Английская Википедия:Environmental policy

Материал из Онлайн справочника
Версия от 00:21, 4 марта 2024; EducationBot (обсуждение | вклад) (Новая страница: «{{Английская Википедия/Панель перехода}} {{Short description|Government efforts protecting the natural environment}} {{Environment sidebar}} '''Environmental policy''' is the commitment of an organization or government to the laws, regulations, and other policy mechanisms concerning environmental issues. These issues generally include air and water pollution, waste management, ecosystem managem...»)
(разн.) ← Предыдущая версия | Текущая версия (разн.) | Следующая версия → (разн.)
Перейти к навигацииПерейти к поиску

Шаблон:Short description Шаблон:Environment sidebar Environmental policy is the commitment of an organization or government to the laws, regulations, and other policy mechanisms concerning environmental issues. These issues generally include air and water pollution, waste management, ecosystem management, maintenance of biodiversity, the management of natural resources, wildlife and endangered species.[1] For example, concerning environmental policy, the implementation of an eco-energy-oriented policy at a global level to address the issues of global warming and climate changes could be addressed.[2] Policies concerning energy or regulation of toxic substances including pesticides and many types of industrial waste are part of the topic of environmental policy. This policy can be deliberately taken to influence human activities and thereby prevent undesirable effects on the biophysical environment and natural resources, as well as to make sure that changes in the environment do not have unacceptable effects on humans.[3]

Definition

One way is to describe environmental policy is that it comprises two major terms: environment and policy. Environment refers to the physical ecosystems, but can also take into consideration the social dimension (quality of life, health) and an economic dimension (resource management, biodiversity).[4] Policy can be defined as a "course of action or principle adopted or proposed by a government, party, business or individual".[5] Thus, environmental policy tends to focus on problems arising from human impact on the environment, which is important to human society by having a (negative) impact on human values. Such human values are often labeled as good health or the 'clean and green' environment. In practice, policy analysts provide a wide variety of types of information to the public decision-making process.[6]

The concept of environmental policy was first used in the 1960s to recognise that all environmental problems, like the environment itself, are interconnected. Addressing environmental problems effectively (such as air, water, and soil pollution) requires looking at their connections and underlying and common sources, and how policies addressing particular problems can have spill-over effects on other problems and policies. "The environment" thus became a focus for public policy and environmental policy the term to refer to the way environmental issues were addressed more or less comprehensively.[7]

Environmental issues typically addressed by environmental policy include (but are not limited to) air and water pollution, waste management, ecosystem management, biodiversity protection, the protection of natural resources, wildlife and endangered species, and the management of these natural resources for future generations. Relatively recently, environmental policy has also attended to the communication of environmental issues.[8] Environmental policies often address issues in one of three dimensions of the environment: ecological (for instance, policies aimed at protecting a particular species or natural areas), resource (for instance, related to energy, land, water), and the human environment (the environment modified or shaped by humans, for instance, urban planning, pollution).[9] Environmental policy-making is often highly fragmented, although environmental policy analysts have long pointed out the need for the development of more comprehensive and integrated environmental policies.[10][11][12]

In contrast to environmental policy, ecological policy addresses issues that focus on achieving benefits (both monetary and non monetary) from the non human ecological world. Broadly included in ecological policy is natural resource management (fisheries, forestry, wildlife, range, biodiversity, and at-risk species). This specialized area of policy possesses its own distinctive features.[13]

Rationale

As documented by environmental historians, human societies have often impacted their environment, with adverse consequences for themselves and the rest of nature. Their failure to (timely) recognise and address these problems has been a contributing factor to their decline and collapse.[14][15] Although particular environmental problems like soil erosion, growing resource scarcity, air and water pollution increasingly became the subject of concern and government regulation from the 19th century, these were seen and addressed as separate issues.[16][17] The shortcomings of this reactive and fragmented approach received growing recognition during the 1960s and early 1970s, the first wave of environmentalism. This was reflected in the creation, in many countries, of environmental agencies, policies and legislation with the aim of taking a more comprehensive and integrated approach to environmental issues.[18][19][20] In 1972, the need for this was also recognised at the international level at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, which led to the creation of the United Nations Environment Programme.[21][22] Thus, growing environmental awareness and concern provided the main rationale for the adoption of environmental policies and institutions by governments. Environmental protection became a focus of public policy.[7]

This rationale for environmental policy is broader than that provided by some interpretations based on economic theories. The rationale for governmental involvement in the environment is often attributed to market failure in the form of forces beyond the control of one person, including the free rider problem and the tragedy of the commons. An example of an externality is when a factory produces waste pollution which may be discharged into a river, ultimately contaminating water. The cost of such action is paid by society-at-large when they must clean the water before drinking it and is external to the costs of the polluter. The free rider problem occurs when the private marginal cost of taking action to protect the environment is greater than the private marginal benefit, but the social marginal cost is less than the social marginal benefit. The tragedy of the commons is the condition that, because no one person owns the commons, each individual has an incentive to utilize common resources as much as possible. Without governmental involvement, the commons is overused. Examples of tragedies of the commons are overfishing and overgrazing.[23][24]

