Managing the impacts of sugarcane farming on the Great Barrier Reef: An evaluation of the implementation of the Polluter Pays Principle

This report provides an evaluation of the implementation of the Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) – a principle of international environmental law – in the context of pollution from sugarcane farming affecting Australia’s Great Barrier Reef (GBR). The research was part of an experiment to test methods for evaluating the effectiveness of environmental laws. Overall, we found that whilst the PPP is reflected to a limited extent in Australian law (more so in Queensland law, than at the national level), the behaviour one might expect in terms of implementing the principle was largely inadequate. Evidence of a longer term, explicit commitment to the PPP was particularly weak.

Regulation via the Polluter-Pays Principle

We consider the problem of regulating an economy with environmental pollution. We examine the distributional impact of the polluter-pays principle which requires that any agent compensates all other agents for the damages caused by his or her (pollution) emissions. With constant marginal damages we show that regulation via the polluter-pays principle leads to the unique welfare distribution that assigns non-negative individual welfare and renders each agent responsible for his or her pollution impact. We extend both the polluter-pays principle and this result to increasing marginal damages due to pollution. We also discuss the acceptability of the polluter-pays principle and compare it with the Vickrey-Clark-Groves mechanism.

The practical interpretation and application of the polluter pays principle

Revisa brevemente la teoría que hay detrás de las dos interpretaciones del principio contaminador-pagador, para comentar las implicaciones de éstas en la política ambiental, y considerar en qué medida este principio es aplicado en la práctica.

The Polluter Profits Principle: A Note on the Grandfathering of CO2 Emissions Rights in Lax-Cap Trading Regimes

Grandfathering is currently the main principle for the initial allocation of tradable CO2 emission rights under the European cap-and-trade scheme. Furthermore, political feasibility often requires non-restrictive emission caps. Grandfathering under lax cap is unjust, biased and brings polluters unintended windfall profits. Still, in any post-Kyoto international CO2 regime, lax caps may be critical in coaxing binding emission targets out of more countries, especially those in the less-developed world. This paper argues that there is a certain quantity of emission rights between the initial and the optimal emissions, the grandfathering of which brings polluters zero windfall profits or zero windfall losses. Our theoretical concept of zero-windfall grandfathering can be used to demonstrate the windfall profits that have emerged at company level during the first EU trading period. It might thus encourage governments to embrace auctioning, and to combine it with grandfathering as a legitimate tool in the initial allocation of emission rights in later trading regimes.

Implementação da diretiva 2010/75/EU - emissões industriais. Estudo de caso: refinaria de Sines

Tese de mestrado integrado em Engenharia da Energia e do Ambiente, apresentada à Universidade de Lisboa, através da Faculdade de Ciências, 2016

Réfugiés climatiques : statut et traitement

L’état actuel des travaux ne rend pas compte de l’ampleur des questions philosophiques et des enjeux moraux suscités par l’apparition sur la scène internationale des réfugiés climatiques. Il est pourtant urgent de leur accorder une protection à travers des accords internationaux. Les philosophes qui se sont penchés sur le sujet ont été induits en erreur tant par la multiplicité des termes employés que leur absence de définitions. Ce travail critique la tendance actuelle des militants écologistes à vouloir englober des populations aux problèmes divers sous le terme de réfugié. Banaliser l’emploi du terme de réfugié n’est pas seulement fallacieux mais également dangereux. A terme, les militants se tourneront vers la Convention de Genève pour revendiquer que les populations déplacées soient considérées comme des réfugiés. Or la Convention de Genève n’est pas un outil adéquat pour remédier au sort de ces populations. De plus, on ne peut élargir le statut de réfugié pour inclure ces populations sans risquer de perdre sa crédibilité et son efficience. Suivre la pente qu’emprunte les militants nous mènerait à accorder le même traitement aux réfugiés climatiques et aux réfugiés politiques, ce qui est une erreur. Notre hypothèse est que les habitants des petits pays insulaires à l’inverse des autres populations ont besoin d’un élargissement de la Convention de Genève. Nous arguerons que nous avons des devoirs et des responsabilités envers eux que nous n’avons pas envers les réfugiés politiques. Pour défendre ce point de vue, il faut définir clairement ce qu’est un réfugié climatique et justifier cette appellation. Nous devrons donc confronter la notion de réfugié climatique à d’autres notions concurrentes. Une fois les termes définis, nous envisagerons les enjeux éthiques à travers le prisme des questions de justice globale. Nous verrons que pour déterminer qui devrait remédier au sort des réfugiés climatique, il ne suffit pas de se référer à la responsabilité causale. Cela nous mènera à arguer que bien que séduisant, le principe pollueur-payeur n’est pas un outil adéquat pour guider la réflexion. Nous serons également amenés à nous interroger sur la pertinence d’une institution environnementale globale.

