PVC. But in the transition, other mechanisms like green taxation can be useful in forcing the vinyl industry to internalize its costs, thus levelling the playing field for alternatives. The movement to ban PVC is already quite strong in Europe, where local and regional PVC-free policies have been implemented in Denmark, Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Spain, Luxembourg, and Austria. Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands have restrictive policies at the national level. Anti-PVC (governmental) procurement guidelines exist in Austria, Netherlands, Nordic countries, UK, Japan and even USA. Such community and regulatory action has spurred corporations themselves to replace PVC in their production processes, with Ford, Peugeot, Daimler Benz, Opel, Volkswagen, BMW, Mercedes Benz, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Toyota all adopting PVC restrictions (Thorpe, 2003). Nike has begun working with McDonough and Braungart to phase PVC out of its shoe-making operations (McDonough & Braungart, 2002). In North America, the movement to phase-out PVC lags behind Europe but is growing in tandem with an exploding green building movement. I have already mentioned the initiatives of McDonough and Braungart, and of the Philadelphia Sheraton Rittenhouse, but there are many more. The Healthy Building Network, the coalition most responsible for the recent US residential ban of CCA-treated wood, is at the centre of the national campaign against PVC. But the campaign is affecting the rapidly spreading LEED building assessment programme of the US Green Building Council (USGBC) which now includes many federal, state and even military buildings. The cities of Seattle and San Francisco, and Boston have implemented various kinds of policy to reduce vinyl use, and developments in Europe are combining with domestic pressure to encourage governmental action against PVC (Healthy Building Network, 2005a).