Environmental policy

Environmental policy is the commitment of an organization or government to the laws, regulations, and other policy mechanisms concerning environmental issues. These issues generally include air and water pollution, waste management, ecosystem management, maintenance of biodiversity, the management of natural resources, wildlife and endangered species.[1] For example, concerning environmental policy, the implementation of an eco-energy-oriented policy at a global level to address the issues of global warming and climate changes could be addressed.[2] Policies concerning energy or regulation of toxic substances including pesticides and many types of industrial waste are part of the topic of environmental policy. This policy can be deliberately taken to influence human activities and thereby prevent undesirable effects on the biophysical environment and natural resources, as well as to make sure that changes in the environment do not have unacceptable effects on humans.[3]

Environment
Environment in

Definition

One way is to describe environmental policy is that it comprises two major terms: environment and policy. Environment refers to the physical ecosystems, but can also take into consideration the social dimension (quality of life, health) and an economic dimension (resource management, biodiversity).[4] Policy can be defined as a "course of action or principle adopted or proposed by a government, party, business or individual".[5] Thus, environmental policy tends to focus on problems arising from human impact on the environment, which is important to human society by having a (negative) impact on human values. Such human values are often labeled as good health or the 'clean and green' environment. In practice, policy analysts provide a wide variety of types of information to the public decision making process.[6]

Environmental issues typically addressed by environmental policy include (but are not limited to) air and water pollution, waste management, ecosystem management, biodiversity protection, the protection of natural resources, wildlife and endangered species, and the management of these natural resources for future generations. Relatively recently, environmental policy has also attended to the communication of environmental issues.[7] In contrast to environmental policy, ecological policy addresses issues that focus on achieving benefits (both monetary and non monetary) from the non human ecological world. Broadly included in ecological policy is natural resource management (fisheries, forestry, wildlife, range, biodiversity, and at-risk species). This specialized area of policy possesses its own distinctive features.[8]

Rationale

The rationale for governmental involvement in the environment is often attributed to market failure in the form of forces beyond the control of one person, including the free rider problem and the tragedy of the commons. An example of an externality is when a factory produces waste pollution which may be discharged into a river, ultimately contaminating water. The cost of such action is paid by society-at-large when they must clean the water before drinking it and is external to the costs of the polluter. The free rider problem occurs when the private marginal cost of taking action to protect the environment is greater than the private marginal benefit, but the social marginal cost is less than the social marginal benefit. The tragedy of the commons is the condition that, because no one person owns the commons, each individual has an incentive to utilize common resources as much as possible. Without governmental involvement, the commons is overused. Examples of tragedies of the commons are overfishing and overgrazing.[9]

Instruments, problems, and issues

Environmental policy instruments are tools used by governments and other organizations to implement their environmental policies. Governments, for example, may use a number of different types of instruments. For example, economic incentives and market-based instruments such as taxes and tax exemptions, tradable permits, and fees can be very effective to encourage compliance with environmental policy.[10] The assumption is that corporations and other organizations who engage in efficient environmental management and are transparent about their environmental data and reporting presumably benefit from improved business and organizational performance.[11]

Bilateral agreements between the government and private firms and commitments made by firms independent of government requirement are examples of voluntary environmental measures. Another instrument is the implementation of greener public purchasing programs.[12]

Several instruments are sometimes combined in a policy mix to address a particular environmental problem. Since environmental issues have many aspects, several policy instruments may be required to adequately address each one. Furthermore, a combination of different policies may give firms greater flexibility in policy compliance and reduce uncertainty as to the cost of such compliance.

Ideally, government policies are to be carefully formulated so that the individual measures do not undermine one another, or create a rigid and cost-ineffective framework. Overlapping policies result in unnecessary administrative costs, increasing the cost of implementation.[13] To help governments realize their policy goals, the OECD Environment Directorate, for example, collects data on the efficiency and consequences of environmental policies implemented by the national governments.[14] The website, www.economicinstruments.com, [15] provides database detailing countries' experiences with their environmental policies. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, through UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews, evaluates progress made by its member countries in improving their environmental policies.

The current reliance on a market-based framework has supporters and detractors. Among the detractors for example, some environmentalists contend that a more radical, overarching approach is needed than a set of specific initiatives, to deal with climate change. For example, energy efficiency measures may actually increase energy consumption in the absence of a cap on fossil fuel use, as people might drive more fuel-efficient cars. To combat this result, Aubrey Meyer calls for a 'framework-based market' of contraction and convergence. The Cap and Share and the Sky Trust are proposals based on the idea.

