Search

Summary The carbon footprint (CF) of biofuels and biomaterials is a barrier to their acceptance, yet the greenhouse gas emissions associated with disposing of biomaterials are frequently omitted from analyses. This article investigates whether harmonization is appropriate for calculating the importance of biomaterials’ disposal. This research shows that disposal stages could double a biomaterial's CF, or reduce it to the point that it could claim to be zero carbon. Incineration with combined heat and power coupled with on-site energy production in the biorefinery are identified as prerequisites to being zero carbon. The article assesses the current UK waste infrastructure's ability to support a low-carbon bio-based future economy, and finds that presently it only achieves marginal net reductions when compared to landfill and so cannot be said to support low-carbon biomaterials, though the article challenges the polluter pays principle where low-carbon disposal infrastructure are not available. Reuse and recycling are shown to have the potential to offset all the emissions caused by landfill of biomaterials. However, the savings are not so great as to offset the biomaterial's upstream emissions. The study explores the ability to overcome the barriers to incorporating disposal into life cycle assessment while identifying limitations of using harmonization as an assessment method. Specifically, data availability and industry consensus are flagged as major barriers. The study also uses sensitivity analysis to investigate the influence of methodological choices, such as allowing additional reuse and recycling stages, classifying biomaterials into different types, and choosing between opposing allocation methods.

Purpose The purpose of this article is to examine the national law regimes related to the remediation of contaminated land. Design/methodology/approach The methodology used is comparative. Models for different systems are described on the basis of varying interpretations of the polluter pays principle. The regimes present in the Member States are then analysed to see which model they have adopted. A comparator from each model group is then considered. Findings This article presents three key findings. First, it concludes that the extent to which additional national legislation relating to environmental damage is permitted, which depends upon the notion of “more stringent” legislation, is incoherent where more than one interpretation is given to the polluter pays principle. Second, the different interpretations given to the principle undermine harmonisation. Finally, this has wider implications for how we justify liability for contaminated land. Originality/value This comparative study of the interpretation of the polluter pays principle, through its implementation in Member States, provides a valuable and novel insight into environmental liability regimes in Europe. It also demonstrates the different type of regimes that are developed on the basis of such different interpretations. Although the different national attitudes to contaminated land policy and remediation have been considered before, this article adds to this debate by suggesting a central cause of such variation in the shape of different interpretations of a principle of the European Union.

Can a small island state be sustainable? Small islands often suffer from a myriad of sustainability challenges owing to their remoteness, size, dependency on imports, and limited waste absorption capacity. Most imports end up as waste accumulation in dumpsites at the end of their life-cycle, representing a one-way material flow. The concept of the “circular economy” (CE) is a promising resource management strategy for island nations to improve solid waste management. In a CE, waste is a resource to be continually circulated within the economy. This study uses material flow accounting (MFA) to quantify waste deposits in Grenada, a tri-island, Caribbean state (population: 110,874). Like many Caribbean islands, Grenada has waste challenges as a result of accumulation of materials in open dumpsites and the persistence of illegal dumping. We estimated that Grenada generated 46,097 tonnes or 1.14 kgs per capita per day of waste in 2017. Leveraging disaggregated trade and waste data, we quantified three problematic waste streams: plastics, tyres, and motor oil and demonstrate an approach for conducting MFA in data-poor environments. Based on the results, Grenada has opportunities to decrease waste production by implementing circularity measures. We recommend improving data collection, implementation of the polluter pays principle, banning substitutable, problematic materials, and developing waste management plans for problematic materials. It is critically important that Grenada transition to a more sustainable waste management system in order to realize the vision of sustainable development. The results of this study make an important contribution to island industrial ecology and sustainable development.

The Panel of Judges examining case No. 26/Pdt.G/2009/PN.TPI issued a verdict which stated that the action of PT Cahaya Bintan Abadi (Defendant I), PT S&B Investama (Defendant II) and PT Perjuangan (Defendant III) carried out bauxite mining and construction of ports for wharves that have stockpiled at the edge of the wharf resulting sea pollution and death of fishes and marine habitats pier the place of Plaintiff’s livelihood is a tort. And stated that the construction of ports carried out by Defendant II and Defendant III did not carry out the function of environmental supervision and cause the sea pollution was an act of tort. According to civil law, in environmental dispute, plaintiff have the rights to make claims for compensation which is stated in Article 1365 Indonesia Civil Code. Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) is a principle of justice which regulates that the costs of pollution prevention and control should be borne by the polluter. The method used is qualitative research method. This study focuses on Case Number: 26/Pdt.G/2009/PN.TPI (inkracht), an environmental dispute between mining companies and fishermen in Tanjung Pinang City, where the mining companies polluted the sea, inflict a financial loss for fishermen and harmed the marine life. The result of this study shows that Case No. 26/Pdt.G/2009/PN.TPI has sentenced the Defendants to pay compensation to the Plaintiffs, yet it is not optimal enough in applying the Polluter Pays Principles.Bahasa Indonesia Abstrak: Majelis Hakim pemeriksa perkara Putusan No. 26/Pdt.G/2009/PN.TPI telah menjatuhkan putusan yang pada pokoknya menyatakan bahwa perbuatan PT Cahaya Bintan Abadi (Tergugat I), PT S&B Investama (Tergugat II) dan PT Perjuangan (Tergugat III) yang melakukan penambangan bauksit dan pembuatan pelabuhan untuk dermaga yang telah menimbun atau stok piil di pinggir dermaga berakibat tercemarnya air laut dan kematian ikan dan habitat laut tempat mata pencaharian Para Penggugat adalah perbuatan melawan hukum. Dan menyatakan bahwa pembangunan dermaga dan/atau pelabuhan yang dilakukan oleh Tergugat II dan Tergugat III tidak menjalankan fungsi pengawasan lingkungan sehingga tercemarnya laut adalah perbuatan melawan hukum. Berdasarkan hukum perdata, dalam sengketa lingkungan hidup, penggugat yang merasa dirugikan mempunya hak untuk menuntut ganti rugi sebagaimana dinyatakan dalam Pasal 1365 KUHPerdata. Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) merupakan prinsip keadilan yang mengatur bahwa biaya pencegahan dan pengendalian pencemaran wajib ditanggung oleh pencemar. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif. Studi ini berfokus pada Putusan Nomor 26/Pdt.G/2009/PN.TPI yang telah berkekuatan hukum tetap, merupakan sengketa lingkungan hidup antara perusahaan pertambangan dengan masyarakat nelayan Kota Tanjung Pinang, dimana perusahaan pertambangan telah mencemari laut dan menimbulkan kerugian finansial bagi masyarakat nelayan dan juga membahayakan kehidupan laut. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa Putusan Nomor 26/Pdt.G/2009/PN.TPI telah menghukum Para Tergugat untuk membayar ganti rugi kepada Para Penggugat, namun belum optimal dalam menerapkan Polluter Pays Principle.

