Suchergebnisse

This paper reviews the potential for problems regarding public acceptability of environmental taxes. It examines the issue through a case study of the municipal waste charge protests in Ireland in 2003 and 2004. The example of these public protests against new waste charges demonstrate the necessity for good advertisement and PR when introducing a new tax. Rather than explain the polluter pays principle and simultaneously providing a good selection of options for recycling and composting, some municipalities moved straight into the new tax (for a service that had originally been free of charge and covered by general taxes). Outbreaks of public revolt occurred, with people blockading the streets and refusing to let the collection trucks down their road. Thus, even the people who had paid up were not getting their waste collected. The paper, which is part of ongoing work this area, seeks to identify the reasons why there was so much resistance to this charge and examine the lessons for the introduction of other environmental taxes and charges in the future. The literature on the various types of municipal waste charge is discussed with a view to seeing if pay-by-weight tends to be more politically acceptable as there is a real incentive and control over the amount of waste collected for landfill or incinerator.

There are 34 local authorities in Ireland with legal responsibility to deal with waste arising in their jurisdictions. In 2003 the National government introduced legislation that allows local authorities to recover the costs of waste collection and disposal, and to do so by 'executive function', i.e., not requiring support or agreement by the relevant local political representatives. The year 2005 was set as the date by which implementation of a pay by weight or volume was to be introduced. The local authorities were given autonomy as to how they addressed this challenge, so we have – in theory – 34 potentially different experiences from which to learn. This paper examines the pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) waste system in Ireland as it develops in line with EU and National demands, with a view to assessing economic and environmental efficiency. All local authorities were surveyed and thirteen responded. While this only represents about 38% of the total number, it includes jurisdictions that contribute in total more than 50% of waste arising. Key figures in the policy and business community were also interviewed in order to identify how the charging schemes were implemented, and to what effect. These insights and parallel investigations are used to review the potential for problems regarding public acceptability of environmental taxes and examine the evidence for economic and environmental efficiency, as well as problem areas, using data from each of the responding local authority jurisdictions. Concentrating on the incentives and drivers across households, municipalities and private waste contractors, the variations in charging system, annual charges and landfill charges are compared where information was available. The various jurisdictions are also examined in terms of relative successes and problems encountered in the transition from fixed charge or free waste collection to PAYT systems. The Irish situation is placed in the context of the international literature on PAYT, the growing waste crisis, environmental attitudes vs. behaviours, and the acceptability of environmental taxes generally.

The Emissions Trading scheme now (January 2003) in prospect in the European Union is likely to be the first trans-national greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme in the world. With the participation of the European Economic Area [EEA] countries and with the forthcoming EU enlargement, 30 countries could be involved in this scheme by 2012. Under European Union law, the European Commission is responsible for making proposals, which are then decided upon by the Council of Ministers —on a «qualified majority» basis in this case— representing the 15 Member State governments, and the European Parliament. In the case of this Directive, the Commission prepared its initial proposals, which have then been scrutinised by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers.The objective of this work is to provide an assessment of the EU Emissions Trading Directive as agreed by the Council of Ministers. The agreement was reached looking at both, the characteristics and potential of this scheme. For some of the issues, there is theory and evidence to support the case made. For others, the absence of evidence means that intuition is called upon. ; La Directiva de Comercio de Emisiones (Enero 2003) aprobada por la Unión Europea constituye, probablemente, el primer esquema de Intercambio de Permisos de Emisión, para gases de efectos invernadero de carácter transnacional, que se va a poner en marcha en el mundo. Con la participación de los países del Área Económica Europea, y con la próxima ampliación de la UE, los países que estarán implicados en el esquema llegarán a 30 el año 2012. Es bien conocido que el reparto de competencias en Europa implica que es la Comisión la responsable de llevar a cabo las propuestas que posteriormente pueden ser aceptadas o rechazadas en el Consejo de Ministros en base a una «mayoría cualificada» (dependiendo del tipo de decisión) y por el Parlamento Europeo. El objetivo de este trabajo es el de llevar a cabo un juicio acerca de la Directiva sobre Intercambio de Derechos de Emisión de la UE tal y como fue aprobada por el Consejo. El acuerdo se alcanzó teniendo en cuenta, tanto las características como el potencial del esquema. Para algunos de los aspectos contenidos en la Directiva existe tanto teoría como evidencia que puede apoyar la decisión adoptada. Para otros, sin embargo, la ausencia de evidencia implica que fue la intuición la que predominó a la hora de tomar la decisión.

[EN] The Emissions Trading scheme now (January 2003) in prospect in the European Union is likely to be the first trans-national greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme in the world. With the participation of the European Economic Area [EEA] countries and with the forthcoming EU enlargement, 30 countries could be involved in this scheme by 2012. Under European Union law, the European Commission is responsible for making proposals, which are then decided upon by the Council of Ministers —on a «qualified majority» basis in this case— representing the 15 Member State governments, and the European Parliament. In the case of this Directive, the Commission prepared its initial proposals, which have then been scrutinised by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers.The objective of this work is to provide an assessment of the EU Emissions Trading Directive as agreed by the Council of Ministers. The agreement was reached looking at both, the characteristics and potential of this scheme. For some of the issues, there is theory and evidence to support the case made. For others, the absence of evidence means that intuition is called upon. ; [ES] La Directiva de Comercio de Emisiones (Enero 2003) aprobada por la Unión Europea constituye, probablemente, el primer esquema de Intercambio de Permisos de Emisión, para gases de efectos invernadero de carácter transnacional, que se va a poner en marcha en el mundo. Con la participación de los países del Área Económica Europea, y con la próxima ampliación de la UE, los países que estarán implicados en el esquema llegarán a 30 el año 2012. Es bien conocido que el reparto de competencias en Europa implica que es la Comisión la responsable de llevar a cabo las propuestas que posteriormente pueden ser aceptadas o rechazadas en el Consejo de Ministros en base a una «mayoría cualificada» (dependiendo del tipo de decisión) y por el Parlamento Europeo. El objetivo de este trabajo es el de llevar a cabo un juicio acerca de la Directiva sobre Intercambio de Derechos de Emisión de ...