3.2 Developing Measures and Standards
29
linked to causing the thinning of eggshells of wild birds, and the case led to the
start of a new environmental movement in the United States. As a result, DDT was
banned for agricultural use in the United States in 1972, and in 2004, DDT was listed
in the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutant (POPs) and subject to
global restriction. It is, however, currently still allowed for use in some regions to
control the spreading of insect-borne diseases such as malaria.
As a result of event-related damages linked to man-made chemical technology
such as DDT, many new sets of legislation and regulations have been passed through
political processes. An example of this reactive process is illustrated in Fig. 3.1. In
the figure, a damage to human health or the environment caused by a chemical
is communicated via the media to wider society, who then can perceive the risk
in different ways. This can lead to a political process that develops legislation
in response. This legislation is then enforced and, depending on its effectiveness,
should greatly reduce (or hopefully eliminate) any remaining risks that could lead
to further harmful accidents or exposures.
Once new legislation has been developed in response to an event and after making
its way through an often complex political process, there are still often important
challenges to consider during implementation and enforcement:
• Given the number of different environmental regulations that exist, the effectiveness of enforcing them can be difficult to qualify if the legal framework has
changed multiple times over the years.
• For some legislation, enforcement can be difficult to do effectively and efficiently
given the limited resources available to a government agency.
• Setting new requirements can involve additional investments or de-investments
(“divestments”) that require time and financial resources. For example, stricter
concentration limits in drinking water can require installation of advanced treatment systems, and the restriction of a substance can require a manufacturer to
discontinue production and may (temporarily) lay off factory workers employed
at a production site.
• Very strict legal limits on emissions could potentially lead to an overall negative
environmental impact (see Fig. 3.2), for example, through increased energy
demand for the operation of treatment systems.
Today, reactive legislation based on addressing problems as they occur has
largely reached its limits. With the current state of environmental law, further
progress can likely be achieved more efficiently by consistently focusing on set
protection goals. An overview of how this approach might look is provided in the
next section.
3.2.2 Proactive Legislation in Alignment with Protection Goals
In a proactive approach to legislation, scientific knowledge and societal consensus
are used to set and achieve protection goals. These long-term protection goals
29
linked to causing the thinning of eggshells of wild birds, and the case led to the
start of a new environmental movement in the United States. As a result, DDT was
banned for agricultural use in the United States in 1972, and in 2004, DDT was listed
in the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutant (POPs) and subject to
global restriction. It is, however, currently still allowed for use in some regions to
control the spreading of insect-borne diseases such as malaria.
As a result of event-related damages linked to man-made chemical technology
such as DDT, many new sets of legislation and regulations have been passed through
political processes. An example of this reactive process is illustrated in Fig. 3.1. In
the figure, a damage to human health or the environment caused by a chemical
is communicated via the media to wider society, who then can perceive the risk
in different ways. This can lead to a political process that develops legislation
in response. This legislation is then enforced and, depending on its effectiveness,
should greatly reduce (or hopefully eliminate) any remaining risks that could lead
to further harmful accidents or exposures.
Once new legislation has been developed in response to an event and after making
its way through an often complex political process, there are still often important
challenges to consider during implementation and enforcement:
• Given the number of different environmental regulations that exist, the effectiveness of enforcing them can be difficult to qualify if the legal framework has
changed multiple times over the years.
• For some legislation, enforcement can be difficult to do effectively and efficiently
given the limited resources available to a government agency.
• Setting new requirements can involve additional investments or de-investments
(“divestments”) that require time and financial resources. For example, stricter
concentration limits in drinking water can require installation of advanced treatment systems, and the restriction of a substance can require a manufacturer to
discontinue production and may (temporarily) lay off factory workers employed
at a production site.
• Very strict legal limits on emissions could potentially lead to an overall negative
environmental impact (see Fig. 3.2), for example, through increased energy
demand for the operation of treatment systems.
Today, reactive legislation based on addressing problems as they occur has
largely reached its limits. With the current state of environmental law, further
progress can likely be achieved more efficiently by consistently focusing on set
protection goals. An overview of how this approach might look is provided in the
next section.
3.2.2 Proactive Legislation in Alignment with Protection Goals
In a proactive approach to legislation, scientific knowledge and societal consensus
are used to set and achieve protection goals. These long-term protection goals