The “market failure” rationale for environmental policy has been criticised for its implicit assumptions about the drivers of human behaviour, which are considered to be rooted in the idea that societies are nothing but collections of self-interested “utility-maximising” individuals.[25][26] As Elinor Ostrom has demonstrated,[27] this is not supported by evidence on how societies actually make resource decisions. The market-failure theory also assumes that “markets” have, or should have precedence over governments in collective decision-making, which is an ideological position that has been challenged by Karl Polanyi whose historical analysis shows how the idea of a self-regulating market was politically created, and who argued that "Such an institution could not exist for any length of time without annihilating the human and natural substance of society."[28]

By contrast, ecological economists argue that economic policies should be developed within a theoretical framework that recognises the biophysical reality. The economic system is a sub-system of the biophysical environmental system on which humans and other species depend for their well-being and survival.[29][30] The need for grounding environmental policy on ecological principles has also been recognised by many environmental policy analysts, sometimes under the label of ecological rationality and/or environmental integration.[31][32][33] From this perspective, political, economic, and other systems, as well as policies, need to be “greened” to make them ecologically rational.[34][35][9]

Environmental policy analysis

How environmental policies are made, how effective they are, and how they can or should be improved, has become the subject of considerable research and debate. In the academic realm, these questions are commonly addressed under the label of environmental policy analysis.

Environmental policy analysis is a broad field comprising different approaches to explaining and developing environmental policy. The first type has been referred to in the policy literature as the analysis of policy and the second as the analysis for policy.[36] Many approaches are derived from the broader field of public policy analysis which emerged as a scientific enterprise after WWII.[37] While policy analysis as a decision-making tool continued to be applied in the business sector, the study of public policy, defined broadly as “What governments do, why they do it, and what difference it makes,[38] became an important strand in political science. This variety, which has been classified into analycentric, policy process, and meta-policy categories, has also manifested itself in the area of environmental policy analysis which developed since the 1960s.[4]

The analycentric or rational approach

The analycentric approach to environmental policy analysis, which focuses on particular issues and uses mostly quantitative methods to identify “optimal” (cost-effective or efficient) solutions, has been the prevalent way to address environmental problems, both by governments and businesses. It is also often depicted as the rational or scientific approach to and for policy development. While scientific analyses and (preferably) quantitative data provide knowledge of the more immediate sources or causes of environmental problems, such as forms of pollution and climate change, policy prescriptions are based on setting goals, objectives and targets and the identification of the most cost-effective and efficient means by assessing alternative options. Technological innovation, more efficient management, and economic instruments such as cost-benefit analysis,[9][39] environmental taxes,[40][41] and tradeable permit schemes (market creation)[42][43] have been among the preferred means in this approach.

The analycentric or rational approach has been critiqued on various grounds.[44][45][46][47] First, it assumes that there is adequate knowledge and agreement on the causes of problems and the goals to be achieved. Second, the approach (for policy) ignores the way policies are developed in (political) practice. Third, the preferred means are often based on questionable assumptions notably about human behaviour. Many of the limitations of the rational approach were already acknowledged by an early proponent, Herbert Simon, who argued that “limited rationality” provided a more realistic basis for decision-making.[48] This view has also been expressed by advocates of more comprehensive and integrated environmental policy development, who argued that looking at problems in isolation (on a one-by-one basis) ignores the linkages between environmental problems and their causes.[49][50] In the late 1980s, “green planning” and the adoption of sustainable development strategies, in particular, received support in academic circles and among many governments as rational, goal-based policy approaches aimed at overcoming the limitations of the fragmented analycentric approach.[51][52][53][54][55]

The policy process approach

The policy process approach emphasises the role and importance of politics and power in policy development. It aims foremost at better understanding how policies are made and put into practice. It commonly involves identifying a variable number of steps, including problem definition and agenda setting, the formulation and selection of policy options, implementation, and evaluation.[4][56] These are conceived as being parts of a policy cycle, as existing policies are reviewed and changed for political reasons and/or because they are deemed to be unsatisfactory. The various stages have become the focus of much research, generating insights into why and how policies have been developed and implemented, with variable outcomes and effectiveness. These studies show that policy development is more about the role of and interplay between conflicting interests than the result of rational analysis and finding and adopting (optimal) solutions to problems. One of the main schools of thought on this front is that of incrementalism, which argues that policy change often occurs in small steps that accommodate conflicting interests.[57][58][46]

Policy process analysis has also been applied to environmental policy in its different stages. It has been used, for instance, to clarify why environmental issues have had difficulty reaching or staying on the public and political agendas.[59][60][61] More recently, research has revealed the role and power of businesses, notably the oil industry, in downplaying the risks associated with climate change or “climate denial.”[62][63][64] “Think tanks” and the media have been used to sow scepticism about the science behind environmental and other problems, to redefine issues, and to avert policies that threaten the interests of businesses.[65][66][67][68]

