Industrial Environmental Management. Tapas K. Das
Читать онлайн книгу.
Conference) and the driving force behind the 1983 World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, or Bruntland Commission). In 1992, the first UN Earth Summit resulted in the Rio Declaration, Principle 3 of which reads: “The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.” Sustainable development has been a core concept of international environmental discussion ever since, including at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Earth Summit 2002), and the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Earth Summit 2012).
2.9.3 Equity
Further information: Intergenerational equity
Defined by UNEP to include intergenerational equity – “the right of future generations to enjoy a fair level of the common patrimony” – and intragenerational equity – “the right of all people within the current generation to fair access to the current generation's entitlement to the Earth's natural resources” – environmental equity considers the present generation under an obligation to account for long‐term impacts of activities, and to act to sustain the global environment and resource base for future generations. Pollution control and resource management laws may be assessed against this principle.
2.9.4 Transboundary Responsibility
Defined in the international law context as an obligation to protect one's own environment, and to prevent damage to neighboring environments, UNEP considers transboundary responsibility at the international level as a potential limitation on the rights of the sovereign state. Laws that act to limit externalities imposed upon human health and the environment may be assessed against this principle.
2.9.5 Public Participation and Transparency
Identified as essential conditions for “accountable governments ⋯ industrial concerns,” and organizations generally, public participation and transparency are presented by UNEP as requiring “effective protection of the human right to hold and express opinions and to seek, receive and impart ideas … a right of access to appropriate, comprehensible and timely information held by governments and industrial concerns on economic and social policies regarding the sustainable use of natural resources and the protection of the environment, without imposing undue financial burdens upon the applicants and with adequate protection of privacy and business confidentiality,” and “effective judicial and administrative proceedings.” These principles are present in EPA, laws requiring publication and access to relevant environmental data, and administrative procedure.
2.9.6 Precautionary principle
One of the most commonly encountered and controversial principles of environmental law, the Rio Declaration formulated the precautionary principle as follows:
In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost‐effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
The principle may play a role in any debate over the need for environmental regulation.
2.9.7 Prevention
The concept of prevention … can perhaps better be considered an overarching aim that gives rise to a multitude of legal mechanisms, including prior assessment of environmental harm, licensing or authorization that set out the conditions for operation and the consequences for violation of the conditions, as well as the adoption of strategies and policies. Emission limits and other product or process standards, the use of best available techniques and similar techniques can all be seen as applications of the concept of prevention.
2.10 Polluter Pays Principle
The polluter pays principle stands for the idea that “the environmental costs of economic activities, including the cost of preventing potential harm, should be internalized rather than imposed upon society at large.” All issues related to responsibility for cost for environmental remediation and compliance with pollution control regulations involve this principle.
2.11 Theory/Environmental Law Debate
Environmental law is a continuing source of controversy. Debates over the necessity, fairness, and cost of environmental regulation are ongoing, as well as regarding the appropriateness of regulations vs. market solutions to achieve even agreed‐upon ends.
Allegations of scientific uncertainty fuel the ongoing debate over greenhouse gas regulation and are a major factor in debates over whether to ban particular pesticides. In cases where the science is well‐settled, it is not unusual to find that corporations intentionally hide or distort the facts, or sow confusion (Oreskes and Conway 2010).
It is very common for regulated industry to argue against environmental regulation on the basis of cost (Pizer and Kopp 2003). Difficulties arise in performing cost‐benefit analysis of environmental issues. It is difficult to quantify the value of an environmental value such as a healthy ecosystem, clean air, or species diversity. Many environmentalists' response to pitting economy vs. ecology is summed up by former Senator and founder of Earth Day Gaylord Nelson: “The economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment, not the other way around” (Nelson et al. 2002). Furthermore, environmental issues are seen by many as having an ethical or moral dimension, which would transcend financial cost. Even so, there are some efforts underway to systemically recognize environmental costs and assets, and account for them properly in economic terms.
While affected industries spark controversy in fighting regulation, there are also many environmentalists and public interest groups who believe that current regulations are inadequate, and advocate for stronger protection (Hiss 2014; Stein and Beckel 2004). Environmental law conferences – such as the annual Public Interest Environmental Law Conference in Eugene, Oregon – typically have this focus, also connecting environmental law with class, race, and other issues.
An additional debate is to what extent environmental laws are fair to all regulated parties. For instance, researchers Preston Teeter and Jorgen Sandberg highlight how smaller organizations can often incur disproportionately larger costs as a result of environmental regulations, which can ultimately create an additional barrier to entry for new firms, thus stifling competition and innovation (Teeter and Sandberg 2017).
2.11.1 Environmental Impact Statement and NEPA Process
An environmental impact statement (EIS), under US environmental law, is a document required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for certain actions “significantly affecting the quality of the human environment” (NEPA 1969). An EIS is a tool for decision making. It describes the positive and negative environmental effects of a proposed action, and it usually also lists one or more alternative actions that may be chosen instead of the action described in the EIS. Several US state governments require that a document similar to an EIS be submitted to the state for certain actions.
2.11.2 Purpose of NEPA
The purpose of the NEPA is to promote informed decision making by federal agencies by making “detailed information concerning significant environmental impacts” available to both agency leaders and the public (Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council 1989). The NEPA was the first piece of legislation that created a comprehensive method to assess potential and existing environmental risks at once. It also encourages communication and cooperation between all the actors involved in environmental decisions, including government officials, private businesses, and citizens (Felleman 2013).
In particular, an EIS acts as an enforcement mechanism to ensure that the federal government adheres to the goals and policies outlined in the NEPA.