Search

The escalating levels of CO2 emissions from the transportation sector have been observed to exert deleterious effects on human well‐being and environmental sustainability. To mitigate these emissions, it is imperative to consider the potential contributions of environmental policies and financial innovation. Thus, this study examines the effects of financial innovation and environmental policy (environmental tax–environmental technology) on transport‐related CO2 emission (TCO2E) for BICS (i.e., Brazil, India, China and South Africa), which are characterized by substantial industrialization, rising TCO2E and growing environmental concerns. The analysis is complemented by including control variables, notably economic growth and the transition to cleaner energy, to offer a nuanced and holistic perspective on the dynamics governing this critical subject matter. The research adopts a novel econometric approach cross‐sectionally augmented auto‐regressive distributed lags for benchmark estimation and fully modified ordinary least squares–dynamic ordinary least squares for robustness analysis from 2000/Q1‐2018/Q4. The findings revealed that financial innovation and economic growth bolster TCO2E and decrease environmental quality in the region. In contrast, environmental tax, environmental innovation and energy transition decrease TCO2E. Based on findings, policy suggestions relating to implementing a carbon tax, promoting green financial innovation and others are discussed to decrease TCO2E. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper my thought experiment leads me to posit that South Africa's environmental governance often results in what I term "hollow environmentalism". This term describes the inevitable long-term outcome of promulgating laws and policies that are idealistic and seem symbolic and that at times fail to achieve their intended objectives or environmental promise. On a narrower scale, hollow environmentalism can also manifest when such symbolic environmental laws and policies lead to judicial decisions that lack substantive ecological justifications, perhaps even resembling symbolic judgments. I substantiate this argument through four key considerations. I commence with a reality check on environmental governance, emphasising that the state is not a neutral actor, necessitating closer scrutiny of state decisions. This leads me to the conclusion that governance stands at a critical juncture. I argue that the symbolic nature of our environmental laws, broadly speaking, often makes it challenging for the state to fully meet the lofty ideals it presents, thereby also complicating court decisions in these matters. Next, I align my thoughts with recent literature on adjudication in the context of the climate crisis. This literature stresses the need for courts to be bold and innovative in their judicial roles, given the precarious nature of stabilising environmental disputes. In the penultimate section I bring the discussion to a close by suggesting two interconnected possibilities to address hollowness in the face of climate change: "sunsetting" and "substitution". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sustainability Assessment is a recent addition to the environmental assessment toolbox that is not currently applied in South Africa in any formal way. However, there appear to be remarkable similarities between what is commonly proposed as Sustainability Assessment and how Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been conceptualised and promoted in South Africa. This paper therefore investigates the following questions: • Could the South African concept and application of SEA be what is required for Sustainability Assessment? • If Sustainability Assessment is "dressing up" SEA, is there really a need to introduce a new tool? • If there is a need for a new tool, are there lessons learnt from the application of SEA in South Africa, which can be used to inform the further development and indeed practice of Sustainability Assessment? This paper identifies from the literature some key criteria that should underpin Sustainability Assessment that are then used to identify some of the shortcomings of SEA, both as promoted and as practised in South Africa. Two sets of criteria form the basis of the analysis: one relating to sustainability assessment processes and the other to the concept of sustainability itself. As a result of this analysis, the paper makes recommendations as to how the practice of SEA in South Africa may be improved to better align with the principles of Sustainability Assessment. These recommendations are also likely to be relevant to other countries seeking to develop Sustainability Assessment processes based upon SEA. Finally, the potential for the emerging field of sustainability science as an underpinning body of knowledge is introduced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]