8.3 CONCLUSIONS

Given the above, the three subquestions can be answered as follows.

The first subquestion was: Is there, or is it possible to scientifically develop, an assessment framework which can predict in what case or cases clustering of environmental law is justified? The answer to that question is that, in the sources consulted, I have not been able to find an assessment framework that can be used to determine in what cases clustering is justified. I therefore developed such a framework myself and explained it in Chapter 3. On the basis of five assessment questions, it can be determined whether clustering by means of rearrangement or integration can be justified.

The second subquestion was: How does the clustering by rearrangement which, in 2010, led to the Environmental Permitting (General Provisions) Act (Wet algemene bepalingen omgevingsrecht), the clustering which, in 2008, led to the integration of the Chemical Substances Act (Wet milieugevaarlijke stoffen) into the Environmental Management Act (Wet milieubeheer), the clustering by rearrangement, proposed by the government in 2010, that is to result in a Nature Protection Act (Wet natuurbescherming), and the proposed clustering that should result in the Environmental Planning Act (Omgevingswet) relate to this scientific assessment framework? This question was answered in Chapters 4, 5, 6 and 7. On the basis of the four case studies dealt with in these chapters, I conclude that the clustering only partly meets the criteria I developed: in its present form, the clustering cannot be completely justified.

The third subquestion was: As regards the clustering projects mentioned under subquestion 2, can proposals be made to the effect that the restruc-turing of environmental law links up better with the scientific criteria (to be developed) for clustering environmental law? This question was answered positively in the sense that a number of suggestions could be made in Chapters 4, 5, 6 and 7. If these suggestions are implemented as regards the three clustering projects studied in this research, these clustering operations would link up better with the criteria developed.

The answers to these subquestions enable me to answer the central question of this study: are the proposals to restructure the system of environmental law through clustering (merely) a political choice or does it also meet the requirements that may be set scientifically for restructuring environmental law? The answer is that clustering of environmental law does not need to be merely a political choice but that it can meet scientific requirements. The fact that clustering in the four case studies did not lead to completely justified clustering does not mean that it is impossible to meet those criteria. I made suggestions for improvement as regards each of the four clustering operations.