Trade-induced technological change : analyzing economic and environmental outcomes

We analyze how changes in trade openness are related to induced technological innovations that are not only GDP increasing but also pollution saving. Our model includes by-products of carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide emissions. We estimate a directional distance function for 76 countries over the period 1963-2000 to measure exogenous and trade-induced technological change. On average, we find substantial trade-induced technological progress, and its magnitude is about one third of the overall technological change. The trade-induced technological changes, however, are GDP reducing and pollution increasing. Empirically, we find that increased trade openness correlates to increased pollution.

Environmental and public health issues in Mount Isa : 2007 community survey

This report presents the results of a random telephone survey of 500 adult residents of Mount Isa, conducted in early November 2007. The study was funded by Xstrata Mount Isa Mines. The primary aim of the survey was to collect data about community perceptions and experiences of air quality in Mount Isa and to compare these results with those of a similar survey conducted in 2000 (MacLennan, Lloyd & Hensley, 2000). Both surveys also included questions relating to other aspects of the Mount Isa environment (e.g. water quality, heat, amount of greenery) as well as questions aimed at ascertaining respondents’ general attitudes towards environmental protection.

Environmental rights, justice and climate change

The human rights implications of climate change are increasingly gaining attention, with wider international acknowledgement that climate change poses a real threat to human rights. This paper considers the impact of climate change on human rights, looking particularly at the experiences of Torres Strait Islanders in northern Australia. It argues that human rights law offers a guiding set of principles which can help in developing appropriate strategies to combat climate change. In particular, the normative principles embodied in environmental rights can be useful in setting priorities and evaluating policies in response to climate change. The paper also argues that a human rights perspective can help address the underlying injustice of climate change: that it is the people who have contributed least to the problem who will bear the heaviest burden of its effects.

The importance of environmental issues and costs in Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) for highway projects

Sustainability has been increasingly recognised as an integral part of highway infrastructure development. In practice however, the fact that financial return is still a project’s top priority for many, environmental aspects tend to be overlooked or considered as a burden, as they add to project costs. Sustainability and its implications have a far-reaching effect on each project over time. Therefore, with highway infrastructure’s long-term life span and huge capital demand, the consideration of environmental cost/ benefit issues is more crucial in life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA). To date, there is little in existing literature studies on viable estimation methods for environmental costs. This situation presents the potential for focused studies on environmental costs and issues in the context of life-cycle cost analysis. This paper discusses a research project which aims to integrate the environmental cost elements and issues into a conceptual framework for life cycle costing analysis for highway projects. Cost elements and issues concerning the environment were first identified through literature. Through questionnaires, these environmental cost elements will be validated by practitioners before their consolidation into the extension of existing and worked models of life-cycle costing analysis (LCCA). A holistic decision support framework is being developed to assist highway infrastructure stakeholders to evaluate their investment decision. This will generate financial returns while maximising environmental benefits and sustainability outcome.

Particle Swarm algorithm with Fuzzy decision making for a multi-objective economic and environmental optimization of design of a thermal system

Multi-Objective optimization for designing of a benchmark cogeneration system known as CGAM cogeneration system has been performed. In optimization approach, the thermoeconomic and Environmental aspects have been considered, simultaneously. The environmental objective function has been defined and expressed in cost terms. One of the most suitable optimization techniques developed using a particular class of search algorithms known as; Multi-Objective Particle Swarm Optimization (MOPSO) algorithm has been used here. This approach has been applied to find the set of Pareto optimal solutions with respect to the aforementioned objective functions. An example of fuzzy decision-making with the aid of Bellman-Zadeh approach has been presented and a final optimal solution has been introduced.

Does an environmental Kuznets curve for waste pollution exist in China?

