ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS eJOURNAL
"Human Rights Approach to Environmental Protection"
OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol. 07, No. 01, pp. 17-24, 2014
PUNEET PATHAK, Central University of Punjab - Centre for Environmental Law
Environmental protection and human rights are interrelated, interconnected, and mutually responsive as both of them intended to the well-being of humanity. Safe and healthy environment is the pre-condition for the enjoyment of fundamental human rights. The linkage between these two approaches has recognised in various international and regional instruments, resolutions of the UN subsidiary organization, the outcome documents of international conferences, and the judicial pronouncement of tribunals, which consider the human rights framework as an effective means to achieving the ends of environment protection. Despite the evident relationship between these two, human rights violations and environmental degradation have been treated by most organizations, governments and even academia as unrelated issues. Environmentalists have tended to focus primarily on natural resource preservation without addressing human impacts of environmental abuse. A state of natural imbalance has been developed by many human-centric activities such as the industrialization, urbanization and the large scale exploitation of natural resources damaging the environment led to many serious repercussions on a large scale including Global Warming, drought, flood, environmental Refugees and migration, health issue, Ozone Depletion. Such issues involves not only environmental factors but other factors as well i.e. political, social, economic factors which requires the integration of both approaches to tackle the issues more holistically. The result of looking these two approaches separately is that the victims of environmental degradation are unprotected by the laws and mechanisms established to address human rights abuses. Linking human rights with the environment creates a rights-based approach to environmental protection that places the people harmed by environmental degradation at its center. Articulating the fundamental rights of peoples with respect to the environment creates the opportunity to secure those rights through human rights bodies in an international forum as well as the national tribunals. In this regard, the contribution made by the Indian judiciary for the protection of environment and to provide remedies to the victim of environmental harm by applying the right based approach to environmental protection is a clear example of how the framework of human rights can contribute in the protection of environment and the very existence of the humanity. The concept of sustainable development is very well served to interlink these approaches as it comprising three interrelated dimensions: environmental, economic and social. The present study is intended to describe the interlink between environmental protection and human rights approaches by analyzing instruments, initiatives taken by environmental and human rights bodies and the judicial pronouncement of various tribunals. Further it also evaluates how far the mechanism of human rights is helpful to provide remedies to the victim of environmental degradation and to provide better protection to the global environment.
"Empowering Stakeholders Towards Better Working Conditions Through Green Factories: An Action Research in India"
OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol. 07, No. 01, pp. 25-36, 2014
GAGAN PREET KAUR, University of Delhi - Department of Resource Management and Design Application
PUJA GUPTA, University of Delhi - Department of Resource Management and Design Application
MATT SYAL, Michigan State University - School of Planning, Design & Construction
The need of sustainable development is picking up pace, with one of the major concerns being to provide healthy environment for citizens to live and work. The Industrial sector has pursued its manufacturing operations without giving much attention to environmental and health issues. This has resulted in an impact on resources, human health and wellbeing. Thus in this context, Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) has developed green factory rating system which can help address issues like energy efficiency, conservation of natural, betterment of working conditions and enhanced productivity. Its adoption can be accelerated by generating awareness amongst stakeholders of manufacturing sector to voluntarily adopt green practices for their factory buildings. The research brings out the action oriented approach followed to generate awareness amongst stakeholders regarding the green factory rating system with special reference to Indoor Environment Quality (IEQ) technologies since it has major impact on the health and productivity of the workers. Also, newer technologies used for IEQ by operational green factories were also studied in detail.
Newer technologies employed by existing green factories, as revealed by the study were Building flush out, entryway systems, high efficiency filters and so forth. Taking these as a framework, a training programme was prepared to generate awareness. The training programme, dealt in imparting knowledge on various issues such as sustainable development, green built environment, green factory rating system etc. It consisted of modules assisted with comprehensive tools like presentations, videos, pamphlet, training manual and handouts. The training programme resulted in change in knowledge and perception of stakeholders which was statistically analyzed. This change helped them to understand and appreciate how their practices and preferences in their factory buildings can contribute to good working environment thereby leading to a holistic goal of sustainable development. Thus, such interventions can be taken up at a wider scale to motivate community stakeholders to adopt green building guidelines.
"Electric Power Resource 'Shuffling' and Subnational Carbon Regulation: Looking Upstream for a Solution"
Forthcoming San Diego Journal of Climate & Energy Law (2014)
JIM ROSSI, Vanderbilt University - Law School
ANDREW JAMES DEARING SMITH, Vanderbilt University - Law School
â€œResource shuffling,â€? a form of carbon leakage, occurs when different subnational approaches to carbon regulation create variations in the costs of production across jurisdictions. This Article addresses the â€œresource shufflingâ€? problem presented by Californiaâ€™s cap-and-trade program and addresses the merits of its legal and regulatory solutions. The potential for â€œresource shufflingâ€? â€” replacing cleaner sources of electric power with dirtier and cheaper sources of energy â€” is a major threat to Californiaâ€™s environmental goals given that about 30 percent of the electricity consumed in California is imported from other states. This imported electricity tends to come from disproportionately dirty sources (such as coal) and represents more than half of the carbon dioxide emitted as a result of Californiaâ€™s electricity demand.