Environmental impact assessments (EIA) are conducted to compare impacts of various policy alternatives. Moreover, although it is often assumed that policymakers make rational decisions based on the merits of the project, Eccleston and March argue that although policymakers normally have access to reasonably accurate environmental information, political and economic factors are important and often lead to policy decisions that rank environmental priorities of secondary importance.

The decision-making theory casts doubt on this premise. Irrational decisions are reached based on unconscious biases, illogical assumptions, and the desire to avoid ambiguity and uncertainty.[16]

Eccleston identifies and describes four of the most critical environmental policy issues facing humanity: water scarcity, food scarcity, climate change, and the population paradox.[17][18][19]

Research and innovation policy

Synergic to the environmental policy is the environmental research and innovation policy. An example is the European environmental research and innovation policy, which aims at defining and implementing a transformative agenda to greening the economy and the society as a whole so to achieve a truly sustainable development. Europe is particularly active in this field, via a set of strategies, actions and programmes to promote more and better research and innovation for building a resource-efficient, climate resilient society and thriving economy in sync with its natural environment. Research and innovation in Europe are financially supported by the programme Horizon 2020, which is also open to participation worldwide.[20]

History

Though the Clean Air Act 1956 in response to London's Great Smog of 1952 was a historical step forward, and the 1955 Air Pollution Control Act was the first U.S. federal legislation that pertained to air pollution, the 1960s marked the beginning of modern environmental policy making. The stage had been set for change by the publication of Rachel Carson's New York Times bestseller Silent Spring in 1962 and strengthened the Environmental movement. Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson, then a U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, after witnessing the ravages of the 1969 massive oil spill in Santa Barbara, California, became famous for his environmental work. Administrator Ruckelshaus was confirmed by the Senate on December 2, 1970, which is the traditional date used as the birth of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Five months earlier, in July 1970, President Nixon had signed Reorganization Plan No. 3 calling for the establishment of EPA. At the time, Environmental Policy was a bipartisan issue and the efforts of the United States of America helped spark countries around the world to create environmental policies.[21] During this period, legislation was passed to regulate pollutants that go into the air, water tables, and solid waste disposal. President Nixon signed the Clean Air Act in 1970 which set the US as one of the world leaders in environmental conservation. The world's first minister of the environment was the British Politician Peter Walker from the Conservative Party in 1970. The German "Benzinbleigesetz" reduced Tetraethyllead since 1972.

In the European Union, the very first Environmental Action Programme was adopted by national government representatives in July 1973 during the first meeting of the Council of Environmental Ministers.[22] Since then an increasingly dense network of legislation has developed, which now extends to all areas of environmental protection including air pollution control, water protection and waste policy but also nature conservation and the control of chemicals, biotechnology and other industrial risks. EU environmental policy has thus become a core area of European politics. The German Umweltbundesamt was founded in Berlin 1974.

Overall organizations are becoming more aware of their environmental risks and performance requirements. In line with the ISO 14001 standard they are developing environmental policies suitable for their organization.[23] This statement outlines environmental performance of the organization as well as its environmental objectives. Written by top management of the organization they document a commitment to continuous improvement and complying with legal and other requirements, such as the environmental policy objectives set by their governments.

Environmental policy integration

The concept of environmental policy integration (EPI) refers to the process of integrating environmental objectives into non-environmental policy areas, such as energy, agriculture and transport, rather than leaving them to be pursued solely through purely environmental policy practices. This is oftentimes particularly challenging because of the need to reconcile global objectives and international rules with domestic needs and laws.[24] EPI is widely recognised as one of the key elements of sustainable development. More recently, the notion of ‘climate policy integration’, also denoted as ‘mainstreaming’, has been applied to indicate the integration of climate considerations (both mitigation and adaptation) into the normal (often economically focused) activity of government.[25]

Environmental policy studies

Given the growing need for trained environmental practitioners, graduate schools throughout the world offer specialized professional degrees in environmental policy studies. While there is not a standard curriculum, students typically take classes in policy analysis, environmental science, environmental law and politics, ecology, energy, and natural resource management. Graduates of these programs are employed by governments, international organizations, private sector, think tanks, advocacy organizations, universities, and so on.

