2. Environmental law and procedure in the Nordic countries 

Denmark has a population of roughly 5,88 million. Both Greenland and the Faroe Islands are parts of the country, although they have special status as self-governing communities. Only Denmark proper is member of the EU, although with some opt-outs.

Generally speaking, the political and administrative structure in Denmark is built upon three tiers; national, regional and local. The central authorities are the Parliament, the government and its ministries and their appurtenant administrative bodies.

https://english.im.dk/responsibilities-of-the-ministry/governance-of-municipalities-and-regions/about-municipalities-and-regions  

  These authorities develop national planning policies and provide guidance to lower levels of administration, which consists of five regions (regioner) and 98 municipalities (kommuner). The regions are primarily responsible for national health service, but also are responsible for some tasks related to social services, public transport, polluted soil and regional development. In contrast to the municipalities, the regions cannot levy taxes but are dependent on yearly grants from the Government. Both the municipalities and the regions are governed by elected councils and neither level is part of the state administration of Denmark.

According to section 82 of the Danish Constitution (Grundloven),

Grundloven, 169/1953.

the municipalities are in a relatively independent position. In a Nordic perspective, Danish municipalities are quite large with an average of 55,000 inhabitants. København stands out in this respect with 600,000 inhabitants and the regional area has more than 1,3 million inhabitants. Local government through the municipalities is a major force in Denmark due to the distribution of administrative competences. They handle the greater part of welfare and societal affairs and have a strong local tax base. Moreover, only the municipalities are regarded as local authorities in Denmark, not the regions. The municipalities are responsible for several environmental issues on local level.

The supervision of the regions and the municipalities is performed by the State Administration which is relatively centralized. Each Minister is the top executive within his or her field. An important aspect of the power vested in the ministries is the right to implement legislation through statutory orders, circulars and different guidelines. The hierarchical relationship also implies that the superior authorities may have the authority to interfere in the doings of the lower level of the administration. Such responsibility can also be left to the appurtenant agencies and the five regions. In the field of environmental law, many ministries are involved, out of which the Ministry of Environment is primarily responsible for pollution control, protection and management of nature, forestry, wildlife and water. Two agencies support the Ministry in performing basic expert and administrative work: the Danish Environmental Protection Agency (Miljøstyrelsen), and the Danish Nature Agency (Naturstyrelsen). The Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Fishery is responsible for the regulation of agricultural activities. The Ministry for Climate, Energy and Utilities is responsible for water utilities, energy resources and the mitigation of greenhouse gases. The Ministry for Ecclesiastical Affairs has the competence to regulate spatial planning. Finally, the Ministry of Industry, Business and Financial Affairs should be mentioned, having the competence to regulate marine planning issues.

As noted, Denmark has been a member of the EU since 1973. The current implementation policy towards the EU is based on a “minimum implementation strategy”.

There is a forum - Erhvervslivets EU- og Regelforum – assigned to advice the Government on how to avoid unnecessary administrative burdens on Danish business; https://em.dk/media/13298/kommissorium.pdf 

Grundloven dates from 1849 and has seen few changes over the years.

Suksi in Nordic Constitutions (2018), pp. 19-21. 

For obvious reasons, it contains no provisions on citizens’ rights to a safe, healthy and ecologically balanced environment. Instead, such rules on the constitutional level are expressed in the EU Treaties, supplemented with soft law instruments such as the Government’s political strategy on sustainable development. Further, apart from the Polluter Pays principle, no internationally recognized principles of environmental law are expressed in Danish law.

Basse at pp. 75, 80.

In a Nordic comparison, Danish environmental law is fragmentized.

Basse at p. 122. Her list on Danish environmental legislation on pp. 137-142 enumerates 86 different acts.

It consists mainly of framework regulations empowering the Minister in charge to implement the legal requirements by way of statutory orders, circulars, plans, guidelines and decisions. Statutory orders are legally binding. Environmental law in Denmark builds upon the ordinary instruments of administrative law, that is permit regimes, notification systems, registrations, inspections and enforcement. As regards the latter, there are both administrative orders and sanctions, as well as criminal sanctions.

The most important piece of legislation for this study is the Danish Environmental Protection Act (MBL).

Miljøbeskyttelseloven (100/2022).

The MBL regulates pollution from private and public industrial activities. Important EU directives such as the Industrial Emissions Directive (2010/75, IED), the Ambient Air Quality Directive (2008/50), the Waste Framework Directive (2008/98) and all of its daughter directives, as well as some of the daughter directives connected to the Water Framework Directive (2000/60) are implemented in the MBL. The Act constitutes a comprehensive permit regime for installations and activities listed in two Annexes under the Statutory Order on Environmental Approval Listed Enterprises (BEK).

Bekendtgørelse om godkendelse af listevirksomhed (2080/2021).

Annex I to the BEK mirrors Annex I to the IED, whereas Annex II covers other activities and installations. In addition, there are directly applicable sector-specific statutory orders that regulate standards of information, conditions for emission and environment quality targets for different activities such as machine factories, geothermal heating systems, auto workshops and dry-cleaning facilities, etc. The permits under MBL are integrated so far as they regulate emissions to air, water and soil, as well as conditions as concerning noise and the handling of waste. It may be noted that there is no specific waste law in Denmark aside from the regulation in the MBL and several statutory orders, including the general Waste Statutory Order.

Affaldsbekendtgørelse (2159/2020). It may also be noted that permits under MBL does not include a right to discharge sewage water into public sewage plants, for which a specific permit is required from the municipality in question.

The permit body is also obliged to evaluate any impact from the activity in question on Natura 2000 sites, as well as on protected species.

Habitatbekendtgørelsen (2019/2021) and Bekendtgørelse om administration af planloven i forbindelse med internationale naturbeskyttelsesområder samt beskyttelse af visse arter (1383/2016).

Large livestock farms are covered by a specific permit regime in the Act on Environmental Approval for Livestock Holdings (HDL)

Bekendtgørelse af lov om husdyrbrug og anvendelse av gødning m.v. (521/2019).

and a statutory order issued under that law.

Other prominent pieces of Danish environmental legislation are the Chemicals and Products Act,

Kemikalieloven (244/2022).

the Contaminated Soil Act

Jordforureningsloven (282/2017).

and the Nature Protection Act.

Naturbeskyttelsesloven (1986/2021).

The Water Basin Management Act

Vandplanlægningslov (126/2017).

implements the Water Framework Directive (2000/60), for which the Miljøstyrelsen is the competent authority together with the municipalities. The Water Course Act (1218/2019)

Vandløbsloven (1217/2019).

regulates drainage and discharges to water courses.

Denmark is the most densely populated country in Scandinavia. This – together with sensitive coastal areas and a very high dependence on ground water resources – may be the reason for why planning and building law was early developed. Today, large developments such as major infrastructural projects are approved in special legislation passed by the Parliament. The building of a wild boar fence along the border between Denmark and Germany and the construction of the peninsula Lynetteholm in København are two such examples.

In addition, there is a comprehensive legal system for developments under the Planning Act (Planloven) and the Building Act.

