Better regulation for the green transition stress‑testing toolkit

Annex A. Case studies

1. Brazil’s National Agency for Land Transportation’s indicators on environmental performance

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Brazil
Name of practice:	Railway Environmental Performance Index (Índice de Desempenho Ambiental Ferroviário - IDA Ferroviário)
Summary	A voluntary practice aiming to monitor and incentivise sustainable actions among railway concessionaires.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Ex post evaluation of regulations
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing Launched in 2019. The questionnaire upon which the IDA is based was updated in 2021.
Responsible authority:	National Agency for Land Transportation.
Level of government:	National.
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following stakeholders: Ministry of Transportation (Former Ministry of Infrastructure) Infra S.A. (Formerly VALEC) National Association of Rail Carriers (ANTF) Railway concessionaires
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To oversee and support railway concessionaires in executing sustainable actions aimed at fostering environmentally responsible enterprises, aiding in policy formulation, and facilitating the implementation of environmental programmes.
Further information:	https://www.gov.br/antt/pt-br/assuntos/ferrovias/acompanhamento-ambiental-das-concessoes-ferroviarias
Description of the practice
A voluntary ongoing practice implemented by Brazil's National Land Transportation Agency since 2019. The index measures the environmental performance of railway concessionaires through an annual questionnaire distributed across eight themes: governance, culture and communities, energy efficiency, emissions, water and effluents, solid waste, biodiversity, and environmental liabilities and accidents. Since its inception, the practice has seen positive outcomes, with a notable increase in participation among concessionaires from 2019 to 2023. The top-performing concessionaire witnessed a growth of nearly 12% in their score over this period. Moreover, the average IDA score of all participants showed a positive trend, indicating an overall improvement in sustainable actions. Stakeholder involvement in the development of this practice included the Ministry of Transportation, Infra S.A. (formerly VALEC), the National Association of Rail Carriers, and railway concessionaires. Inputs from stakeholders were collected through face-to-face meetings and discussions, aiding in the refinement of evaluation criteria and methodologies. While the practice has not yet led to new policies or structural reforms, it has quantifiably increased voluntary participation and demonstrated tangible improvements in environmental performance among railway concessionaires. Additionally, ANTT provides access to an environmental monitoring BI panel on its official website, offering detailed insights into environmental licenses, new railway enterprises, IDA scores, and implemented environmental actions and best practices.
Results of the practice:	The practice has yielded the following results: Between 2019 and 2023, there was a notable 45% increase in concessionaire participation. The leading concessionaire scored 0.81 in the first year of implementing the index, while in 2023, the top scorer reached 0.91, indicating a growth of nearly 12%. The average IDA score of all participants rose from 0.61 in 2019 to 0.81 in 2023, demonstrating an overall improvement in sustainable actions across participants.
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: To influence on concessionaires to maintain sustainable actions aligned with environmental protection goals, aiding in policy formulation and program implementation. To promote gradual improvement in concessionaires' actions over time given the annual nature of the index. To incentivise concessionaires to strive for better results, fostering effective environmental sustainability practices.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenge: To ensure the accuracy of provided information poses a challenge, with more rigorous validation methods incurring higher costs.

2. Canada’s Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Canada
Name of practice:	Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment
Summary	The Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment (SEEA) is a standardised, mandatory process for assessing the environmental and economic impacts of proposals—including regulations—submitted to the Canadian Cabinet for decision-making. Proposals for new or amended regulations are exempt from the economic component and must continue to meet pre-existing cost-benefit analysis requirements under the Cabinet Directive on Regulation.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Early-stage in the development of regulations (before draft) Later-stage in the development of regulations (during draft)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing. Launched in 2024, with a soft launch period from April 1 to September 1, followed by full implementation for regulatory proposals initiated after September 1, 2024.
Responsible authority:	Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC)
Level of government:	Federal
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: Consultation with more than 40 federal departments and agencies began in Spring 2022 to modernise the Strategic Environmental Assessment directive. All federal departments and agencies preparing regulatory proposals subject to the Cabinet Directive on Regulation must undertake a strategic environmental assessment of important environmental effects, positive or negative, for each regulatory proposal when appropriate and in accordance with the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment.
Objectives of practice:	The practice had the following objectives: To enhance understanding and integration of expected environmental and economic effects of proposals referred to Cabinet for decision as well as regulatory proposals. To minimise harm and maximise benefits for the environment and the economy.
Further information:	https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_cesd_201810_03_e_43147.html https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/laws/developing-improving-federal-regulations/requirements-developing-managing-reviewing-regulations/guidelines-tools/cabinet-directive-regulation.html#toc2 https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/conservation/sustainability/strategic-environmental-economic-assessment/cabinet-directive.html https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/conservation/sustainability/strategic-environmental-economic-assessment/reference-template.html

 