В работе рассматривается вопрос о том, насколько существующие в России институты платного природопользования способствуют решению задач перехода к «зеленой» экономике. Показано, что в ситуации, когда расчет платежей производится пропорционально объему произведенной продукции, возникают стимулы для снижения эко-интенсивности, что само по себе является позитивным фактором. Однако анализ и расчеты свидетельствуют, что этого недостаточно для «зеленого» экономического роста. Целесообразно установление некоторого уровня эко-интенсивности, в случае превышения которого платежи за негативное воздействие существенно растут. Один из способов создания стимулов для «зеленого» роста – регулярное понижение этого «нормативного порога». Необходимо, чтобы это снижение происходило с достаточно высокой скоростью – тем выше, чем выше темпы экономического роста. Такие высокие темпы экологической модернизации требуют новых институциональных инструментов регулирования. Представлена модель «дорожной карты», реализующей этот механизм.

In this study, we propose a cost recovery model for a wastewater treatment and reuse process based on the polluter pays principle that, among other things, provides appropriate incentives for efficient waster use and guarantees its future availability. Finally, the proposed cost recovery model is then applied using date provided by the Wastewater Treatment Plant of Santa Cruz de Tenerife (Canary Island, Spain). Using the tariff system proposed in this article for wastewater reuse, citizens would become aware of the financial investments involved in this process with the consequent impact on saving water, which would then help maintain reserves.

The Paris Agreement obliges states to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions more than they would have otherwise. It thereby obliges them to incur a cost, or pay a price, for those emissions mitigated because of the Agreement. In this sense, states are under an obligation to price at least some of their emissions. The general rule holds even if we exclude the United States (which has announced its withdrawal from the Agreement) and those less wealthy countries whose domestic mitigation effort may not be affected by the Agreement in the short term. Other elements of the Agreement, detailed in this article, also signify a treaty-led elevation of the polluter-pays principle in the climate change regime. I argue that the principle is increasingly being recognized as creating a positive obligation on states to act. The logical endpoint of this progressive development of the law is that every “polluter state” must accept that it will incur a cost for the emission of greenhouse gases in its territory, as a matter of law. An emerging international legal compulsion to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by pricing them is not to be made light of in a field that is almost devoid of substantive law. Recognition of the principle’s legal weight may help to speed up and deepen the global response to climate change.

Zmiany klimatyczne są problemem, który dotyczy przyszłości wszystkich państw, niezależnie od teraźniejszego stanu rozwoju. Zasada "zanieczyszczający płaci" jest konkretnym sposobem walczenia z rosnącymi toksycznymi emisjami. Ten sposób powoduje, że firmy i państwa będą odpowiedzialne za swój wpływ na środowiskowo i ten wpływ może być kontrolowany. Global warming causes the gathering of the international community already for 25 years, starting with the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Today, more than ever, the challenge and urgency that climate change poses imply serious threat to the human world. Considering the regional inequality around the globe, this crisis prompts the question of solidarity from developed countries towards emerging and less developed countries. Accordingly, this situation brings the interrogation of the responsibility of protection of the environment and populations. In order to act, many appeals to the Polluter Pays Principle. We will first establish the juridical ground of such a principle, to determine its application - especially in international law, whereas the second point will be the assessment of the Katowice summit, as it describes the progress of the international community. Arguably, the Damocles sword that dangerous climate change constitutes would be one of the greatest opportunities to organize the biggest international cooperation in history.

While more and more nuclear installations facing the end of their lifetime, decommissioning financing issues gain importance in political discussions. The financing needs are huge along the Uranium value chain. Following the polluter pays principle the operator of a nuclear installation is expected to accumulate all the necessary decommissioning funds during the operating life of its facility. However, since decommissioning experience is still limited, since the decommissioning process can take several decades and since the time period between the shutdown of a nuclear installation and the final disposal of radioactive waste can be very long, there are substantial risks that costs will be underestimated and that the liable party and the funds accumulated might not be available anymore when decommissioning activities have to be paid. Nevertheless, these financing risks can be reduced by the implementation of transparent, restricted, well-governed decommissioning financing schemes, with a system of checks and balances that aims at avoiding negative effects stemming from conflicts of interests.

Options for addressing plastic pollution at the global level have been a topic of discussion in many international fora with some countries voicing support for a new global agreement. Traditional approaches have been used to describe such an agreement in the context of preventing marine litter, but do not discuss in detail the financial mechanisms possible for funding national implementation and, in particular, sustainable waste management. We conceptualise a global extended producer responsibility scheme (global EPR scheme) as a core component of an envisaged new global agreement to reduce residual plastic waste. The global EPR scheme is implemented through global design standards and the development of voluntary National Finance Plans. The Polluter Pays Principle is thereby applied to the management of plastic pollution at the global level.

The upstream-downstream relationship in international river basins is a traditional challenge in water management. Water use in upstream countries often has a negative impact on water use in downstream countries. This is most evident in the classical example of industrial pollution in upstream countries hindering drinking water production downstream. The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) gives new impetus to the river basin approach and to international co-operation in European catchments. It aims at transforming a mainly water quality oriented management into a more integrated approach of ecosystem management. After discussing the traditional upstream-downstream relationship, this article shows that the WFD has a balancing effect on upstream-downstream problems and that it enhances river basin solidarity in international basins. While it lifts the downstream countries to the same level as the upstream countries, it also leads to new duties for the downstream states. Following the ecosystem approach, measures taken by downstream countries become increasingly more important. For example, downstream countries need to take measures to allow for migrating fish species to reach upstream stretches of river systems. With the WFD, fish populations receive increased attention, as they are an important indicator for the ecological status. The European Commission acquires a new role of inspection and control in river basin management, which finally also leads to enhanced cooperation and solidarity among the states in a basin. In order to achieve better water quality and to mitigate upstream-downstream problems, also economic instruments can be applied and the WFD does not exclude the possibility of making use of financial compensations, if at the same time the polluter pays principle is taken into account. The results presented in this article originate from a broader study on integrated water resources management conducted at Bonn University and refer to the Rhine and Elbe basins (Moellenkamp, 2006).