Planloven (1157/2020) and Byggeloven (1178/2016).

As noted, the responsibility for the implementation of those laws rests with the Ministry of the Ecclesiastical Affairs and the Ministry of Social Affairs, Housing and Senior Citizens. The aim of the legislation on spatial planning is to ensure a general binding framework for decision-making on land use. The framework distinguishes among three zones: rural, urban, and summer cottage areas. Vertically, the planning system is further built upon two levels: 1) national planning through binding state plans and other directives on issues of national interest, and 2) municipal/local planning. Each municipal (structure) plan describes the future development of land use and some guidelines for the use of properties within the municipality. With reference to the municipal plan, the municipality can adopt local development plans, covering smaller areas, containing more specific regulation regarding the use of the area, heights of buildings, etc. Local development plans are binding for future land use in the area concerned. A wide array of issues and activities can be regulated in such a plan. In addition to complying with the local development plan, building construction requires a building permit.

The Miljøstyrelsen deals exclusively with environmental protection and is responsible for more than 60 environmental acts. Based on this legislation, the authority has the competence to permit and control many enterprises and local waste handling facilities. It also prepares statutory rules and guidelines for the Minister to adopt. Further, the Miljøstyrelsen decides on permits for the most complicated industrial installations and activities covered by the MBL and the BEK. For all other activities listed in the BEK and the HDL, permits are issued by the municipal boards. In Denmark, this division of responsibilities is based on the principle of subsidiarity, which implies that decisions shall be made at the lowest possible level.

As in the other Nordic countries, municipal (structure) plans and local development plans are decided by the municipal council. However, the Danish Ministry of the Ecclesiastical Affairs has far-reaching authority to guide and even interfere with such plans if they are in breach of national interests. To begin with, the Minister may lay down binding rules on the quality and content of local plans. The Minister may also publish statutory orders concerning national interests. Further, according to the Planning Act, the Minister may veto a local plan in breach of certain national interests; business development, binding rules on environmental protection and nature conservation, culture and landscape preservation, and interests in national/regional facilities. Finally, the Minister may order the municipality to produce a local development plan or by way of a national directive establish legal effects on the land-use in an area similar to such a plan.

The implementation of the SEA Directive (2001/42) and the EIA Directive (2011/92) was originally performed in the Act on Environmental Strategic Planning (1533/2015) and Planloven. Since 2018, however, these rules are subject to legislation of their own, namely the Environmental Assessment Act (1976/2021) and the Statutory Order on the Environmental Assessments (269/2021).

Miljøvurderingsloven (1976/2021) and Miljøvurderingsbekendtgørelsen (1367/2021).

The municipalities are responsible for the EIA procedures in most cases, although the Miljøstyrelsen may in certain situations take over (“call-in”) the responsibilities if the project in question concerns the competences of several authorities or is of significant importance. It may be noted that Denmark has utilized its competence to establish threshold criteria under Article 4(3) of the EIA Directive (2011/92) to be applied instead of case-by-case decisions on screening and scoping in the regulation of the agricultural use of fertilizer.

In all cases related to EIA it is the developer who is responsible for the EIA procedure and to provide the authorities with an EIA report. As for the authorities, a time limit of 90 days is set for the screening decision. The EIA procedure is concluded with a separate decision by the competent authority. Such an approval according to the Environmental Assessment Act can by part of a permit decision according to MBL or HDL. Even so, the activity with such a permit decision under either of these acts still needs to be in line with the local plans according to the Planning Act.

Supervision and enforcement in Denmark are performed by the same authority that issued the permit in question. Thus, this responsibility rests with the municipal council in most cases, including some installations under the IED. However, for heavily polluting and complex industries the responsibility lies with the Miljøstyrelsen. All supervision activities are regulated by the Statutory Order on Supervision of Environmental Polluting Activities (1536/2019).

In Denmark, there are no administrative courts. Instead, all administrative decisions may be challenged on issues of legality to the general courts according to Section 63 in Grundloven. The general court system consists of 24 district court, two courts of appeal and one Supreme Court (Højesteret). However, for a long time Denmark has had an elaborate system of appeal boards to which most administrative decisions may be appealed by those who are affected, including the public concerned. The appeals boards apply the inquisitorial principle and commonly have the power to look into the case on its merits and may decide anew.

There are three such boards in the field of environmental law, namely the Environmental Protection and Food Appeals Board (Miljø- og Fødevareklagenævnet), the Spatial Planning Appeals Board (Planklagenævnet) and Energy Appeals Board (Energiklagenævnet). Organisationally, they are independent of but with administrative services provided by the Ministry of Industry, Business and Financial Affairs. All are located in Appeals Boards’ House in Viborg, where they have a joint secretariat. The appeal boards are chaired by an external lawyer and the other members are assigned by the two courts of appeal, the Minister for Business and Growth, and the Danish Parliament. The composition of each board differs, although most cases are decided by the secretariat without involving the chair or the expert members. Permit decisions under the MBL and the SEA/EIA Act are handled by the Miljø- og Fødevareklagenævnet, whereas the Planklagenævnet takes care of decisions under Planloven. This system of appeals boards furnishes those who are involved in environmental cases with a simple, relatively fast and cheap possibility to challenge administrative environmental decision-making. Although one may bring such a case directly to a district court without exhausting the possibilities for administrative appeal, this possibility is rarely used in administrative cases under environmental law. However, it should be noted that, in contrast with the general courts in Denmark, the appeals board cannot request the CJEU for a preliminary ruling.

C-222/13 The Danish telecommunication Complaints Board (2014).

The population of Norway is about the same size as Denmark and Finland, namely 5.5 million (2021). The country is a constitutional monarchy but, as in Denmark and Sweden, the King as an individual has merely a formal and symbolic function. The Norwegian Parliament (Stortinget) has one chamber with 169 delegates, elected on a four year basis. As noted in the introduction, Norway is not a member of the European Union but is a member of EFTA. Through the EEA agreement, the country is bound to most of the EUs environmental legislation with a couple of important exceptions: agriculture and fisheries are not included, nor are the two nature conservations directives of the EU – that is, the Birds Directive (2009/147) and the Habitats Directive (92/43).

Traditionally, Norwegian public law is passed as framework legislation by the Stortinget, delegating to the Government the responsibility to adopt subsequent regulations. Policy implementation is performed by the Government, although it is quite common that the Stortinget issue instructions through political guidelines. As of today, the Norwegian Government is organised as follows. The Ministry of Climate and the Environment (Klima- og miljødepartementet, KLD) is the coordinating ministry for climate policy and law and is responsible for pollution control, nature conservation and the management of biodiversity, cultural heritage, and measures to promote outdoor recreation. The Norwegian Environment Agency (Miljødirektoratet) and the directorates for cultural heritage (Riksantikvaren, Direktoratet for kulturminneforvaltningen) are agencies under the Ministry. KLD defines the general lines of policy, prepares matters for the Government and Stortinget and issues general regulations within its area of competence. The Ministry for Local Government and Regional Development (Kommunal- og distriktsdepartementet, KMD) is responsible for spatial planning at the regional and local level. It also shares the responsibility for the EIA legislation with the KLD. Water resources and energy production is within the competence of the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy (Olje- og energidepartementet, OED), under which the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (Norges Vassdrags- og Energidirektorat, NVE) has an important role to play as a decision-maker.