Policy process analyses also include studies of the variety of actors and their influence on government decision-making. Although pluralism, the idea that not one group dominates all decision-making in modern societies, has long been the prevailing school of thought in political science,[69][70] it has been contested by elite theories that assign predominant power to elites in different areas or sectors of decision-making.[71][72][73] To what extent environmental groups have had influence on government decisions and policies continues to be a subject of debate. Some argue that Non-Governmental organizations have the greatest influence on environmental policies.[74] These days, many countries are facing huge environmental, social, and economic impacts of rapid population growth, development, and natural resource constraints. As NGOs try to help countries to tackle these issues more successfully, a lack of understanding about their role in civil society and the public perception that the government alone is responsible for the well-being of its citizens and residents makes NGOs tasks more difficult to achieve. NGOs such as Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund can help tackling issues by conducting research to facilitate policy development, building institutional capacity, and facilitating independent dialogue with civil society to help people live more sustainable lifestyles. The need for a legal framework to recognize NGOs and enable them to access more diverse funding sources, high-level support/endorsement from local figureheads, and engaging NGOs in policy development and implementation is more important as environmental issues continue to increase.[75]

It has been argued that notwithstanding Reagan's efforts to undo environmental regulation in the US, the effects have been limited as environmental interests were already strongly entrenched.[76] Under President Trump, again, many environmental regulations have been dismantled or were scheduled to be rolled back.[77][78][79] Other research suggests that many environmental policies adopted by governments are designed to be weak and largely ineffective as business interests use their power to influence or even shape these policies, also at the international level.[9][80]

International organizations have also made great impacts on environmental policies by creating programmes such as the United Nations Environment Programme and hosting conferences such as the United Nations Earth Summit to address environmental issues. UNEP is the leading global environmental authority tasked with policy guidance for environmental programs. The UNEP monitors environmental aspects, such as waste management, energy use, greenhouse gas inventory, and water use to promote environmental sustainability and address environmental issues.[81]

The role of science and scientists in policy environmental policy development has been another focus of research. Scientists have been instrumental in discovering many environmental problems, from the damaging effects of the use of pesticides,[82] the depletion of the ozone layer, the greenhouse effect, all kinds of pollution, among others. In this respect, they have often provided legitimacy and support to the raising of concerns by the environmental movement, although they have often been reluctant to get involved in environmental activism out of fear of compromising their scientific credibility.[83] Nonetheless, scientists have played a significant role pushing environmental issues onto the international agenda, together with international ENGOs, in what have been referred to as “epistemic communities.”[84] However, to what extent science can be “value-free” has been a subject of debate.[85][86][87] Science and scientists always operate in a political-economic context that circumscribes their role, research and its effects.[88] This raises the question of scientific integrity, especially when scientists are paid to serve commercial and political interests.[89][68][90][91]

The meta-policy approach

Meta-policy research focuses on the ways policy development is influenced or shaped by contextual factors, including political institutions and systems, socio-cultural patterns, economic systems, knowledge frameworks, discourses, and the changes therein. The latter may involve deliberate changes to the formal and non-formal institutions through which policy analysis, development, decision-making, and implementation occur, such as the introduction of rules for cost-benefit analysis, risk analysis, consultation and accountability requirements, and organisational change.[4]

How environmental problems are interpreted and defined directly affects the development of environmental policies, at all stages of the policy cycle, from problem recognition, and the formulation of policy options, to decision-making, implementation and policy evaluation. However, much (meta-policy) research has been undertaken on what influences or shapes these views and interpretations. For instance, there is a large body of research that looks at whether societies have moved or are moving towards “post-materialist” values,[92][93] or to a New Environmental Paradigm.[94][95] More broadly, the link between dominant worldviews and the way the environment is treated has been a focus of much debate.[96][97][98][iv] The rise and growing support for the environmental movement is often seen as a driver towards “greener” societies.[99][100] If such socio-cultural trends hold, this is expected to lead governments to adopt stronger environmental policies.

Other meta-policy research focuses on the different “environmental discourses” and how they compete for dominance in societies and worldwide.[101][102][103][104]The power to influence or shape people's view of the world has been referred to as “cognitive power”.[105] The role of intellectuals, opinion leaders, and the media in shaping and advancing the dominant views and ideologies in societies has been an important focus of Marxist and critical theory that has also influenced the analysis of environmental policy formation.[106] Ownership and control of the media play an important role in the formation of public opinion on environmental issues.[107][108][109]