China is an emerging and leading world economy. The pace of economic change has been tremendously rapid since the beginning of economic reforms. Despite the importance of the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) and environmental problems in China, no previous study has tested the EKC in China because of the difficulty in obtaining data and the need to adjust the data. The focus of this paper is to test the EKC in China using province level data over the period 1992-2003. This study applies non-parametric techniques to estimate the relationship between income and the environmental quality of wastewater, air pollution and solid waste. Copyright © 2009 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

Greenwashing the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Fossil fuels, the environment, and climate change

There has been much controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a plurilateral trade agreement involving a dozen nations from throughout the Pacific Rim – and its impact upon the environment, biodiversity, and climate change. The secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Japan; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico and the United States. There was an agreement reached between the parties in October 2015. The participants asserted: ‘We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.’ The final texts of the agreement were published in November 2015. There has been discussion as to whether other countries – such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea – will join the deal. There has been much debate about the impact of this proposed treaty upon intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity and climate change. There have been similar concerns about the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a proposed trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. In 2011, the United States Trade Representative developed a Green Paper on trade, conservation, and the environment in the context of the TPP. In its rhetoric, the United States Trade Representative has maintained that it has been pushing for strong, enforceable environmental standards in the TPP. In a key statement in 2014, the United States Trade Representative Mike Froman insisted: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative maintained: ‘Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region’. Moreover, the United States Trade Representative asserted: ‘Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.’ The United States Trade Representative has provided this public outline of the Environment Chapter of the TPP: A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services. Mark Linscott, an assistant Trade Representative testified: ‘An environment chapter in the TPP should strengthen country commitments to enforce their environmental laws and regulations, including in areas related to ocean and fisheries governance, through the effective enforcement obligation subject to dispute settlement.’ Inside US Trade has commented: ‘While not initially expected to be among the most difficult areas, the environment chapter has emerged as a formidable challenge, partly due to disagreement over the United States proposal to make environmental obligations binding under the TPP dispute settlement mechanism’. Joshua Meltzer from the Brookings Institute contended that the trade agreement could be a boon for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim: Whether it is depleting fisheries, declining biodiversity or reduced space in the atmosphere for Greenhouse Gas emissions, the underlying issue is resource scarcity. And in a world where an additional 3 billion people are expected to enter the middle class over the next 15 years, countries need to find new and creative ways to cooperate in order to satisfy the legitimate needs of their population for growth and opportunity while using resources in a manner that is sustainable for current and future generations. The TPP parties already represent a diverse range of developed and developing countries. Should the TPP become a free trade agreement of the Asia-Pacific region, it will include the main developed and developing countries and will be a strong basis for building a global consensus on these trade and environmental issues. The TPP has been promoted by its proponents as a boon to the environment. The United States Trade Representative has maintained that the TPP will protect the environment: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the TPP negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative discussed ‘Trade for a Greener World’ on World Environment Day. Andrew Robb, at the time the Australian Trade and Investment Minister, vowed that the TPP will contain safeguards for the protection of the environment. In November 2015, after the release of the TPP text, Rohan Patel, the Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, sought to defend the environmental credentials of the TPP. He contended that the deal had been supported by the Nature Conservancy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the World Wildlife Fund, and World Animal Protection. The United States Congress, though, has been conflicted by the United States Trade Representative’s arguments about the TPP and the environment. In 2012, members of the United States Congress - including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and John Kerry (D-MA) – wrote a letter, arguing that the trade agreement needs to provide strong protection for the environment: ‘We believe that a '21st century agreement' must have an environment chapter that guarantees ongoing sustainable trade and creates jobs, and this is what American businesses and consumers want and expect also.’ The group stressed that ‘A binding and enforceable TPP environment chapter that stands up for American interests is critical to our support of the TPP’. The Congressional leaders maintained: ‘We believe the 2007 bipartisan congressional consensus on environmental provisions included in recent trade agreements should serve as the framework for the environment chapter of the TPP.’ In 2013, senior members of the Democratic leadership expressed their opposition to granting President Barack Obama a fast-track authority in respect of the TPP House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said: ‘No on fast-track – Camp-Baucus – out of the question.’ Senator Majority leader Harry Reid commented: ‘I’m against Fast-Track: Everyone would be well-advised to push this right now.’ Senator Elizabeth Warren has been particularly critical of the process and the substance of the negotiations in the TPP: From what I hear, Wall Street, pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rig the deal in the upcoming trade talks. So the question is, Why are the trade talks secret? You’ll love this answer. Boy, the things you learn on Capitol Hill. I actually have had supporters of the deal say to me ‘They have to be secret, because if the American people knew what was actually in them, they would be opposed. Think about that. Real people, people whose jobs are at stake, small-business owners who don’t want to compete with overseas companies that dump their waste in rivers and hire workers for a dollar a day—those people, people without an army of lobbyists—they would be opposed. I believe if people across this country would be opposed to a particular trade agreement, then maybe that trade agreement should not happen. The Finance Committee in the United States Congress deliberated over the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2014. The new chair Ron Wyden has argued that there needs to be greater transparency in trade. Nonetheless, he has mooted the possibility of a ‘smart-track’ to reconcile the competing demands of the Obama Administration, and United States Congress. Wyden insisted: ‘The new breed of trade challenges spawned over the last generation must be addressed in imaginative new policies and locked into enforceable, ambitious, job-generating trade agreements.’ He emphasized that such agreements ‘must reflect the need for a free and open Internet, strong labor rights and environmental protections.’ Elder Democrat Sander Levin warned that the TPP failed to provide proper protection for the environment: The TPP parties are considering a different structure to protect the environment than the one adopted in the May 10 Agreement, which directly incorporated seven multilateral environmental agreements into the text of past trade agreements. While the form is less important than the substance, the TPP must provide an overall level of environmental protection that upholds and builds upon the May 10 standard, including fully enforceable obligations. But many of our trading partners are actively seeking to weaken the text to the point of falling short of that standard, including on key issues like conservation. Nonetheless, 2015, President Barack Obama was able to secure the overall support of the United States Congress for his ‘fast-track’ authority. This was made possible by the Republicans and dissident Democrats. Notably, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden switched sides, and was transformed from a critic of the TPP to an apologist for the TPP. For their part, green political parties and civil society organisations have been concerned about the secretive nature of the negotiations; and the substantive implications of the treaty for the environment. Environmental groups and climate advocates have been sceptical of the environmental claims made by the White House for the TPP. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Australian Greens and the Green Party of Canada have released a joint declaration on the TPP observing: ‘More than just another trade agreement, the TPP provisions could hinder access to safe, affordable medicines, weaken local content rules for media, stifle high-tech innovation, and even restrict the ability of future governments to legislate for the good of public health and the environment’. In the United States, civil society groups such as the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, WWF, the Friends of the Earth, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org have raised concerns about the TPP and the environment. Allison Chin, President of the Sierra Club, complained about the lack of transparency, due process, and public participation in the TPP talks: ‘This is a stealth affront to the principles of our democracy.’ Maude Barlow’s The Council of Canadians has also been concerned about the TPP and environmental justice. New Zealand Sustainability Council executive director Simon Terry said the agreement showed ‘minimal real gains for nature’. A number of organisations have joined a grand coalition of civil society organisations, which are opposed to the grant of a fast-track. On the 15th January 2013, WikiLeaks released the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP - along with a report by the Chairs of the Environmental Working Group. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, stated: ‘Today's WikiLeaks release shows that the public sweetener in the TPP is just media sugar water.’ He observed: ‘The fabled TPP environmental chapter turns out to be a toothless public relations exercise with no enforcement mechanism.’ This article provides a critical examination of the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP. The overall argument of the article is that the Environment Chapter of the TPP is an exercise in greenwashing – it is a public relations exercise by the United States Trade Representative, rather than a substantive regime for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim. Greenwashing has long been a problem in commerce, in which companies making misleading and deceptive claims about the environment. In his 2012 book, Greenwash: Big Brands and Carbon Scams, Guy Pearse considers the rise of green marketing and greenwashing. Government greenwashing is also a significant issue. In his book Storms of My Grandchildren, the climate scientist James Hansen raises his concerns about government greenwashing. Such a problem is apparent with the TPP – in which there was a gap between the assertions of the United States Government, and the reality of the agreement. This article contends that the TPP fails to meet the expectations created by President Barack Obama, the White House, and the United States Trade Representative about the environmental value of the agreement. First, this piece considers the relationship of the TPP to multilateral environmental treaties. Second, it explores whether the provisions in respect of the environment are enforceable. Third, this article examines the treatment of trade and biodiversity in the TPP. Fourth, this study considers the question of marine capture fisheries. Fifth, there is an evaluation of the cursory text in the TPP on conservation. Sixth, the article considers trade in environmental services under the TPP. Seventh, this article highlights the tensions between the TPP and substantive international climate action. It is submitted that the TPP undermines effective and meaningful government action and regulation in respect of climate change. The conclusion also highlights that a number of other chapters of the TPP will impact upon the protection of the environment – including the Investment Chapter, the Intellectual Property Chapter, the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter, and the text on public procurement.