State administration is organised at three levels. The ministries develop governmental policies under the different policy areas, helped by specialized directorates and agencies which have decision-powers in individual cases. In addition, there is a state administration on the regional level, based on the division of the country into eleven counties (fylke), each having a county governor (statsforvalteren). The county governors are responsible for issues of regional or local importance as well as decision-making in public law matters. They also have a controlling function over the municipalities, including being the first instance of appeal for some decisions made at the local level.

Within each of the counties (fylke), there is also a regional authority for municipal cooperation and the taking care of joint tasks such as regional development and planning, secondary education, certain transport tasks, health care, and cultural heritage. These county authorities (fylkeskommuner) are led by directly elected assemblies (fylkestinget) and have their own administration, separated from the state authorities. In the course of the years, they have been awarded a growing number of tasks in different policy areas, as there has been a tendency to transfer power and competence from the state to the regional or even municipal authorities.

There are 356 municipalities (kommuner), which are administered by directly elected municipal councils, each headed by a mayor and a small executive cabinet. The municipalities are responsible for the many public services that are characteristic of the Nordic welfare state. In the field of environmental policy, the municipalities are responsible for spatial planning and management of certain protected sites for nature conservation and outdoor recreation. It may be noted that the Norwegian municipalities have a very strong position in society, even in a Nordic context. Out of tradition and early legislation from the beginning of independence in the early 1900s, the largest rivers cannot be exploited for hydro power by private entities, something that instead is performed by municipal or regional associations.

In 2015, 55% of the major hydro power installations were in the hands of the municipalities or the counties (fylkeskommuner), 35% were state owned, see Darpö (2016) at p. 4.

As the municipalities also often act as strong defenders of natural values and the outdoor recreation of the local community,

This factor must not be underestimated in Norway, where according to a poll referred to in Bugge (2021, at para 29), 90% of the population enjoy hiking, skiing or similar activities twice or three times a week on average.according to a poll referred to in Bugge (2021, at para 29), 90% of the population enjoy hiking, skiing or similar activities twice or three times a week on average.

their role is one of conflicting interests.

Even though Norway is not a member of the EU, the country is a party to most of the regional and global conventions in the field of the environment on which the EU environmental legislation is based concerning air pollution, waste, climate change, natural resources, nature conservation and  species protection, marine protection and water pollution. Further, the most important pieces of EU environmental legislation are directly implemented in Norwegian law in accordance with the EEA agreement, most importantly here the IED (2010/75), the Ambient Air Quality Directive (2008/50), the Waste Framework Directive (2008/98), the Renewable Energy Directive (2018/2001), the Water Framework Directive (2000/60), as well as both the EIA Directive (2011/92) and the SEA Directive (2001/42).

The Norwegian Grunnloven, 1814-05-17) dates from 1814 and has obviously seen many changes over the years. Since 1992, Grunnloven has included a provision on environmental protection, today Article 112. This Article contains a substantive right to a healthy and “natural” environment for the citizens, as well as a procedural right to access to environmental information. Article 112 is an important political symbol and guideline for the interpretation of legislation, although its value as a yardstick in judicial review of environmental decision-making has been limited.

People v Arctic Oil case (Norges Høgsterett, 2020-12-22 in case no. 20-051052SIV-HRET), see Bugge at para 49-49A.

For the focus of this study, the most important pieces of Norwegian environmental legislation are the following. The 1981 Pollution Control Act (FL)

Forurensningsloven (1981-03-13-6).

  covers all kinds of pollution from stationary sources, waste management and liability for environmental damage. The Act establishes an integrated system to prevent and control pollution of the air, water and soil. Some basic environmental principles are expressed in the FL, such as BAT and the Polluter Pays Principle, whereas others are implicit in the basis of the regulation. Examples of the latter are the precautionary principle (“føre-var-prinsippet” in Norwegian) and the principle that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at its source (cf. Article 191 TFEU). The FL establishes a general licensing system for polluting activities, although today it mostly applies to industrial installations and other kinds of operations of some size or environmental impact. The IED is implemented in the FL and the subsequent Pollution Regulation.

Forskrift om begrensning av forurensing (2004-06-01-931).

Other important environmental laws in Norway are the Climate Act,

Lov om klimamål (2017-06-16-60).

the Product Control Act,

Produktkontrolloven (1976-04-09-21).

the Water Resources Act,

Vannressursloven (2000-11-24-82).

the Regulation on Hazardous Waste,

Forskrift om gjenvinning og behandling av avfall (2004-06-01-930).

the REACH Regulation

REACH-forskriften (2008-05-30-516 with amendments).

and the Forestry Act.

Skogbrukslova (2005-05-27-31).

As neither the Birds Directive (2009/147) nor the Habitats Directive (92/43) is included in the EEA agreement, the legislation on nature conservation is purely domestic. The main piece of legislation here is the Nature Diversity Act.

Naturmangfoldloven (2009-06-19-100).

The aim of the Planning and Building Act (PBL)

Plan- og bygningsloven (2008-06-27-71).

 is to establish a comprehensive system of spatial planning in order to promote sustainable development for the good of individuals, society at large and future generations. Spatial planning according to the PBL is intended to contribute to the coordination of national, regional and local commitments and to give guidance for the use and protection of land and natural resources. The PBL is built upon a hierarchy of plans; Regional plans (regionplan) issued by the county councils guide all lower level plans (sector plans and municipal plans). Regional plans are also instrumental for the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60). General municipal master plans (kommuneplan) draw up the main lines for land-use activities in a wide sense, whereas the local development plans (reguleringsplan) give the particulars of the development. The development plan may have the form of an “area regulation” (områderegulering) for a somewhat extended area that the municipality wants to develop or secure for certain purposes, including protection of the environment. More common, however, is a more detailed regulation (detaljregulering) with the purpose of developing a smaller area with a limited number of constructions, commonly based on the proposal of a private developer. The regional plans are regarded as recommendations, while both the municipal master plan and the development plan are legally binding on future land use and exploitation. The latter plan may also be used as a basis for expropriation. Finally, the PBL contains rules on building permits. As a rule, building permits are issued on the basis of the land-use plan for the area in question.

The Norwegian implementation of the EIA Directive and the SEA Directive is found in the PBL and the Regulation on EIA.

Forskrift om konsekvensutredninger (2017-06-21-854).