Other meta-policy research relevant to the development of environmental policy focuses on institutional and systemic factors. For instance, the role of environmental institutions and their role, capacity and power within the broader systems of government is found to be an important factor in advancing or constraining environmental policy.[110][111][112] More broadly, the question of whether capitalism is compatible or not with long-term environmental protection has been a subject of debate.[105][113][114][115] As, after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the introduction of capitalism in China, capitalism became a globally dominant system, this question has become even more important to the future development of environmental policy at the national and international levels. As many analysts of global environmental politics have pointed out, the institutions for developing effective environmental policy at that level are weak and rather ineffective,[116][117][105][118] as demonstrated by accounts of continuing environmental deterioration.[119][120][121][122]

Instruments, problems, and issues

Environmental policy instruments are tools used by governments and other organizations to implement their environmental policies. Governments, for example, may use a number of different types of instruments. For example, economic incentives and market-based instruments such as taxes and tax exemptions, tradable permits, and fees can be very effective to encourage compliance with environmental policy.[123] The assumption is that corporations and other organizations who engage in efficient environmental management and are transparent about their environmental data and reporting presumably benefit from improved business and organizational performance.[124]

Bilateral agreements between the government and private firms and commitments made by firms independent of government requirement are examples of voluntary environmental measures. Another instrument is the implementation of greener public purchasing programs.[125]

Several instruments are sometimes combined in a policy mix to address a particular environmental problem. Since environmental issues have many aspects, several policy instruments may be required to adequately address each one. Furthermore, a combination of different policies may give firms greater flexibility in policy compliance and reduce uncertainty as to the cost of such compliance.

Ideally, government policies are to be carefully formulated so that the individual measures do not undermine one another, or create a rigid and cost-ineffective framework. Overlapping policies result in unnecessary administrative costs, increasing the cost of implementation.[126] To help governments realize their policy goals, the OECD Environment Directorate, for example, collects data on the efficiency and consequences of environmental policies implemented by the national governments.[127] The website, www.economicinstruments.com, [1] [128] provides database detailing countries' experiences with their environmental policies. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, through UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews, evaluates progress made by its member countries in improving their environmental policies.

The current reliance on a market-based framework has supporters and detractors. Among the detractors for example, some environmentalists contend that a more radical, overarching approach is needed than a set of specific initiatives, to deal with climate change. For example, energy efficiency measures may actually increase energy consumption in the absence of a cap on fossil fuel use, as people might drive more fuel-efficient cars. To combat this result, Aubrey Meyer calls for a 'framework-based market' of contraction and convergence. The Cap and Share and the Sky Trust are proposals based on the idea.

Environmental impact assessments (EIA) are conducted to compare impacts of various policy alternatives. Moreover, although it is often assumed that policymakers make rational decisions based on the merits of the project, Eccleston and March argue that although policymakers normally have access to reasonably accurate environmental information, political and economic factors are important and often lead to policy decisions that rank environmental priorities of secondary importance.

The decision-making theory casts doubt on this premise. Irrational decisions are reached based on unconscious biases, illogical assumptions, and the desire to avoid ambiguity and uncertainty.[129]

Eccleston identifies and describes four of the most critical environmental policy issues facing humanity: water scarcity, food scarcity, climate change, and the population paradox.[130][131][132]

Research and innovation policy

Synergic to the environmental policy is the environmental research and innovation policy. An example is the European environmental research and innovation policy, which aims at defining and implementing a transformative agenda to greening the economy and the society as a whole so to achieve a truly sustainable development. Europe is particularly active in this field, via a set of strategies, actions and programmes to promote more and better research and innovation for building a resource-efficient, climate resilient society and thriving economy in sync with its natural environment. Research and innovation in Europe are financially supported by the programme Horizon 2020, which is also open to participation worldwide.[133]

UNFCCC research shows that climate-related projects and policies that involve women are more effective. Policies, projects and investments without meaningful participation by women are less effective and often increase existing gender inequalities. Women's found climate solutions that cross political or ethnic boundaries have been particularly important in regions where entire ecosystems are under threat, e.g. small island states, the Arctic and the Amazon and in areas where people's livelihoods depend on natural resources e.g. fishing, farming and forestry.[134][135][136]

History

Though the Clean Air Act 1956 in response to London's Great Smog of 1952 was a historical step forward, and the 1955 Air Pollution Control Act was the first U.S. federal legislation that pertained to air pollution, the 1960s marked the beginning of modern environmental policy making. The stage had been set for change by the publication of Rachel Carson's New York Times bestseller Silent Spring in 1962 and strengthened the Environmental movement. Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson, then a U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, after witnessing the ravages of the 1969 massive oil spill in Santa Barbara, California, became famous for his environmental work. Administrator Ruckelshaus was confirmed by the Senate on December 2, 1970, which is the traditional date used as the birth of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Five months earlier, in July 1970, President Nixon had signed Reorganization Plan No. 3 calling for the establishment of EPA. At the time, Environmental Policy was a bipartisan issue and the efforts of the United States of America helped spark countries around the world to create environmental policies.[137] During this period, legislation was passed to regulate pollutants that go into the air, water tables, and solid waste disposal. President Nixon signed the Clean Air Act in 1970 which set the US as one of the world leaders in environmental conservation. The world's first minister of the environment was the British Politician Peter Walker from the Conservative Party in 1970. The German "Benzinbleigesetz" reduced Tetraethyllead since 1972.