Action must be taken to combat climate change. Yet, how the costs of climate action should be allocated among states remains a question. One popular answer—the polluter-pays principle (PPP)—stipulates that those responsible for causing the problem should pay to address it. While intuitively plausible, the PPP has been subjected to withering criticism in recent years. It is timely, following the Paris Agreement, to develop a new version: one that does not focus on historical production-based emissions but rather allocates climate burdens in proportion to each state’s annual consumption-based emissions. This change in carbon accounting results in a fairer and more environmentally effective principle for distributing climate duties.

Estuaries provide advantageous sites for both harbors and fish habitats. In many countries, harbor expansion in estuaries contributed to the decline of fish populations with impacts at the global scale. Restoring these habitats is important to prevent a global biodiversity crisis but is costly and potentially unaffordable for polluters under the Polluter Pays Principle. Such affordability issues prompt decision-makers to reduce environmental targets of restoration programs. Harbor infrastructures destroy fish habitats but generate benefits for society and contribute to the public interest, raising some questions on who is responsible for environmental degradations and who can afford environmental restoration costs? One way to allocate restoration costs is to analyze the amount of harbor services consumed by economic sectors. This paper addresses these questions by computing burden sharing scenarios with an input–output matrix. These scenarios are simulated under the shared responsibility principle to distribute restoration costs among stakeholders in the Seine estuary, France., info:eu-repo/semantics/published

There has been strict environmental legislation that aims at protecting the environment from various detrimental actions. Besides, there have been increasing concerns on resources consumption as well as economic developments. These turn out to be major drivers for a growing amount of countries to strive towards a reduction in the quantity of solid waste that are being sent to the landfills as well as to enhance diversion and recycling. Furthermore, there have been concerted efforts not only on lowering the incessant increase in the aggregate waste production but also on improving the awareness of the citizens on the need for waste reduction. Consequently, various viable measures that can be exploited have been the main concerns worldwide. Besides, different countries are reviewing the waste management financial mechanisms and giving more considerations to the environmental policy. Conventionally, general tax payments or levies are used by a lot of countries to fund their waste services. This approach fails to be fair enough to provide an objective link between the actual individual waste production and costs charged for waste disposal. As a result, the citizens have little or no motivational incentive to be conscious of the produced waste quantity by the conventional approach. An alternative approach to this is differentiated fee systems known as pay-as-you-throw (PAYT). The PAYT has been receiving growing attention under the waste reduction goal due to the fair proportionality between waste management costs and amount of produced waste. This dissertation presents overviews of PAYT across the world. The main aim of this dissertation is to analyze the opportunities and challenges of PAYT in the World so as to study its effectiveness not only in waste reduction but also in offering fair proportionality between waste management costs and actual amount of produced waste. To achieve the research objectives, the dissertation presents results of research on municipal waste management in some parts of the world. Moreover, the dissertation emphasizes mainly on the effects of different municipal solid waste charging systems not only on separating but also on recycling efforts of the respective households and municipalities. Furthermore, different relevant waste charging systems are considered along with the applicable ideologies of the municipal legislations in an attempt to study the behavior of different municipalities and households under alternative waste treatment/charging schemes. In addition, results of surveys conducted on different municipalities and households across the world is presented. Based on the results, it is inferred that the generated waste is comparatively low in municipalities where PAYT charging scheme is being implemented due to the fact that people tend to separate their waste and generate lesser residual waste. Also, some factors that influence adequate waste separation are presented. The analyzed factors can be of great help in policy recommendations for the PAYT charging systems introduction and implementation in various countries. In addition, a number of PAYT systems related issues such as legislation, design, implementation and impact are discussed. The analysis carried out in different countries, about the PAYT results, shows that PATY systems implementation can result into 15–30% rise in recycling as well as 30–40% reduction in waste to landfill. Atualmente existe legislação rigorosa na área do ambiente, que visa proteger o meio ambiente de vários impactes negativos, associada à crescente preocupação sobre o consumo de recursos, bem como ao desenvolvimento económico. Estes são os principais impulsionadores para que cada vez mais países se esforcem em reduzir a quantidade de resíduos enviados para os aterros e em aumentar as taxas de reciclagem. Além disso, tem havido esforços concertados, não só na redução do aumento incessante da produção global de resíduos, mas também na sensibilização dos cidadãos relativamente à necessidade de prevenir a geração de resíduos. Neste sentido, tem sido preocupação em todo o mundo, a exploração e aplicação de várias medidas. Além disso, diferentes países têm vindo a rever os mecanismos financeiros de gestão de resíduos, passando a ter em consideração a política ambiental. Por norma, os pagamentos de impostos e de taxas, são usados por muitos países para financiar os serviços de gestão de resíduos. Esta abordagem não é suficientemente justa para fornecer uma ligação objectiva entre a produção individual real de resíduos e os custos cobrados pela sua correta gestão. Como resultado, os cidadãos têm pouco ou nenhum incentivo motivacional para estarem conscientes da quantidade de resíduos produzidos. Uma abordagem alternativa para isso é o sistema de pagamento diferenciado, do serviço de gestão de resíduos, conhecido como pay-as-youthrow (PAYT). O sistema PAYT tem sido alvo de crescente atenção, pois ele contribui para a redução de resíduos gerados, devido à justa proporcionalidade entre os custos de gestão de resíduos e a quantidade de resíduos produzidos. Esta dissertação apresenta uma visão geral do sistema PAYT em todo o mundo. O principal objetivo desta dissertação é analisar as oportunidades e desafios do PAYT no mundo, de modo a estudar sua eficácia, não apenas na redução de resíduos, mas também em oferecer justa proporcionalidade entre os custos de gestão de resíduos e a quantidade real de resíduos produzidos. Para atingir os objetivos propostos, a dissertação apresenta resultados da pesquisa realizada sobre a gestão municipal de resíduos em algumas partes do mundo. Além disso, a dissertação enfatiza os efeitos dos diferentes sistemas municipais de cobrança do serviço de gestão de resíduos nos esforços dos municípios e munícipes na separação para reciclagem. São consideradas diferentes formas de cobrança, associadas aos diferentes tipos de legislação municipal, na tentativa de avaliar o comportamento de diferentes municípios e famílias sob esquemas alternativos de cobrança / tratamento de resíduos. Nesse sentido, são apresentados resultados de pesquisas conduzidas em diferentes municípios e domicílios em todo o mundo. Com base nos resultados, infere-se que a quantidade de resíduos gerados é comparativamente mais baixa nos municípios onde o regime de cobrança PAYT está sendo implementado, devido ao facto de que as pessoas tendem a separar seus resíduos e gerar menos resíduos indiferenciados. São apresentados alguns fatores que influenciam a separação adequada de resíduos. Os fatores analisados podem ser de grande ajuda em recomendações na decisão política para a introdução e implementação de sistemas de cobrança PAYT, em vários países. Além disso, uma série de questões relacionadas com os sistemas PAYT, tais como legislação, projeto, implementação e impacto, são discutidas. A análise realizada em diferentes países, sobre os resultados da implementação do sistema PAYT, mostra que este pode resultar num aumento de 15 a 30% na reciclagem de resíduos, bem como uma redução de 30% a 40% nos resíduos enviados para aterro. Mestrado em Estudos Ambientais