The legislation basically reflects the requirements of the two directives, applying to all types of projects and land-use plans that may have a significant impact on the environment and on society. A common distinction is made between two groups of projects, out of which one category always requires an EIA (Annex I to the Regulation), whereas the other (Annex II) obliges the competent authority to undertake an evaluation in the individual case (a “screening decision”). In Norway, there is a close link between spatial planning and permits for different operations that may have a significant impact on the environment. Land-use plans are as a rule decisive for the localization and development of infrastructure and major industrial and other projects. A SEA/EIA is mandatory for regional plans and municipal master plans that provide guidelines and framework for projects listed in Annexes I and II. Local development plans must include a SEA/EIA if the project may have significant environmental or social effects. The EIA must establish the investigation and communication requirements not only in the planning procedure, but also any subsequent permit procedure. Thus, the EIA will also as a rule be used by the developer when applying for a permit according to FL.

Concerning pollution control, the administration is to a large extent undertaken by the Miljødirektoratet and the statsforvaltaren, even though the municipalities are responsible for some tasks as well. Licenses under the FL are normally issued by Miljødirektoratet, although some competence regarding activities having a regional or local importance has been delegated to the county governor (statsforvalteren).

See Statsforvalterens myndighet etter forurensningsloven, oreigningslova og produktkontrolloven, Klima- og miljødepartementet, Rundskriv 16.12.2020 (12/5062).

Licenses under the FL are integrated, as they cover all types of pollution and disturbances (air, water, soil, noise, waste). A license cannot be issued in breach of a regional plan or municipal plan. As the Act provides wide administrative discretion, the permit may also to some extent take into account other environmental concerns, such as nature conservation and species protection.

According to the PBL, all plans are decided by elected assemblies: the regional by the county council (fylkestinget), and master plans/local development plans by the municipal council (kommunestyret). Thus, planning in Norway is, much as in other Nordic countries, a regional or local issue. However, a state authority may raise objections (innsigelse) if a regional or municipal plan has a substantial effect on national or regional interests which has not been taken properly into account. If such an objection is raised, mediation will be carried out with the county governor (statsforvalteren) as chair and ultimately the controversial issues will be decided by the Ministry for Local Government and Regional Development (after consulting with other parts of the Government). The Ministry can also adopt a state plan in order to run over the conflicting regional or municipal plan. To this backdrop, the Government may issue State planning guidelines (statlige planretningslinjer) that play an important role in the relationship between the national, regional and local levels. It should finally be noted that also neighbouring municipalities as well as the Sami Parliament can raise innsigelse against a plan, triggering a similar procedure.

A similar legal construct in the Energy Act has been used by the municipalities the other way around, so to speak. By raising innsigelse against licenses for wind farms, the hosting municipalities have managed to stop these developments in a number of cases by having the cases “lifted” to the political level, namely the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy, see Darpö in NMT 2020:1 at pp. 73f.  

As for the EIA, the process is integrated in the ordinary procedure for land-use planning or licenses under the sector legislation. Thus, the EIA procedure in Norway is not an independent decision-making process. At an early stage, the developer is required to notify the permit authority that an application is on the way, thus preparing for this procedure. As noted, an EIA is mandatory for projects under Annex I, and is based on a case-by-case decision for projects under Annex II to the Regulation on EIA. Criteria for these screening decisions are also given in the Regulation, as well as the details of the procedure. A proposal for a “study programme” must be presented, informing about the project in question, the environmental issues the project may raise, the methods for the investigation, realistic alternatives and how public participation will be guaranteed. After public consultation, the competent authority decides on the study programme, which then is to be carried out by the applicant, or – if the EIA is made for a regional or municipal plan – by the planning authority. The possible environmental impacts are assessed through the study programme and the findings must be included in the application for the plan or project. The content and form of the EIA is prescribed in the Regulation, basically reflecting Annex IV of the EIA Directive (2011/92). The application, together with the EIA, is made public and consultations are undertaken. Additional studies may be required and comments from the public must be taken into account when the competent authority decides on the plan or permit. Thus, the final say on whether the EIA suffices will be in the hands of the planning authority or permit body.

As in Denmark, monitoring, supervision and enforcement in Norway is performed by the same authority that issued the permit in question. The FL talks about the “pollution control authority” (forurensingsmyndigheten), which means the Miljødirektoratet with delegation powers. In some types of cases, it is the county governor (statsforvalteren) that monitors and supervises the operators, as well as enforcing the legal obligations on the permit holder. Statsforvalteren also oversees the municipal authorities on those areas where they are awarded a supervisory and enforcement competence, for example concerning local sewage installations. The instruments afforded in the FL are the ordinary ones of public law, that is, orders, fines, access to property, etc. The pollution control authority is also obliged to notify the police when they have reason to believe that a crime has been committed.

It can be noted that Norway has a leading role in Europe in fighting environmental crimes, introducing a special police force for these matters; https://www.okokrim.no/kriminalitetsomraader.547992.no.html

In contrast to the other Nordic countries, Norway does not have either administrative courts with general jurisdiction or environmental appeals boards. Instead, all administrative appeals are made within the ordinary line of administration and can only be brought to the next level of the hierarchy. Under the FL, municipal decisions are appealed to the county governor (statsforvaltaren). Decisions by the county governor are appealed to the Miljødirektoratet, whereas decisions by the Miljødirektoratet and the Riksantikvaren may be tried by the Ministry (KLD). Concerning decisions under PBL, the line of appeal is similar, although the final say rests with the Ministry for Local Government and Regional Development (KMD).

Judicial review of decisions made by the Government can be brought to court, but compared to the other Nordic countries, this rarely happens. Three factors are relevant here. First, criteria for licenses are either very technical or broadly formulated, leaving the administration considerable room for discretion to decide, for example, what is ‘socio-economically effective’. In practice, the review in court is confined to formal issues and other basic rules of good governance.

See Backer, IL: Ulveforvaltning og ulvefelling. Lov og Rett 2022, s. 7-27.

Second, it is procedurally complicated to bring an action for judicial review in Norway, as one must bring the claim to the first level in the general court system, that is the District Court (tingrett). Thereafter, the case must proceed through the Court of Appeal (lagmannsrett) before arriving at the final instance, the Norwegian Supreme Court (Høyesterett/Høgsterett). Third, the costs of bringing such a case may be considerable, as the loser-pays-principle applies as the main rule in almost all instances.

In 2018, the WWF challenged the decision on hunting wolves, the litigation costs in Oslo District Court amounted to more than NOK 450,000 equivalent to €47,000. However, in cases concerning important legal principles, the claimants can be exempted from paying the opponent’s costs, see the case concerning Barents Sea mentioned above.  

Iceland is a republic, a parliamentary democracy with an elected president who functions as head of state. The executive power rests with individual ministers and each of them bears political and legal responsibility in a defined area of subject-matter. As in Denmark, Finland and Norway, public authorities are not constitution­ally separated from the government.

See further Bull, T: Institutions and division of powers. Chapter 3 in The Nordic Constitutions (2018).

Administrative functions are also entrusted to central governmental agencies and municipal authorities. Acts by the Parliament (Alþingi) and administrative regulations (secondary legislation) issued by individual ministers make up the most important public law legislation. General guidelines and other “soft law" instruments are sometimes issued by national agencies.