In the European Union, the very first Environmental Action Programme was adopted by national government representatives in July 1973 during the first meeting of the Council of Environmental Ministers.[138] Since then an increasingly dense network of legislation has developed, which now extends to all areas of environmental protection including air pollution control, water protection and waste policy but also nature conservation and the control of chemicals, biotechnology and other industrial risks. EU environmental policy has thus become a core area of European politics. The German Umweltbundesamt was founded in Berlin 1974.

Overall organizations are becoming more aware of their environmental risks and performance requirements. In line with the ISO 14001 standard they are developing environmental policies suitable for their organization.[139] This statement outlines environmental performance of the organization as well as its environmental objectives. Written by top management of the organization they document a commitment to continuous improvement and complying with legal and other requirements, such as the environmental policy objectives set by their governments.

Environmental policy integration

The concept of environmental policy integration (EPI) refers to the process of integrating environmental objectives into non-environmental policy areas, such as energy, agriculture and transport, rather than leaving them to be pursued solely through purely environmental policy practices. This is oftentimes particularly challenging because of the need to reconcile global objectives and international rules with domestic needs and laws.[140] EPI is widely recognised as one of the key elements of sustainable development. More recently, the notion of 'climate policy integration', also denoted as 'mainstreaming', has been applied to indicate the integration of climate considerations (both mitigation and adaptation) into the normal (often economically focused) activity of government.[141]

Environmental policy studies

Шаблон:See also Given the growing need for trained environmental practitioners, graduate schools throughout the world offer specialized professional degrees in environmental policy studies. While there is not a standard curriculum, students typically take classes in policy analysis, environmental science, environmental law and politics, ecology, energy, and natural resource management. Graduates of these programs are employed by governments, international organizations, private sector, think tanks, advocacy organizations, universities, and so on.

Academic institutions use varying designations to refer to their environmental policy degrees. The degrees typically fall in one of four broad categories: Master of Arts, Master of Science, master of public administration, and PhD. Sometimes, more specific names are used to reflect the focus of the academic program.

Notable institutions include the Balsillie School of International Affairs, SIPA at Columbia, Sciences Po Paris, Graduate Institute Geneva, University of Oxford, University of Warwick, and University of British Columbia, among others.

Environmental policy incentives

Incentives for compliance with environmental policy is a way to encourage the population to be more sustainable. The article," Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments - a survey", covers that if the government can issue regulatory policies by virtue of administered prices (taxes), then this will be just as equivalent as companies issuing tradable permits. This means that if there is policies that directly tax unsustainable company practices, this will encourage them to become more sustainable and have them transition from tradable permits.

Incentives can affect the decision to eco-innovate. The article,"The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments - A typical case of the blind mean and the elephant", mentions that based on studies made by Cleff and Rennings different environmental policy instruments in Germany, survey data noted that environmental policies encouraged many to eco-innovate. These studies revealed that if a population is faced with a policy that brings them a problem, they must adapt to the point where the policy isn't a problem. In this case, in Germany, environmental policies imposed taxes and regulations for waste, energy, etc. As a result, people changed their habits so that they wouldn't be taxed. Also, when there is incentives on the line, it is more beneficial to eco-innovate and benefit, rather than acquiring no incentive and still being taxed.

Effects of environmental policy

Environmental policies can increase environmental sustainability when implemented. The article," British Columbia's revenue-neutral carbon tax: A review of the latest 'grand experiment' in environmental policy" states that in 2012 the effect of the gasoline sales tax in British Columbia caused a reduction in gasoline sales of 11% to 17%. What is obtained from this information is that people are willing to find alternatives in transportation in save money. This could mean that the implementation of stricter environmental policies, could draw higher percentages of sustainability.

Environmental policies promote can promote innovation in many different ways. The text," Content analysis of China's environmental policy instruments on promoting firms' environmental innovation", China's environmental policy form promoted innovation through notices, measures, 'opinions', 'law', regulations, announcements, decisions, regulations, and rules. Pushing environmental policies in such ways can reach a population in many different ways. Like opinions brings the public voice into the matter, but regulation sets a standard for what needs to be done.

