Lyell Collection

Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Christie, S.
Right arrow Articles by Teeuw, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Engineering Geology Special Publications; 1998; v. 14; p. 55-61;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.ENG.1998.014.01.07
© 1998 Geological Society of London

Section 2: Policy, protection and vulnerability

A comparison of European state policies on ‘orphan’ sites

Stella Christie & Richard M. Teeuw

Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK

Contaminated land is a serious problem in most countries with any industrial history. Contaminated land policy is still being formed, and there is little commonality in approach. Some states have laws, either on statute, or in draft, which deal specifically with contaminated land. Some use other legislation to control this area. Those states with vulnerable water supplies tend to be most concerned, particularly with ‘orphan’ sites. However, responsibility for identification and remediation varies within countries, as well as between states, as does the funding regime. There are few specific remediation standards. The number of sites in need of remediation is also largely unknown. Costs are high, leading to prioritization due to inadequacies in funding. The European Environment Agency could act as a focus for co-ordination and dissemination of knowledge. ‘Orphan’ sites need to be part of national and international policy.