Description of the practice
The Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment supports Cabinet decision-making by highlighting the economic and environmental impacts of a proposal in a clear, consistent, and comparable way across all government departments and agencies. The process entails the application of a mandatory, structured template, known as the Climate, Nature, and Economy Lens (CNEL). This lens facilitates a thorough analysis across various dimensions, encompassing greenhouse gas emissions, impacts on nature and biodiversity, broader environmental effects, climate change impacts, climate resilience, and economic impacts. The CNEL reference template incorporates mandatory preliminary screening questions which prompt further and detailed analysis only pertinent to each proposal, ensuring that key environmental and climate-related factors are systematically evaluated. The template includes an economic component, however, regulations subject to the Cabinet Directive on Regulation are exempt from this part of the assessment, as they are already subject to cost-benefit analysis requirements. This process serves as a tool for decision-makers, providing them with comprehensive insights into the potential implications of proposed policies, regulations, and funding requests.
Results of the practice:	The practice is expected to yield the following results: Departments and agencies will conduct environmental analysis in a rigorous, consistent, and comparable manner while developing policies, programs, and regulations and present this information to support decision-making. Environmental and economic analysis identifies applicable linkages to federal commitments, strategies, and goals, and to relevant goals and targets of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy.
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Ensure the mandatory use of standardised template (i.e. the CNEL), which is designed to facilitate clear, consistent, and comparable assessments across all federal departments and agencies. Facilitate a comprehensive evaluation of proposals, covering multiple dimensions of environmental and climate-related impacts, enhancing transparency and accountability in decision-making processes. Independent review of select environmental assessments by ECCC where environmental impacts are particularly high, including review of all proposals claiming >0.5Mt of greenhouse gas increases or reductions to ensure soundness and incrementality to measures already modelled in Canada’s projections.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenge: Potential concerns regarding the additional burden and complexities associated with new and expanded analytical requirements. Varied levels of environmental and climate literacy among stakeholders may pose challenges in effectively implementing the directive.

3. Denmark’s Green Business Forum

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Denmark
Name of practice:	Grønt Erhvervsforum - Green Business Forum
Summary	The Green Business Forum unites the presidents and CEOs of the 14 Klimapartnerskaber (Climate Partnership)1 to foster sector-specific understanding for government's green transition.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Early-stage in the development of regulations (before draft)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing practice Launched in 2020
Responsible authority:	Ministry of Industry, Business and Financial Affairs Ministry of Climate, Energy and Utilities Ministry of Economic Affairs
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: Chairmen and members of the 14 climate partnerships across different business sectors, driving sector-specific initiatives and reductions. Representatives from business organisations, facilitating co-ordination and implementation within industries. Members from the trade union movements, contributing to dialogue on opportunities and challenges in the green transformation.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To facilitate knowledge sharing between public and private sectors. To encourage cross-sector knowledge and experience sharing. To ensure inclusive participation for diverse perspectives.
Further information:	kefm.dk/Media/638210383481364898/Kommissorium for klimapartnerskaber og Grønt Erhvervsforum 2023.pdf
Description of the practice
Grønt Erhvervsforum serves as a pivotal platform, bringing together the presidents of the 14 Klimapartnerskaber (representatives from different sectors, including at CEO level) in a dynamic public-private partnership. This collaborative effort facilitates a broader understanding for the government of sector-specific challenges associated with the green transition. The forum fosters a collaborative environment where stakeholders can collectively address and discuss solutions to complex environmental issues. Over the years, the forum has observed an increased frequency of presentations from the 14 Klimapartnerskaber, providing valuable insights and expertise from diverse sectors crucial to Denmark's environmental objectives. The meetings cover a range of topics, including challenges associated with the implementation of political agreements concerning the green transition. Preparation for the meetings involves active contributions from the Klimapartnerskaber, identifying and articulating significant hurdles in their respective sectors. The agenda is strategically structured to address the most prevalent issues highlighted by the Klimapartnerskaber, fostering inclusive participation, and ensuring relevant discussions.
Results of the practice:	The practice yields the following results: Facilitate knowledge sharing between public and private sectors. Encourage cross-sectors knowledge and experience sharing. Supports the achievement of current and future CO2 reduction targets, mitigating climate change impacts and safeguarding environmental integrity.
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Fostering collaboration and knowledge sharing between the government and different sectors to better face the green transition. Tailored climate partnerships allow for targeted approaches within each sector, maximising the impact of initiatives and addressing unique challenges faced by different industries. Ensuring ongoing oversight and evaluation of progress, enabling timely adjustments and optimisation of strategies to maintain momentum in Denmark's green transition.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenge: Ensuring the relevance of meeting subjects for all participants. Given the diverse nature of the sectors involved, each grappling with unique challenges, maintaining a focus that resonates with all participants requires thoughtful consideration in the agenda-setting process.

1. Klimapartnerskaber represent a government-initiated partnership aimed at fostering collaboration between the business community and the government to explore initiatives for reducing greenhouse gas emissions within the business sector and enhancing companies' green competitiveness. The government has established 14 partnerships, each addressing a specific environmental-related sector.

