It would be unrealistic and even incorrect to say that the formulation of policy follows a clear and consistent pathway or route. Policy development is actually an involved and sometimes haphazard process that differs widely depending upon the concern being addressed. Sometimes it is a long and winding road with lots of detours and stops along the way. Despite the variation in policy process, there are some general steps (described below) that are common to its development. These are:
- Selecting the desired objective.
- Identifying the target of the objective.
- Determining the pathway to reach that objective.
- Designing the specific program or measure in respect of that goal.
- Implementing the measure and assessing its impact.
From the literature perception, there are two main approaches to estimate adaptation costs. The top-down approach evaluates total climate change impacts and the optimal adaptation level. However, it neglects the specific characteristics of concrete adaptation measures, which are important for evaluating the impacts of real adaptation policy. Furthermore, the top-down-approach can rarely distinguish between private and public adaptation – a question of high relevance for designing adaptation policy at EU level. The other stream of economic evaluation is the bottom-up-literature, often focusing on specific adaptation options in a specific period and location, and a certain political, societal and natural context. The costing exercise in this project extensively relied on this kind of literature, since only bottom-up studies allow a sufficiently detailed insight into the cost drivers of adaptation measures.
The present legislation related to paper for recycling defines general requirements. No specific environmental obligations apply for paper products. The packaging waste directive gives reference to the EN packaging standards which provide guidelines on how to implement essential packaging requirements for all (see section2.1.). When paper enters the waste stream, the general rules covered in the Waste Framework Directive apply, as for all other materials. Regulation concerning collection, sorting and use of paper for recycling is generally acceptable. Overregulation that could become a barrier to development should be avoided. Nevertheless, obstacles and weaknesses in the present regulation exist that need to be improved. Separate collection is widely interpreted.
As in the incentives, the different policy measures considered in IMPACTPapeRec project can be grouped also into three categories: Legal and economic; Social and communicative; Technical and operational
