I would add to Angus' observations about enforcement that enforcement takes
place at multiple levels and through various actors. I think that too often
enforcement is defined too narrowly as what government(s) do to regulate
particular activities. These often are limited by the mechanisms through
which agencies work: periodic and oft' times pre-announced site visits and
testing for compliance. I think a better measure is the extent to which
governments support nongovernment organizations and individuals as
quasi-regulatory actors. This includes whether and to what extent employees
are encouraged and/or supported by laws and governments in reporting
violations, because they have intimate knowledge about actual practices
that may otherwise be hidden from regulators. I think the BP fiasco offers
some insight into how important employees can be in acting, or not, to
protect themselves and the environment. 

Darrell Whitman


Original Message:
-----------------
From: Wright, Angus [email protected]
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 12:54:18 -0700
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: RE: [gep-ed] data question



In my experience in the United States, Mexico, Brazil, and reading
regarding other countries, the key is more often enforcement effort rather
than the letter of the law. An aggressive government and/or prosecutors can
do a great deal with relatively loose laws, and, on the other hand, can use
very tough looking legislation as nothing more than a smoke screen that
enables poor performance. Of course, it goes without saying that it is best
to have an aggressive government enforcement effort and stringent law,
although some of my friends and ex-students in California state government
complain mightily that sometimes stringent laws, by too great caution and
specificity, can actually stand in the way of effective enforcement, and,
especially, of remediation.

These observations may be platitudinous to all of you, but such points
often seem to get lost in the legal and political science literature, as
well as in journalistic treatments.

Angus

Angus Wright
Professor Emeritus of Environmental Studies
California State University, Sacramento
________________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Raul
Pacheco-Vega [[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 9:06 PM
To: [email protected] >> "[email protected]"
Subject: Re: [gep-ed] data question

Dear Asseem, Kevin and colleagues,

I have previously criticized measurements of stringency of environmental
laws, and to this day, I do not think we have one that is rigorous
enough. How would we define stringency of environmental law? Number of
inspections of industrial plants per year? Re-incidence of inspection?
Amount of money paid per infraction (fine)?

When I wrote my doctoral dissertation I used a combined measure of
number of plant inspections and fines to assess Mexican environmental
regulatory pressure, but I acknowledged it was a very rough measure. I
agree with Kevin that EPI could be used, but I think we still are far
away from a solid measurement of regulatory stringency.

Yours,
Raul

Kevin Gallagher wrote:
> A. Prakash
>
> I think the best you can do with that and a grain of salt is Esty's
> "Environmental Performance Index" at Yale:
>
> http://epi.yale.edu/
>
> Best
>
> Kevin Gallagher
>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am looking for cross-national data on stringency of environmental
>> laws and levels of carbon taxation. Any suggestions where I might
>> find such data?
>>
>> Many thanks,
>>
>> ********************************************
>> Aseem Prakash
>> Professor
>> Department of Political Science
>> 39 Gowen Hall, Box 353530
>> University of Washington
>> Seattle, WA 98195-3530
>>
>> 206-543-2399
>> 206-685-2146 (fax)
>> [email protected]
>> http://faculty.washington.edu/aseem/
>
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web


Reply via email to