Abstract

BackgroundDespite clear-cut scientific evidence for pharmaceutical contaminants causing adverse effects in aquatic life, the regulatory response in Germany has been weak. In principle, there are different policy approaches to address pharmaceutical contaminants: German water protection policies mostly follows a control approach, complemented by end-of-pipe solutions in some German states. The approach leaves the activities of key target groups, such as the pharmaceutical industry, largely unaffected. A stakeholder consultation initiated in 2016 by the German Federal Ministry of the Environment did not lead to significant changes in regulation. Empirical research in political science has shown that analysing the public debate can be helpful in explaining policy responses and, in particular, policy change. This study follows this approach and investigates whether the German policy response to pharmaceutical contaminants can be explained by characteristics of the public debate on the issue.ResultsA discourse network analysis based on newspaper reporting in Germany was conducted between 2013 and 2017 to investigate the public debate on pharmaceutical contaminants. German newspapers actually paid considerable attention to the issue. In fact, the debate was not controversial, and participating organisations expressed similar views with regard to the risk of the contaminants, the causes of contamination and the approaches to be taken to mitigate the release of contaminants to the environment. The main narrative in the debate was supportive to the current policy approach applied in Germany. There were no concerted efforts by organisations such as environmental organisations or ecological parties to mobilise for an alternative policy approach.ConclusionsThe low level of polarisation in the policy subsystem and the absence of a strong narrative mobilising a major policy change may explain the persistence of the policy approach to pharmaceutical contaminants applied in Germany. A significant change to the current approach in the near future seems unlikely. Nevertheless, literature in political science shows that a polarised public debate and a strong pro-change actor coalition often preceded policy change. Actors with an interest in stricter regulation might want to reconsider their mobilisation strategies.

Highlights

  • Despite significant improvements in wastewater treatment and water quality protection, the majority of European surface waters is not in a good ecological condition [114] as required by the European Water Framework DirectiveSchaub and Braunbeck Environ Sci Eur (2020) 32:140[106]

  • Results we first evaluate the policy response to pharmaceutical contaminants in Germany and analyse whether a major policy change occurred over time

  • Major policy change? Theoretically, we argued that a major policy change in the regulation of pharmaceutical contaminants would involve a significant change in the overall approach or in the pressure policy instruments put on target groups

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Despite significant improvements in wastewater treatment and water quality protection, the majority of European surface waters (rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters) is not in a good ecological condition [114] as required by the European Water Framework DirectiveSchaub and Braunbeck Environ Sci Eur (2020) 32:140[106]. There is growing evidence that pharmaceutical residues in surface waters cause adverse effects in aquatic life [5, 17, 36, 69, 74]. Despite clear-cut scientific evidence for pharmaceutical contaminants causing adverse effects in aquatic life, the regulatory response in Germany has been weak. Empirical research in political science has shown that analysing the public debate can be helpful in explaining policy responses and, in particular, policy change This study follows this approach and investigates whether the German policy response to pharmaceutical contaminants can be explained by characteristics of the public debate on the issue

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.