See also

Шаблон:Div col

Шаблон:Div col end

References

Шаблон:Reflist

External links

Шаблон:Public policy Шаблон:Environmental social science Шаблон:Authority control Шаблон:Portal bar

Партнерские ресурсы
Криптовалюты
Магазины
Хостинг
Разное

  1. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  2. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  3. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  4. ↑ 4,0 4,1 4,2 4,3 Шаблон:Cite book
  5. ↑ Concise Oxford Dictionary, 1995.
  6. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  7. ↑ 7,0 7,1 Шаблон:Cite journal
  8. ↑ A major article outlining and analyzing the history of environmental communication policy within the European Union has recently come out in The Information Society, a journal based in the United States. See Mathur, Piyush. "Environmental Communication in the Information Society: The Blueprint from Europe," The Information Society: An International Journal, 25: 2, March 2009 , pp. 119–38.
  9. ↑ 9,0 9,1 9,2 9,3 Шаблон:Cite book
  10. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  11. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  12. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  13. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  14. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  15. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  16. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  17. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  18. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  19. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  20. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  21. ↑ Шаблон:Citation
  22. ↑ Gray, Mark Allan. 1990. "The United Nations Environment Programme: An Assessment." Environmental Law 20:291-319.
  23. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  24. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  25. ↑ Raworth, K. 2017. Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. Random House, Chapter 3. ISBN 9781473517813
  26. ↑ Keen, Steve. 2011. Debunking Economics. The Naked Emperor Dethroned? London: Zed Books. eISBN 9781780322209
  27. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  28. ↑ Polanyi, Karl. 1944. The Great Transformation. The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. (1957 ed.). Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, pp.3-4. [ISBN 9780807056790]
  29. ↑ Шаблон:Citation
  30. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  31. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  32. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  33. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  34. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  35. ↑ Meadowcroft, James. 2012. "Greening the State?". In Comparative Environmental Politics. Theory, Practice and Prospects, 63-86.  Edited by Paul F. Steinberg and Stacy D. VanDeveer. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
  36. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  37. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  38. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  39. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  40. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  41. ↑ European Environment Agency (2000), Environmental Taxes: Recent Developments in Tools for Integration. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency, http://reports.eea.eu.int/Environmental_Issues_No_18/en/envissue18.pdf .
  42. ↑ Hahn, Robert W. (1995), "Economic Prescriptions for Environmental Problems: Lessons for the United States and Continental Europe", in Eckersley, R. (ed.) Markets, the State and the Environment: Towards Integration. Melbourne: Macmillan, pp.129-156. ISBN 0732930960
  43. ↑ Tietenberg, Tom (2003), "The Tradable-Permits Approach to Protecting the Commons: Lessons for Climate Change", Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol.19, No.3, pp.400-419.
  44. ↑ Braybrooke, D. and Charles E. Lindblom (1963), A Strategy of Decision. New York: The Free Press.
  45. ↑ Majone, Giandomenico (1989), "Analysis as Argument", in Majone, G. (ed.) Evidence, Argument and Persuasion in the Policy Process. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, pp.21-41. ISBN 9780300052596
  46. ↑ 46,0 46,1 Wildavsky, A. (1979), The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis. London: Macmillan Press. ISBN 978-3-319-58618-2
  47. ↑ Wildavsky, Aaron (1973), "If Planning Is Everything, Maybe It's Nothing", Policy Sciences, Vol.4, No.2, pp.127-153.
  48. ↑ Simon, Herbert A. (1961, 2nd ed.), Administrative Behaviour. New York: The Macmillan company.
  49. ↑ Bartlett, Robert V. (1990), "Comprehensive Environmental Decision Making: Can It Work?", in Vig, N. J. and M. E. Kraft (eds.), Environmental Policy in the 1990s: Toward a New Agenda. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press, pp.235-254.
  50. ↑ Guruswamy, Lakshman (1989), "Integrating Thoughtways: Re-Opening of the Environmental Mind?", Wisconsin Law Review, Vol.3, pp.463-537.
  51. ↑ Bührs, Ton (2000), "Green Planning in Australia and Canada: Dead or Alive?", Environmental Politics, Vol.9, No.2, pp.102-125.
  52. ↑ Dalal-Clayton, D. B. (1996), Getting to Grips with Green Plans: National-Level Experience in Industrial Countries. London: Earthscan. ISBN 9781315870168
  53. ↑ Jänicke, Martin  and Helge Jörgens (1997), National Environmental Policy Plans and Long-Term Sustainable Development Strategies: Learning from International Experiences. Berlin: Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik (FFU) Freie Universität Berlin, pp.1-29.
