
Projects regarding the reduction of emissions from farms Stimulating use up-to-date farming techniques and machinery Industry
Projects regarding the reduction of emissions from industrial companies
Sources: Overheid.nl (2016); Gelderland.nl (2016); Milieuzones.nl (2016); Portofamsterdam.nl (2016); De Bruijn (2015); Van Bergen (2016); Langenberg (2015); Gemeente Utrecht (2013)
It is difficult to rank these measures in terms of importance, since every municipality places the emphasis somewhere else, considering their specific needs. However, from the interviews, municipal documents and other relevant information sources, it has become clear that all the urban municipalities strongly focus on air quality measures regarding traffic, public transportation and cycling. The reasons they give for this is that they feel that this is the only issue that they are truly able to influence on a municipal level. The rural municipalities have a significantly weaker focus on traffic, public transportation and cycling and they focus more on projects regarding poultry farms. Interestingly, five (out of six) urban municipalities have Low Emission Zones. In terms of electric transportation, Amsterdam reported the following:
“…, in Amsterdam we are very busy with electric transportation. We are truly a frontrunner. Definitely in Europe. But in some ways also worldwide.”
Five (out of six) urban municipalities take air quality measures regarding shipping, and the rest of the municipalities (urban and rural) do not. The rural municipalities all strongly focus on air quality measures regarding the reduction of particulate matter emission from poultry farms. Intriguingly, even though the focus of rural municipalities lies on poultry farms, they stated that they do not take a lot of additional measures (beyond what the law requires). They do actively engage with local farmers and educate them with regard to techniques and machines that are able to reduce the level of air pollution. In some cases rural municipalities find that farmers are willing to go above and beyond what the law requires. Moreover, one rural municipality (Venray) indicated that it had organized a dialogue including several parties (i.e. council members, students and inhabitants) to educate people regarding the issue of particulate matter. An interesting finding with regard to air quality measures, which resulted from the interviews, is the effectiveness of and the misconception among citizens about the use of greenery. “… greenery has been completely removed from the plans. In the beginning we thought it would provide good results, however, we investigated the effects of greenery on air quality, but especially the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment and the central Dutch government have heavily criticized it, as becomes apparent from the investigation. Actually, the reason to use greenery for air quality will not be encountered a lot in the Netherlands anymore. The effect on air quality can in some cases even be negative because greenery retains the air so that it cannot spread.” (Nijmegen)
People do not want to believe that, however, the trees impede the air renewal and the dilution of exhaust gases keep lingering.” (The Hague)
5.1.4 Best Available Technique Consideration at poultry farms
After the first interview with Environment Service the Valley, it became clear that the Best Available Technique (BAT) Consideration (Dutch: BBT-afweging) is an important tool with which particulate matter emission from farms can be reduced. It was indicated that the law prescribes two things: it needs to be checked whether entrepreneurs do not exceed the air pollution limits and it needs to be checked whether the entrepreneur always uses the best available technique. The first requirement is fulfilled everywhere in the Netherlands. However, the second requirement is not fulfilled with regard to farms. Meanwhile in industry they always check for the presence of the best available technique. As indicated, the BAT Consideration does have a legal basis, however, it is fragmented because every type of company falls under different legislation. Environment Service the Valley feels that this is an important tool with which municipalities can accomplish much in terms of air quality improvement. It is important to keep in mind here that the best available technique is not only the best in terms of lower emissions, but also in terms of economic considerations. If poultry farmers would go bankrupt because of an investment in a technique, it cannot be considered the best available technique. Venray has a slightly different stance in this matter. The interviewee explained that initially a government decree (Dutch: Algemene Maatregel van Bestuur or AMvB) was issued, which focused on reducing ammonia emissions. This required the use of the BAT Consideration. However, over time, odor and particulate matter became more important. They are not fully integrated in the BAT Consideration. However, last year the government decree low-emission housing (Dutch: AMvB emissiearme huisvesting) entered into force, which included air pollution limits for particulate matter. In essence this can be viewed as a BAT Consideration, since a new poultry barn needs to comply to air pollution limits for particulate matter. Venray also indicated that the economic considerations are very important. To what extent can you enforce a farmer to use the best available technique? It is relatively easy to enforce this with new barns. However, sometimes the best available technique does not fit into old barns. In extreme cases you can use enforcement, but Venray has never seen such an example.
