Air, water and soil pollution caused by industrial activity are major problems on the environmental agenda of the Russian Federation. Generally, a mix of policy instruments is recommended to tackle environmental problems effectively. This would mean that but also voluntary environmental regulation measures could be helpful in abating Russias pollution problems. There is, however, a scientific debate going on whether voluntary policy instruments are effective, and if they are, under what conditions. The analysis made by Gouldson and Murphy suggests that the institutional framework must create pressure on polluters to take voluntary protection measures. If this is the case, voluntary policy instruments prove their advantages over mandatory regulation: they circumvent acceptance and monitoring problems and impose fewer costs on the state budget. Using Gouldson's and Murphy's analysis, this paper wants to examine whether the institutional framework in the Russian Federation is favourable for the implementation and diffusion of Environmental Management Systems as a voluntary policy instrument. Therefore it describes legal provisions and state institutions, trying to derive constraints and incentives imposed on polluters to implement an Environmental Management System. To avoid focusing exclusively on formal state institutions, it also presents three brief case studies in order to identify economic or social institutions which might be relevant in this respect. The paper concludes that Environmental Management Systems are not actively promoted through environmental policy in the Russian Federation. The existence of Environmental Management Systems in Russia-based companies can rather be explained by international diffusion, than by Russia's national environmental policy.
|Uddannelser||TekSam - miljøplanlægning, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Kandidat|
|Udgivelsesdato||1 jun. 2004|