Government in Preventing Environmental Crime - Essay Example

Analysis of Roles of Government in Preventing Environmental Crime Introduction In the recent times, the United Kingdom government has embarked on efforts to protect the environment from the adversity of environmental crime. Environmental crime is an illegal act that is directed to nature, either plants or wildlife. Notably forest preservation efforts and wildlife protection are the pillars of a comprehensive environmental law. This essay affirms that the government is committed to protect the environment and wildlife from individuals and corporate environmental and wildlife crime. There have been concerted efforts from international bodies, including the, Interpol, G8 and United Nations environmental programs to protect the environment from the adverse effects of individual and corporate environmental crime. Moreover, the effort from the 1975 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES) has been felt globally (St. John & Edward-Jones 2012). International Environmental South & Brisman (2013) state that some of the environmental protocols set by the international bodies include the banning of wildlife trade in endangered species under the CITES stipulations. It has been an instrumental international law that did shape the UK Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 amendments. Secondly, the illegal logging Act that protects forests from unthoughtful exploitation. Besides, the international protocols on the environment include banning of dumping hazardous wastes in water as provided in the Basel Convention on the Control of Tran boundary Act 1989. Committing any of the above crimes is liable to prosecution in accordance to international law; this should be seen being enforced by the individual government. Overview of UK Environmental Act Today, United Kingdom is among the countries that have signed several environmental and wildlife conventions are a renewed commitment to protect the environment from crime. Some of the provisions in the Countryside and Wildlife Act 1981 include banning of poaching, illegalizing unplanned logging and prevention of endangered species as provided in the CITES 1975 international protocol (Reins 2012). Since the Committee inquiry of 2004, the government commitment to protect the wildlife increased substantially, this was seen when the house of common began to deliberate on numerous amendments of the Countryside and Wildlife Act 1981, resulting in the more recent Wildlife Act 2012 Amendment. However, wildlife has been amended many times to respond to new crime threats that has become complex to non-specialist police. The year 2006 saw the enactment of law that prohibits the poisoning of birds because there were increased threats posed by poaching through poisoning. Moreover, the formation of the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU) is a living testimony of the framework created by the government to enforce and repeal numerous Acts of the wildlife (Stewart 2012). However, some critics argue that wildlife crime enforcement has been greatly undermined by lack of definite sentencing guidelines for wildlife judges. Role of Government in Environmental and Wildlife Protection There is no doubt that the government is committed to protect the wildlife and the ecosystem from exploitation. One of the fundamental drives of protection is a commitment to preserve natural resources for future generations. In England, much of biodiversity protection efforts are captured in the Amendment of Wildlife Act 2012 (Williams & Demello 2007). It encompasses protection of endangered species, birds, forests, water bodies, and wildlife as key international obligations. Roles of Government in Wildlife and Environmental Protection One of the integral goals is to ensure preservation of species for future generations. This goal is driven by government efforts to ensure sustainability of resources. For instance, as an obligation the CITES 1975 protocol stipulates that the government should ensure endangered species remain to the fourth generation of the current generation (Dick 2012). In order to ensure this fundamental goal is protected, the government has undertaken three important deliberate steps. The Forestry Act 1967 The Act is a historical reflection of the government efforts to secure ecosystem through developing legal commitment and enacting laws to live up to the goal. The Act provides for protection of forests through forestation and regulation of Timber. In Northern Ireland, forest protection incorporated the wildlife and bird species that were considered endangered. Huffman et al (2012) observe that although the Act was later amended to create the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1985, the overall goal of enforcing environmental protection through legislation remains alive to modern times. However, the recent shift as see in the recent Acts has been a move to create environmental and wildlife protection through public participation and moral good as primary drives. Regulating Environmental Crime Firstly, it has agreed to enforce the CITES stipulation by putting in place the UK Wildlife and Protection of Species Act 2000, that aims, among other issues, to protect the environment and wildlife from depletion (Clifford & Edwards 2012). Besides, the government has adopted the CITES stipulation to protect areas of land that harbor these animals. Today, poaching is considered among serious crimes in the UK that attracts not less than 15 years. The new wildlife Act 2012 stipulates the banning of illegal possession of elephant tusks and other wildlife artifacts as constituting to grave environmental crime. Many analysts have applauded the continuation stringent rules created from the defunct Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (Calhoun 2005). Initially, the document lacked specificity on what constitute massive environmental crimes, however, through appeal the document now captures elements that are in line with the international provisions on wildlife. Secondly, Duffy (2012) states that through using licenses and other forms of agreements; the UK government has substantially complied with international obligations. Today, the UK government must license any transportation of timber or any wildlife related products. This has created a