4. European Union’s Impact Assessment

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	European Union
Name of practice:	Impact Assessment
Summary	A better regulation framework that ensures robust consideration of economic, social and environmental impacts in EU policies, ensuring single integrated assessment.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Early-stage in the development of regulations)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing Launched in 2001
Responsible authority:	Mostly the European Commission but it is an (Interinstitutional agreement.
Level of government:	EU
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: Led by the relevant Directorate-General (DG). Interservice group (ISG): Immediately established after initiative validation, the ISG, comprising representatives from relevant DGs including the Secretariat-General, steers the assessment process, ensuring diverse perspectives are considered. Stakeholders are invited to provide input throughout the policy cycle, starting with a 'call for evidence,' outlining key elements of the assessment, including consultation activities and policy options. Stakeholder engagement continues as the lead DG drafts the impact assessment or evaluation report with ISG support, incorporating feedback and diverse viewpoints. For impact assessments, a public consultation of stakeholder lasting 12 weeks is requested using a centralised portal. Other stakeholder outreach activities (targeted consultations) are normally also undertaken: focus groups, expert groups and consultation of other institutions. Once the draft act is adopted by the Commission, stakeholders can still provide feedback for 8 weeks. The final Impact Assessment Report includes a summary of all the stakeholder consultation activities undertaken. Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB) with stakeholder representation, reviews the draft report's quality, ensuring it reflects stakeholder concerns and perspectives. Interservice consultation (ISC) gathers formal opinions from relevant EU services. It's mandatory for documents needing College decisions or staff working papers. ISC includes the impact assessment report, executive summary, legislative proposals, and other relevant instruments, integrating opinions from the Regulatory Scrutiny Board. Adjustments to the impact assessment report and proposals may be made based on ISC feedback. The explanatory memorandum summarises the proposal's compliance with EU principles, including subsidiarity, proportionality, and 'better regulation,' as well as its contribution to UN sustainable development goals and European digital initiatives. It also references the subsidiarity assessment grid. Social partners consulted on the possible direction of EU action and on the contend of the proposal include: employers’ organisations and trade unions engaged in the European social dialogue.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To integrate environmental aspects into policies through Impact Assessment, both ex ante and ex post evaluations. To ensure proportionate consideration of environmental aspects across different policy areas. To use stakeholder consultation methods such as online public consultations, targeted consultations, workshops, and expert groups to gather input from diverse perspectives. To check the quality of analyses through a Regulatory Scrutiny Board to ensure robustness and accuracy.
Further information:	https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-making-process/planning-and-proposing-law/better-regulation/better-regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox/better-regulation-toolbox_en
Description of the practice
The European approach to Better Regulation integrates environmental considerations throughout the policy development process. The Better Regulation Guidelines and toolbox merge Regulatory Impact Assessment and Sustainability Impact Assessment, ensuring environmental aspects are proportionately evaluated both before (ex ante) and after (ex post) implementation. This approach varies depending on the policy area, with sophisticated analyses, including the monetisation of environmental and health impacts for areas like air quality. The results of these assessments are transparently published, though quantifying and monetising environmental impacts can pose challenges. Stakeholder consultation is comprehensive and inclusive, employing various methods such as online public consultations, targeted consultations, workshops, and expert groups to ensure diverse perspectives are considered.
Results of the practice:	The practice has yielded the following results: Increased incorporation of environmental considerations into EU policies by integrating Regulatory Impact Assessment and Sustainability Impact Assessment. Comprehensive evaluation of environmental factors at both pre- and post-implementation stages, with ongoing improvements in analysis sophistication. Maintained transparency and accountability by publicly releasing all completed analyses.
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Integration of environmental aspects into Better Regulation Guidelines and toolbox. Proportionate evaluation of environmental aspects tailored to different policy areas. Comprehensive stakeholder consultation methods to ensure diverse inputs. Quality assurance through the Regulatory Scrutiny Board.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenges: Quantification and monetisation of environmental impacts pose challenges. Ensuring comprehensive stakeholder consultation across all policy areas. Maintaining proportionality and depth of analysis over time.

5. Germany’s Electronic Sustainability Assessment Tool, eNAP

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Germany
Name of practice:	Electronic Sustainability Assessment Tool (eNAP)
Summary	A compulsory electronic tool used by ministry officials in drafting legislation, providing guidance on indicators, goals, and principles of the German National Sustainable Development strategy and increasing awareness on it.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Later-stage in the development of regulations (during draft)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing practice Launched in 2018
Responsible authority:	Federal Ministry of the Interior
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: Federal ministries, particularly the Ministry of Justice. Federal Information Technology Center (ITZBund). German University of Administrative Sciences Speyer.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To allow efficient and standardised sustainability impact assessment. To increase awareness of the German National Sustainable Development strategy.
Further information:	https://plattform.egesetzgebung.bund.de/
Description of the practice
The Electronic Sustainability Assessment Tool is a mandatory software application used by ministry officials during the drafting of legislation. It guides users through sustainability impact assessment by providing information on indicators, goals, and principles outlined in the German National Sustainable Development strategy. This tool aims to increase awareness of sustainability considerations in legislative processes. In December 2019, the Government introduced eNAP for all regulatory projects. Throughout 2021, eNAP underwent several adjustments focusing on content, accessibility, responsiveness, and user-friendliness. Subsequently, eNAP was seamlessly integrated into the e-legislation platform, setting the stage for further development and enhanced integration with the electronic legislative impact assessment (eGFA). The eGFA offers users additional interactive assessment modules such as the “Demography check”, “Equivalence check” and “Gender mainstreaming” adding value to the assessment process. Key features of eNAP include its design as an interactive web-based application under the e-legislation project, session-based functionality ensuring privacy, guided assessment steps with links to relevant documents, and mandatory indication of relevance for all 17 SDGs and strategy principles. Engagement methods include cross-departmental meetings, while user groups primarily involve civil servants in legislative drafting, workshops, consultations, and feedback mechanisms. Stakeholder involvement extends to civil servants engaged in legislative drafting and leadership levels within federal ministries, with engagement opportunities communicated through various channels including ministry communications, email invitations, and government intranet notifications.
Results of the practice:	The practice yields the following results: Allows efficient and standardised sustainability impact assessment. Users as well as the Parliamentary Committee on Sustainable Development consider the eNAP to be a helpful tool (according to a 2020 workshop).
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Collaboration among the Federal Ministry of the Interior, the Federal Government, the German Bundestag, and the Bundesrat aims to digitise the federal legislative process, ensuring seamless electronic operation and interoperability among stakeholders. Provides a structured framework for sustainability impact assessment during legislative drafting. Increases awareness of sustainability considerations among policymakers. Offers guidance on indicators, goals, and principles outlined in the German National Sustainable Development strategy.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenges: Limited insights into sustainability implications due to the binary nature of eNAP's questions (yes/no). Difficulty in assessing the material content of legislative proposals concerning sustainability. Integration of sustainability assessment into the regulatory impact assessment process requires further improvement. Potential for eNAP to be used for justification rather than decision-making if applied late in the legislative process.