Academic institutions use varying designations to refer to their environmental policy degrees. The degrees typically fall in one of four broad categories: master of arts, master of science, master of public administration, and PhD. Sometimes, more specific names are used to reflect the focus of the academic program.

Notable institutions include the Balsillie School of International Affairs, SIPA at Columbia, Sciences Po Paris, Graduate Institute Geneva, University of Oxford, University of Warwick, and University of British Columbia, among others.

gollark: Also, *why* would human brains be *optimal*?!
gollark: rust rust --rust /rust/rust/rust.rust
gollark: At http://rust-is.cool, obviously.
gollark: r u s t w i k i
gollark: Needs more Rust.

See also

References
  1. Eccleston, Charles H. (2010). Global Environmental Policy: Concepts, Principles, and Practice. ISBN 978-1439847664.
  2. Banovac, Eraldo; Stojkov, Marinko; Kozak, Dražan (February 2017). "Designing a global energy policy model". Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Energy. 170 (1): 2–11. doi:10.1680/jener.16.00005.
  3. McCormick, John (2001). Environmental Policy in the European Union. The European Series. Palgrave. p. 21.
  4. Bührs, Ton; Bartlett, Robert V (1991). Environmental Policy in New Zealand. The Politics of Clean and Green. Oxford University Press. p. 9.
  5. Concise Oxford Dictionary, 1995.
  6. Loomis, John; Helfand, Gloria (2001). Environmental Policy Analysis for Decision Making. Springer. p. 330. ISBN 978-0-306-48023-2.
  7. A major article outlining and analyzing the history of environmental communication policy within the European Union has recently come out in The Information Society, a journal based in the United States. See Mathur, Piyush. "Environmental Communication in the Information Society: The Blueprint from Europe," The Information Society: An International Journal, 25: 2, March 2009 , pp. 119–38.
  8. Lackey, Robert (2006). "Axioms of ecological policy" (PDF). Fisheries. 31 (6): 286-290.
  9. Rushefsky, Mark E. (2002). Public Policy in the United States at the Dawn of the Twenty-first Century (3rd ed.). New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. pp. 253–254. ISBN 978-0-7656-1663-0.
  10. http://www.oecd.org/about/0,3347,en_2649_34281_1_1_1_1_1,00.html http://www.oecd.org/about/0,3347,en_2649_34295_1_1_1_1_1,00.html
  11. "Environmental Compliance & Corporate Performance - Can You Have It All?". www.emisoft.com. 2016-10-26.
  12. en_2649_34281_1_1_1_1_ 1,00.html Archived June 10, 2015, at the Wayback Machine
  13. "Instrument Mixes for Environmental Policy" (Paris: OECD Publications, 2007) 15–16.
  14. “Environmental Policies and Instruments,” http://www.oecd.org/department/0,3355,en_2649_34281_1_1_1_1_1,00.html
  15. "Economic Instruments". Economic Instruments. 2011-01-26. Archived from the original on 2011-02-07. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  16. Eccleston C. and Doub P., Preparing NEPA Environmental Assessments: A Users Guide to Best Professional Practices, CRC Press Inc., 300 pages (publication date: March 2012).
  17. Eccleston C. and March F., Global Environmental Policy: Principles, Concepts And Practice, CRC Press Inc. 412 pages (2010).
  18. "The Population Paradox - Our World".
  19. "Population paradox: Europe's time bomb". 2008-08-08.
  20. See Horizon 2020 – the EU's new research and innovation programme http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-1085_en.htm
  21. “Managing the Environment, Managing Ourselves: A History of American Environmental Policy”
  22. Knill, C. and Liefferink, D. (2012) The establishment of EU environmental policy. In: Jordan, A.J. and C. Adelle (ed.) Environmental Policy in the European Union: Contexts, Actors and Policy Dynamics (3e). Earthscan: London and Sterling, VA.
  23. Eccleston, Charles H. (2010). Global Environmental Policy: Concepts, Principles, and Practice. Chapter 7. ISBN 978-1439847664.
  24. Farah, Paolo Davide; Rossi, Piercarlo (December 2, 2011). "National Energy Policies and Energy Security in the Context of Climate Change and Global Environmental Risks: A Theoretical Framework for Reconciling Domestic and International Law Through a Multiscalar and Multilevel Approach". European Energy and Environmental Law Review. 2 (6): 232–244. SSRN 1970698.
  25. Taskforce on Conceptual Foundations of Earth System Governance http://www.earthsystemgovernance.net/conceptual-foundations/?page_id=144
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.