prohibitive policy in handling the wildlife products. Thirdly, it has simplified wildlife protection guidance and laws to ensure people understand and comply with the law. Some studies have shown that some countries within the European Union have rules that are poorly understood by the people. Another goal of government protection of ecosystem is to ensure the value of the benefits from the nature is respected and protected. The goals of protection of forests and wildlife were well captured in the Natural Environment Paper 2011 (David 2012). Through this policy framework, the government is obliged to have a periodic publishing of the regular updates on environmental situation, the protection efforts ad suggestion of improved methods of curbing the environmental degradation and wildlife protection. It was through publishing that the government establishes the Committee Inquiry in 2004 to assess the performance in wildlife protection. Wildlife protection, informed the creation of wildlife audit committees that carry out a periodic review of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 in order to align the law with the emerging ecosystem threats. Besides, the government has established the Local Nature Partnership 2008 across the country. The main goal of this LNP program is to educate the public on the importance of wildlife and environmental protection. In line with the United Nations Environmental Agency Report 2006, environmental and wildlife protection should be established within the community. As one of the commitment to the universal wildlife protection, the LNP program lays emphasis on community policing and knowledge of relevant provisions of various environmental and wildlife laws. Stewart (2012) states that the establishment of Biodiversity 2020 strategic plan of promoting environmental friendly practices and enforcing stringent Acts to prohibit wildlife poaching menace has been drawn. The government strategy is to ensure that the components of biodiversity, including animals, birds and insects are secured through putting down Acts and refining the existing acts to combat the rising threats of wildlife trafficking. As a result, the UK Ecosystem Assessment 2010 and the 2011 study of the benefits of the nature to the society laid a firm commitment to promote a sustainable ecosystem that will benefit up to the fourth generation. Bills and Legislation There are a number of strategic bills and legislations put forward by the government that serves to prove the government commitment to protect the environment and wildlife. Firstly, the creation of the Natural environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 stipulates that the rural communities and public are obliged to consider environmental and wildlife protection when carrying out daily activities. This policy appears to have dictated the government committed to institutionalize the efforts to protect the environment from the community level (Thompson et al., 2003). In addition, the creation of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) that outlines government strategic plans to ensure environmental protection is another show of steadfast effort in promoting environmental safety. Moreover, the habitats of wildlife have been captured through the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (CHSR) 2010 (David 2012). Through CHSR, the government outlines its penalties for possession of wildlife products without a license. The growing depletion of badger, one of the most endangered species in UK appears to shape the policy creation. Besides, in its obligation to protect the elephants, rhinos and other animals, the Act gives authority the government to prosecute both citizens and non-citizens found in possession of elephant tusks or any other wildlife products. Moreover, there are other policies and laws that include Birds Directives 2010, the Wildlife ad Countryside Amendment Act 2012 and the European Union Trade Regulation Act are some of the laws and regulations that have been drawn or signed by the United Kingdom and now being enforced to protect the environment and wildlife from merciless depletion of natural resources. Moreover, Layzer (2012) observe that the UK Forestry Standards (UKFS) outlines two primary forests and water protection goals; these are legal compliance and upholding good forestry practice. These are some of the recent legal outlines showing how government has been deliberately consistent with the environmental issues and wildlife protection. Theory of Green Criminology According to this theory, its green criminology outlines the crimes committed against the environment. It involves interpretation of both international and national environmental law interpretation and enforcement. It incorporates promotion of environmental justice, through creation of laws that prohibit deforestation and other practices that prohibit merciless and illegal exploitation of forest resources and wildlife. Kwasniak & Canadian Institute of Resources (2007) observes that the theory defines green crime as ruthless practice subjected by human activities to the ecology. Besides, it affirms that it is a social construct, derived from the continued effort to promote environmental safety. In order to achieve environmental justice, the theory suggests that there should be government commitment through legislation and practical enforcement. Animals Rights and Species Biopiracy One of the fundamental principles of green criminology is recognition of the animal’s right of protection from exploitation. In essence, animal rights refer to protecting the lives and habitats as primary elements of environmental protection. Due to recognition of wildlife and animal rights, the government embarks on putting down legislation agenda that promotes animal rights. Some of these rights include banning of poaching, making animal poisoning illegal and banning of illegal wildlife trafficking (Collins 2006). Biopiracy is now the front of argument in political commitment to uphold the green movement. While performing their businesses, corporate bodies have engaged in biopiracy practices that is now causing a rampant environmental crime. Biopiracy by definition is where others utilize an indigenous knowledge of the nature of a particular group of persons for profit. While patents right exists, there has been abuse