L'application du principe du pollueur-payeur à la gestion du risque environnemental et à la mutualisation des coûts de la pollution

Le but de cette étude est de déterminer qui paie pour le risque de pollution et par conséquent de vérifier si le principe du pollueur-payeur est effectivement mis en œuvre dans le domaine de la gestion du risque environnemental. Il s’agit d’examiner le degré de mutualisation de la gestion du risque dans différentes législations particulière. Les payeurs peuvent a priori se classer dans quatre catégories : les personnes dont l’activité contribue au risque de pollution, les compagnies d’assurance qui acceptent d’assurer ces personnes, les organismes ou autorités publics et les tiers. Divers exemples issus de la législation belge ou européenne seront examinés afin de déterminer s’ils sont conformes à la lettre et/ou à l’esprit du principe pollueur-payeur. Il s’agit notamment de la responsabilité civile, de la responsabilité environnementale, de la gestion des déchets et du marché de quotas d’émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Les techniques de responsabilité qui interviennent après que le dommage ait lieu et requièrent la démonstration de l’existence d’un lien de causalité ne permettent pas toujours d’assurer pleinement la fonction préventive du principe du pollueur-payeur. Elles ne constituent pas des instruments adéquats de gestion de la pollution diffuse ou chronique. En conséquence, des techniques de mutualisation de la gestion du risque environnemental se sont développées. Le recours à ces techniques de mutualisation (par le recours à l’assurance, aux fonds publics financés par la fiscalité environnementale ou aux marchés de droit d’émissions) est-il conforme au principe pollueur-payeur et permet-il d’atteindre l’objectif d’un niveau élevé de protection de l’environnement ? L’effet dissuasif du principe pollueur-payeur n’est-il pas amoindri par la mutualisation ? L’article montre que la définition du principe pollueur-payeur par la Cour de Justice de l’Union européenne est centrée sur la contribution au risque de pollution ce qui permet de recourir aux techniques de mutualisation de la gestion du risque tout en respectant le Traité sur le fonctionnement de l’Union européenne. 

Expenditures, investment and financing for sustainable development in Brazil

Includes bibliography

Los principios de derecho ambiental a la luz del sistema internacional

Incluye Bibliografía

The genesis of EC environmental principles. Research Paper in Law 7/2003

[From the Introduction]. The EC Treaty in its present version contains a number of environmental principles. The following contribution will try to retrace the origins of these principles in the EC Treaty and how they were developed by the EC institutions and in particular by the Commission. This discussion concerns the principles of integration[1], prevention[2] and precaution[3], the principle that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source[4] and the polluter-pays principle[ 5].

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.