6. Korea’s Circular Economy Regulation Sandbox

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Korea
Name of practice:	Regulatory Exceptions for New Technologies and Services for Circular Economy
Summary	Korea's Circular Economy Regulation Sandbox accelerates innovation with regulatory exemptions and SME support, driving circular economy solutions.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Implementation (incl. transparency/accessibility)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing practice Launched in January 2024
Responsible authority:	Minister of Environment
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: The Circular Economy New Technology and Service Deliberation Committee, a public-private council under the jurisdiction of the MOE, consists of high-ranking public officials from related ministries, experts recommended by government agencies or local governments, and individuals selected by the Minister of Environment. Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute (subsidiary of Ministry of Environment).
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objective: To support and expedite the introduction of circular economy-related innovations into the market by providing regulatory exemptions and support for SMEs.
Further information:	https://www.me.go.kr/home/web/board/read.do?boardMasterId=1&boardId=1648045&menuId=10525
Description of the practice
The Circular Economy Regulation Sandbox, launched in 2024, facilitates the introduction of circular economy-related innovations into the market through special regulatory treatment and temporary licenses. This initiative offers a fast track for innovation by providing information on relevant regulations and enables simultaneous processing of multiple regulations. Entrepreneurs can benefit from exemptions from certain regulations for up to four years if their business involves circular economy technologies or services. Additionally, temporary licenses for market production are granted to those meeting specific criteria, further fostering innovation and market entry. The Ministry of Environment oversees this initiative, with involvement from the Circular Economy New Technology and New Service Deliberation Committee and the Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute, ensuring expert guidance and support throughout the process. This approach aims to expedite innovation implementation, support SMEs, and advance circular economy solutions in Korea.
Results of the practice:	The practice has yielded the following results: Anticipated to expedite innovation implementation and market entry for circular economy-related products.
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Offers regulatory exemptions Supports SMEs Enables faster innovation adoption
Challenges of the practice:	The practice has faced the following challenges: Regulatory hurdles Limitations on recycling methods, and strict waste treatment regulations