Iceland is currently divided into 64 municipalities. Pursuant to Article 78 of the Constitution (Stjórnarskrá lýðveldisins Íslands)

Stjórnarskrá lýðveldisins Íslands, 33/1944, see https://www.government.is/library/01-Ministries/Prime-Ministrers-Office/constitution_of_iceland.pdf

the municipalities manage their affairs independently as laid down by law. Accordingly, the municipalities have the right to local self-government. Further, they are administratively independent and do not form a part of the central government hierarchy; thus, other administrative authorities lack the power to supervise or overrule municipal decisions. However, and in line with Article 109 of the Local Government Act (LGA),

Sveitarstjórnarlög nr. 138/2011.

the Minister of Infrastructure is entrusted with the role of general administrative monitoring of municipalities. According to the Local Government Act, an elected municipal council governs the administration of each municipality and elects a chair.

See further Valsson, T.F.: Sveitarstjórnarréttur¸ Bókaútgáfan Codex (2014), pp. 323–331.

However, in the larger municipalities, the day-to-day business is usually run by a professional administrator, local bodies, specialized officials and committees.

The bulk of Icelandic environmental law has undergone considerable development the last three decades. In addition to the ratification and incorporation of the most important global and regional environmental treaties, a sizeable part of the EUs environmental law relating to pollution prevention and environmental quality has, through the European Economic Area (EEA) mechanism, been implemented into the Icelandic legal system.

Jóhannsdóttir, A: Would Article 79 og the 2016 Bill make much Difference? Some considerations on the legal consequences of the proposed constitutional environmental provisions. In Icelandic Constitutional Reform. People, Processes, Politics, eds. Ágúst Þór Árnason and Catherine Dupré, Comparative Constitutional Change, Routledge (2021), p. 207.

In addition to the Nature Conservation Act,

Lög nr. 60/2013 um náttúruvernd.

the Hygiene and Pollution Control Act,

Lög nr. 7/1998 um hollustuhætti og mengunarvarnir.

and the Planning Act,

Skipulagslög nr. 123/2010.

most environmental related legislation regulates particular issues. These include the Act on the Protection of Sea and Beaches Against Pollution,

Lög nr. 33/2004 um varnir gegn mengun hafs og stranda.

the Act on Water Management,

Lög nr. 36/2011 um stjórn vatnamála.

the Water Act,

Vatnalög nr. 15/1923.

the Act on the Treatment of Waste,

Lög nr. 55/2003 um meðhöndlun úrgangs.

and the Chemicals Act.

Efnalög nr. 61/2013.

The local governments are responsible for spatial planning and land-use decisions, and for building and development permits.

See Act (123/2010) on Spatial Planning, also Jóhannsdóttir, A: Inngangur að skipulagsrétti, lagarammi og réttarframkvæmd, Háskólaútgáfan (2016), pp. 158–180, 201–232, and 252–279.

Other public tasks and services in this field of law – including environmental protection, licensing, and control – are as a rule divided between central government agencies,

Including the Environment Agency of Iceland, https://ust.is/english/?, the National Planning Agency, https://www.skipulag.is/en, the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority, https://www.mast.is/en, the Directorate of Fisheries, https://www.fiskistofa.is/english, and the National Energy Authority, https://nea.is/, the Housing and Construction Authority https://www.hms.is/.

on the one hand, and local bodies, government officials and committees on the other. On the national level, there are the Environment Agency (Umhverfisstofnun), the National Planning Agency (Skipulagsstofnun), the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority (Matvælastofnun), the Directorate of Fisheries (Fiskistofa), the National Energy Authority (Orkustofnun), and the Housing and Construction Authority (Húsnæðis- og mannvirkjastofnun). Most environment-related administrative decisions stemming from local governments and central government agencies, including environmental licenses, may be appealed to a higher administrative level within the administrative system (administrative recourse/appeal). Depending on the decision at hand, the higher instance may be an independent and impartial instance – such as the Environmental and Natural Resources Board of Appeal (Úrskurðarnefnd umhverfis- og auðlindamála, ÚUA)

See further Jóhannsdóttir, A: Some Critical Views Relating to the Implementation of Article 9(2) of the Aarhus Convention in Iceland and the Situation of ENGOs. In Festskrift till Jan Darpö, eds. Maria Forsberg et al., Iustus förlag 2022, pp. 215–235. 

– while in other instances, appeals may be made to a central government agency, or directly to the responsible minister.

Iceland has recently reformed its legislation concerning EIAs. According to the Act on Environmental Assessment of Projects and Public Plans and Programmes,

Lög nr. 111/2021 um umhverfismat framkvæmda og áætlana.

listed projects are either subject to an EIA or must be screened in order to determine whether they might have significant effects on the environment and should therefore be subject to an EIA. For certain activities, threshold criteria are used. The developer of a project that is subject to an EIA must draft a scoping document (Assessment Plan), which the National Planning Agency announces. When a project is subject to the EIA Act, the National Planning Agency then – after having consulted with the public – issues an opinion on the scope and level of detail of the information to be included by the developer in the environmental impact assessment report.

In practise, all decisions and opinions of the National Planning Agency are published on the agency’s website.

The EIA report submitted by the developer is required to be open for public comments for six weeks before the National Planning Agency issues an opinion on the environmental impact of the project. A permit for development – a collective term including not only permits issued by local government but also all other permits and licences that may be necessary for the project – must be based on the opinion of the National Planning Agency and the licensing authority is required to lay out how the permit corresponds to the opinion of the National Planning Agency.

According to the Administrative Procedure Act

Stjórnsýslulög nr. 37/1993.

an administrative decision must be announced to all parties to the decision. Operation permits are issued in accordance with Act (7/1998) on Hygiene and Pollution Control and Regulation 550/2018 based on that Act either by the Environment Agency of Iceland or the municipal Environmental and Public Health Office. Some projects that must undergo an EIA are subject to a building permit.

Reglugerð 550/2018 um losun frá atvinnurekstri og mengunarvarnaeftirlit.

Depending on the location of the project, building permits are issued by the municipal authorities or the Iceland Construction Authority. Other projects may be subject to a licence issued by the National Energy Authority or the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority.

When applying for a permit, the developer must submit an analysis on whether the premises for the EIA have changed. In addition, the developer or the permit authority may at any time request an opinion from the National Planning Agency on whether the EIA must be revised, if there are reasons to believe that the basis of the report has changed. If the development does not commence within ten years of the opinion of the National Planning Agency on the given EIA, it is mandatory to request a new opinion.

On a general level, the responsibility for supervision and enforcement of environmental law is divided between the central level and local level. The division is commonly tied to the location, type, size or complexity of the activity in question. On the national level, competent authorities are, for example, the Environment Agency, the Food and Veterinary Authority and the National Energy Authority. The local level consists of the local governments, and municipal bodies and committees. As in Norway and Denmark, the responsibility for the supervision and enforcement of the law in relation to licensed activities, as a rule, rests upon the licensing authority. As already noted, the ultimate legal and political responsibility for supervision and enforcement of environmental law rests with the relevant minister. However, the Minister would not act directly against a company or an individual unless law explicitly provides such an authority.