El trabajo “Instrumentos económicos para la protección ambiental a la luz del derecho ambiental mexicano” presenta la categorización que en el derecho ambiental mexicano se ha hecho sobre estos instrumentos, comparando ésta con otras clasificaciones presentes en la doctrina. Asimismo, se da la clasificación hecha de estos instrumentos por la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos (en adelante OCDE), que fue la primera Organización en sugerir su uso en el año 1974 a través de la adopción del principio “quien contamina paga” y de la Unión Europea (en adelante UE) en donde, a través de las políticas comunes, se inició su uso inmediatamente después de la recomendación de la ocde. Además de analizar los pros y contras del tratamiento que la Ley General de Equilibrio Ecológico y la Protección al Ambiente (LGEEPA) (Diario Oficial de la Federación, 28 de enero de 1988) otorga a estos instrumentos, se propone una nueva clasificación y, sobre todo, definición de éstos, sin apartarse de la tradición en el país, la cual distingue entre instrumentos fiscales, financieros y de mercado. El estudio profundiza en las diferencias entre el enfoque basado en el principio “quien contamina paga” y la utilización de ayudas públicas para la internalización de las externalidades ambientales y su reflejo en los instrumentos económicos en materia ambiental.

Policies have been structured for collection and recycling of spent portable battery waste within a framework of stakeholders (recycling council body, producer, recycler and consumer) especially for those battery units that are discarded worldwide because of their expensive cost of recycling. Applicability of stakeholders’ policies in their coalition framework have been reviewed and critically analyzed using the Shapley value of cooperative game theory models. Coalition models for ‘manufacturer and recycler’ indicated the dominating role of manufacturers over the recyclers, and waste management is highly influenced by producer responsibility. But, the take-back policy enables recyclers’ dominance role in the management and yields maximum benefit to both recyclers and consumers. The polluter pays principle has been implemented in formulating policies to key stakeholders, ‘manufacturers’ as well as ‘consumers’, of battery products by the introduction of penalties to encourage their willingness to join the Environment, Health and Safety program. Results indicated that the policies of the framework have the potential to be implemented within a marginal rise in battery price by 12% to 14.3% in the range of recycling cost per tonne of US$2000 to US$5000. The policy of the stakeholders’ framework presented in the study could be an important aid to achieve high collection and recycling rates of spent portable batteries.

Resumo: O princípio do poluidor-pagador surge a partir de modelos econômicos previstos na década de 1920, que visam internalizar ao poluidor os custos ambientais de sua produção. A partir destas teorias, imputa-se ao uso dos recursos naturais um valor monetário, o que possibilita a inserção da cobrança pela deterioração causada ao meio ambiente. À medida que estes modelos evoluíram, o princípio do poluidor-pagador passa, gradativamente, a ser um princípio ambiental universal. Assim, o meio ambiente passa a ser compreendido como um direito-dever de todos, materializado em especial pelo convencionado princípio do poluidor-pagador, que se consagra como uma evolução das políticas públicas na proteção ambiental. Partindo de uma ótica internacional que irradia sobre o ordenamento jurídico brasileiro, este estudo tem por objetivos analisar a criação do princípio do poluidor-pagador, sua aceitação no cenário internacional e sua incorporação no sistema normativo brasileiro, inclusive com decisões do STJ. O referencial teórico sistematiza a doutrina e as legislações comparadas da União Europeia, da Espanha e do Brasil. Os resultados da pesquisa buscam demonstrar a evolução histórica do referido princípio no cenário internacional e nacional, permitindo inferir pela sua plena aceitabilidade no sistema jurídico brasileiro. A pesquisa conclui que o princípio do poluidor-apagador não representa apenas um sinônimo de responsabilidade civil para reparação dos danos ambientais: é um instituto muito mais amplo, de cunho sancionador, indenizatório e tributário. A aplicação do princípio deve ser contínua, mesmo em épocas de retração econômica, considerando que a qualidade ambiental é requisito essencial para a subsistência do ser humano no planeta terra. Abstract: The polluter-pays principle emerges from economic models introduced in the 1920’s, that internalized environmental costs to the producers. As these economic models evolved, the polluter-pays principle starts to be accepted as a universal principle. Therefore, the environment is understood at the same time as a right and as a duty of all, embodied in the polluter-pays principle, which has established itself as an evolution of public policies in environmental protectionism. From an international perspective that radiates on the Brazilian legal system, this study aims to analyze the creation of the polluter-pays principle, its acceptance in the international arena and its incorporation into the Brazilian legal system, including its Superior Court of Justice. As benchmark it used the systematization of the doctrine and the comparative legislation of the European Union, Spain and Brazil. The results of the research seek to demonstrate how the historical evolution of the polluter pays principle in the international and national scenario allows to infer the acceptance of the principle in the Brazilian legal system. The research concludes that the polluter pays principle not only corresponds as the compensation for a damage. It is a much broader institute that incorporates sanctioning, indemnity and taxation. The application of the polluter pays principle must be continued even in times of economic retraction, considering that environmental quality is an essential requirement for the subsistence of the human being on planet earth.