Trade wars in the TRIPS Council: Intellectual property, technology transfer, and climate change

This Chapter considers the geopolitical conflicts in respect of intellectual property, trade, and climate change in the TRIPS Agreement 1994 under the World Trade Organization (WTO). In particular, it focuses upon debates in the TRIPS Council on the topic of patent law and clean energy in 2013 and 2014. The chapter highlights the development agenda of a number of developing countries who are keen for access to clean energy to combat climate change and global warming. It also considers the mixed contributions of members of the BRICS/ BASIC group – including Brazil, India, China, and South Africa. This chapter highlights the intellectual property maximalist position of a number of developed countries on intellectual property, climate change, and trade. Seeking to overcome this conflict and stalemate, this Chapter puts forward both procedural and substantial reform options in respect of intellectual property, trade, and climate change in the TRIPS Council and the WTO. It also flags that the TRIPS Agreement 1994 could well be displaced by the rise of mega-regional trade agreements – such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).

The science of assessment : identifying and predicting environmental impacts

The historical challenge of environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been to predict project-based impacts accurately. Both EIA legislation and the practice of EIA have evolved over the last three decades in Canada, and the development of the discipline and science of environmental assessment has improved how we apply environmental assessment to complex projects. The practice of environmental assessment integrates the social and natural sciences and relies on an eclectic knowledge base from a wide range of sources. EIA methods and tools provide a means to structure and integrate knowledge in order to evaluate and predict environmental impacts.----- This Chapter will provide a brief overview of how impacts are identified and predicted. How do we determine what aspect of the natural and social environment will be affected when a mine is excavated? How does the practitioner determine the range of potential impacts, assess whether they are significant, and predict the consequences? There are no standard answers to these questions, but there are established methods to provide a foundation for scoping and predicting the potential impacts of a project.----- Of course, the community and publics play an important role in this process, and this will be discussed in subsequent chapters. In the first part of this chapter, we will deal with impact identification, which involves appplying scoping to critical issues and determining impact significance, baseline ecosystem evaluation techniques, and how to communicate environmental impacts. In the second part of the chapter, we discuss the prediction of impacts in relation to the complexity of the environment, ecological risk assessment, and modelling.

Identification of key environmental issues for building materials

Manufacture, construction and use of buildings and building materials make a significant environmental impact internally (inside the building), locally (neighbourhood) and globally. Life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology is being applied for evaluating the environmental impact of building/or building materials. One of the major applications of LCA is to identify key issues of a product system from cradle to grave. Key issues identified in an LCA lead one to the right direction in assessing the environmental aspects of a product system and help to identify the areas for improvement of the environmental performance of a product as well. The purpose of this paper is to suggest two methods for identifying key issues using an integrated tool (LCADesign), which has been developed to provide a method of determining the best alternative for reducing environmental impacts from a building or building materials, and compare both methods in the case study. This paper assists the designers or marketers related to building or building materials in their decision making by giving information on activities or alternatives which are identified as key issues for environmental impacts.