Pondering on Environmental Policy Issues

Among the topics that particularly interested and enlightened my perspective on environment protection through formulating policies are the issues on US participation on the Kyoto Protocol, solid waste management and environmental ethics/values. On the issue of solid waste management and environmental degradation in western countries, particularly, the United States, it was stated that problems became slightly less severe in 2006 than in 1994. Key pollutants released in the environment were reduced and recycling became more evident. The environment, over the years, gained status on the political agenda of the government. (Cohen, 2006) Yes, there have been numerous international agendas, contracts and protocols between countries, formulated for the past decades that resulted from an alarm on natural resource depletion but mostly because it has harmed the health of humans and large-scale calamities have been experienced one period after another in a short interval never been expected or thought of. I think one factor that led to these changes is rapid globalization. Solely, not only on the perspective of the world becoming flatter, as an exchange of goods and services between countries, no matter how remote from each other, have become the daily grind, but because capitalists from developed nations have relocated almost all of their manufacturing plants and office hubs in developing nations. We know that most manufacturing plants pollute the environment one-way or another, even when mitigating measures and controls are being applied. Business process outsourcing provides these capitalists cheap labor costs, but significantly also stops them from harming the environment of their own country, and instead reroutes all negative first-hand environmental impact to developing countries, which mostly have no choice but to warmly welcome their billions of investment to trigger economic growth for the benefit of the population’s empty stomach. Of course, most of the developing nation’s governments do not have strict reinforcement of environmental laws, that’s why pollutants aren’t that much of a big deal to a hungry nation. So I am not surprised at all why the US hasn’t ratified the Kyoto Protocol yet. I know that it is not just the US who have transferred their manufacturing plants elsewhere, but some European nations too, but generally from by observation through the books that I’ve read, from past travels and documentary TV shows, most European countries, have already advanced their efforts on environmental protection as early as the 70’s. Some European nations consider recycling as daily habit and an old lifestyle, have pilot-tested hybrid cars and were pioneers in operating bullet trains as public transport. Most of us know that the Kyoto Protocol sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries until 2012, including the United States, and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Because developed countries are principally responsible for the current high levels of GHH emissions in the atmosphere as a result of more than 150 years of industrial activity, the Protocol places a heavier burden on them. The US signed the protocol, ungratified because it was not rallied in front of the US legislature for the past administrations have strong objections arguing that the protocol shall also require developing countries to keep greenhouse gas levels at targeted minimums. They felt that the Kyoto Protocol is unfair in that a country like itself will be harmed economically because they will have to make the most adjustments in order to adhere to targeted levels of CO2 levels set forth in the Kyoto Protocol.

Solid waste is a telltale sign of how citizens’ lifestyles change as a result of economic progress. Moreover, the distribution of waste generation in the different regions of a country is indicative of its degree of urbanization. We all know that in cities, where standard of living is higher, there is usually a higher waste output as compared to rural areas. I have always admired Japan for the technology and innovation that have applied on solid waste disposal. It is reassuring to get an affirmation from our readings that 70% of wastes in Japan is incinerated and used as fuel to generate electricity. (Cohen, 2006) Recycling waste to energy per se, not considering the ill effects that incineration causes to human health, though initial investments on conversion are costly, is still the best way to eradicate solid waste problems in the long run. Unlike in New York City where it must export all its garbage to out-of-state landfills and incinerators in each of New York’s 5 boroughs even though it had enough land to dump most of its garbage in landfills. The city’s current method is the most expensive environmentally damaging option one could imagine. The politics of situating waste-to-energy plants causes the city governments to pursue a policy of waste export. (Cohen, 2006) The same situation of exporting waste also happens in highly urbanized cities of developing nations like Metro Manila. Metro Manila generates almost ¼ of the country’s total waste generation according to a study by World Bank in 2001. (Cohen, 2006) In the past, it was the San Mateo Waste Disposal Facility (SMWDF) in Rizal, which took in majority of Metro Manila’s solid waste. Incineration was also banned so there’s no way we can adapt the model of what Japan is doing. The situation is still very difficult even until now even if we are exporting our wastes at controlled and open dumpsites at the Montalban Solid Waste Disposal Facility in Rodriguez, Rizal, and San Pedro, Laguna and some parts within Metro Manila. I remembered in 2002 when Metro Manila was declared to be in a “state of emergency” to ask for government assistance due to the unmanageable heaps and piles of garbage found everywhere in the metropolis. The not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) problem makes the task of searching for locations for future solid waste disposal facilities for the LGUs and the MMDA a bigger problem.

I have always thought that environmental ethics is relative to one’s culture, traditions and moral standards. The part in the readings where it discussed values as an environmental issue pointed out this reason. For a citizenry, the type of environment and surroundings that they wish to live in dictates not only the environmental policies, but also the value and care they tend to their natural resources. (Cohen, 2006) Contrary to the note on the readings, I think that policy approaches on the environment doesn’t necessarily reflect the way a people value their ecosystems. In the case of the some environmental policies in our country, we might be setting policies and laws that are just dictated by international grant agencies and/or sister countries from where we get our environmental protection funding from, but that doesn’t automatically conclude that the nation really puts a value on it ecosystem. Sure, we put importance to the environment to protect our health, but we as a people have very short-term memories and vision for our next generations. We tend to forget that good environmental policies are made with a purpose of eventually bringing not only economic progress, but also moral progress to our country. I also totally agree with the reasoning that it is difficult to halt economic development and its associated environmental impacts. The desire for economic development is an expression of values. A good life, includes a high level of resource consumption. (Cohen, 2006) Civilization and development itself paved way to the exploitation of the earth’s natural wealth from the time of the Roman Empire to the construction of the tallest skyscrapers in the deserts of Dubai and Abu Dhabi. It was also mentioned that the environmental ethic for most people in most countries has been a form of enlightened self-interest. If we stick to this kind of value system, environmental protection is not traded off against the value of economic consumption. (Cohen, 2006) That is why environmental policies are made to focus on developing less damaging methods for fulfilling our insatiable human appetite for consumption.