This article traces the evolution of polluter-pays-principle (PPP) as an economic, ethical and legal instrument and argues that it has the potential of effecting global responsibility for adaptation and mitigation and for generating reliable funding for the purpose. However, the contradiction is that while it rests on neoliberal market principles, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change did not include the PPP as its provision though the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility based on respective capabilities” (Article 3.1) implicitly recognizes this. The article raises the basic question that under a free-market global system: why should the polluters not take responsibility of their actions so that the global society does not suffer? The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries apply this PPP in many of its forms. Some developing countries are also applying it albeit still more as a governmental rather than polluter responsibility. Currently there is an emerging consensus that a carbon tax should be applied globally to address the intractable problem of climate change. Since the problem relates to a global commons, the issue is how to apply the PPP globally yet equitably. This article brings in Caney’s proposal that as complementary to the PPP. The “ability to pay principle” (APP) can take care of emissions of the past agreed by the Parties and current and future legitimate emissions of the disadvantaged countries and groups of people. He calls the latter poverty-sensitive PPP. While PPP is primarily a market principle, APP is a principle of justice and equity. That polluters should pay the social and environmental costs of their pollution reflects the most fundamental principles of justice and responsibility.

The main goal of the paper is to provide the first ex-post analysis of the EU ETS in year 2013 in the Czech Republic, based on the analysis of the key EU ETS sector - combustion processes. Regarding the methodology, the empirical research was used as a one part, as a second part the Mamdani fuzzy rule-based system. Since the EUA market price was low in year 2013, the Czech companies within the combustion processes group had weak motivation to trade with the EUAs. However, the revenues obtained from the EUA auctions in year 2013 were higher than revenues obtained from the environmental taxes. Moreover, auctioned EUAs had the similar characteristics as the environmental taxes. We can say that the EUA behaved as an additional carbon tax - in case that the company exceeded the level of emission limit represented by free emission allowances.Keywords: emission trading; environmental taxation; EU ETS; Czech Republic.JEL Classification : H23, H3, Q48, Q58IntroductionGenerally, emission allowances trading, also called as "cap and trade program", originally started up in the USA and currently it is frequently used throughout the world. National or sub-national emission trading systems are already operating in Australia, the European Union, Japan, New Zealand, Switzerland and the United States, and are planned in Canada, China and South Korea (European Commission, 2013). Besides trading with emissions (mainly CO2, NOx, SO2), there are also tradable fish quota or trading in waste sector, water protection sector and land protection sector.The European Union established a scheme for CO2 and other greenhouse gases' emission allowances trading, the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). The initial EU ETS was based on Directive 2003/87/EC, which established a fundamentally decentralized system for the pilot phase of emissions trading (2005 to 2007) and the Kyoto Protocol commitment phase (2008 to 2012). The key instruments were the National Allocation Plans (NAPs) (Wettestad et al., 2012). In year 2013, based on new Directive 2009/29/EC, the EU ETS came into Phase III (2013 to 2020), the post-Kyoto commitment period.The EU ETS is substantially larger and by far more complex than the pioneering US Sulphur Allowance System (Conrad et al., 2012). The EU ETS covers more than 11,000 power stations and manufacturing plants in the 28 EU member states as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Aviation operators flying within and between most of these countries are also covered. In total, around 45% of total EU emissions are limited by the EU ETS (European Commission, 2013). The EU ETS covers both European Emissions Allowances - EUAs (since 2005) and European Aviation Allowances - EUAAs (since 2012). The market price of the allowances is determined by supply and demand at the exchange. Both in the first and in the second trading period, the EU emission allowances were traded mostly on the BlueNext trading exchange. In the third trading period, there is one significant big exchange, where the auctions can be organized - European Energy Exchange EEX (EEX, 2015).The regulatory framework of the EU ETS was largely unchanged for the first two trading periods of its operation (2005 - 2012); however the beginning of the third trading period in 2013 brings changes in common rules, published as Directive 2009/29/EC, which should strengthen the system. Since the EU emission allowances were previously grandfathered - for free (Wettestad et al., 2012), from year 2013 the significant yield of the emission allowances is auctioned. Grandfathering was widely criticized, mostly because it introduced significant distortions to the EU ETS (Falbo et al., 2013). Auctioning is the most transparent method of allocating allowances and puts into practice the polluter pays principle (Vicha, 2011; European Commission, 2013). Sectorial differentiation was also introduced, with (initially) far more auctioning of allowances for energy producers than energy-intensive industries. …

Following the Gulf of Mexico blowout of 2010, various parties called for the introduction of safety case regulation in the US. Such regulation is well known in various other jurisdictions around the world and is regarded as best practice for the regulation of rare but catastrophic events. New regulation in the US must pass the cost/benefit test or alternatively show why strict cost/benefit analysis is inapplicable. This paper argues that safety case regulation can surmount this hurdle. It argues that strict cost/benefit analysis is impossible for safety case regulation and it demonstrates this by providing a detailed critique of the attempts by the European Commission to provide a cost/benefit justification for the introduction of safety case regulation for offshore oil and gas production in its jurisdiction. The paper argues that such regulation can be justified in the US on other grounds; first, the polluter pays principle, second, the fact that society regards multiple fatalities occurring together far more seriously than the same number of fatalities occurring separately; and third, that the incidents to be prevented are viewed by the courts as criminal and therefore to be prevented as a matter of principle.

This article aims to assess the feasibility of applying the Polluter-Pays Principle (PPP) to its fullest measure in counteracting ship-source pollution in Hong Kong (HK). Ship-source pollution is of chief concern for HK׳s marine environmental protection. A comprehensive legal and policy framework has already been established to control and remedy ship-source pollution; nevertheless, the costs of implementing measures under this framework are largely undertaken by the government or through the public avenue, leading to an inconsistency with PPP, which is a principle rooted in HK environmental policy. Through an intensive literature review and questionnaire survey, the results of this study have revealed that the adequacy and/or effectiveness of the existing legal and policy framework for controlling and remedying ship-source pollution are questionable. In addition, despite varied understandings of PPP, the industry also supports the adoption of innovative legal and policy measures to apply PPP to its fullest measure in order to better control and remedy ship-source pollution. These findings provide useful evidence, and enable meaningful reflection on the existing legal and policy framework covering ship-source pollution.