  54. ↑ Johnson, Huey D. (1995, 2008, 3rd ed.), Green Plans: Blueprint for a Sustainable Earth. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 0803252323, 9780803252325
  55. ↑ Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2006), National Strategies for Sustainable Development: Good Practices in OECD Countries. Report Presented at the OECD Annual Meeting of Sustainable Development Experts, Paris 3–4 October. Sg/Sd(2005)6, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  56. ↑ Hogwood, Brian. and Lewis. Gunn (1984), "Analysing Public Policy", in Hogwood, B. and L. Gunn (eds.), Policy Analysis for the  Real World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.12-31. ISBN 0198761848, 9780198761846
  57. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  58. ↑ Lindblom, Charles E. (1979), "Still Muddling, Not yet Through", Public Administration Review, Vol.39, No.6, pp.517-526.
  59. ↑ Crenson, Matthew A. (1971), The Un-Politics of Air Pollution; a Study of Non-Decisionmaking in the Cities. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. ISBN 0801811775
  60. ↑ Downs, Anthony. (1972), "Up and Down with Ecology - the "Issue-Attention Cycle"", The Public Interest, Vol.28, pp.38-50.
  61. ↑ Pralle, Sarah B. (2009), "Agenda-Setting and Climate Change", Environmental Politics, Vol.18, No.5, pp.781 - 799.
  62. ↑ Farley, John W. (2012), "Petroleum and Propaganda: The Anatomy of the Global Warming Denial Industry", Monthly Review, Vol.64, No.1, pp.40-53.
  63. ↑ Goldenberg, Suzanne (2013), "Secret Funding Helped Build Vast Network of Climate Denial Thinktanks", The Guardian, Publication date: 14 February.
  64. ↑ Oreskes, Naomi and Erik M. Conway (2011, e-book ed.), Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 9781596916104
  65. ↑ Beder, Sharon (1997), Global Spin. The Corporate Assault on Environmentalism. Melbourne: Scribe Publications. ISBN 0 908011 32 6
  66. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  67. ↑ Mayer, Jane (2016), Dark Money. The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right. New York: Doubleday. ISBN 9780385535601
  68. ↑ 68,0 68,1 Oreskes, Naomi and Erik M. Conway, Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. ISBN 9781596916104
  69. ↑ Dahl, Robert Alan (1961), Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 0300003951, 9780300003956
  70. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  71. ↑ Domhoff, G.W. (2014, 7th ed.), Who Rules America? Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-07-802671-3
  72. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  73. ↑ Wright Mills, C. (1956), The Power Elite. London: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0199761140, 9780199761142
  74. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  75. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  76. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  77. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  78. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  79. ↑ Шаблон:Cite news
  80. ↑ Clapp, Jennifer (2005), "The Privatization of Global Governance: ISO 14000 and the Developing World", in Levy, D. L. and P. J. Newell (eds.), The Business of Global Environmental Governance. Cambridge, Mass and London: MIT Press, pp.223-248. ISBN 0262621886, 9780262621885
  81. ↑ Newell, Peter J. (2005), "Towards a Political Economy of Global Environmental Governance", in Dauvergne, P. (ed.) Handbook of Global Environmental Politics. Northampton, MA: E. Elgar, pp.187-201. ISBN 0262621886, 9780262621885
  82. ↑ Carson, Rachel (1962), Silent Spring. Harmondsworth: Penguin. ISBN 014022404 1
  83. ↑ Caldwell, Lynton K. (1990), Between Two Worlds: Science, the Environmental Movement, and Policy Choice. Cambridge England; New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0 521 33152 8
  84. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  85. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  86. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  87. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  88. ↑ Langley, Chris and Stuart Parkinson (2009), Science and the Corporate Agenda. The Detrimental Effects of Commercial Influence on Science and Technology Policy in the 1980s and Beyond. Folkestone, United Kingdom: Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR).
  89. ↑ Bucchi, Massimiono (2009), Beyond Technology. Science, Politics and Citizens. Dordrecht: Springer. ISBN 0387895221, 9780387895222
  90. ↑ Pepper, David (1984), The Roots of Environmentalism. London & New York: Routledge, Chapter 5. ISBN 1000753581, 9781000753585
  91. ↑ Union of Concerned Scientists (2004), Statement - Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policymaking.  Union of Concerned Scientists.
  92. ↑ Inglehart, Ronald (1990), Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 069118674X, 9780691186740
  93. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  94. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  95. ↑ Hodis, D. Denis and N. Pereira Luis (2014), "Measuring the Level of Endorsement of the New Environmental Paradigm: A Transnational Study", Dos Algarves: A Multidisciplinary e-Journal, No.23, pp.4-26.
  96. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  97. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  98. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  99. ↑ Cotgrove, Stephen (1982), Catastrophe or Cornucopia? The Environment, Politics and the Future. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 047110079X, 9780471100799
  100. ↑ Milbrath, Lester (1984), Environmentalists. Vanguard for a New Society. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. ISBN 087395887X, 9780873958875