Typical tools for the enforcement of the law are fines, decisions to clean up or reverse the situation, orders aimed at a company or individual to cease an illegal situation or action, and sometimes to report the case to the police for investigation and – if there is sufficient evidence – to report the case to the prosecutor for a decision on whether to take action in court.

In Iceland, the judicial system consists of three tiers of general courts: eight District Courts, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court. These courts deal with most subject matters, including criminal law, civil law, administrative law and, in addition, constitutional issues.

See Bull, T: Institutions and division of powers (2018).

Similar to Denmark and Norway, administrative courts have not been established in Iceland. Thus, parallel to the possibility for the public concerned to make an appeal within the administration – commonly to the competent Ministry

See for example Article 111 of the Local government act, stating that a party to a case may appeal an administrative decision falling under the scope of article 109 of the act to the minister.

– the public concerned may challenge an environmental administrative decision by launching judicial review in a district court. None of the general courts is specialized in environmental law. However, in many instances, an administrative recourse by appeal is possible, including to the Environmental and Natural Resources Board of Appeal (ÚUA), which specialises in environmental and natural resources issues.

See Act on Environmental and Natural Resources Board of Appeal (Lög nr. 130/2011 um úrskurðarnefnd umhverfis- og auðlindamála).

The administrative recourse is very often used before going to court. This picture, however, is made more complex as the parties to a decision – such as landowners and operators – still have the possibility to go directly to court, whereas members of the public concerned cannot do so. As the ÚUA commonly stays its proceedings until the court case is decided, it may be argued that the appeal process is not equal for all parties to such environmental cases.

See Jóhannsdóttir, A. (2022), pp. 227–228.

In Sweden, the executive power rests with the Government (regeringen), which always decides as a collective. Administratively, the Government is assisted by the Government Offices, comprising all ministries. Under the Government there are some 400 national and regional agencies and public authorities. Administrative functions are also entrusted to municipal authorities or delegated to private bodies. EU Regulations, Acts by the Parliament (Riksdagen) and Governmental Ordinances are most important in public law legislation, although regulations issued by national agencies also play an important role. General guidelines and other “soft law" instruments are frequently issued by all national and regional agencies.

Sweden is divided into 21 counties (län) and 290 municipalities (kommuner). Each county has a County Administrative Board (länsstyrelsen) headed by the County Governor. Constitutionally, the County Administrative Boards are governmental agencies with expert staff in various areas within the field of public law. At the local level, each municipality has an elected assembly, the municipal council (kommunfullmäktige). The municipal council appoints the municipal executive board (kommunstyrelsen), which leads and coordinates the tasks and responsibilities of the community. The Swedish municipalities are responsible for executing and providing a significant proportion of all public tasks and services, including environmental and health protection. Traditionally, the municipalities have a strong independence. There exist avenues for governmental agencies to intervene – not least due to the influence of EU law – but overall they are not common within administrative law.

Moreover, according to the Swedish constitution (Regeringsformen),

Kungörelse (1974:152) om beslutad ny regeringsform.

all authorities are independent in their decision-making concerning exercise of authority towards individuals or in applying the law. This independence from any influence from other authorities or the Government, together with the fact that the Government always decides as a collective, entails that – similarly to Finland – the notion of “ministerial rule” does not exist in Sweden. Thus, the relevant ministry is not permitted to intervene in an individual matter that is being handled by an agency or a municipality.

Sweden has a universally applicable Environmental Code (MB),

Miljöbalken (1998:808).

which harmonises the general rules and principles in this field. The Code applies to all activities that may harm the environment and the human health. It contains the environmental principles and provisions providing for environmental quality norms as well as environmental impact assessments (EIA). Listed industrial undertakings, quarries and other environmentally hazardous activities, as well as water operations, are subject to permit or notification requirements. The Code also contains provisions relating to nature conservation and species protection – including Natura 2000 – chemicals and waste. EU Regulations and Directives on these subject areas are all implemented in the Environmental Code. National regulations are issued by – among others – the Environmental Protection Agency (Naturvårdsverket), the Chemicals Agency (Kemikalieinspektionen) and the Agency for Marine and Water Management (Havs- och vattenmyndigheten).

Certain activities are also regulated in special pieces of legislation. Planning and building issues are covered by the 2010 Planning and Building Act (PBL).

Plan- och bygglagen (2010:900).

Infrastructure installations, such as railroads and highways, have regulations of their own, as do mining, forestry and nuclear installations. Permits for electric grids and nets are decided according to the Electricity Act.

Ellagen (1997:857).

The authority to issue plans and permits under the Planning and Building Act resides with the municipalities. To a certain extent, the municipalities also act as decision-makers under the Environmental Code. This applies for example on licensing for minor environmentally hazardous activities, handling of certain categories of waste and the management of ambient air quality.

The County Administrative Boards has a general responsibility for “green” issues and water-related activities, as well as a role as a coordinator of public interests. Additionally, they issue permits for waste transportation and disposal, chemical activities, and similar activities. Concerning environmentally hazardous activities listed in the Ordinance on environmental licensing,

Miljöprövningsförordningen (2013:251).

the responsibility to issue permits rests on the Regional Licensing Boards (Miljöprövningsdelegationen), which are hosted by 12 of the County Administrative Boards. In their decision-making, these boards are independent from the county administration and the County Governor.

Installations and activities considered to have a substantial environmental impact must obtain a permit from the Land and Environmental Court, as do all kinds of water operations. This latter situation, in which courts “exercise administrative powers”, is unique in Europe.

C-263/08 Djurgården-Lilla Värtan para 37.

Also national authorities, such as the Naturvårdsverket, the Swedish Chemicals Agency (Kemikalieinspektionen) and the National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen), are responsible for some environmental decision-making.

Permit decisions according to the specific legislation on mining, infrastructure projects and nuclear installations are made by national authorities and their regional branches, such as the National Transport Administration (Transportstyrelsen), the Geological Survey of Sweden (Sveriges Geologiska Undersökning) and the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (Strålsäkerhetsmyndigheten). The Swedish Forest Agency (Skogsstyrelsen) and its regional branches make decisions regarding forestry.

Some projects may also be preceded by a governmental decision on “permissibility” according to Chapter 17 of the Environmental Code before a permit can be granted. A mandatory requirement for such a decision is today restricted to large scale activities, such as nuclear activities, major infrastructure projects and certain industrial installations. However, the Government may also on a case-by-case basis by its own initiative decide that they shall try the permissibility of other activities. However, Governmental decisions on permissibility today mostly concerns the national defence. The Supreme Court has also made clear that a decision on permissibility cannot exclude a subsequent complete, precise and definitive evaluation of all effects of the activity. Thus, such a preliminary decision is not a guarantee for a permit at the end of the day.

NJA 2013 s. 613 with reference to C-127/02 Waddenzee (2004), C-404/09 Alto Sil (2011) and C-258/11 Sweetman (2013).