7. Korea’s Emission Trading Scheme

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Korea
Name of practice:	Emission Trading System (ETS)
Summary	The Korean ETS (K-ETS) employs historical emissions data to allocate permits, fostering accountability and market stability. ETS incentivises GHGs reduction efforts and attracts investment.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Implementation (incl. transparency/accessibility)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing practice Launched in 2015. First updated in 2018-2020 and then in 2021-25.
Responsible authority:	Ministry of Environment
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: Relevant ministries and agencies are consulted by the Ministry of Environment when designing the Emission Permit Allocation Plan. Emission Cap Allocation Committee that, under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Economy and Finance, assesses and (as needed) adjusts the Emission Permit Allocation Plan. Green Growth Committee deliberating about the Emission Permit Allocation Plan, under the jurisdiction of the President. State Council deliberating about the Emission Permit Allocation Plan. State council members are appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, and heads of executive ministries shall be appointed by the President from among members of the State Council on the recommendation of the Prime Minister. All Institutions that verify the certification of ETS participants. Verification Institutions are independent and specialised in emission verification; they are designated by Ministry of Environment. Emission Certification Committee: reviews and adjusts technical issues related to certifying emissions and offsets. It comprises senior officials from various ministries responsible for emission verification and experts commissioned by the Minister of Environment upon the recommendations of the heads of relevant central administrative agencies. Presently, the Ministry of Economy and Finance, Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, the Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries, the Office for Government Policy Co-ordination, the Korea Forest Service, and other departments appointed by the committee chairperson participate in its activities. All Ministries certifying the Offset, after consultations with Ministry of Environment and deliberation by the Emission Certification Committee. Korea Exchange (KRX) provides trading service for all financial instruments in Korea, provides Emission Permit trading.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To reduce GHGs emissions.
Further information:	배출권시장 정보플랫폼 (krx.co.kr)
Description of the practice
The Emission Trading System (ETS) is a pivotal mechanism implemented by the Korean government to curb greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions. Established in 2015 and continuously updated, the ETS allocates emission permits based on historical emissions, with mandatory participation for selected businesses and voluntary participation for others. Each planning period spans three to five years, with emission caps set accordingly. Tradable emission permits are allocated annually, promoting efficiency and accountability. Emission reductions from sectors not covered by the ETS can be converted into tradable permits if they meet international standards. Stakeholders, including businesses, participate in the design and adjustment of allocation plans, fostering inclusivity and transparency. Despite challenges such as ensuring fairness in allocation and stabilising market dynamics, the ETS has yielded positive outcomes. In 2020, 637 businesses were allocated emission permits, with proper reporting and management to ensure accountability. The ETS has incentivised GHGs reduction efforts, attracting increased investment for GHG reduction and fostering interest in environmental management. Ongoing reforms, including allowing financial institutions to participate in permit trading and streamlining foreign emission conversions, demonstrate the system's adaptability and commitment to long-term sustainability. While challenges persist, the ETS remains a cornerstone of Korea's climate policy, driving progress towards emissions reduction goals.
Results of the practice:	The practice yields the following results: Increased incentive for GHGs reduction Increased investment for GHGs reduction
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Efficient allocation of emission permits through market mechanism. Involvement of stakeholders in planning via a pool of experts from business and civil society as well as through public hearings and forums.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenges: Ensuring fairness in allocation Stabilising ETS market Addressing business compliance difficulties

8. Korea’s Environmental Impact Assessment

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Korea
Name of practice:	Environmental Impact Assessment
Summary	The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system promotes environmentally friendly development, enhances public awareness, and informs policy decisions through stakeholder engagement and various EIA types, fostering sustainable growth.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Early-stage in the development of regulations (before draft) Later-stage in the development of regulations (during draft)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing practice Launched in 1993 and revamped in 2012
Responsible authority:	Ministry of Environment and Regional Governments
Level of government:	National and Regional
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: Environmental Impact Assessment Council: deliberating on the scope of the EIA report, among other things. The council comprises: EIA experts including private representatives of residents and civil societies. Expert Institutions for reviewing EIA reports submitted by developers include: Korea Environment Institute. National Institute of Environmental Research. National Institute of Biological Resources. Korea Environment Corporation. National Institute of Ecology. Residents affected by the project or plan are involved in stakeholders’ meetings, provided with the EIA report draft for review, and their opinions are considered by developers.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To evaluate the potential environmental impact of major plans or project, and to accordingly provide measures to protect the environment. To protect the environment and promote a sustainable and healthy lifestyle.
Further information:	Environmental Impact Assessment System Support
Description of the practice
Korea's Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system, initiated in 1993 and revamped in 2012, aims to forecast and assess the environmental impacts of major projects and to formulate measures to minimise environmental impacts. It requires developers of significant projects to submit comprehensive EIA reports, including research, predictions, and evaluations of potential environmental impacts. Stakeholder engagement lies at the heart of Korea’s EIA process. Residents’ opinions are actively sought and incorporated into the reports, ensuring that community concerns are duly considered. The process unfolds through various stages, commencing from project planning and culminating in construction approval, all under the oversight of the Ministry of Environment and expert institutions. One notable aspect of Korea's EIA system is its adaptability, with different types of EIAs tailored to suit projects of different scales, including Strategic EIA, specifically for development of plans of administrative agencies, and Small-Scale EIA for small scale projects situated in high environmental risk areas. Despite challenges like quantifying environmental value and balancing development with preservation, the EIA system has promoted environment-friendly projects, enhanced public awareness, and facilitated stakeholder participation in decision-making.
Results of the practice:	The practice has yielded the following results: Promote environment-friendly project development Open process and stakeholder participation to promote social agreement and harmony Ex ante Environmental Impact Assessment, and ex post monitoring on the accuracy of assessment helped to improve scientific accuracy of assessment Promote environment-friendly technology in development
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Evaluate potential impact on environment of major plans or project and provide measures to protect environment beforehand. This practice protects environment, promote sustainable and healthy lifestyle.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenges: Complexity in measuring environmental Impacts Quantify the value of environment Projects subject to EIA are limited Balancing competing priorities: e.g. development vs preservation

