Eco-Labeling and ISO 14000: An Analysis of US Regulatory Systems and Issues Concerning Adoption of Type II Standards

/ Current private and public regulatory systems may not provide an optimal degree of regulation for labels bearing environmental information, and established institutions may detract from efforts to provide for better environmental management. The advent of ISO 14000 offers new opportunities for making eco-labeling a meaningful tool to encourage environmental stewardship. While new federal legislation offers the best vehicle to introduce these standards into US law, the slow pace of the legislative process may recommend an alternative system. Multinational and civic-minded firms may be expected to employ private programs to nurture benevolent environmental management practices until more definitive governmental institutions can be put in place.KEY WORDS: Eco-labels; Environmental labeling; International standards; ISO 14000     

Examining legal rules to protect children from injuries in recreational and sport activities

Our jurisprudence assigns duties to persons to keep children safe. Under negligence law, a breach of duty causing an accident means the breaching party can be liable for damages inflicted on the injured person. Legislatures are considering new laws that reduce the damages that activity providers will need to pay to injured participants. Under some statutes, injured persons are precluded from maintaining lawsuits. In other cases, injured plaintiffs have a more stringent burden of proving liability. While activity providers may use insurance to pay for accident damages, for some injuries we might hold injured persons responsible. Four suggestions are offered as mechanisms to reduce tort litigation.     

The use of best management practices to respond to externalities from developing shale gas resources

The public is concerned that activities accompanying hydraulic fracturing in the development of shale gas resources are unnecessarily adversely affecting them and the environment and is petitioning elected representatives to take actions to reduce risks. The health risks associated with fracturing chemicals and air pollutants are relatively unknown and constitute the impetus for public concern. An evaluation of state legal and regulatory provisions regarding best management practices discloses that states are not adopting timely regulations to protect people and the environment from activities accompanying hydraulic fracturing. Simultaneously, regulatory policy concerning negative externalities suggests that governments underinvest in the protection of human health and environmental quality. Governments have choices in protecting people from dangers that accompany shale gas development. Due to the risks of injuries and unpaid damages from shale gas development, governmental policies need to evolve to accord people greater health protection.     

Governmental Provisions to Manage and Eradicate Feral Swine in Areas of the United States

Feral swine (wild hogs) are one of the most widely distributed free-ranging mammals in the world. In the United States, feral swine serve as game animals for the sport of hunting in some areas, while they are nuisance species at other locations. Increasing feral swine populations creates negative impacts to growing crops, native plant communities, and wildlife. Feral swine can also serve as reservoirs for a number of bacterial and viral diseases that can infect wild animals, livestock, and humans. The US state governments are adopting statutes and regulations to reduce the growth and dispersal of feral swine populations. An analysis of these provisions suggests that while they seek to control feral swine populations, they are unlikely to provide any significant relief from damages to crops and native ecosystems. More localized reduction plans and a national disease control program are suggested to assuage damages being wrought by these invasive animals.     

Evolving policies to regulate pollution from animal feeding operations

Due to concentrations of animals at large facilities, animal feeding operations (AFOs) have emerged as a major potential source of water pollution. The federal government regulates concentrated animal feeding operations under its point-source pollution permitting regulations. A major determinant of whether an operation must apply for a permit is the number of animals at an individual lot or facility. This paper examines federal mandatory controls and voluntary guidelines that seek to reduce contaminant pollution from AFOs. Land treatment practices are delineated due to their importance in reducing the injurious by-products of agricultural production. An evaluation of proposed revisions to federal regulations on confined animal feeding operations suggests they diverge from their goal of controlling water pollution. Federal regulations focus on the size of operation and amount of manure governed by the permitting process to the exclusion of other criteria related to the impairment of water quality. Given the uncertainties about the amount of pollution from AFOs, lack of enforcement of existing regulations, localization of problems, and possible alternatives for addressing the pollution, more demanding federal regulations may not form an appropriate response.     

Limitations on the Confinement of Food Animals in the United States

Citizen petitions and legislative bills in seven states in the US have established space and movement limitations for selected species of farm animals. These actions show Americans becoming concerned about the humane treatment of confined farm animals, and willing to use governmental intervention to preclude existing confinement practices. The individual state provisions vary, including the coverage of species. All seven states deal with sow-gestation crates, five states address veal calf crates, and two states’ provisions also apply to battery cages used for egg-laying hens. The actions show citizen and legislative opposition to current animal production practices, and suggest a movement to provide better treatment for farm animals. Accompanying the actions are challenges for animal production industries in remaining competitive while meeting social expectations on the ethical treatment of food animals. While the actions are only a small step in addressing welfare issues, they may be the beginning of a significant movement to do more to address human and animal welfare issues.     

Oversight of shale gas production in the United States and the disclosure of toxic substances

With the encouragement of shale gas production in the United States, governments have considered a range of legislative and regulatory proposals to manage health and environmental damages that may accompany extraction activities. Exceptions adopted by Congress to major federal environmental legislation have meant that individual US states have deemed it necessary to provide oversight through regulations to protect people and safeguard environmental quality. In responding, states have legal structures under which drilling firms may not need to disclose the toxic substances used in fracturing wells. Yet, with increasing numbers of drilling sites, more people are at risk from accidents and exposure to harmful substances used at fractured wells. To provide for meaningful health and safety protection, governments may need to reevaluate legal provisions offering trade secret protection for toxic substances used in fracturing.     

New regulations to minimize water impairment from animals rely on management practices

Water pollution from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) led to revised federal regulations in the United States. The regulations provide for the greater management of potential sources of agricultural contamination and impose additional financial costs on producers. Along with a duty to secure a permit, significant changes address coverage of pollutants, separation of production and land application areas, effluent limitation guidelines, and differentiating agricultural storm water discharges from other discharges. The revised provisions require more producers to secure National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits and mandate that large CAFOs develop technology-based effluent discharge limitations involving best management practices. Medium- and small-sized CAFOs need to adopt technology-based effluent discharge requirements employing best professional judgment. For farms raising animals that are not CAFOs, voluntary management practices may be employed to intercept pollutants before they enter waterbodies. Additional educational efforts promoting the implementation of further management practices that address the agricultural impairment of water resources may be needed.     

Governmental Oversight of Discharges from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations

As point sources of pollution in the United States, concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) are subject to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permitting system requirements. Changes to federal regulations in 2003 and a 2005 court decision have increased the governmental oversight of CAFOs. Manure application to fields from “large CAFOs” that results in unpermitted discharges can be regulated under the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s interpretation of agricultural stormwater discharges was approved so that unpermitted discharges may arise if an owner or operator of a CAFO fails to apply manure correctly. Owners and operators do not, however, have a duty to secure governmental permits in the absence of a discharge. Turning to the federal provisions regarding nutrient management plans, a court found that they were deficient. Moreover, the federal government needs to reconsider requirements that would reduce pathogens from entering surface waters. Although these developments should assist in reducing the impairment of U.S. waters, concern still exists. Greater oversight of nutrient management plans and enhanced enforcement efforts offer opportunities to provide greater assurance that CAFO owners and operators will not allow a discharge of pollutants to enter surface waters.