European Union (EU) environmental policy is the sole EU policy to proclaim a cluster of principles, including the polluter pays principle, the precautionary principle and the principles that preventive action should be taken and environmental damage rectified at source as a matter of priority. Although various understandings and definitions of these principles exist in international environmental law, the EU treaties provide no such definition. Lawyers are thus increasingly inquiring into the types of role these principles play, or may play in the legal practice. The Fipa case, examined in this case note, is one such example.

This paper examines the responsibilities of states to assist and to receive stateless people who are forced to leave their state territory due to rising seas and other unavoidable climate change impacts and the rights of ‘climate refugees’ to choose their host state. The paper employs a praxeological method of non-ideal theorising, which entails identifying and negotiating the unavoidable tensions and trade-offs associated with different framings of state responsibility in order to find a path forward that maximises the protection of climate refugees within the constraints imposed by political feasibility. It argues that the responsibility of states to support climate refugees through financial and technical assistance should be treated separately from their responsibility to receive them. The former is a differentiated responsibility grounded in the ability to pay principle, or relative capability, while the latter is a common responsibility grounded in the fact that all states have causally contributed to their plight, albeit in varying degrees which cannot be, and need not be, precisely determined. A common state ‘responsibility to receive’ is linked with a right on the part of climate refugees to choose their host to suit their circumstances, which would provide a form of partial compensation for the injustice and trauma of their loss and damage. This right is expected to become more viable, and the political willingness of states to receive them more likely, the more that climate refugees are assured of adequate support for resettlement according to states’ differentiated responsibilities to assist.

Acknowledging the importance of water resources protection and sustainable management, the European Parliament enacted directives based on the “polluter-pays” principle aiming for “environmental damage” protection and restoration of water resources. The main aim of this paper is to examine, for the first time in Greece, the possibility of achieving environmental goals, such as reduction of agrochemical pollution and irrigation water use, alongside with the farmers’ willingness to undertake the environmental costs arising from their activity. In a questionnaire survey, conducted using a “state preference” method, participants were asked to respond on whether they are willing to absorb an “environmental charge” for the protection and restoration of surface and ground water. It is an essential precondition to understand the factors that affect taxpayers’ willingness to participate in the Water Framework Directive, as they are expected to cover the cost of its implementation. The identification of the driving forces that affect stakeholders’ environmental decisions can emerge as an important and useful tool in extending public participation in the Water Framework Directive.

This master thesis assesses how the polluter pays principle (PPP) is implemented in Norwegian and Swiss law in regard of contaminated soil. The paper does first analyse the PPP. Thereafter it assesses the PPP in the EU, Norway and Switzerland. It focuses on the liability for conducting remediation measures and the connected costs of those measures in relation to the public. Central questions are: 1. When is liability relevant? 2. Who is the liable subject? 3. What is the liability’s extent? Finally, the different implementations are compared in a critical perspective. The paper concludes that Norway has a broader implementation and Switzerland has a stricter implementation of the PPP. This means that in Norway the liable subject has in general are more distant relation to the creation of the pollution than in Switzerland. Further, the Norwegian legal norms are less predictable than in Switzerland. These findings may be useful in a debate about the law de lege ferenda.

In a 2010 paper Feng and Buhi suggested that the Copenhagen Accord of 2009 had demoted the principle of common but differentiated responsibility and “silently” elevated the polluter-pays principle to a dominant position in international climate law. As evidence they cited the fact that some non-Annex I parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, including China, had taken positions previously associated only with Annex I parties, in particular on the provision of climate finance to (other) developing countries. Now, eight years later, with the Paris Agreement erected on the conceptual foundation of the Copenhagen Accord, I ask whether the Feng-Buhi hypothesis has gained plausibility. Certainly, the Paris Agreement obliges states to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions more than they would have otherwise. It thereby obliges them to incur a cost, or pay a price, for those emissions mitigated because of the Agreement. In this sense, states are under an obligation to price at least some of their emissions. (The general rule holds even if we exclude the United States and those less wealthy countries whose domestic mitigation effort may not be affected by the Agreement in the short term.) Other elements of the Agreement, detailed in this paper, also signify a treaty-led elevation of the polluter-pays principle in the climate change regime. Has it now therefore gained a legal foothold in the regime, if only implicitly? An alternative narrative is that the parties to the Agreement have agreed to reduce their emissions in response to, not any legal imperative, but what we might call the physical necessity of avoiding global warming of 2°C or above. A stronger counter-narrative points to certain political sensitivities that conspire to keep the polluter-pays principle’s ascendancy quiet, if not entirely “silent”. In practice, however, as I argue, the principle is increasingly being recognized as delivering a positive obligation for states to act. The logical endpoint of this progressive development of the law is that every “polluter-state” is to accept that the emission of greenhouse gases in its territory must come at a cost to the state, as a matter of law. An emerging legal compulsion to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by pricing them is not to be made light of in a field that is almost devoid of substantive law. Open acceptance of the principle may help to speed up and deepen the global response to climate change.

This article traces the trajectory of ‘polluter-pays principle’ (PPP) in India’s environmental law and policy, with specific attention to the role of Supreme Court in shaping rooting the principle in the Constitution and India’s global environmental commitments. It also discusses the relatively new institution The National Green Tribunal (NGT) and its role in solidifying the PPP in India’s environmental justice. The paper examines the heavy reliance on PPP and attributes it to the neo-liberal paradigm.

