Industrial Pollution Regulations - Essay Example

Industrial pollution regulations Name: Course: Institution: Instructor: Date: Industrial pollution regulations The effects of industrial pollution have escalated in the several decades due to expansion of industries as a result of population growth. This has led to significant damage to the natural environment, ozone depletion, climate change, land degradation among others in the planet (Haley, 2003). The planet which sustains the people has therefore been subjected to uncertainty due to these controversial and complex economic and social pressures. Therefore there is need to prevent at all costs the ongoing planet environmental degradation in order to prevent ecological disasters from occurring. This has led the policy makers to come up with regulations that will ensure that environmental degradation is minimized and later halted. Some of these strategies include conventional command and control regulations and economic instruments like tax emissions that have been put in place to reduce industrial pollution. Assessed below are the strengths and weaknesses of each of these strategies implemented to regulate pollution. The Conventional and Control Command regulations are policies implemented by government to regulate all industries. The regulation is through legislation which outlines legal and illegal standards that the industries must comply with and failure leads to prosecution and sanctions (Helfand & Berck, 2003). The strengths of these regulations include one it is quicker to prosecute industries that do not abide by the standards set out in the policies. Since the regulations and standards are clearly outlined in these legislations there is no loophole that allows the industries to get away with any illegal activity. These regulations apply to all industries regardless of size, location, products being manufactured therefore it is easy to crack down on industries that are not abiding by these standards. Since the regulations are set by the government it has the power to close down an industry that is operating outside these limits. This ensures that industries operate their business in accordance to the command and control regulations to avoid sanction by the regulators. The second strength of conventional command and control regulation is that the government increases is viewed as decisive and in control politically through implementation of these regulations. The people’s confidence in the government is increased when they pass such legislations that benefit them directly. This is because the industrial pollution negatively affects the environment which the people largely depend on resulting to calamities, diseases, contamination etc. Therefore when the government directly imposes regulations on industries the citizens are pleased with the swift action it has taken and this increases its popularity politically. The third strength of conventional command and control measures is that they are more efficient at the source point compared to other regulations. This is because the government regulations ensure that the products manufactured from the various industries meet certain standards. For example it is easier for the government to ensure through their policies that car manufacturers make energy efficient cars than crack down on motorists polluting the air on the road. If these measures are followed at the industry level the pollution will be greatly reduced at the source point before it spreads out through the products. The fourth strength of conventional command and control regulation is that it provides more clarity to those being regulated. The regulations are set out in a manner that is understandable, simple and clear of what is expected from the industries. In addition the regulations states ways each requirement should be met. The government regulation provides specific ways to achieve these standards to avoid confusion and misinterpretations. This ensures that the industries have a strict and clear method to follow in fulfilling these regulations. This ensures that no conflict arises concerning the implementation of this regulation between the government and industries. The fifth strength of conventional command and control regulation is that it leads to more rapid environmental resolution. When the government passes this regulation they automatically become part of the law which every person should abide to. Hence the government has the power to respond rapidly to an environmental problem through legislation in order to put an immediate stop to it. For example the government may put a ban on use of polythene paper bags to avoid environmental degradation caused by poor disposal of polythene bags. This achieves a rapid respond to this problem once it is legislated. The fist weakness of conventional command and control regulation is the government and industries fostering a close relationship that may end up in capture. This means that they may form close ties and end up favoring each others interest at the expense of the public (Byers, 1991). This capture leads the government to defend the interest of the industries therefore ignoring the welfare of the people. This is largely influenced by the fact that there is no institution or organization in place to check the government’s implementation and interpretation of this regulation. The government may take advantage of this and put their interests first by favoring industries which in return operate outside of the set standards. The second weakness of conventional command and control regulation is that these regulations may hinder development and growth of industries. Since these regulations are formed through an act of legislation, they are therefore inflexible and cannot be altered easily which poses a challenge to enterprises. This makes it difficult for new industries and existing ones to expand since there are certain conditions that should be met. In addition too many regulations put in place may lead to over regulation which stifles the industries, hinders economic development and discourages entrepreneurship among the people. The third weakness of conventional command and control regulation is the high cost incurred during the enforcement of these regulations (Caffera, 2004). The government has to set aside revenue to be allocated to the research of the factors contributing to pollution and how it can be avoided. The government has to appoint a legislative committee to draw up the measures the government will implement before they are fully passed. In addition the government has to hire the qualified professionals to assist the committee in drawing up the regulations. Lastly, for the government to successfully implement the regulation it has to employ people who will be constantly monitoring the industries. The fourth weakness of conventional command and control regulation is the