As for the EIA, the responsibility under the Environmental Code to undertake the procedure and to produce the investigation rests solely on the operator. In an initial public consultation, the County Administrative Board (länsstyrelsen), the supervisory authority and individual stakeholders shall be heard, after which the Board decides on whether an EIA is required (the “screening decision”). After this, another hearing is performed with a wider circle of authorities and other stakeholders about the content of the EIA (the “scoping”). When the EIA procedure and investigation is concluded, the operator submits the EIA together with the application for the permit. Normally, additional amendments are requested by the permit authority of its own accord or on the proposal of different stakeholders. When the EIA is complete, the permit application together with the EIA is announced. It is for the permit authority to have the final say on whether the procedure and content of the EIA meet the requirements of national and EU law. It should also be noted that the permit under the Environmental Code integrates all environmental impacts of the activity: discharges to air, soil and water, water management, chemicals and waste, nature conservation and species protection (Natura 2000). However, plans and permits according to the PBL lie outside the permit under the MB, although they are taken into account.

The responsibility for decision-making on permits is kept strictly separate from the subsequent supervision/enforcement of those permits. National agencies may issue general guidance and recommendations directed to other authorities on supervision and enforcement, but actual supervision and enforcement directed to the permit holders is a task for the regional or local authorities. The basic provisions about the responsibilities are directly pointed out in the Code, while the more precise distribution of competence among the authorities is regulated in the Ordinance on Environmental Supervision and Enforcement.

Miljötillsynsförordningen (2011:13).

Concerning industrial installations, the County Administrative Board is assigned as the competent authority. This competence may, however, be delegated to the municipal Environmental Board. This possibility is used to such an extent that one may actually conclude that the supervision and enforcement on these activities normally rests with the local authorities. However, if the local level does not fulfil its obligations as a supervisory authority the County Administrative Board may withdraw the delegation as well as order the municipality to fulfil its obligations under the law. As the County Administrative Boards nevertheless are responsible for “green” issues – that is, nature conservation and species protection and supervision concerning water-related activities –  they still have authority to request an updating of the permit. Such initiatives are, however, extremely rare. As noted, as all authorities are independent under the Constitution from any interference by the Government or other administrative body when deciding on issues concerning permits. National or regional authorities representing a certain interest may of course issue an opinion in the decision-making procedure, and ultimately, if their interests are not taken into account, appeal the permit decision to court.

Sweden has administrative courts for the appeal of administrative decisions and ordinary courts for civil and criminal cases. The administrative courts decide cases on the merits in a reformatory procedure, meaning that they may replace the appealed decision with a new one following analysis of all the relevant facts of the case. Furthermore, the ultimate responsibility for the investigation of the case rests with the court according to the “ex officio principle”.  The Environmental Code establishes a system of five Land and Environmental Courts and one Land and Environmental Court of Appeal. They are all divisions within the ordinary courts, but essentially act as administrative courts for cases under the Environmental Code and the Planning and Building Act. A Land and Environmental Court has some of the characteristics of a tribunal, consisting of both law-trained judges and technically-trained experts. All members of the courts have an equal vote. Appeals in most cases concerning the environment follows this route: Municipal level → County Administrative Board → Land and Environmental Court → Land and Environmental Court of Appeal. Some cases can also be brought to the Supreme Court, mainly cases that has started at the land and environment court. Thus all appeals of environmental decisions follow this route, although the starting-point and terminus may differ. 

However, some cases are dealt with in a different manner. Decisions on hunting and forestry are appealed to the administrative courts. Permits concerning mining and infrastructure projects made by national authorities and their regional branches can be appealed to the Government. Governmental decisions can be challenged by launching an action for judicial review in the Supreme Administrative Court (HFD).

See Rättsprövningslagen (2006:304).

This procedure furnishes a legality control in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Aarhus Convention. In addition to this, some municipal statutes and decisions can be challenged in a legality-control procedure in the administrative courts by any of the municipality’s inhabitants according to the Local Government Act.

Kommunallagen (1991:900).

The Republic of Finland has a population of roughly 5.5 million. The country is administratively divided into 19 counties (maakunta/landskap) and 309 municipalities (kunta/kommun). The counties are governed by the member municipalities and serve as forums of cooperation in the areas of health care and social services. As for the state administration, it follows the territorial division of the counties, although state agencies are responsible for one or more of these in different combinations. The Regional State Administrative Agencies – so-called AVI-centres – are divided into regions (alue/region). They are in charge of basic public services, as well as responsible for different permits and law enforcement. There are six AVI-centres in mainland Finland and a similar administrative body on Åland. In addition, there are 15 Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (ELY-centres) which also form part of the state administration. Each ELY-centre is responsible for the promotion of regional business and industry, cultural activities, transport and infrastructure. They also have important tasks related to the environment and the climate, such as the use of natural resources, nature protection and water management planning. On central level, the Ministry of the Environment is tasked with a wide array of responsibilities. Alongside with the traditional issues concerning environmental policies, pollution control and waste management, it is also responsible for land-use, planning and building, nature conservation and outdoor recreation. This is also reflected in the responsibilities of the environmental divisions of the ELY-centres, which are even wider, covering water management under the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. The ELY-centres, however, do not have the competence to issue permits under the most important environmental legislation (see below). Even so, the ELY-centres play an important role in the permit procedures by way of their status as authority responsible for supervision and expert bodies, and ultimately, a right to appeal permit decisions.

According to the Finnish Constitution,

Suomen perustuslaki (731/1999).

the municipal administration is based on self-government. On local level, they are responsible for public services such as social welfare, health care, education and technical infrastructure. The sizes of the Finnish municipalities vary greatly, from a little more than 1,000 inhabitants over 600,000. Alongside with the general tasks of municipalities, they are also assigned with duties concerning the implementation of national legislation. These duties are commonly undertaken by legislatively created municipal authorities.

A superior authority in Finland cannot intervene in individual cases under consideration by subordinate authorities or municipal boards. This basic notion is also valid for the relation between a Ministry and its subordinate authorities.

Finland is a member of the European Union, as well as a Party to most multilateral environmental agreements on the European and global level. The international obligations and all of the EU Regulations and Directives are implemented in the national environmental legislation. On the constitutional level, there is an express provision stating that the responsibility for the environment belongs to all. Further, according to section 20 in the Finnish Constitution, it is the duty of the Government to ensure a healthy environment and to provide opportunities for all to have a say in environmental matters.

Fundamental environmental principles such as the Precautionary Principle, Best Available Technology (BAT) and Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) are expressed in the Environmental Protection Act (ML).

Ympäristönsuojelulaki (2014/527).

The ML together with the Water Act (VL)

Vesilaki (2011/587).

