LEGAL ISSUE 5
Forover one year, the environment has been the popular area of policyconcern for the public among the Canadians. The recent publicopinion, in fact, presents a high level of environmentalidentification as the most imperativeissue that face Canada since the issue began beingtracked.The concern of the public driven by the first-hand combination ofunusual and extreme weather events, episodes and smog experience andthe impacts of the changes in climate that range from mountaininfestation of pine beetle to droughts emphasized strongly on airquality and climate change(Salzman, 2013).
Thelevels of the public concerns are connecting to a massive expectationof action by the government on protecting the environment. The issuehas beenderivedfrom the periods of darkness that followed the high point of theworld conference in 1992 on development and environment. Theexpectation was that it was a decade of sustainable development thatturned to be an ideal storm against immediate action by the state onthe environment. The fiscal crises at the provincial and federallevels led to a reduction of anywhere between 30 and 60% of thebudget of operation of natural and environmental resources agencies.
Whilethe crisis was followed closely by the Quebec referendum, there was asignificant federalretreat from the leadership concerned with the environmental matters.At the same time, the revolution of Klein in Ontario and Albertamarked the beginning of neo-liberal ideas dominance in Canadianpublic policy. The system worked actively against activist notionseeking the goals of the policy beyond the effectivefunctioning markets
Atthe international level especially within the confines of OECD,diverse innovation has taken placein the field of environmental policy. The changes amount to increasesuggestions of shopworn from the classical economists presenting thesolution to the environmental problems, from the emission of GHG tomanagement of the natural resources, is creating a market for theenvironmental services. The radiation and the trading systems play asignificant role in advancing the sustainability. One area of policyinnovation is the waste management. Within EU, the extendedresponsibility of the producer has established diverse products andpackaging under the directive of national legislation and EU. The EPRsystem needs those putting products on the market to assumepost-consumer management and recycling responsibility. Significantchanges in packaging have been made to reduce the intensity ofmaterials(Revesz & Stavins, 2007).
Ina change of climate, the carbon market is emerging at theinternational level within EU. Some Nordic and EU countries haveimplemented charges and taxes on emissions as part of the widerstrategy to the fiscal reform. Dissemination and gathering ofinformation have come to its own as an instrument of environmentalpolicy. In the area of energy efficiency, there is an excellentrejoinder(Fischer, Parry & Pizer, 2003).
Theamount of reduction to demand in electricity compared to nuclearpower output wasachievedin the confines of the growing economy and population. The energycommission in California, which developed sophisticated methods foreffectiveness assessment for the energy, identifies the use of codesand standards to push the lower efficiency of services and productsfrom the market as the foundation success in reducing consumption ofenergy in the state isactualized.California has incorporated the cycle of energy efficiency updateevery three years. The approach deals with the long-standingconventional regulatory critique that they present no new incentivesor moving beyond the compliance. It contrasts the Canadian model ofdeveloping and implementing the standards of governing through theperiod of lobbying and consultation and leaving the resulting rigidrequirements with no tangible updates or review (Hepburn,2006).
CriticalComment on the arguments
Withthe cursory review of the initiatives within over OECD past decade,the author shows that there is a shortage of the ways the legal toolsareusedin advancing the sustainability inthe environment.In the context of Canada, the basicproblem has not been that people have the needed tools or individualscannot devise ways of using them. There is the diversity of thesuccessful model in jurisdiction comparablefrom.In essence, the Canadian problem has not been a failure regarding thechoice of goals of the policy. The state has chosen to ensureeconomic development conventionally as it is understood(Hepburn, 2006).
Thismeansthat the resource focuses on commodity export, the major policyrather than the economic and environmental sustainability. The resultis that is the state in Canada are to have sustainable future fortheir children they need to ask the state to be creative in tools onthe use of the environmental policy and be ambitious regarding theway they use the tools (Goulder& Parry, 2008).
Alaggard environment wasestablishedin Canada. The country failed to make remarkable progress instabilizing or reducing its GHG emissions. Despite the stabilizationlevels on climate change, the emissions in Canada increased by 27%.Canada has been the 28thfrom 30 organizations for OECD regarding the environmentalperformance (Goulder& Parry, 2008).
Goulder,L. H., & Parry, I. W. (2008).Instrument choice in environmental policy. Reviewof Environmental Economics and Policy,2(2),152-174.
Hepburn,C. (2006). Regulation byprices, quantities, or both: a review of instrument choice. Oxfordreview of economic policy,22(2),226-247.
Fischer,C., Parry, I. W., & Pizer, W. A. (2003). Instrumentchoice for environmental protection when technological innovation isendogenous.Journalof Environmental Economics and Management,45(3),523-545.
SalzmannJ. (20130Teaching Policy Instrument Choice in Environmental Law: TheFive P’s, 23 DukeEnvironmentalLaw& PolicyForum363-376Availableat: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/delpf/vol23/iss2/8
Boardman,Robert, and VanNijnatten D (2002). CanadianEnvironmental Policy.Don Mills, Ont.: Oxford University Press. Print.