Vittorio Hösle suočio se 1990. godine s populacijom moskovskih studenata, suvremenika sloma SSSR-a, na temu osmišljavanja procesa postizanja ekološke održivosti, ne samo u neposrednom društveno-političkom kontekstu nego i u kontekstu globalnoga procesa mijenjanja dotadašnjih obrazaca razvoja. Hösleov predložak razumijevanja i prijedloga rješavanja ekološke krize transponira se u širi povijesni i društveni kontekst i kontinuitet, posebice onaj koji je kronološki uslijedio nakon moskovskih predavanja, uz procjenjivanje njegove kakvoće i relevantnosti s obzirom na realne okolnosti društvenog razvoja i primjene načela čuvanja okoliša. Komentira se i vrednuje Hösleov obrazac slijedom problemsko-tematskih odrednica: povijesno-društvena uvjetovanost ekološke krize; etički okvir i silnice društva ekološke krize; sustav uvjetovanosti ekonomije i ekologije u društvu pogođenom ekološkom krizom; političke okolnosti i posljedice ekološke krize. Cilj je pratiti i analizirati što se zbivalo "nakon Höslea" i koliko je to u suglasju s njegovim rezoniranjem. Zaključuje se da je Hösleov obrazac višestruko primjenjiv, vjerodostojan i aktualan., Vittorio Hösle faced a population of Moscow students, contemporaries of the USSR collapse in 1990. He was expected to discuss the process of designing and achieving environmental sustainability, not only within the immediate socio-political context of his audience, but also within the context of a global reshaping of existing development patterns. In the paper Hösle's template of understanding and proposing solutions for the ecological crisis is transposed into a broader historical and social context and continuity, especially one that chronologically followed after his Moscow lectures. The purpose of this article is to assess and evaluate the quality and relevance of Hösle's template considering the realistic circumstances of social development and the application of environment protection principles. The selected framework is developed through the following thematic options: historical and social conditioning of ecological crisis; ethical framework of society affected by ecological crisis; conditioning system of economy and ecology in society affected by ecological crisis; and political circumstances and consequences of ecological crisis. The goal is to follow and analyze what has happened "after Hösle's 'Philosophy of Ecological Crisis'" and whether this is consistent with his reasoning. The conclusion is that Hösle's template is confirmed as fully applicable, credible and relevant.

Erworben im Rahmen der Schweizer Nationallizenzen (http://www.nationallizenzen.ch), Solid waste management (SWM) is a significant challenge for the Seychelles. Waste generation, fueled by economic development and tourism, increases steadily, while landfilling continues to be the main disposal path, thus exacerbating the island nation's specific weaknesses. Due to the small scale of the Seychelles economy, there is little capital available to stimulate innovations in SWM and generate the knowledge for setting priorities and guiding SWM action. Students from ETH Zurich and UniSey conducted a transdisciplinary case study (tdCS) to fill this knowledge gap and gain insights into the obstacles and opportunities related to sustainable SWM. The tdCS approach allowed students to gain comprehensive and in-depth knowledge about the SWM system required to set priorities for action and next steps. The government should streamline the different financial frameworks according to a clear principle (e.g., polluter pays principle). Specific biogenic waste streams represent a potential source of energy and fertilizers. Expanding the scope and densifying the network of collection points could help raise recycling rates of other waste fractions. Diverting biogenic waste and recycling more glass, metals, paper, and plastics would also significantly reduce landfilling rates. Regardless of future amounts of waste ending up on landfills, the latter must be reengineered before the surrounding environment suffers major adverse impacts. All these actions imply a government-driven approach which integrates the views of stakeholders and consumers alike.

Municipal waste charges have been widely acknowledged as a crucial tool for waste management at the local level. This is because they contribute to financing the costly provision of waste collection and treatment services and they can be designed to provide an economic stimulus to encourage citizens and local businesses to improve separate collection and recycling. This work presents a methodology to evaluate a sample of 125 municipal waste charges in Spain for the year 2015, covering 33.91% of the Spanish population. The qualitative benchmarking of municipal waste charges shows that flat fees are frequent, whereas variable fees are set according to criteria that are weakly related to waste generation. The average fee per household is €82.2 per year, which does not provide full cost recovery. The current configuration of municipal waste charges penalises taxpayers contributing to source separation of waste, while subsidising less environmentally friendly behaviours. In this sense, municipal waste charges in Spain are far from applying the polluter pays principle. Furthermore, it is argued that municipal waste charges are ineffective for promoting the proper application of the so-called 'waste hierarchy'.

Made available in DSpace on 2018-12-11T16:47:09Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2017-07-01 The “polluter pays principle” (PPP) has been looked at from the perspective of legal values and technical principles, namely of soil science, to evaluate the acceleration of soil erosion and the consequent development of degraded areas in the Uberaba River basin (area: 2419 km2), state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Having accomplished this goal, the study highlights the importance of PPP for the conservation of soil and development of an ecologically equilibrated environment. The diagnosis of degraded areas was based on the coupling of a Geographic Information System with soil loss, land use conflict and tolerance to soil loss models, and revealed a preoccupying situation because an extension of approximately 905 km2 (1/3 of the basin) has been considered in advanced state of degradation potentially causing environmental damage (e.g., decline of soil fertility and hence crop production, negative impacts of soil particles export on stream and lake water quality and biodiversity of riverine ecosystems). Facing this problem, a legal framework standing on doctrinaire principles, federal laws and the Brazilian Constitution has been proposed whereby the protagonists of soil degradation are called to assume responsibility as well as the costs of repairing this negative condition. Although the study has been carried out on a specific country under pre-defined settings, the rationale behind the proposals can easily be transposed to other scenarios because the scientific methods on which soil degradation has been defined and mapped are generally applicable, while the suggested legal values are currently applied to many regions on the planet. Promotoria de Justiça do Ministério Público do Estado de Minas Gerais UNESP—Universidade Estadual Paulista Campus de Jaboticabal Estado de São Paulo Instituto Federal do Triângulo Mineiro Uberaba Estado de Minas Gerais Centro de Investigação e Tecnologias Agroambientais e Biológicas Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Ap 1013 Centro de Química de Vila Real Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Ap 1013 UNESP—Universidade Estadual Paulista Campus de Jaboticabal Estado de São Paulo

It has been almost ten years since the introduction of plastic levy in Botswana. The levy was introduced as part of measures to combat littering of plastic bags and reduce their negative effects on the environment. The main objective of environmental taxes is to pass on the cost of pollution on polluters. This paper uses exploratory research method of reviewing and/or assessing available literature with respect to the implementation of environmental tax in Botswana. This paper investigates the effectiveness of the plastic levy in ensuring that the public or the government does not shoulder the burden of waste management since its introduction in Botswana. The plastic levy is not being used for the purposes it was intended for due to the failure of the government to collect the levied monies from business owners. The study concludes that there are institutional vacuums and failures that hinder the effective implementation of the plastic levy in Botswana. In the interim, this paper calls for the immediate suspension of the failed levy which is enriching the few businesses owners in the name of the environment. Keywords: Plastic bags, Environmental tax, Polluter Pays Principle, Environmental management

In order to address the water contamination and supply problems in China, a number of water pricing policies have been introduced. They include water resource fees, water supply charges, wastewater treatment fees, and water pollution levies. The purposes of China’s water pricing policies are to protect and conserve water resources, encourage reasonable utilization of water resources, control pollution, and protect the environment. However, concern about the affordability of China’s water pricing for users has resulted in generally low tariffs. Moreover, as a result of poor supervision, China’s actual revenues from water pricing are far less than receivables. Consequently, wastewater discharges still produce pollution, while the polluters achieve environmental dividends by bearing relatively low pollution control costs. China’s water pricing policies should be improved through application of the polluter-pays principle and full-cost pricing. It is also necessary to strengthen environmental laws by specifying environmental standards on the basis of environmental non-degradation.