Part I of this Article describes resource shuffling and its significance for subnational efforts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, such as Californiaâ€™s cap-and-trade program for carbon. Part II discusses the tension that Californiaâ€™s initial regulatory strategy presented with federal regulators who oversee wholesale electric power markets. Part III addresses ways to more effectively regulate resource shuffling. This Article argues that federal energy regulators could improve the efficacy of subnational efforts to address GHG emissions and produce greater certainty for power markets by addressing resource shuffling through a harmonized set of rules or guidelines articulating acceptable least-cost dispatch protocols for the operation of wholesale power markets. Absent this kind of upstream approach, resource shuffling will continue to occur, thwarting the ability of subnational regulation to achieve green house gas reduction goals, and uncertainty about shuffling will continue to plague interstate power markets.
"Do Emission Trading Schemes Facilitate Efficient Abatement Investments? An Experimental Study"
CERGE-EI Working Paper Series No. 503
SILVESTER VAN KOTEN, Charles University in Prague - CERGE-EI (Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute)
Cap-and-trade programs, such as the EU carbon Emission Trading Scheme, are currently the most prominent market-based method used to reduce carbon emissions. Cap-and-trade programs are, on theoretical grounds, considered to be a cost-efficient method. Experimental evidence, however, shows that experimental subjects make highly inefficient abatement choices and that permit allocation methods (allocating permits for free or against payment) bias subjects to too much or too little abatement. The experimental evidence thus suggests that cap-and-trade programs may in practice be more costly than theory predicts. This study, however, challenges this interpretation and shows that, when they are price takers (as in thick markets) and have ample opportunities for learning, subjects quickly learn to make accurate decisions and that these decisions are not affected by the permit allocation method.
"The Accidental Postmodernists: A New Era of Skepticism in Environmental Policy"
FSU College of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 671
SHI-LING HSU, Florida State University - College of Law
Environmental law and policy conflicts seem to have entered a new phase. The emergence of complex problems such as climate change and of complex technologies such as hydraulic fracturing and genetic modification have created new political and legal schisms that no longer break down predictably along "pro-environment" versus "pro-business" lines. Rather, a new era of skepticism seems to be taking hold in which antagonists spar over the epistemic legitimacy of certain claims made in support of a policy position. Environmental law and policy conflicts thus divide antagonists into two camps: self-styled positivists â€“ scientists (physical, chemical, biological, and social) and environmental postmodernists, who seek to undermine the legitimacy of the positivists.
Environmental postmodernists urge us to take a skeptical look at the claims of self-styled positivists, because they suspect their epistemic claims are part of an attempt to gerrymander environmental law. Some environmental postmodernists challenge the use of cost-benefit analysis, and others are climate skeptics, who contest the prevailing concern over global climate change. These new schisms produce strange bedfellows, but environmental postmodernists share a common objective of creating doubt and skepticism.
I argue that environmental postmodernism can make a contribution: it can highlight dangerous policy situations in which a concentration of esoteric information can generate a power imbalance, and it can highlight the usefulness of transparency measures aimed only making information more publicly accessible and otherwise broadening process inputs. If this is the upshot of environmental postmodernism, it will have articulated a policy means of power diffusion, and therefore gone beyond the failures of Twentieth-century, post-structuralist postmodernism.
"Toxic Chemicals and the Solution: Innovations Creating a Sustainable Environment"
PANKAJ KUMAR, IPConstellation
Environmental preservation is one of the key strategies addressing sustainable development. Preserving environment need environmental technology and a broad aspect of it is known as â€œgreen technologyâ€? innovation. Competitive advantage, governmental regulation, international trade, individual capability, and public pressure are all important factors that can stimulate such innovation. Therefore, understanding environmental technology innovation in a country is necessary for making policies and decisions in environment management.
"How Much Do We Owe Future Generations?"
Environmental Policy and Law, Vol. 43, Issue 6, 2013
TERESA THORP, Insight International
The UNFCCC COP should re-evaluate cost-benefit-analysis and consider adopting a first principles approach to protect future generations in light of deep uncertainty. This paper argues for a type of â€œequitable efficiencyâ€? or â€œfirst principles efficiencyâ€? that exists when a dynamic first principles approach is used to produce an extra unit of a â€œduty to protectâ€? humankind. Antitrust tools could be used to trigger â€œdistributingâ€? a dynamic package of first principles and consequential norms fairly.
About this eJournal
This eJournal distributes working and accepted paper abstracts in the full range of subjects that comprise Environmental Economics. Topics include economic causes and consequences of environmental changes; tax and regulatory policies that affect the environment; markets for pollution rights and related issues; government policies toward the environment; valuation of environmental resources, "green accounting" and intergovernmental cooperation in environmental policy.
To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, click the My Papers link on left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of page.
If your organization is interested in increasing readership for its research by starting a Research Paper Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please email: RPS@SSRN.com
Economics Research Network (ERN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
ERN SUBJECT MATTER EJOURNALS
MICHAEL C. JENSEN
Harvard Business School, Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP), Inc., National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for ERN-Sub.
Environmental Economics eJournal
Professor, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign - Department of Finance, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), CESifo (Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute)
LAWRENCE H. GOULDER
Shuzo Nishihara Professor of Environmental and Resource Economics, Stanford University - Department of Economics, Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), University Fellow, Resources for the Future
WILLIAM D. NORDHAUS
Yale University - Department of Economics, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
PAUL R. PORTNEY
University of Arizona - Eller College of Management
ROBERT N. STAVINS
Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government, Harvard University - Harvard Kennedy School (HKS), University Fellow, Resources for the Future, Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
Mitchell Family Professor of Economics, Colby College - Department of Economics