– containing regulation of the use of water bodies and related construction (“water management”) – establishes a comprehensive permit regime, covering all activities that pose a risk of environmental pollution from different sources into air, water or land. The ML together with the Environmental Protection Decree

Valtioneuvoston asetus ympäristönsuojelusta (2014/713).

is based on an integration approach with a very wide scope of non-sectoral application. The permit regime ranges from industrial installations, landfills, airports, quarries and harbours through fish farms and animal husbandry to municipal sewers and waste management facilities. Many of the provisions of the Waste Act

Jätelaki (2011/647).

are directly applicable in the permit procedure under ML. The IED regime is implemented in the ML, as well as some forty other EU pollution-related directives for stationary activities or installations. Detailed provisions are largely left to different topic-specific decrees under the Act. Provisions on environmental quality standards for water and ambient air are given, mostly reflecting the EU legislation in those areas, A permit according to the ML and the Water Act may also include an evaluation and acceptance that the project is in line with the rules on Natura 2000. Nowadays, the ML also contains “lighter” alternatives to the permit regime, namely notifications and registrations. The difference between the two is that the notification procedure concludes with an administrative decision, whereas registration merely means that the competent authority is informed about the planned activity. The minimum environmental protection requirements for the registered activities are issued in sector specific degrees.

The Land Use and Building Act

Maankäyttö- ja rakennuslaki (1999/132).

and the supplementary Land Use and Building Decree

Maankäyttö- ja rakennusasetus (1999/895).

contain provisions on planning and zoning, as well as permits and consents for different kinds of land-use and construction. The aim of the legislation is to organise the use of land areas and building activities in a way that creates the preconditions for a favourable living environment. The Act gives the municipalities and the counties a wide competence to decide on land-use matters at the local level, although there is also some possibility for the state to give guidance by way of National Land Use Goals. The most important instruments for the regulation of land-use and construction are building permits (and construction permits for “lighter" developments), together with the Regional plans and Local master plans with a mostly guiding effect. Detailed plans are used for regulating developments with binding effect. A permit according to the ML or the VL cannot be issued in breach of a Detailed plan, a Regional plan or a Local master plan. Finally, the recently reformed Climate Change Act

Ilmastolaki (423/2022 and 108/2023).

lays down the general framework for the planning of climate change policy and the monitoring of its implementation.

Under the ML, the competence to issue permits is divided between the Environmental Permit Divisions in four of the Regional State Administrative Agencies (AVI-centres) and the municipal Environmental Authorities. What kind of operation requires a permit and the distribution of competence between the authorities is made clear in different Annexes under the Environmental Protection Decree. The AVI-centres are responsible for large scale activities, such as those that may have a significant effect on the environment, or those which, by their size and nature, type of emissions, use of natural resources, waste management, etc. warrant the decision to be made by a regional (state) authority. The same goes for activities which, as well as an ML permit, also require a permit according to the VL. Normally, permits according to ML and the VL are tried by the AVI-centre in the same procedure.

There are further possibilities to merge permit procedures according to the Act on Adjusting Certain Environmental Permit Procedures (Laki eräiden ympäristöllisten lupamenettelyjen yhteensovittamisesta (2019/764).

Municipal Environmental Authorities are permit bodies for activities having lesser environmental impact. The AVI-centres are exclusively competent to decide on IED installations. The Environmental Permit Division at the centre is independent in its decision-making and has access to legal, technical and environmental expertise.

Under the Land Use and Building Act the municipalities play a key role as decision-makers for all building and construction activities. However, this competence must be utilized by a specific independent Building Supervision Authority required by law. The role of the ELY-centres in this field of law is mostly to give guidance for planning and building.

The EIA procedure is regulated in the Environmental Impact Assessment Procedures Act and the Government Decree on Environmental Impact Assessment Procedures.

Laki ympäristövaikutusten arviointimenettelystä (2017/252) and Valtioneuvoston asetus ympäristövaikutusten arviointimenettelystä (2017/277).

It is notable that the EIA procedure in Finland is separated from the different permit procedures, preceding the latter. As required by the EIA Directive, there is an obligatory list, supplemented by an enumeration of projects that need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, in order to see whether an EIA must be undertaken. For all cases, the competent “liaison authority” for the EIA procedure is the ELY-centre. The centre is responsible for providing all information necessary from different authorities and for negotiating with the developer. For those projects that need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, the ELY-centre must decide whether the project needs an EIA (“screening decision”) within one month after all relevant information is submitted. If that decision is positive, the developer needs to set up an assessment programme for public scrutiny and the liaison authority must present its view on the accuracy of that programme. Ultimately, the developer’s assessments result in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which will be submitted to the ELY-centre for further public scrutiny. Within two months, the authority is obliged to make a reasoned opinion on the sufficiency and quality of the EIS. After this, the EIS – together with the statement of the ELY-centre – is published and made available to the relevant planning or permit authority. Consequently, the EIS may be used for different permit applications under a wide array of environmental acts and periods of time. On these occasions, however, the ELY-centre must confirm that the EIS is up to date. In addition to these initial competences of the ELY-centres, the liaison authority may also appeal those permit decisions, claiming insufficiencies in the EIS or the EIA procedure.

As in Sweden, supervision and enforcement under the ML is also divided between the regional (state) level and the municipal level. The distribution of responsibility follows the same lines as the distribution of competence to issue permits, namely that when a permit is issued by the AVI-centre, the supervisory authority is the ELY-centre. Permits issued by the municipal Environmental Protection Authorities are supervised by them. Several other authorities – such as the Finnish Safety and Chemicals Agency and the municipal food safety authorities – also play a role in supervising and controlling the activities, but the actual enforcement of permits, notifications and registrations rests exclusively with the ELY-centres and the municipal Environmental Protection Authorities.

As in Sweden, the court system in Finland is dualistic, having general courts and administrative courts. The general courts (District Courts, Courts of Appeal and the Supreme Court) deal with civil and criminal cases, whereas the administrative courts deal with administrative matters on appeal. There are six Regional Administrative Courts in Finland, plus the Administrative Court of Åland. Judgements and decisions by the administrative courts may be appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court, although there is a leave to appeal requirement. The jurisdictional districts of administrative courts are determined in accordance with the regional division of the counties so that one Regional Administrative Court deals with appeals from one or more counties. However, legal proceedings of certain categories of matters have been concentrated in one or a few administrative courts. For appeals of decisions made under ML and the VL, the Vaasa Administrative Court has exclusive competence for the entire country. Thus, that court deals with roughly one fourth of all environmental cases. Other environmental cases – concerning issues such as nature conservation and soil extraction – are handled by the regionally competent administrative court. In the administrative courts the procedure is reformatory, meaning that the review covers the case or the controversial issue on its merits. The result of the review may be that the court upholds, alters or quashes the decision at stake. In cases under ML, changes are made most commonly when a remit back to the administrative body seems to be unnecessary, for example when the controversy only concerns a condition within a permit. It may be noted that, as in Sweden, the two Supreme Courts are independent of each other. As the Finnish Supreme Court deals with very few environmental cases – in contrast with Sweden where the Supreme Court is the last instance in a number of those cases – this division seems to be a lesser problem.

Many municipal decisions concerning the environment can only be challenged by way of municipal appeal to the administrative courts. As for the Land Use and Building Act, it only allows for such an action. In a municipal appeal, the scope of review strictly speaking only covers legality issues. However, this still includes both procedural and substantive legality. Unlike the ordinary judicial review in environmental cases, the administrative court cannot change the decision on municipal appeal, only accept or quash it.