We are especially grateful to anonymous referees and the Editor Martin Cripps for their helpful comments and suggestions. This research started while the second author was visiting Toulouse School of Economics (INRA-LERNA). It received financial support from INRA (France), the ANR (France) through the project ANR-12-BSH1-0003-01 on ‘Political Economy of the Environment’, the SSHRC (Canada) and the FRQSC (Québec).; International audience; We consider the problem of regulating an economy with environmental pollution. We examine the distributional impact of the polluter-pays (PP) principle which requires that any agent compensates all other agents for the damages caused by his or her (pollution) emissions. With constant marginal damages we show that regulation via the PP principle leads to the unique welfare distribution that induces non-negative individual welfare change and renders each agent responsible for his or her pollution impact. We extend both the PP principle and this result to increasing marginal damages due to pollution. We also compare the PP principle with the Vickrey–Clark–Groves scheme.

Modern waste legislation aims at resource efficiency and landfill reduction. This paper analyses more than 20 years of landfill reduction in the Netherlands. The combination of landfill regulations, landfill tax and landfill bans resulted in the desired landfill reduction, but also had negative effects. A fierce competition developed over the remaining waste to be landfilled. In 2013 the Dutch landfill industry generated €40 million of annual revenue, had €58 million annual costs and therefore incurred an annual loss of €18 million. It is not an attractive option to prematurely end business. There is a risk that Dutch landfill operators will not be able to fulfil the financial obligations for closure and aftercare. Contrary to the polluter pays principle the burden may end up with society. EU regulations prohibiting export of waste for disposal are in place. Strong differentials in landfill tax rate between nations have nevertheless resulted in transboundary shipment of waste and in non-compliance with the self-sufficiency and proximity principles. During the transformation from a disposal society to a recycling society, it is important to carefully plan required capacity and to guide the reorganisation of the landfill sector. At some point, it is no longer profitable to provide landfill services. It may be necessary for public organisations or the state to take responsibility for the continued operation of a ‘safety net’ in waste management. Regulations have created a financial incentive to pass on the burden of monitoring and controlling the impact of waste to future generations. To prevent this, it is necessary to revise regulations on aftercare and create incentives to actively stabilise landfills.

As sewer flooding frequents due to localized and concentrated stormwater and increased non-permeable surface area after urbanization, building cities with sound water recycle and accordingly efficient management of rainwater is demanded. To do this, the existing sewage (including rainwater) fee imposition system should be philosophically evaluated. This study presents problematic issues of the existing domestic sewage fee imposition system considering the principle of sharing costs on the service of sewage and rainwater collection and treatment. Four methods to improve the existing sewage fee imposition system are suggested: 1) imposing stormwater fee according to Polluter Pays Principle, 2) clarification of the share of public sector, 3) reducing or exempting the sewerage fee for inhabitants reducing urban runoff by constructing their own rainwater management facilities, 4) imposing charge for discharging rainwater to sewers due to new development action. Short, mid, or long term planning for rainwater management is recommended considering the situation of each municipality.

This study constructs comprehensive operational equitable initial rights of emissions allocation models by estimating the total abatement cost based on the criteria of egalitarianism, sovereignty, the ability to pay, polluter pays and various scenarios of the Greenhouse Development Rights (GDRs) framework among groups of countries or individual nations. The analyses provide the potential crux regarding the agreements, cooperation and/or conflict among nations for joining the trading. The results show that the polluter pays principle generates the greatest total abatement cost saving for upper-middle and low-middle income nations, but not for others. Full capacity GDRs apply to China, egalitarianism to India and sovereignty to the United States on an individual basis. The results show that the disagreement and gaps with regard to an equitable initial allocation of rights among groups or individual nations is one of the possible obstructions and hindrances to the promotion and formation of a world trading scheme.

In view of the environmental problems, the paper start with talking about the externality theory and polluter pays principle, and then introduce two kinds of environmental management policy, which are emission standard and Pigouvian Tax. By comparing them in the perspective of economic efficiency, we can learn that: Only the coordination of administrative means and economic measures, we can better solve the environmental problems.

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! In their ‘Ethical and Technical Challenges in Compensating for Harm Due to Solar Radiation Management Geoengineering’ (2014), Toby Svoboda and Peter Irvine (S&I) argue that there are significant technical and ethical challenges that stand in the way of crafting a just solar radiation management (SRM) compensation system. My aim here is to contribute to the project of addressing these problems. I will do so by focusing on one of S&I’s important ethical challenges, their claim that thepolluter pays principle(PPP) is too problematic to be useful in determining responsibility for SRM compensation. Their argument for the latter claim consists in a series of allegations, mostly in the form of questions, that are thought to indicate serious difficulties standing in the way of using the PPP to craft a just compensation system. I will argue that S&I fail to substantiate these allegations: the PPP is not as problematic as S&I suggest, and moreover, is a viable candidate for determining responsibility for SRM compensation. S&I raise five allegations against the PPP. I will discuss each in turn.

Most firms that process rubber in Sri Lanka do not comply with national water pollution control standards. The present command and control system fails in the face of a slow enforcement process, and also because of the nature of ‘older’ production units, many of which date back to colonial times. This study seeks to estimate a pollution tax that could motivate firms to meet these standards. I use data from 62 rubber-producing firms in Sri Lanka over three years to estimate a marginal cost function for pollution abatement. I then estimate the taxes that would bring firms into compliance. The tax rate necessary for environmental compliance is 26 Sri Lankan rupees per 100 grams (in 2005 values) of Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) per year. While the burden of this pollution tax on the average firm would be equivalent to 8.6 per cent of annual turnover, it varies with the size of the firm, which may have adverse consequences for small firms through closures or layoff of workers. I suggest that the use of this economic instrument might motivate the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) to monitor effluents more carefully and firms to make economic use of effluents.