9. Korea’s Public Purchase of Green Product

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Korea
Name of practice:	Public Purchase of Green Product
Summary	An environmentally friendly procurement practice in public institutions with the use of eco-labelling and increased product diversity.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Implementation (incl. transparency/accessibility)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing Launched in 2005
Responsible authority:	Ministry of Environment
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The Public Purchase of Green Product Implementation involves the following partners: All Public Institutions that purchase green products and implement internal adjustment for green product purchase. Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute: managing green product purchase records and promoting and educate about the program. Public Procurement Service: providing overall public purchase of green product record to public purchase of green product participants and Ministry of Environment. Ministry of Economy and Finance and the Ministry of the Interior and Safety: that evaluate other public institutions also considering Public Purchase of Green Product
	The Label involves the following partners: Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute (subsidiary of Ministry of Environment): in charge of practical work on issuing Eco-friendly label and Low-Carbon label. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy: responsible authority of Good Recycling label. Korea Agency for Technology and Standard , as well as the Korea Institute for Recycling Industry Accreditation (both subsidiaries of Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy):in charge of practical work on issuing Good Recycling label.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To promote the use of environmentally friendly products in public institutions.
Further information:	Ministry of Environment and Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute “2022 Green Product Purchase Guideline”
Description of the practice
Korea's Public Purchase of Green Product initiative, launched in 2005, mandates public institutions to procure products carrying eco-labels: Eco-friendly, Low Carbon, and Good Recycle labels. Administered by the Ministry of Environment, this initiative incentivises environmentally conscious production and purchasing. Currently, it covers products with one of three labels: Eco-friendly label, Low-Carbon label, Good Recycling label. The Eco-friendly label was introduced in 1992. The Good Recycling label was introduced in 1992, while the Low Carbon label was introduced in 2011.Participation is obligatory for designated public entities, regulated by the Act on the Management of Public Institution, and reinforced by the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of Purchase of Green Product. Annually, public institutions align their implementation plans aligned with the Green Product Purchase Promotion Master Plan, which is updated every five years, and submit purchase records. The eco-labelling process involves rigorous assessment by relevant ministries. The Ministry of Environment reviews applications for Environment-friendliness and Low Carbon labels, while the Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy oversees the Good Recycle label. Each label undergoes meticulous scrutiny, including document review, on-site verification, and committee deliberation, to ensure compliance with stringent criteria. Stakeholder engagement is crucial, with various entities involved in implementation and evaluation. Partners such as the Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute and the Public Procurement Service play key roles in record management and oversight. Additionally, the Central Environmental Policy Committee, comprising experts, public officials, and civil society representatives, offers guidance and deliberates on policy matters. Evaluation of the initiative highlights its impact on increasing the purchase of environmentally friendly products by public institutions. Internal data from the Ministry of Environment indicates a significant rise in green product procurement over the years.
Results of the practice:	The practice has yielded the following results: Increase in the purchase of environmentally friendly products
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Encourage environmentally friendly production and procurement
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenges: Balancing procurement costs and environmental considerations

10. Korea’s regulation on toxic chemicals

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Korea
Name of practice:	“Acts on Registration and Evaluation of Chemical Substances”: Report and Registration of all chemical substances. “Chemical Substances Control Act”: Regulation on hazardous chemical substances.
Summary	A systematic management and safety practice of chemical substances, reflecting international standards, with ongoing updates to enhance risk proportionality.
Policy-making stage the practice relates to:	Implementation (incl. transparency/accessibility)
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing practice. Launched in 2015
Responsible authority:	Ministry of Environment
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: National Institute of Environmental Research (subsidiary of Ministry of Environment). National Institute of Chemical Safety (subsidiary of Ministry of Environment). Korea Environment Corporation (subsidiary of Ministry of Environment). Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute (subsidiary of Ministry of Environment).  Chemicals Evaluation Committee (under the jurisdiction of Ministry of Environment), composed of experts and public officials appointed or commissioned by Ministry of Environment. Chemical Substance Control Committee (under the jurisdiction of Ministry of Environment), composed of experts and public officials appointed or commissioned by Ministry of Environment.
Objectives of practice:	The Acts on Registration and Evaluation of Chemical Substance has the following objectives: To provide systematic management of hazard and risk of chemical substances. To provide systematic management of statistics and information on chemical substances. To protect public health and environment.
	The Chemical Substances Control Act has the following objectives: To strengthen precautionary management of hazardous chemical substances. To provide immediate response system to chemical accidents. To protect public health and environment.
Further information:	Reports and Registration: Help Centre for Industry - Chemical Substance Information Management Supporting Group (https://www.chemnavi.or.kr/main.do) Control: National Institute of Chemical Safety. Information System of Chemical Substance (https://icis.me.go.kr/main.do)
Description of the practice
The Chemical Substance Regulation comprises the "Acts on Registration and Evaluation of Chemical Substance" and the "Chemical Substances Control Act." Introduced in 2015 and continually updated, these acts mandate registration and evaluation of chemical substances, evaluating their hazard and risk. The system, aligned with global standards like EU REACH, promotes systematic management and safety of hazardous substances. Recent updates in 2024 have increased registration thresholds, introduced hazard categorisation, and implemented various standards for hazardous chemical handling facilities to enhance risk proportionality. Managed by the Ministry of Environment, the practice involves stakeholder engagement through forums, ensuring balanced representation and feedback mechanisms. Information on practices and outcomes is publicly available, contributing to enhanced public health and environmental protection through preventive measures against potential risks from chemical substances and accidents.
Results of the practice:	The practice has yielded the following results: Protect public health and environment by preventing chemical accident
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Systematic management of chemical substances Preventing chemical accident
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenge:  Requires establishment of a management system that considers the hazards of chemical substances and the characteristics of chemical handling facilities