5.1.5 Common difficulties in the implementation plan
Figure 10 Difficulties municipalities face in the implementation plan
Every interviewee mentioned the difficulty of establishing the effectiveness of the air quality measures. Gaining budget is perceived by three urban and all rural municipalities as a problem. It was found that only the urban municipalities indicate a lack of public support and national political resistance as difficulties. The lack of control with regard to background concentrations was indicated by both urban and rural municipalities to be a difficulty. The enforcement of the BAT Consideration and the development of new applicable farm techniques were indicated by rural municipalities as being difficulties. Moreover, the weather can strongly influence the monitoring results in both a negative and a positive way, depending on the direction of winds. Interestingly, the G4 (Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht) indicated that they would like more European and national regulation with regard to air quality. They desire strict European regulation for car producers when it comes to car emissions. Moreover, they are supporters of a uniform national system of rules, which would standardize certain issues. For example, uniform rules for Low Emission Zones, which would remove the confusion about who can go where. This would relieve some of the pressure on municipalities. They feel this would greatly improve air quality and that municipalities on their own are not able to achieve as much as the national and European level can in terms of air quality improvement.
5.1.6 Enforcement of policy
The Environment Services enforce air quality policies by granting or declining licenses of companies and farms. They regularly check whether companies and farms still adhere to the
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Num ber o f inte rv iew s
Difficulties that municipalities face in the implementation plan
agreements which are stipulated in the license. Another form of enforcement of air quality is the monitoring itself. Not only the monitoring which is carried out by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, but also monitoring done by regional monitoring stations. In addition to these forms, another obvious form of enforcement involves the Low Emission Zones. There are cameras, which register the license plates and automatically check in the vehicle registration system of the Central Service for Road traffic (Dutch: Rijksdienst Wegverkeer or RDW) what kind of vehicle it is. If the vehicle is not allowed to be there then the owner will receive a fine from the Central Judicial Collection Agency (Dutch: Centraal Justitieel Incassobureau or CJIB). Moreover, the parking service monitors whether people do not park next to an electric charging point when they are not charging.
Finally, during interviews it was indicated that the rest of the air quality measures are very difficult in terms of enforcement. For example, you cannot force people to only ride bicycles or use public transportation.
5.1.7 Analysis of the findings
The main findings, with regard to the first theme ‘the municipal implementation process of the European legislative Directive 2008/50/EC, are summarized in table 3 below.
Main findings
Main reason for municipalities to develop air quality policy: public health. Main source of air pollution:
o Rural municipalities: poultry farms o Urban municipalities: road traffic Main type of air quality measures by theme:
o Rural municipalities: farms, education
o Urban municipalities: traffic, public transportation and cycling, shipping, education, industry
Main difficulties faced by municipalities:
o Difficulty measuring effectiveness of measures o Budget
o Lack of national and European regulation o Ability to influence background concentrations Enforcement of all air quality measures is difficult
Table 3 Main findings regarding the first theme
municipalities. This will be elaborated upon in the final section, which is dedicated to the urban versus rural distinction. Interestingly, the G4 indicated that they would like more European and national regulation with regard to air quality. They feel this would greatly improve air quality since they are not able to achieve as much as the national and European level in terms of air quality improvement. Essentially, municipalities are thus demanding more coercive pressure from the national and European level.
5.2 Influence of coercive isomorphism on the implementation process
This section discusses the findings regarding the second theme, which is the influence of coercive isomorphism on the implementation process of the European air quality regulation. The questions pertaining coercive isomorphism include the degree of influence of authorities and institutions on the policy regarding air quality, the influence of possible sanctions for municipalities when not adhering to certain air quality standards, and the influence of the inhabitants of the municipality on the policy regarding air quality.
5.2.1 Influence of authorities and institutions
First, the influence of municipalities, provinces and central government on the municipal implementation process is discussed. Figure 11 below indicates the number of interviews during which the particular institutions were indicated as having a strong or a weak influence on the implementation process. A distinction has been made between rural and urban municipalities.
Figure 11 Number of interviewees that indicated authorities have a strong or weak influence
First, as expected, every municipality mentioned itself as the primary controller of the implementation plan concerning air quality policy. They themselves are able to exert the greatest influence. This is not graphically depicted in the figure above because the influence of the municipality itself cannot be considered a coercive pressure. Furthermore, the province and
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Province Central government
Num ber o f inte rv iew s Government level Strong influence Urban Rural 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Province Central government
