环境志愿协议的拓展性认识

环境志愿协议作为环境政策的一种新思路、新举措，已经在世界许多国家的环境管理实践中得到了广泛的应用。本文在对环境志愿协议全面分析的基础上，进一步拓展了环境志愿协议的内涵和意义，并对政府和企业在实施环境志愿协议中的地位和作用进行了论述。     

基于环境协议的工业园区环境管理模式研究

环境协议制度在我国的实施尚处于摸索阶段,作为先进环境管理方法试验田的工业园区,应率先在环境管理激励机制中采用这一制度并配合环境目标、制衡型环境管理形成制约体系,促进环境协议的践行。本文在探索基于环境协议的工业园区环境管理先进模式的研究中,引入了具有生态工业特点的"绿色星级企业"评价标准,与对企业的优惠措施挂钩,对环境协议制度有一定的实践意义。     

企业环境信息自愿披露法律问题研究

企业环境信息自愿公开是企业环境信息公开的重要组成部分,是促进环境保护和可持续发展的重要举措。企业环境信息自愿披露与强制披露有着明显的区别;通过法律责任的设置,保证企业自愿披露的环境信息的质量;运用各种激励措施鼓励企业自愿披露环境信息,建立企业环境信息自愿披露的健康机制。     

对建设项目实施有效的环境管理之探讨

本文通过分析建设项目环境管理工作在保护环境与发展经济的矛盾关系中存在的问题,探讨并提出了对建设项目实施有效的环境管理之途径。     

乡镇企业环境管理的钳式效应

监督与服务是乡镇企业环境管理的两爿钳嘴,两者相辅相承,互为依托。监督的原动力是正确的法规和标准,服务的原动力是先进的科学和技术;环境管理的科学决策则是使力点作用于受力点的“关键”。环境法规和环保技术通过管理决策对企业进行监督和服务,环境管理靠监督与服务在管理功能区内产生效应场。显然环境法规和环保技术只有统一在发展生产力的标准上才能产生亲和力,两者亲和力愈强,环境管理的功能作用便会发挥得愈好。乡镇企业的环境管理一靠监督,二靠服务,更靠二者优化结合所产生的最佳效应。     

多边环境协议与WTO规则的互动性

本文介绍了在可持续发展理论的支撑下，WTO组织密切关注着环境问题，大量的国际环境协议也对贸易问题有所规定，为保护环境这一目标取向上的一致性使得两种国际组织日益联合，形成了良性的互动状态。     

危险废物环境管理探讨

介绍了危险废物的特征及危害,通过阐述危险废物管理工作中存在的问题,从5个方面提出了改善危险废物管理的有效措施,并提出创新监管手段,探索科技电子化管理,运用高科技的手段监管重点污染源危废转移,使环境污染降至最低。     

行政管理部门建立和实施环境管理体系的探讨

本文论述了企业与行政管理部门建立和实施ISO14001环境管理体系的异同点,着重探讨了行政管理部门建立环境管理体系的过程、特点和意义,为我国的环境管理工作提供新的思路和方法。     

Risk of Public Disclosure in Environmental Farm Plan Programs: Characteristics and Mitigating Legal and Policy Strategies

Although various studies have shown thatfarmers believe there is the need for a producer-ledinitiative to address the environmental problems fromagriculture, farmers in several Canadian provinceshave been reluctant to widely participate inEnvironmental Farm Plan (EFP) programs. Few studieshave examined the key issues associated with adoptingEFP programs based on farmers', as opposed to policymakers', perspectives on why producers are reluctantto participate in the program. A study adapting VanRaaij's (1981) conceptual model of the decision-makingenvironment of the firm, and prospect theory on valuefunctions associated with the gains and losses fromrisky choices can be used to characterize how farmersperceive potential risks in environmental farmplanning. This framework can be used to assert thatfarmers are concerned about risks of public disclosureof potentially incriminating environmental informationfrom farms because the EFP program requirements foridentification and extensive documentation of farminformation is perceived by farmers as facilitatingthe accessibility of environmental information to thepublic, and public investigative efforts. Although theEFP program does not explicitly generate informationabout the environmental conditions of a farm nor thedisclosure of such information to the public, itcreates the possibility of generating and divulgingpotentially incriminating information that the farmermay want to treat as confidential. Yet, alone, theserisks of public disclosure concerns should not preventfarmers from participating in the EFP. Awareness ofand participation in environmental farm planning canbe increased if farmers and policy makers understandwhat the risks are, and how they arise. Aspects of theEFP process that have the potential to generate riskof public disclosure concerns relate to farm reviews,documentation and record keeping, and correctiveaction plans. There are legal and policy instrumentsthat can offer various forms of protection and helpminimize such risks, and these need to be assessed.     

A Paradigm of International Environmental Law: The Case for Controlling the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes

The production of large quantities of wastes globally has created a commercial activity involving the transfrontier shipments of hazardous wastes, intended to be managed at economically attractive waste-handling facilities located elsewhere. In fact, huge quantities of hazardous wastes apparently travel the world in search of “acceptable” waste management facilities. For instance, within the industrialized countries alone, millions of tonnes of potentially hazardous waste cross national frontiers each year on their way for recycling or to treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) because there is no local disposal capacity for these wastes, or because legal disposal or reuse in a foreign country may be more environmentally sound, or managing the wastes in the foreign country may be less expensive than at home. The cross-boundary traffic in hazardous wastes has lately been under close public scrutiny, however, resulting in the accession of several international agreements and laws to regulate such activities. This paper discusses and analyzes the most significant control measures and major agreements in this new commercial activity involving hazardous wastes. In particular, the discussion recognizes the difficulties with trying to implement the relevant international agreements among countries of vastly different socioeconomic backgrounds. Nonetheless, it is also noted that global environmental agreements will generally be a necessary component of ensuring adequate environmental protection for the world community—and thus a need for the careful implementation of such agreements and regulations.     

Risk of public disclosure in environmental farm plan programs: Characteristics and mitigating legal and policy strategies

Although various studies have shown that farmers believe there is the need for a producer-led initiative to address the environmental problems from agriculture, farmers in several Canadian provinces have been reluctant to widely participate in Environmental Farm Plan (EFP) programs. Few studies have examined the key issues associated with adopting EFP programs based on farmers’, as opposed to policy makers’, perspectives on why producers are reluctant to participate in the program. A study adapting Van Raaij’s (1981) conceptual model of the decision-making environment of the firm, and prospect theory on value functions associated with the gains and losses from risky choices can be used to characterize how farmers perceive potential risks in environmental farm planning. This framework can be used to assert that farmers are concerned about risks of public disclosure of potentially incriminating environmental information from farms because the EFP program requirements for identification and extensive documentation of farm information is perceived by farmers as facilitating the accessibility of environmental information to the public, and public investigative efforts. Although the EFP program does not explicitly generate information about the environmental conditions of a farm nor the disclosure of such information to the public, it creates the possibility of generating and divulging potentially incriminating information that the farmer may want to treat as confidential. Yet, alone, these risks of public disclosure concerns should not prevent farmers from participating in the EFP. Awareness of and participation in environmental farm planning can be increased if farmers and policy makers understand what the risks are, and how they arise. Aspects of the EFP process that have the potential to generate risk of public disclosure concerns relate to farm reviews, documentation and record keeping, and corrective action plans. There are legal and policy instruments that can offer various forms of protection and help minimize such risks, and these need to be assessed.