  101. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  102. ↑ Dryzek, John S. (1997), The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.ISBN 0199696004, 9780199696000
  103. ↑ Hajer, Maarten A. (1995), The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford England. ISBN 019152106X, 9780191521065
  104. ↑ Torgerson, Douglas (1999), The Promise of Green Politics: Environmentalism and the Public Sphere. Durham and London: Duke University Press. ISBN 0822323702, 9780822323709
  105. ↑ 105,0 105,1 105,2 Bührs, Ton (2022), A Planetary Tragedy. Why Humanity Fails the Environmental Challenge. Tauranga: Fantail Publications, Chapter 10. ISBN 978-0-473-65635-5.
  106. ↑ Levy, David L. (2005), "Business and the Evolution of the Climate Regime: The Dynamics of Corporate Strategies", in Levy, D. L. and P. J. Newell (eds.), The Business of Global Environmental Governance. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press, pp.73-104. ISBN 0262621886, 9780262621885
  107. ↑ Cracknell, Jon (1993), "Issue Arenas, Pressure Groups and Environmental Agendas", in Hansen, A. (ed.) The Mass Media and Environmental Issues. Leicester: Leicester University Press, pp.3-21. ISBN 0718514440, 9780718514440
  108. ↑ Hansen, Hans (1993), The Mass Media and Environmental Issues, Leicester University Press. ISBN 0718514440, 9780718514440
  109. ↑ Luedecke, Gesa and Maxwell T. Boykoff (2017), "Environment and the Media", in Richardson, D., N. Castree, M. E. Goodchild, A. Kobayashi, W. Liu and R. A. Marston (eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Geography. Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0464
  110. ↑ German Advisory Council on the Environment (2016), Environmental Report 2016 - an Integrated Approach to Environmental Policy: The Way Forward. Chapter 1: Pioneering an Ecological Transformation. German Advisory Council on the Environment (SRU) Retrieved 22 July 2016.
  111. ↑ Шаблон:Cite book
  112. ↑ Jänicke, Martin (2002), "The Political System's Capacity for Environmental Policy: The Framework for Comparison", in Weidner, H. and M. Jänicke (eds.), Capacity Building in National Environmental Policy. A Comparative Study of 17 Countries. Berlin: Springer, pp.1-18. ISBN 3540431586, 9783540431589
  113. ↑ Jackson, Tim (2009), Prosperity without Growth: Economics for a Finite Planet. London: Earthscan. ISBN 1844078949, 781844078943
  114. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  115. ↑ Smith, Richard A. (2015), Green Capitalism: The God That Failed. World Economics Association. ISBN 1848902050, 9781848902053
  116. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  117. ↑ Biermann, Frank, Bernd Siebenhüner and Anna Schreyögg (2009), International Organizations in Global Environmental Governance. Abingdon; New York: Routledge. ISBN 1134031335, 781134031337
  118. ↑ Charnovitz, Steve (2005), "A World Environment Organization", in Chambers, W. B. and J. F. Green (eds.), Reforming International Environmental Governance: From Institutional Limits to Innovative Reforms. Tokyo, New York, Paris: United Nations University Press, pp.93-123. ISBN 9280811118, 9789280811117
  119. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  120. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  121. ↑ J. Rockström, J. Gupta, D. Qin, S. J. Lade, J. F. Abrams, L. S. Andersen, et al. (2023), Safe and just Earth system boundaries. Nature. Шаблон:Doi
  122. ↑ United Nations Environment Programme (2019), Global Environmental Outlook GEO-6. Healthy Planet, Healthy People. Cambridge, U.K: Cambridge University Press.
  123. ↑ http://www.oecd.org/about/0,3347,en_2649_34281_1_1_1_1_1,00.html http://www.oecd.org/about/0,3347,en_2649_34295_1_1_1_1_1,00.html
  124. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  125. ↑ en_2649_34281_1_1_1_1_ 1,00.html Шаблон:Webarchive
  126. ↑ "Instrument Mixes for Environmental Policy" (Paris: OECD Publications, 2007) 15–16.
  127. ↑ “Environmental Policies and Instruments,” http://www.oecd.org/department/0,3355,en_2649_34281_1_1_1_1_1,00.html
  128. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  129. ↑ Eccleston C. and Doub P., Preparing NEPA Environmental Assessments: A Users Guide to Best Professional Practices, CRC Press Inc., 300 pages (publication date: March 2012).
  130. ↑ Eccleston C. and March F., Global Environmental Policy: Principles, Concepts And Practice, CRC Press Inc. 412 pages (2010).
  131. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  132. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  133. ↑ See Horizon 2020 – the EU's new research and innovation programme http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-1085_en.htm
  134. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  135. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  136. ↑ Шаблон:Cite web
  137. ↑ “Managing the Environment, Managing Ourselves: A History of American Environmental Policy”
  138. ↑ Knill, C. and Liefferink, D. (2012) The establishment of EU environmental policy. In: Jordan, A.J. and C. Adelle (ed.) Environmental Policy in the European Union: Contexts, Actors and Policy Dynamics (3e). Earthscan: London and Sterling, VA.
  139. ↑ Eccleston, Charles H. (2010). Global Environmental Policy: Concepts, Principles, and Practice. Chapter 7. Шаблон:ISBN.
  140. ↑ Шаблон:Cite journal
  141. ↑ Taskforce on Conceptual Foundations of Earth System Governance http://www.earthsystemgovernance.net/conceptual-foundations/?page_id=144
Источник — http://wikihandbk.com/ruwiki/index.php?title=Английская_Википедия:Environmental_policy&oldid=14550069