Whats Happening onearth

Gore Jumps On The Logjam

Al Gore, not known for working on a small-scale (read: Live Earth), has launched a three-year, $300 million dollar campaign for climate change. He reasons that in order to get moving on the issue, “we” need to alert the public and policy makers, and this is one way to do that. He says to a Washington Post reporter [emphasis added], "The simple algorithm is this: It's important to change the light bulbs, but it's much more important to change the laws.” After attending an environmental law conference last week, where some attendees suggested that it's not necessarily the laws we have that are the problem, this statement caught my eye.

Held at New York University, the conference was called “Breaking the Logjam: An Environmental Law for the 21st Century.” In one room, for two days, it kept economists, environmental lawyers, and policy experts high on peanut butter cookies and cheese pastries as they worked to create an environmental “roadmap” for the 2009 administration. The idea was for the group to develop guidelines that the new Congress could use when writing new enviro laws.

But some conference participants raised the point that they don't believe weak laws cause the "logjam," rather, they said, it's due to weak enforcement of the existing laws. As they see it, the bottleneck that prevents us from protecting the environment often arises when laws are not properly executed. Peter Lehner, executive director of the NRDC, expressed similar sentiment in a speech over lunch, saying, "And while it may be tempting to say that our environmental laws have failed us, maybe the truth is that we have failed them." Lehner pointed out that often it is cheaper for a polluter to engage in litigation than it is for them to follow or implement environmental regulations. Couple to that the fact that environmental law-breakers often come away from a court case with only a slap on the wrist, and it simply makes sense companies aren’t feeling pressured to help the environment. Will we need new environmental laws, as Mr. Gore suggests? Undoubtedly, especially when tackling climate change. But scores of laws won’t matter if there’s no follow-through.

Comments

  • Anonymous User wrote on April 19, 2008, 05:53AM : Flag this comment as inappropriate Flag this comment as inappropriate

    From my experiences in India I can say two things:

    1) Its enforcement which is a problem. There are numerous good laws but the machinery required to implement them is completely defunct and in the hands of corrupt politicians and bureaucrats.

    2) How do we define a good law? What good is a law if it sounds good and makes environmentalists happy but alienates various other sections of the society who then seek to find loopholes. Many such laws then become convenient extortion tools for the corrupt administrators.

    3) More than good laws (and appropriate laws as I see it) the challenge is to create a larger atmosphere where people see beyond immediate needs and understand the bigger picture. And law is not going to help in creating that atmosphere.

    Maybe its a bit Utopian but nevertheless we need to develop a society which comes to environmental issues with a sense of responsibility just as it would to its health (where too we do not see any interest and which raises questions that if people are not interested in their own health then where will they bother about the planets health?)

    Regards,

    Rishi
    http://rishiaggarwaal.wordpress.com/

    (I was in the US in June 2007 on invitation of the a US government program called International Vistors Program on Environmental Sustainability. Spent 3 weeks there and met many people including lawmakers.

Comment on this post


Subscribe to Magazine | Site Map | About OnEarth | All Authors | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Media Kit | Contact the Editors | NRDC Home

NRDC