|
Section 2: Policy, protection and vulnerability |
1 Stats Geotechnical Ltd, St Albans AL3 6PQ, UK
2 Geotechnical Group, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4DA, UK
The need for a legislative framework to deal with contaminated land and its relationship to the market for novel remedial techniques is described. Problems of bureaucracy, inflexibility and liability are cited as reasons for a move towards more mature policy approaches, including brownfield development, the use of economic incentives, and remedial action based on suitability of land use. The contaminated land policy of the UK is outlined and the question as to whether this policy will prevent the kind of protracted legal battles experienced in the USA under Superfund is posed. Regulatory capture is suggested as a reason for the UK's predominantly deregulatory stance and it is proposed that this has the potential to stifle the development of advanced techniques. Barriers and opportunities to development are outlined: licensing, pilot studies and perception. It is concluded that ‘Suitable for Use’ will protect public health and the environment cost effectively — albeit at the expense of a strong market for advanced remedial techniques in the UK. Poor policy decisions by government are highlighted as a reason for uncertainty in the UK's remedial market. Niche markets and turnkey operations are identified as areas where UK firms have the potential to succeed.