Foundations of International Climate Law : Objectives, principles and methods

This chapter explores the objectives, principle and methods of climate law. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) lays the foundations of the international regime by setting out its ultimate objectives in Article 2, the key principles in Article 3, and the methods of the regime in Article 4. The ultimate objective of the regime – to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference – is examined and assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are considered when seeking to understand the definition of this concept. The international environmental principles of: state sovereignty and responsibility, preventative action, cooperation, sustainable development, precaution, polluter pays and common but differentiated responsibility are then examined and their incorporation within the international climate regime instruments evaluated. This is followed by an examination of the methods used by the mitigation and adaptation regimes in seeking to achieve the objective of the UNFCCC. Methods of the mitigation regime include: domestic implementation of policies, setting of standards and targets and allocation of rights, use of flexibility mechanisms, and reporting. While it is noted that methods of the adaptation regime are still evolving, the latter includes measures such as impact assessments, national adaptation plans and the provision of funding.

Los tributos medioambientales: estudio comparado Andino

El desarrollo de la presente tesis es hacer un estudio comparativo de la implementación de los tributos Medioambientales en nuestro país, a partir de la experiencia de la Comunidad Europea quienes desarrollaron y siguen desarrollando la protección y conservación del Medio Ambiente a través de la imposición tributaria. En ese sentido partimos definiendo y precisando el término Medio Ambiente y ecología a fin de delimitar el tema de estudio, ya que el objetivo de la tesis es identificar las formas o mecanismos de protección del Medio Ambiente, enfatizando en la imposición Medioambiental que pueden ser a través de los impuestos, tasas o contribuciones; además de la consideración por nuestra Constitución del medio ambiente como un derecho humano fundamental de los seres humanos. Durante el desarrollo de la tesis, exponemos los instrumentos nacionales e internacionales, cuya finalidad busca garantizar la protección y conservación del Medio Ambiente, bajo el principio “quien contamina paga”, que no es otra cosa que la el criterio objetivo en la que el sujeto que deteriora o contamina el Medio Ambiente debe ser el responsable de reparar el daño causado. Finalmente analizamos la viabilidad de la protección del Medio Ambiente en los países andinos y en nuestro texto constitucional.

Cameron's hot air. Pollution, fraud and the politics of carbon emissions

It is widely recognised that exposure to air pollutants affect pulmonary and lung dysfunction as well as a range of neurological and vascular disorders. The rapid increase of worldwide carbon emissions continues to compromise environmental sustainability whilst contributing to premature death. Moreover, the harms caused by air pollution have a more pernicious reach, such as being the major source of climate change and ‘natural disasters’, which reportedly kills millions of people each year (World Health Organization, 2012). The opening quotations tell a story of the UK government's complacency towards the devastation of toxic and contaminating air emissions. The above headlines greeted the British public earlier this year after its government was taken to the Court of Appeal for an appalling air pollution record that continues to cause the premature deaths of 30,000 British people each year at a health cost estimated at £20 billion per annum. This combined with pending legal proceedings against the UK government for air pollution violations by the European Commission, point to a Cameron government that prioritises hot air and profit margins over human lives. The UK's legal air pollution regimes are an industry dominated process that relies on negotiation and partnership between regulators and polluters. The entire model seeks to assist business compliance rather than punish corporate offenders. There is no language of ‘crime’ in relation to UK air pollution violations but rather a discourse of ‘exceedence’ (Walters, 2010). It is a regulatory system not premised on the ‘polluter pay’ principle but instead the ‘polluter profit’ principle.

Waste and resource management practices, legislation and policy encouraging and influencing ‘regeneration reuse’ of property assets

Carbon taxation governance is becoming increasingly popular, further evolving the polluter pays concept already well established in the built environment as a mechanism to controlling and licensing waste generation. This paper presents an explanation of property asset ‘regeneration reuse’ principles following deconstruction, which reduce waste generation associated with the process of demolition, construction and operation. An analysis is made of strategies in Australia and the United Kingdom, comparing jurisdiction targets pertaining to construction and demolition waste that encourage ‘regeneration reuse’. From examination of applicable Australian and United Kingdom legislation, strategic, fiscal and policy that influence on the 'regeneration reuse' of property assets, an evaluation to the variety of issues relevant to waste and resource management practices is reached. The paper concludes that a systematic evaluation framework to selecting building components and structures suitable for reuse after deconstruction must be considered in legislation.