11. Luxembourg’s Citizen Climate Council

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Luxembourg
Name of practice:	Klima Biergerrot (KBR) - Luxembourg Climate Citizens’ Assembly
Summary	Klima Biergerrot engaged citizens in climate policymaking through inclusive recruitment and multilingual deliberation, promoting awareness and acceptance of policy decisions
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Early-stage in the development of regulations (before draft)
Timeframe of the practice:	One-time initiative launched in 2022
Responsible authority:	Ministry of State Ministry of Environment Ministry of Energy and Urban Planning
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: The polling institute Ilres oversaw recruit the possible assembly members. Oxygen & Partners, Pétillances and AccentAigu Were appointed for the governance, facilitation, moderation, and communication, respectively. Experts from academia, professionals, as well as representatives of ministries and public administrations were consulted in different phases to ensure that KBR member had access to balanced information on all topics discussed.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To engage citizens in climate policymaking To promote inclusiveness in policy decisions To increase public awareness and acceptance of policy decisions
Further information:	https://pldp.lu/project/klima-biergerrot/
Description of the practice
The Luxembourg Climate Citizens’ Assembly was a one-time initiative launched in 2022 by the Luxembourg Government. The Luxembourg Platform for Participatory Democracy supports the supervision of the assembly, especially in their evaluation efforts. This practice aimed to engage citizens in climate policymaking, promote inclusivity, and increase public awareness and acceptance of policy decisions related to climate change mitigation and adaptation. The practice involved citizens, experts, government representatives, and the media. To ensure balanced representation among stakeholders, the practice employed a civic lottery for the citizens, attitudinal sampling, and multilingual facilitation to select stakeholders from different groups. Stakeholders were notified of the engagement opportunity through public announcements, invitations made via official press conferences by the Government. Supporting materials such as information packets, reports, and expert presentations were made available to stakeholders, and ICT was used for online feedback mechanisms and communication. Inputs from stakeholders, including recommendations, feedback, and proposals, were used for policy development and decision-making. The implementation of the practice led to the development of new policies and changes in existing climate change mitigation and adaptation policies. Recommendations formulated by the assembly influenced the drafting of the National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP) and other governmental programs. Internal and external evaluations highlighted the effectiveness of the stakeholder engagement process in informing policy decisions and enhancing public trust in government initiatives.
Results of the practice:	The practice yields the following results: Enhanced public awareness Increased citizen competence and satisfaction with democracy Significant impact on climate policies Attention and response from government and parliament Contribution to democratic debate within political parties
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Inclusive recruitment strategy Multilingual deliberation Diverse stakeholder engagement Effective facilitation Significant impact on public awareness and policy formulation
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenges: Recruitment bias Lack of attitudinal diversity Dominance of certain participants Limited media engagement during the process Constraints of multilingual deliberation

12. Spain’s Citizen Assembly for the Climate

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	Spain
Name of practice:	Citizens’ Climate Assembly
Summary	Harnessing citizen voices for climate action, fostering recommendations for policy and societal change.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Ex post evaluation of regulations
Timeframe of the practice:	Launched in 2021. The working team adjusted in successive sessions based on the assessments of previous sessions and the recommendations received from various stakeholders. The practice ended in May 2022.
Responsible authority:	Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: An independent Co-ordination Panel, comprising the Red Española para el Desarrollo Sostenible (REDS) and the Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), responsible for the preparation, implementation, and logistical support of the Assembly. The Co-ordination Panel also assisted the work of the Independent Group of Experts and co-ordinated with the Facilitation Team during the Assembly. An Independent Group of Experts (IGE) made of multidisciplinary, multisectoral, and multigenerational experts in the fields of climate, energy, biodiversity, the environment, and social transformation, among others. The IGE oversaw the content for all sessions, including proposing the thematic issues that were open for public consultation. A Facilitation Team responsible for the design and implementation of the sessions, and regularly consulted by the IGE, with the facilitation of the Co-ordination Panel. The Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge, through the Spanish Office of Climate Change, and the Biodiversity Foundation acted as secretariat.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To better understand the concerns, perceptions, and preferences of ordinary citizens about public policies to address climate change. To open a new channel for public participation and engagement in climate change to create public awareness and more inclusive participation.
Further information:	https://asambleaciudadanadelcambioclimatico.es/
Description of the practice
The Citizens’ Climate Assembly, brought together 100 randomly selected participants to deliberate on climate policies. The Assembly aimed to better understand citizen concerns and preferences regarding climate change policies, including mitigation and adaptation, while opening new channels for public engagement. Led by an independent co-ordination panel and supported by an independent group of experts, the Assembly featured structured participation, multilingual deliberation, and ongoing engagement. Participants were selected to mirror the diversity of Spanish society, ensuring inclusive representation in the deliberations. Throughout six sessions, the Assembly produced 172 recommendations across various thematic areas, culminating in the adoption of principles ratified and submitted as recommendations to the Spanish government and Congress. These recommendations have since influenced public awareness, policy formulation, and engagement with stakeholders at various levels, including regional and local administrations. Despite challenges in achieving full representation and high participation rates, the Assembly's impact has been significant, demonstrating the effectiveness of deliberative democracy in addressing complex societal issues like climate change.
Results of the practice:	The practice has yielded the following results: Adoption of a set of principles that guided definition of objectives and recommendations. Set of recommendations endorsed by a high percentage of participants submitted as recommendations to the Government (June 2022) and Spanish Congress (October 2022). Public diffusion and outreach of recommendations at various levels (national, local, regional) and engagement with organisations.
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Representative selection process for the 100 individuals involved. Structured governance with administrative, expert, technical support, and co-ordination. Use of international principles for deliberative processes. Reports and recommendations submitted to the government and Congress for discussions.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenges: To achieve a 100-person sample of Spanish citizens that reflects the diversity of Spanish society. Leave no one behind because of their social status, integrating all participants in the process. To have a high attendance of participants in the 6 double sessions with high commitment and participation. To achieve a plural and enriching debate that will produce solid proposals.

