This document analyzes soil erosion policies in Western Balkan countries and the Mediterranean region compared to EU policies. It finds that while legislation is fragmented in some states, overall gaps in soil protection policies are narrow among these regions and EU member states. The study examines the goals of the EU Soil Framework Directive, and identifies obstacles to its implementation in certain blocking EU member states. Key requirements of the directive include identifying risk areas for soil degradation processes, reviewing them every ten years, and establishing programs to reduce risks and implement protection measures. The analysis concludes that technical solutions exist to support a common soil protection legislation, given agreement can be reached on controlling soil sealing.

1. Western Balkan Countries vs. Mediterranean
Region Policy on Soil Erosion
Dr. Adanela Musaraj
European University Institute, STG, adanela.musaraj@eui.eu
.
1. Musaraj A., Janku K., 2017. Legal framework of western Balkan
countries on preventing soil erosion. Environmental Management
48, 490–499
2. Abu Hammad A, Borresen T. 2006. Socioeconomic factors
affecting farmers’ perceptions of land degradation and stonewall
terraces in Central Palestine. Environmental Management 37: 380–
394.
3. Alberti M. 2005. The effects of urban patterns on ecosystem
function. International Regional Science Review 28: 168–192.
4. Arhonditsis G, Giourga C, Loumou A, Koulouri M. 2002.
Quantitative assessment of agricultural runoff and soil erosion
using mathematical modeling: applications in the Mediterranean
Region. Environmental Management 30: 434–453.
5. Barrow CJ. 1990. LAND DEGRADATION - Development and
Breakdown of Terrestrial Environments. Cambridge University
Press: Cambridge.
6. Hillel D, Rosenzweig C. 2005. The role of biodiversity in
agronomy. Advances in Agronomy 88: 1–34. Hussein MH. 1998.
Water erosion assessment and control in Northern Iraq. Soil and
Tillage Research 45: 161–173. Issac J, Hirimat N, Qumsiya V,
Uweiwi M. 1997.
7. Encyclopedia of the Palestinian Environment (First Volume)-
Environmental Features. ARIJ: Bethlehem. Johnson DL, Lewis AL.
1995. Land degradation, Creation and Destruction.
8. Blackwell: Oxford. Lubwama FB. 1999. Socio-economic and
gender issues affecting the adoption of conservation tillage
practices. In Conservation Tillage with Animal Traction,
Kaumbutho P, Simalenga T, (eds). Animal Traction Network for
Eastern and Southern Africa (ATNESA): Harare; 155–162
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
This study aims at specifying the possible
obstacles, differences, and gaps between the
goals set by the Directive and the legislature
and administration in the countries that
formed the blocking minority, resulting in the
refusal of the Directive. The current study
focuses on the legislative and administrative
aspects present in the five countries and does
not aim to make a comprehensive assessment
for all EU Member States, nor an assessment
of any political or economic motivation that
may be present when regulating the protection
of soil resources. Though protection provisions
indirectly contribute to the protection of soils
in the Community acquis in areas such as
agriculture, water, and environment, there is
no specific EU legislation on soil protection
[6], and only a few Member States have
specific legislation on it [1].
METHODOLOGY
The materials used in the research part of the
study include the Soil Framework Directive,
and English citations of legal documents of the
Western Balkan Countries, Mediterranean
countries (other than Albania), and EU
countries, blocking five Member States at
national, regional and local levels. The sources
were the official governmental websites, the
official website containing EU laws (EUR-Lex),
and national legal experts’ contributions (e.g.,
websites, articles, and comments). The
different types of legal acts [2], such as:
Regulations—binding legislative acts, which
must be applied; directives—legislative acts
that sets out goals; decisions—binding on those
to whom they are addressed and are directly
applicable.
MAIN RESULTS
Erosion, organic matter decline, salinization,
compaction, and landslides were addressed
within the legal framework (fig.1). Within five
years from transposition date, Member States
should have identified the risk areas in their
national territory, where there was evidence or
suspicion that one or more soil degradation
processes had occurred or would have been
likely to do so in the near future. Member
The risk areas were to have been reviewed
every ten years. Under each risk area, Western
Balkan Countries and EU Member States were
to draw up a program of measures including
risk reduction targets, the appropriate
measures for reaching those targets, a
timetable for implementation, and an estimate
of the funding allocation. Member States were
encouraged to use their own existing
monitoring schemes and improve them if
necessary (fig.2), (fig.3).
CONCLUSIONS
Results of our gap analysis suggest that—
although legislation related to soil protection
may be fragmented in some states—overall
gaps in the contents of soil protection
legislations are rather narrow among the
Mediterranean, WBC and EU member states.
Thus, given that an agreement on the control
of soil sealing can be reached, technical
solutions are available to support the
construction of a common political will to
introduce a common soil protection legislation
in the EU, and WBC as well as Mediterranean
countries.