ľ�ϸ���Ӱ��

Does weaving environmental concerns into other policy areas help us reach a more sustainable future, or does it simply maintain the status quo? Often the latter, argue Peter Driessen, Heleen Mees, Dries Hegger, and Mandy van den Ende in their latest publication in Environmental Policy & Governance.

Environmental Policy Integration (EPI) is a widely promoted approach that aims to embed environmental and sustainability into sectors like agriculture, housing, and water management. However, research shows that in practice, it often prioritises economic interests over meaningful environmental progress. “Policy integration tends to bring only small improvements that do not necessarily lead to sustainable land use,” explains Van den Ende.

From policy integration to governance integration

Recognising that policy choices are shaped by power dynamics and institutional structures, the researchers introduce a broader concept: Environmental Governance Integration (EGI). Unlike EPI, which focuses on policy content, EGI examines the entire governance system, including who holds influence and how decisions are made.

Environmental concerns are considered in policy only when they align with economic interests, rather than being treated as a shared societal priority

The study applies EGI to a pressing issue: land subsidence in the Dutch peatlands. Caused by drainage to support intensive agriculture, subsidence leads to infrastructure damage, significant CO2 emissions, biodiversity loss, and increased flood risks. The researchers identified two major obstacles to the integration of subsidence in other policy sectors.

1. Power structures limit the existing solution space: While governments acknowledge subsidence as a problem, they often treat it as a water management or climate challenge solvable through technical fixes. This narrow framing sidesteps the role of unsustainable agriculture and powerful economic players—banks, supermarkets, and agro-food corporations—who benefit from the status quo. Meanwhile, the interest of less influential stakeholders, including younger generations, ecosystems, and wildlife, remains underrepresented. “This limits the exploration of alternative, more sustainable futures for the region,” says Van den Ende.
2. Institutions reinforce the business as usual: Existing laws, regulations, and subsidies tend to support conventional, unsustainable land use such as intensive agriculture and housing in low-lying polders. There is little support provided for sustainable alternatives such as nature-inclusive farming or floating houses. "This lack of institutional support is an obstacle for transforming to a sustainable land use," the authors note.

A call for change: From economic to environmental governance integration

“Our analysis reveals that environmental concerns are considered in policy only when they align with economic interests, rather than being treated as a shared societal priority,” says Van den Ende. “Environmental governance integration—where environmental concerns are integrated early and equitably into policymaking—requires a recognition of prevailing power dynamics and rethinking of existing institutional frameworks”.