of natural resources through this form of piracy. However, there has been little effort by the government to uphold these patents and protect the natural herbs and animals from being carelessly executed. Although, biopiracy is the latest form of environmental justice concern, the issue is now attracting huge environmental issues. Environmentalists argue that it is the only medicinal value that should be protected to particular groups. Poor enforcement of these patents leads to environmental crime (Duffy 2012). The Criminal Exploitation of Natural Resources Criminal exploitation of natural resources has been defined as unthoughtful, illegal, and unplanned harnessing of natural resources. One of the reasons of the existence of Environmental justice (EJ) is the rampant criminal exploitation of resources that dates back to industrialization age. As an organization and businesses expand, many analysts argue that the environment bore the greatest brunt in any expanded economy. In essence, the natural resources derived from the environment. As a result, corporate bodies have been compelled me the recently created corporate responsibility clause in the company formation Act. As an integral responsibility of the government, the UK government has promoted the adherence of corporate social responsibility through Corporate Environmental Act of 2001 (Stewart 2012). Certainly, there has been a substantial commitment from the side of government in promoting personal and corporate environmental protection practices through legislation. The underpinning principles of environmental justice involve creation of a sustainable ecosystem. While the creation of ecosystem has appeared in the past as primarily based on inanimate resources, the recent Amendment of the Countryside Act has given a wider and diverse definition of environmental protection. One of the greatest advantages of the environmental justice system recognizes the fact that nobody or an institution is immune from the environmental law. Corporate Environmental Responsibility The modern UK business regulations encompass a signed commitment from the business and corporate bodies to enforce specific measures to protect the environment and wildlife. Moreover, the support should be seen through supporting of green movement organizations throughout the country to institutionalize the issues of environmental protection. One of these elements of social corporate responsibility is the creation of corporate social responsibility clause that should be signed as a prerequisite Strengths and Weakness of Modern Environmental Laws and Policies One of the greatest achievements of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 2004 Amendment is recognition of the community’s role in securing environmental justice (South & Brisman 2013). Unlike the previous laws that focused on creating agencies and using police force to enforce the rules, the recent mind shift has put the community in a special position as custodian of wildlife. Secondly, Reins (2012) observes that the laws have brought down environmental crimes committed by corporate bodies by constructing a compelling commitment to protect the environment. In addition, the CITES has been institutionalized by creating laws that inhibit poaching and illegal trafficking of wildlife artifacts. However, the law remains poor in ending biopiracy, which is the latest trend of environmental injustice. Besides, the law has not clearly stipulated the legal penalties that are unforgiving to the offenders of. Conclusion It is certain that the government efforts have been seen in securing wildlife and environmental justice through legislation and implementation of international standards and protocol. The main goal of environmental justice is to preserve a sustainable environment through upholding the CITES 1975 treaties and various UN environmental declarations. More importantly, the government in the recent time changed strategy from policy-based to community oriented. It is no doubt that within the legislation and enforcement of international laws on the environment and wildlife, the government has substantially performed. References List Calhoun, Y. 2005. Wildlife protection. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers. Clifford, M., & Edwards, T. D. 2012. Environmental crime. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Collin, R. W. 2006. The Environmental Protection Agency: Cleaning up Americas act. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. David, P. 2012. Mother Natures son. Harbin [United States?: Aberdeen Bay. Dick, D. 2012. Wildlife crime: The making of an investigations officer. Dunbeath: Whittles Pub. Duffy, R. 2010. Nature crime: How were getting conservation wrong. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Huffman, J. E., Wallace, J. R., & Wiley InterScience (Online service). 2012. Wildlife forensics: Methods and applications. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Kwasniak, A. J., & Canadian Institute of Resources Law. 2007. Wildlife management beyond wildlife laws. Calgary: Canadian Institute of Resources Law, University of Calgary. Layzer, J. A. 2006. The environmental case: Translating values into policy. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Reins, L. 2012. Environmental Protection Versus Energy Supply Security - The Shale Gas Case and Its Impact on Ecosystem Services. South, N., & Brisman, A. 2013. Routledge international handbook of green criminology. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. St John, F. V., & Edwards-Jones, G. 2012. Opinions of the public, conservationists and magistrates on sentencing wildlife trade crimes in the UK. (Opinions of the public, conservationists and magistrates on sentencing wildlife trade crimes in the UK.) Cambridge University Press. Stewart, A. 2012. Wildlife & the law: A field guide to recognising, reporting and investigating wildlife crime in Scotland. Glendaruel: Argyll. Stewart, R. T. 2012. Poachers were my prey: Eighteen years as an undercover Wildlife Officer. Kent, OH: Black Squirrel Books. Thompson, G., McConnell, M. L., & Huestis, L. B. 2003. Environmental law and business in Canada. Aurora: Canada Law Book. Williams, E. E., & DeMello, M. 2007. Why animals matter: The case for animal protection. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. Read More