Basic HTML Version
Ireland’s Environment 2012
112
Environmental
Regulation
Although environmental regulation
is sometimes perceived as a threat
to competitiveness, it contributes
a large dividend in terms of
environmental improvements. The EC
has indicated that implementation
of EU environmental law will be
a cornerstone of its forthcoming
Seventh Environmental Action
Programme (7 EAP). It cites that
delayed or poor implementation
can have negative consequences –
not just for the environment, but
also for the economy, by creating
regulatory uncertainty for industry
and distorting the Single Market (EC,
2012b).
The EC has also noted that the
cost of inaction is greater than the
cost associated with implementing
legislation. For example, the clean-
up of illegal waste sites and other
contaminated land can outweigh the
initial costs of prevention. The cost
of not implementing the current EU
environmental legislation is broadly
estimated at €50 billion. This relates
not only to environmental impacts,
but also to human health impacts
(e.g. as a result of breaches of air
quality standards) (EC, 2012b).
Similarly, the EC has also estimated
that the full implementation of
EU waste legislation will generate
400,000 jobs and have net costs
of €72 billion per year lower than
the alternative scenario of non-
implementation.
In a national context, between
2001 and 2007 the IPPC regulatory
framework in Ireland is estimated to
have contributed a 40% absolute
reduction in direct pollution, and
45% pollution avoidance relative to
a hypothetical non-IPPC regulatory
scenario (Styles et al., 2009). Within
the pharmaceutical sector the benefit
of pollution avoided is estimated at
over double the emission control
cost incurred by the pharmaceutical
companies (Styles and Jones, 2010).
Pollution/emissions abatement is
generally the most cost-efficient
approach to environmental
protection. The evidence from the
analysis of expenditures of industrial
firms is that the implementation
of the EPA’s IPPC licensing regime
is cost-effective, in that direct
compliance costs borne by operators
are considerably lower than the
avoided external pollution costs.
Conclusion and
Future Challenges
Before the current recession began
the global economy was five times
the size it had been 50 years ago
and, if it had continued on that
growth path, would be 80 times
that size by 2100 (SDC, 2009). Such
growth rates are unprecedented and
they raise the fundamental question
of how they can be sustained in a
world of finite resources and fragile
ecosystems. Continuing on the same
path is clearly not sustainable.
The current economic recession
provides an opportunity to break that
cycle and follow an environmentally
sustainable approach to production
and consumption, with a focus on
resource efficiency. The success of
the EPA’s National Waste Prevention
Programme has demonstrated that
well-targeted and well-designed
resource efficiency initiatives can
result in savings and gains to
business and, at the same time,
lead to positive environmental
outcomes. In addition, EPA research
has shown that the implementation
of new technologies can reduce
water and energy use, moderate
waste and wastewater generation,
as well as deliver significant financial
returns (EPA, 2009, 2010). Investing
in environmental technologies is
good for the environment and
does not impact negatively on
competitiveness.
Equally in the policy arena there is an
opportunity to learn from previous
environmental policy successes,
including the plastic bag tax, the
realignment of vehicle registration
tax (VRT), and the BER scheme. One
important element of successful
environmental policies is a wide
consensus on the need for policy
intervention. For example, Convery
et al.’s (2007) analysis of the plastic
bag tax shows that the popularity
of the measure was due in part to
the public belief that the tax was