Search

Absence of scientific independence can be associated with a lack of impartiality and therefore with a lack of credibility. Yet scientific credibility is essential for effective participation in sociopolitical processes-processes that necessarily involve politics and often result in decisions about land management, conservation, and public policy. All scientists are aware of these processes, many wish to participate, and some wish to advocate for their personal policy preferences. However, scientists who lack impartiality often create the perception of bias, and they can suffer a concomitant loss of credibility. Some policy-makers also have personal preferences for certain policies, and the term normative policies can be used here even though all policies can be viewed as normative in the sense that they involve multiple inputs. Hence, the idea that scientists must provide unbiased information for unbiased application by policy-makers is sometimes wrong. For scientists to be effective participants in sociopolitical processes that lead to conservation policies or related actions, they should inform the public about issues while avoiding direct involvement in policy development and the political considerations this necessarily entails. Scientists should only participate in the decision-making process with impartial information and in their proper role as objective scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How genuine is the Conservative party's rediscovery of the environment? Would a Conservative government led by David Cameron implement a wide-ranging and progressive environmental policy? This article explores why Cameron has embraced the environment so enthusiastically when Conservative governments have had a poor record of environmental protection and the Conservative party has traditionally shown little interest in the issue. It assesses the impact of Cameron's strategy both on his own party and on the wider world of environmental politics and it evaluates the continuing commitment of the Conservatives to the issue by assessing what kind of policies a future Conservative government might implement. Although Cameron remains committed to the issue and he has already had a positive impact on Labour government policy, he has not yet convinced his party or its supporters, so a future Conservative government would probably represent continuity rather than significant change in environmental policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Directive 2002/95/EC, the Restriction of Hazardous Substances or ‘RoHS’ Directive, restricts the use of environmentally hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment distributed and sold in the EU from 1 July 2006. The Directive's objectives are to harmonize EU Member States’ national legislation and protect human health and the environment. This article reveals differences in the implementation of the RoHS Directive at the time it took effect. Differences were revealed in the analysis of results obtained from telephone interviews conducted with all but four of the 25 EU Member State RoHS enforcement officials. Differences in implementation created barriers to the achievement of the RoHS Directive's objectives and caused problems for producers of electrical and electronic equipment. The article attributes the principal cause of differences in implementation to insufficiently detailed text in the RoHS Directive. The article also considers how barriers and problems could have been prevented and makes proposals to solve them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reflects on the environmental policy in Canada. The author argues that the Canadian environmental and resource policy failed to use economic instruments that would be important to the development of the policy. The policy focuses on air quality regulation, water quality regulation, water pricing and energy conservation.

Objective. Despite the rich discussions about the role of information disclosure programs in environmental policy, our theoretical understanding of how and why information disclosure programs work lacks a clear framework. This article begins to fill that void by laying out some fundamental theories and concepts that underlie the empirical work on the subject. Methods. Basic theories arising from our knowledge of economics, psychology, and politics are compared. Previous research is analyzed with these theories in mind. Results. Research results confirm the plausibility of each of these theories, though the most compelling evidence so far suggests that shock and shame are key motivating factors for improved environmental performance by industry. Conclusions. The argument is made that our theoretical foundations must be understood better if we are to make sense of the empirical work on the subject. Policy implications are addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the problem-making tendencies in environmental policymaking has been an incremental approach to regulation and control. Either because the full dimensions of an environmental problem are not perceived or because political resistance compels step-by-step action, environmental controls tend to be applied progressively, beginning with nominal, largely ineffectual, retroactive declarations. Failing to meet objectives, laws are toughened and extended year by year until the severity of sanctions begins to defeat their intended effects. The fractionized state of environmental law, focusing on specific problems of pollution and subject to changes in interpretation, makes observance and enforcement difficult. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 could have facilitated the unification of environmental policy; unfortunately presidents and congresses have not chosen to use it for this purpose. Meanwhile, because environmental protection per se is relatively new to public law and policy and has few roots in the common law, private citizens aggrieved by political obstruction of their expectations have appealed to the courts for relief and compensation. Conservative courts have granted this relief under the "taking" clause of the Constitution. Extraordinary measures in constitutional law may be necessary to resolve an impasse in public policy resulting from conflict between public interests and private rights as interpreted by the judiciary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among the unforeseen problems of the new industrial age has been the disposal of increasing quantities of wastes many hazardous and toxic. Industrial chemistry has produced numerous products that, while useful, are alien to nature and resistant to biodegradation or detoxification. Growing public awareness of the possible hazards and risks involved in disposal of the residuals of industrial activities is arousing a popular demand for environmental protection. But this popular awareness depends upon public information and a degree of scientific literacy--conditions which vary widely among nations. Initial consequences are environmental regulations and restrictions respecting waste disposal in scientifically developed countries, and vulnerability among less developed countries to the export of hazardous wastes from the countries of their origin. A secondary consequence is the emergence of international waste trade as a national and international multidimensional policy problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The politics of the environment may not be unique, but they present some distinctive characteristics. In undertaking policy analyses and administrative strategies an appreciation of concepts, assumptions and circumstances, and underlying environmental policy issues is needed. To ignore these fundamentals is to risk superficiality in analysis, and error in findings and conclusions. Yet getting down to basics is often rejected as diversion from the goal of analysis. It deviates from a "straight to the point" approach, adds cost and time to investigation, and seldom interests practical-minded analysts. Even so, this paper will be prefaced by a concise reminder of some basic factors that make environmental policy problematic. Among these are: (1) incompatible concepts of man-nature relationships notably conflict between perceived facts and values, (2) inadequate comprehension of the complexities of nature, (3) sectoral subdivisions of knowledge, (4) assumptions, situations and motivations in environmental politics, (5) fractionated structure of laws and administration, and (6) short-range perception of time. In addition to these conceptual factors the widely varied subject-matter of environmental politics narrows the scope of generalization for policy purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]