Suchergebnisse

The Australian Government's climate policy during the administration of Prime Minister John Howard was based on three pillars: inaction on mitigation and adaptation, a preference for voluntary beneficiary pays programs and a desire to protect the interests of emission intensive industries. This article examines the domestic factors that shaped the Howard Government's approach in an effort to provide insights into the future direction of Australia's climate policy. The article finds that the most important domestic factors were concerns about abatement costs, the Howard Government's values and the influence of the fossil fuel lobby. The article concludes that while there is evidence of change with the departure of the Howard Government, fundamental political blockages remain. Australia's climate policy is likely to be cautious in the near term and fall short of what is needed to make an equitable contribution to avoiding dangerous climate change. A more aggressive Australian climate policy is only likely to emerge if there is a significant shift in public opinion or foreign influences.

The object of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December 2009 was to reach an agreement on a new international legal architecture for addressing anthropogenic climate change post-2012. It failed in this endeavour, producing a political agreement in the form of the Copenhagen Accord. The Accord sets an ambitious goal of holding the increase in the global average surface temperature to below 2°C. This paper describes 45 CO2-only mitigation scenarios that provide an indication of what would need to be done to stay within the 2°C limit if the international climate negotiations stay on their current path. The results suggest that if developed countries adopt a combined target for 2020 of ≤20% below 1990 levels, global CO2 emissions would probably have to be reduced by ≥5%/yr, and possibly ≥10%/yr, post-2030 (after a decade transitional period) in order to keep warming to 2°C. If aggressive abatement commitments for 2020 are not forthcoming from all the major emitting countries, the likelihood of warming being kept within the 2°C limit is diminutive.

The Australian Government introduced a new project-based EIA regime in July 2000. Since its introduction, there has been a robust debate about its environmental effectiveness. To add to this debate, a survey was conducted of proponents of projects that were regulated under the regime between 16 July 2000 and 10 June 2009. The survey sought proponents' views on whether the regime improved the environmental outcomes of regulated actions and the costs they incurred in relation to the process. This article outlines the method applied in conducting the survey and presents key results. It also discusses the methodological issues associated with EIA cost-effectiveness studies. The results suggest that proponents believe the federal EIA regime is environmentally ineffective, producing significant improvements in environmental outcomes in only 11% of cases. The information supplied by respondents also suggests that average proponent costs were high, ranging between AU$130,000 and AU$2,230,000 per regulated action.

The Australian Government's climate policy during the administration of Prime Minister John Howard was based on three pillars: inaction on mitigation and adaptation, a preference for voluntary beneficiary pays programs and a desire to protect the interests of emission intensive industries. This article examines the domestic factors that shaped the Howard Government's approach in an effort to provide insights into the future direction of Australia's climate policy. The article finds that the most important domestic factors were concerns about abatement costs, the Howard Government's values and the influence of the fossil fuel lobby. The article concludes that while there is evidence of change with the departure of the Howard Government, fundamental political blockages remain. Australia's climate policy is likely to be cautious in the near term and fall short of what is needed to make an equitable contribution to avoiding dangerous climate change. A more aggressive Australian climate policy is only likely to emerge if there is a significant shift in public opinion or foreign influences.

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a process that involves the identification, prediction, evaluation and mitigation of the environmental and other impacts associated with development proposals and policies, plans and programs. Australian governments were amongst the first in the world to introduce EIA in the 1970s. Since then, the federal, state and territory EIA regimes have undergone multiple changes. In recent times, the push for EIA reform has intensified as governments have sought ways to improve the cost-effectiveness of regulatory processes. In light of the impetus for change, this article outlines principles and a framework for best practice EIA in Australia. The intention is to inform the policy development processes at the federal, state and local levels.

The Garnaut Climate Change Review was the most comprehensive government inquiry into climate change that has ever been conducted in Australia. The Final Report of the Review was published in late September 2008 and contains an extensive list of recommendations on adaptation and abatement policy options. Most controversially, the Review argues that Australia's climate response should be built around gaining an international consensus on stabilising the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases at 550 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2-e). While arguing that a lower stabilisation target of "450 ppm or less" would better suit Australia's interests, the Review concludes that anything significantly below 550 ppm is politically unrealistic. If there is a global agreement to pursue a 550 ppm outcome, the Review argues that Australia's mid- and long-term targets should be to reduce emissions net of international trading by 10% from 2000 levels by 2020, and 80% by 2050. This article provides a critique of the Review's mitigation recommendations, focusing on whether the proposed global and national targets are likely to lead to a 550 ppm outcome. It concludes that the international community, and especially Australia and other developed countries, should adopt abatement targets in excess of those proposed by the Review if there is a desire to keep the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases to 550 ppm.

This article outlines the results of a broad cost-effectiveness analysis of the federal environmental impact assessment (EIA) regime under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth). Statistics on the operation of the EIA regime are reviewed and an analysis of the regime's effectiveness in dealing with Australia's main environmental threats is provided. Consideration is also given to any indirect benefits the regime may have generated. The identified environmental achievements of the EIA regime over the period July 2000 to 30 June 2008 are compared to its administration costs, which are estimated at $135 million-$220 million. The conclusion is reached that over the study period the EIA regime generated minor improvements in environmental outcomes at moderate to high cost.

