Environmental liabilities in insolvency:an area ripe for reform?

Purpose: The paper examines the question whether legislative reform is the ‘silver bullet’ for the problems generated by the failure of a company which is exposed to claims arising from the non-fulfilment of its environmental obligations. The limited capacity of the United Kingdom insolvency regime to facilitate the fulfilment of a debtor company's environmental obligations is often illustrated with reference to some significant judicial decisions. However, no real picture has emerged of the frequency with which these issues arise, based on which firm proposals for reform could be advanced. This paper argues that greater regard should be paid to existing mechanisms which provide a means of enabling insolvency risks to be managed or minimised, as these point towards the scope for these issues to be resolved through the environmental protection framework rather than through reliance on company and/or insolvency law. Design/methodology/approach: Research was conducted into the statutory and non-statutory regulations (such as statutory guidance), and case law principles, which underpin the treatment of the claims against an insolvent (or potentially insolvent) company resulting from its environmental activities. This included research into policies which have a bearing on this area, developed through governmental and civic consultations and studies. Findings: The paper concludes that the likelihood of a case for legislative reform being made out is weak, and the focus should accordingly shift to strengthening the effectiveness of existing law, policy and practice. Originality/value: This paper is the first (in the United Kingdom context) to challenge the perceived need for reform in this area, engaging with recent examples of such corporate failures and the impact of recent legislative and policy developments.

Normative conflicts in international investment law: the case of environmental law

This dissertation investigates the relationship between investment and environmental obligations from the perspective of international investment law. In order to do so, the dissertation will consider how these obligations might enter into conflicts and what tools are available to investment tribunals to solve these normative conflicts. The dissertation analyses in order interpretative techniques, conflict resolution tools available in general international law, as expressed in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and finally express clauses in international investment agreements. The dissertation includes the review of some relevant case law arising from investment agreements in investment treaty tribunals, to discover how in practice these conflict resolution tools are applied and to assess their effectiveness. This dissertation places itself squarely within the debate between the unity and the fragmentation of international law; therefore it tackles the issue of normative conflicts resolution in a dispute settlement environment with the view of gauging their value in maintaining the unity of international law and defuse the risk of fragmentation. The dissertation can only conclude that much work remains to be done, including by providing a more comprehensive taxonomy of possible interventions, both on the legal and political sphere.

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.

Regime geral da responsabilidade ambiental e disciplian na Lei n. 9.605/98

Pós-graduação em Direito - FCHS

A divulgação de provisões e passivos contingentes ambientais pelas empresas do setor de energia elétrica em comparação ao desenvolvimento da normatização da evidenciação contábil

O pressuposto desta pesquisa é de que a divulgação de informações ambientais, no âmbito das provisões e passivos contingentes, reagiu aos avanços na normatização contábil. A normatização contábil genérica sobre evidenciação de obrigações incertas era restrita, em meados de 1976, à Lei no 6.404, e assim permaneceu ao longo de pelo menos uma década e meia, quando começou a ser desenvolvida. Ao longo dos anos foram criados padrões obrigatórios de divulgação, com critérios de julgamento mais detalhados para a classificação da obrigação incerta em provável, possível ou remota. Embora ainda apresente algum grau de subjetividade, o desenvolvimento destes critérios pode ter contribuído para a diminuição da assimetria informacional: a empresa passou a contar com um conjunto de orientações mais claras e, portanto, com melhores condições de averiguar e divulgar suas obrigações incertas. Esse avanço contribuiu para que as obrigações ambientais passassem a ter maior exposição, principalmente no âmbito das empresas potencialmente poluidoras, como as do setor de energia elétrica, que utilizam recursos naturais e modificam o meio ambiente. Neste contexto, o objetivo deste estudo foi analisar as evidências de passivo ambiental divulgadas pelas empresas do setor de energia elétrica, de 1997 a 2014. Para tanto, foi desenvolvido um estudo qualitativo, descritivo e longitudinal, por meio da análise de conteúdo de 941 notas explicativas, de uma população de 64 empresas do setor de energia elétrica, de acordo com listagem na BM&FBovespa, em maio de 2015. A amostra foi constituída de 26 empresas, que divulgaram o total de 468 notas explicativas no site da CVM, de 1997 a 2014. Ao longo destes 18 anos, 14 empresas da amostra (53,85%) evidenciaram passivos ambientais ao menos uma vez e 12 instituições (46,15%) não o fizeram e, do total de 468 notas explicativas, 100 (21,37%) evidenciaram passivo ambiental. O número de evidências de passivos ambientais era pequeno em meados de 1997, mas ascendeu, com um aumento mais consistente a partir de 2006, ano que coincide com a aprovação da Norma e Procedimento de Contabilidade 22 - Provisões, Passivos, Contingências Passivas e Contingências Ativas, emitida pelo IBRACON. Adicionalmente, a materialidade quantitativa estava na média de 0,61% para provisões ambientais e 0,89% para os passivos contingentes ambientais, desconsiderando-se os outliers. A dimensão das notas explicativas, em termos de quantidade de palavras, foi crescente e diversificada. Em conclusão, a evidenciação contábil pode, em adição à evidenciação voluntária, ser um meio plausível para a divulgação de questões ambientais e redução da assimetria informacional, principalmente quando a normatização contábil se faz mais clara e detalhada.