challenge of standard setting. In order for this regulation to work effectively the government has to choose the appropriate standards to include in the policy to avoid causing harm to the industries. This requires the government to collect as much information as possible from all the stake holders involved to overcome this challenge (Kolb, & Sage Publications, inc. 2008). This is achieved by holding meetings with the industry owners, the public, experts of environmental studies among others which is time consuming and difficult to please each. The fifth weakness of conventional command and control regulation is how the implementation process is conducted (Gunningham, Kagan & Thornton, 2003). How well the regulations resolve the pollution problems is determined by how the implementation is carried out by the government’s relevant body. Therefore the governments should cautiously and critically carry out inspections on industry standards strictly following the laid down rules. This is to avoid unexpected consequences that may arise due to uncritical and unethical implementation of these regulations by the relevant people. The economic instruments such as emissions taxes or emissions trading regulations are market based ways of controlling industrial pollution through provision of economic incentives when pollutants emitted by industries is reduced (Crew & Parker, 2006). Each industry is allowed to have a permit which allows it to emit a certain volume of pollutants that does not exceed the set limit or cap. Industries that emit more pollutants are therefore required to purchase permits from those industries that emit less pollutants hence need few permits. These purchases are called trade and facilitate the most polluters to pay for it while the least polluters gain by selling permits (Tietenberg, 2006). One of the strengths of economic instrument is that it’s cost effective. This is because in trading emissions the regulation recognize that each industry vary in pollutants emissions and offers an opportunity to the polluters to minimize this in a cheaper expensive way. Rather than buying new machine that use better technology which is more costly than economic instrument regulation (Sterner, 1999). These regulations ensure that the industries have the chance to for go the command and control regulations that are more expensive to the industries. The second strength of economic instrument regulation is that it is a dynamic way of innovating incentives that regulate pollution. This regulation encourages industries to achieve the allowed limit of pollutant emissions and reduce it further since there is economic gain through trading. Unlike other regulations that only ensure that the industry comply with the limit, this regulation motivates the industries to achieve the least possible pollutants emissions. In return the industries trades it permits and increases its revenue due to reduced emissions. The third strength of economic instrument regulation is that this method reduces the capture that the regulator may have on the regulated. This regulation does not involve negotiations with the stake holders to come up with the measures, therefore no opportunity for favors and interests to be considered. This regulation ensures that the interest of the public is not ignored but rather it is prioritized. This regulation does not directly discriminate against any industry depending on their size, location and product. The first weakness of economic instrument regulation is that, it is difficult to efficiently regulate pollution since the tax pollution is uniform yet each source of emission produced has different damage to the environment. These posses a challenge of effectiveness which is more difficult to achieve since individual tax rate allocations may attract lobbying from these industries (Global Conference on Environmental Taxation & Deketelaere, 2007). In addition some environmental taxes would have to be maintained at uniform rates which would make it difficult to differentiate between the two taxes. The second weakness of economic instrument regulation is that it may create damage activities while industries look for ways to avoid responsibility that will increase their emissions. Some industries may look for alternative ways of disposing waste leading to dumping so that their pollutants emissions will be reduced. This dumping results to more pollution and environmental degradation which is what the regulation was trying to prevent. In addition these damage activities that industries cause while trying to avoid responsibility poses high social costs than disposing it properly. It is evident that in regulating industrial pollution there are various approaches that can be used to achieve a less polluted environment. Each regulation has its weaknesses and strengths during the implementation process and consultation process but achieves the desired results. Some of the challenges include cost incurred, the interests of both regulators and regulators, politics, standard setting, damage of each pollutant emission, information available among others. Despite all the challenges the regulations have enabled the level of pollution to the environment and the people reduce. References Byers, R. L. (April 01, 1991). Regulatory barriers to pollution prevention: A position paper of the implementation council of the American institute for pollution prevention. Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association, 418-422. Caffera, Marcelo F. (2004). The implementation and enforcement of environmental regulations in a less developed market economy: Evidence from Uruguay. ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. Crew, M. A., & Parker, D. (2006). International handbook on economic regulation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Global Conference on Environmental Taxation, & Deketelaere, K. (2007). Critical issues in environmental taxation: International and comparative perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gunningham, N., Kagan, R. A., & Thornton, D. (2003). Shades of green: Business, regulation, and environment. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press. Haley, J. (2003). Pollution. San Diego,CA : Greenhaven Press. Helfand, G. E., & Berck, P. (2003). The theory and practice of command and control in environmental policy. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate. Kolb, R. W., & Sage Publications, inc. (2008). Encyclopedia of business ethics and society. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Sterner, T. (1999). The market and the environment: The effectiveness of market based policy instruments for environmental reform. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Tietenberg, T. H., & Tietenberg, T. H. (2006). Emissions trading: Principles and practice. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. Read More