In December 2011, the Australian Government introduced the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI), a project-based, baseline-and-credit offset scheme for emissions and removals from the land use, land use change and forestry, agriculture and waste sectors. The scheme is one of the most robust of its kind, having several innovative design features developed to deal with integrity and perverse impact risks, and promote co-benefits. Despite this, there are a number of issues undermining the capacity of the CFI to realize cheap abatement opportunities and improve environmental outcomes. This paper provides an overview of the CFI and an analysis of the obstacles to its success. Suggestions for improvements are made, including substituting a flexible permanence period-permanence deduction mechanism for the existing 100-year rule and modifying the risk of reversal buffer and leakage deduction processes to improve returns to project proponents.

Ecologically sustainable development (ESD) has been a meta-objective of Australian environmental policy for more than two decades. This article questions the effectiveness of ESD, asking whether it has had a material impact on Australia's environmental institutions. The argument made is that, while ESD has had some success at the margins, its overall impact has been limited. The institutions necessary to ensure policy makers impose and abide by a binding strong sustainability constraint based on the maintenance of natural capital have not been created. There have been advances in environmental protection since the early 1990s but, by and large, these have been a product of the same types of political and contextual factors that drove policy prior to the adoption of ESD. The score may have changed, but the rules have remained the same.

Ecologically sustainable development (ESD) has been a meta-objective of Australian environmental policy for more than two decades. This article questions the effectiveness of ESD, asking whether it has had a material impact on Australia's environmental institutions. The argument made is that, while ESD has had some success at the margins, its overall impact has been limited. The institutions necessary to ensure policy makers impose and abide by a binding strong sustainability constraint based on the maintenance of natural capital have not been created. There have been advances in environmental protection since the early 1990s but, by and large, these have been a product of the same types of political and contextual factors that drove policy prior to the adoption of ESD. The score may have changed, but the rules have remained the same.

The Australian Government introduced a new project-based EIA regime in July 2000. Since its introduction, there has been a robust debate about its environmental effectiveness. To add to this debate, a survey was conducted of proponents of projects that were regulated under the regime between 16 July 2000 and 10 June 2009. The survey sought proponents' views on whether the regime improved the environmental outcomes of regulated actions and the costs they incurred in relation to the process. This article outlines the method applied in conducting the survey and presents key results. It also discusses the methodological issues associated with EIA cost-effectiveness studies. The results suggest that proponents believe the federal EIA regime is environmentally ineffective, producing significant improvements in environmental outcomes in only 11% of cases. The information supplied by respondents also suggests that average proponent costs were high, ranging between AU$130,000 and AU$2,230,000 per regulated action.

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is a process that involves the identification, prediction, evaluation and mitigation of the environmental and other impacts associated with development proposals and policies, plans and programs. Australian governments were amongst the first in the world to introduce EIA in the 1970s. Since then, the federal, state and territory EIA regimes have undergone multiple changes. In recent times, the push for EIA reform has intensified as governments have sought ways to improve the cost-effectiveness of regulatory processes. In light of the impetus for change, this article outlines principles and a framework for best practice EIA in Australia. The intention is to inform the policy development processes at the federal, state and local levels.

The Garnaut Climate Change Review was the most comprehensive government inquiry into climate change that has ever been conducted in Australia. The Final Report of the Review was published in late September 2008 and contains an extensive list of recommendations on adaptation and abatement policy options. Most controversially, the Review argues that Australia's climate response should be built around gaining an international consensus on stabilising the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases at 550 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2-e). While arguing that a lower stabilisation target of "450 ppm or less" would better suit Australia's interests, the Review concludes that anything significantly below 550 ppm is politically unrealistic. If there is a global agreement to pursue a 550 ppm outcome, the Review argues that Australia's mid- and long-term targets should be to reduce emissions net of international trading by 10% from 2000 levels by 2020, and 80% by 2050. This article provides a critique of the Review's mitigation recommendations, focusing on whether the proposed global and national targets are likely to lead to a 550 ppm outcome. It concludes that the international community, and especially Australia and other developed countries, should adopt abatement targets in excess of those proposed by the Review if there is a desire to keep the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases to 550 ppm.

In December 2011, the Australian Government introduced the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI), a project-based, baseline-and-credit offset scheme for emissions and removals from the land use, land use change and forestry, agriculture and waste sectors. The scheme is one of the most robust of its kind, having several innovative design features developed to deal with integrity and perverse impact risks, and promote co-benefits. Despite this, there are a number of issues undermining the capacity of the CFI to realize cheap abatement opportunities and improve environmental outcomes. This paper provides an overview of the CFI and an analysis of the obstacles to its success. Suggestions for improvements are made, including substituting a flexible permanence period-permanence deduction mechanism for the existing 100-year rule and modifying the risk of reversal buffer and leakage deduction processes to improve returns to project proponents.