Do stakeholders or social obligations drive corporate social and environmental responsibility reporting? Managerial views from a developing country

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to explore senior managers’ perception and motivations of corporate social and environmental responsibility (CSER) reporting in the context of a developing country, Bangladesh. Design/methodology/approach – In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 senior managers of companies listed on the Dhaka Stock Exchange. Publicly available annual reports of these companies were also analysed. Findings – The results indicate that senior managers perceive CSER reporting as a social obligation. The study finds that the managers focus mostly on child labour, human resources/rights, responsible products/services, health education, sports and community engagement activities as part of the social obligations. Interviewees identify a lack of a regulatory framework along with socio-cultural and religious factors as contributing to the low level of disclosures. These findings suggest that CSER reporting is not merely stakeholder-driven, but rather country-specific social and environmental issues play an important role in relation to CSER reporting practices. Research limitations/implications – This paper contributes to engagement-based studies by focussing on CSER reporting practices in developing countries and are useful for academics, practitioners and policymakers in understanding the reasons behind CSER reporting in developing countries. Originality/value – This paper addresses a literature “gap” in the empirical study of CSER reporting in a developing country, such as Bangladesh. This study fills a gap in the existing literature to understand managers’ motivations for CSER reporting in a developing country context. Managerial perceptions on CSER issues are largely unexplored in developing countries.

Environmental undertakings: Ownership and obligations

Enforceable undertakings have proven to be a useful mechanism for achieving regulatory compliance in the trade practices context. This paper argues that enforceable environmental undertakings could prove equally useful. An administrative measure of this kind has the potential, if used appropriately, to encourage organisations to take greater ownership of their problems and responsibility for finding solutions.

The function of property in creating an effective legal regime for trade in environmental offsets

Market-based environmental regulation is becoming increasingly common within international and national frameworks. Environmental offset and trading regimes are part of the market-based instrument revolution. This paper proposes that environmental market mechanisms could be used to introduce an ethic of land holder responsibility. In order for market based regimes to attract sufficient levels of stakeholder engagement, participants within such scheme require an incentive to participate and furthermore need to feel a sense of security about investing in such processes. A sense of security is often associated with property based interests. This paper explores the property related issues connected with environmental offset and trading scheme initiatives. Relevant property-related considerations include land tenure considerations, public versus private management of land choices, characteristics and powers associated with property interests, theories defining property and the recognition of legal proprietal interests. The Biodiversity Banking Scheme in New South Wales is then examined as a case study followed by a critique on the role of environmental markets.

Beware statutory disclosure obligations

Great care is needed to ensure strict compliance with statutory disclosure obligations in conveyancing. The types of issues that may arise are well illustrated by the facts before the court in APM Property 3 Pty Ltd v Blondeau [2009] QSC 326, decision of Mullins J.

Legislating for sustainability: a framework for managing statutory rights obligations and restrictions affecting private land

The ad hoc growth of administrative controls on land use has produced an information management problem. Land registries face growing demands to record on the Torrens register particulars of rights, obligations and restrictions created under public law statutes, in order to reduce information costs, promote compliance and inform planning. As sustainable management of land and natural resources will require more legislative regulation, this paper proposes a framework of principles for the more coherent and consistent management of public law controls on private land use.

Regulating coal seam gas in Queensland : lessons in an adaptive environmental management approach?

The current regulatory approach to coal seam gas projects in Queensland is based on the philosophy of adaptive environmental management. This method of “learning by doing” is implemented in Queensland primarily through the imposition of layered monitoring and reporting duties on the coal seam gas operator alongside obligations to compensate and “make good” harm caused. The purpose of this article is to provide a critical review of the Queensland regulatory approach to the approval and minimisation of adverse impacts from coal seam gas activities. Following an overview of the hallmarks of an effective adaptive management approach, this article begins by addressing the mosaic of approval processes and impact assessment regimes that may apply to coal seam gas projects. This includes recent Strategic Cropping Land reforms. This article then turns to consider the preconditions for land access in Queensland and the emerging issues for landholders relating to the negotiation of access and compensation agreements. This article then undertakes a critical review of the environmental duties imposed on coal seam gas operators relating to hydraulic fracturing, well head leaks, groundwater management and the disposal and beneficial use of produced water. Finally, conclusions are drawn regarding the overall effectiveness of the Queensland framework and the lessons that may be drawn from Queensland’s adaptive environmental management approach.

Incorporating international environmental legal principles into future climate change instruments

The article explores the role of international environmental legal principles and their role in future climate change instruments. The five international environmental legal principles explored in this context are: inter and intergenerational equity, the precautionary principle, common but differentiated responsibility, the polluter pays and principle and the principles of responsibility and prevention. Principles are used within regulatory frameworks to guide the interpretation and implementation of the obligations specified within the instrument. It is found that these principles provide a useful basis for the development of international adaptation and mitigation measures that are equitable and ethical in nature. This article argues that these principles must be drafted more strategically into international climate change instruments allowing them to serve as a foundational basis upon which more stringent and equitable binding duties and rights can be derived from. This article makes some recommendations as to the type of obligations that these principles could be used to inform in future climate instruments.