13. The United Kingdom Environment Agency’s standardising environmental metrics for food businesses project

 

Overview of the practice
Country:	United Kingdom
Name of practice:	SEEBEYOND – Incentive based regulation
Summary	The SEEBEYOND project aims to enhance environmental data quality and transparency in the UK's Food and Drink Sector, advancing beyond legal compliance by standardising metrics and data schemes. The initial reporting focus includes air pollutants, water quality, waste, and materials usage.
Policymaking stage the practice relates to:	Implementation (incl. transparency/accessibility) Review of regulatory policy
Timeframe of the practice:	Ongoing The first phase was launched in 2021 to March 2022. The second phase started in February 2023 and is expected to finish by March 2027.
Responsible authority:	Environment Agency (England)
Level of government:	National
Partners involved:	The practice involves the following partners: The Environment Agency undertook interviews with representatives of each environmental regulator of the UK and of the University of Cambridge, to examine the different perceptions and challenges associated with a voluntary approach to beyond compliance. Several other partners, including the University of Cambridge, supported the Environmental Agency in formulating the project proposal and submitting a bid to the UK Government’s Regulators Pioneer Fund in 2021. The British Standards Institute, Waste Resources Action Programme (WRAP), Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, Northern Ireland Environment Agency, DAERA, and Natural Resources Wales contributed to the review and provided input. Additionally, the Environmental Agency collaborated with food and drink businesses to understand their needs and reflect their views in the project design. The project’s implementation involved collaboration with 300 stakeholders, including both permitted and non-permitted food and drink business, as well as other UK environmental regulators.
Objectives of practice:	The practice has the following objectives: To motivate regulated entities to voluntarily improve their environmental practices through market forces and incentives. To tackle the stagnation in greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions observed since 2015 from the regulated sites. To co-design a new regulatory approach involving other regulators, industry, academia, and other non-governmental organisations. To facilitate the removal of behavioural barriers within the industry to go beyond legislative compliance helping industry to transition to sustainability.
Further information:	https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/environment-and-business/seebeyond/
Description of the practice
The SEEBEYOND project enabled the Environment Agency to further explore the use of market-led approach as a complementary regulatory approach for motivating business to go beyond legal compliance. The project has established a set of standardised environmental metrics for the food and drink sector and prototyped a digital platform with these metrics. These metrics will help industry to measure and communicate their environmental performance transparently and efficiently by creating standardised and comparable environmental metrics; automating environmental data exchange; mitigating greenwashing risks; address the data challenge faced by the industry. The metrics focus on greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions and air pollutants, materials (including raw materials and plastics), waste (including food waste) and water (resources and quality) and align with the government’s environmental goals and create a level playing field for measuring and communicating performance, supporting businesses to better integrate social, environmental, and economic benefits into their business value, thereby incentivising them to improve their environmental performance.
Results of the practice:	The practice is expected to yield the following results: A set of standardised metrics have been developed and y tested with food companies. A digital platform has been prototyped with standardised environmental metrics and will be tested with potential users. Ability to scale the approach to other sectors beyond Food and Drink over time.
Strengths of the practice:	The practice has the following strengths: Use of behavioural insights as a complementary technique to traditional regulatory methods. Facilitating removal of barriers to business improving industries environmental performance. Namely, the data challenge was perceived as the biggest barrier by 79% of companies surveyed (n=101). Harness market and moral incentives, as identified by our research, are the biggest drivers for all sizes of companies in improving environmental performance voluntarily. Improve transparency of primary environmental data and tackle greenwashing with digital traceability technologies. Enable businesses to report their environmental performance effectively and transparently through data automation. Alignment to green finance. Enable financial sector to assess environmental performance of a company rigorously and increase its environmental value of investment decisions. Board engagement from industry sectors. Enable both large companies and small and medium-sized enterprises to engage with the development process by adoptinga co-creation approach. During feasibility testing, stakeholders presented fewer challenges compared to other policy/strategy areas where a more decisive, advisory, and defensive approach was adopted. Enabling innovation and bringing new products to market through transparent rigorous benchmarking of performance by supporting businesses reporting and communicating environmental claims/ performance more easily and accessibly to their supply chain.
Challenges of the practice:	The practice faces the following challenge: Funding continuity after the initial government funding. Organisational culture change, as resistance was encountered when employing alternative techniques. Technological constraints and the current charging model does not allow the Agency to charge for beyond legislative compliance. How to verify environmental data to ensure greater rigor of environmental reporting and avoiding additional burden should be created.