Valentina Mileusnic Vucic was for 19 years the Economics Advisor of the Serbian Minister of Environmental Protection and advisor in economics of water management. She was also Co-ordinator of the Environmental Management Programme of the Republic of Serbia, a National Expert for the Study of Economic Instruments in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and a National Expert on Financial Mechanisms for the UNDP/GEF Programme on Environmental Pollution Reduction in the Danube Basin. She is a Member of the European Association of Environmental and Resources Economists, and of the European Association of Applied Econometricians, and her previous posts include a research fellowship at the Foreign Trade Institute. Ms. Vucic is the co-author of a book Economics of Natural Capital – Valuation and Conservation of Natural Resources; she has also published papers on the Environmental Aspects of World Development, the Green Business Policy of Leading Chemical Companies, Eco-Industry Expansion, Environment at Entrepreneurship, Conflicts and World Trade Environmental Problems, the Environmental Effects of Economic Sanctions on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, a Comparative Study of EMS Selected Financial Mechanisms of Environmental Investments, Debt for Nature Swaps, Economic Instruments in Environmental Policy in the Republic of Serbia, the Interaction of Economic and Environmental Goals, Corporate Environmental Management and Economic Performance in Transition Economies.She has chaired World Congress of Evnironment and Resource Economists, Venice, Italy, 1998 This paper has been presented in a capacity of invited speaker by the Hungarian Academy of Science, Budapest, Hungary. Published with kind permission of an author
The role of the economy in today's societies is a fundamental one, since economic determinism is an unstoppable force. Nothing can deprive human freedom like total absence of financial means. Therefore, for biocentric society to realise its basic aims it has to achieve bio-economic development, i.e. rise in production and employment. Otherwise a vast segment of the human population will be left without the means for living, will be condemned to starvation and homelessness, and will be deprived of health protection etc.
Paradoxically, only sound economic development can contribute to the recuperation of the environment. On this planet there is an environmentally-literate population living in poverty and an environmentally-illiterate one which is not poor. In other words, it is only through an educated population that a bios-oriented development can become a reality. We must pursue a new development paradigm and integrated environmental economics. Bio-education secures environmental literacy for every decision maker, employee and consumer, a necessary prerequisite for the realisation of a biocentric society which will secure a brighter future for the entire planet. It seems that a biocentric society is of fundamental importance and a price to be paid for peace, inner and any other. No goal set by a bios-oriented society is as clear and unconventional as the task of taxing personal incomes, consumption and luxury consumption in order to create and sustain an open and modern bios-oriented educational system.
Einstein said that there is no better economist than nature. A better understanding of the environment would enrich economists with a more profound understanding of their own responsibilities towards the state of the environment and of the legacy left to present and future generations. Therefore, an economically efficient society implies stable and sustained growth, which is hard to imagine in a society other then a bios-oriented one. No one can doubt the favourable economic effects of such a society and such a policy. In order to meet the challenges of the next millennium, economics must re-evaluate its role towards global development and take responsibility for the state of natural resources throughout the planet. A new bios-supporting structure for society based on, among other things, bio economics, calls for the creation of ethical, as opposed to merely pragmatic, invectives. Since business people are realists first and foremost, the environment can and should be seen as a challenge and as a new opportunity for more profitable and environmentally-friendly production. That these goals are completely compatible is a fact which needs to be stressed.
 |
| Црква Александра Невског |
Conclusions
The link between environmental policies and competitiveness is a complex one. Empirical analyses suggest that environmental standards and regulations in developed countries have not as yet had significant effects on competitiveness. They may, however, have a greater effect on the competitiveness of developing countries. The effects of similar environmental regulations or standards on competitiveness can be negative in the short-run, but may be less significant, and can even be positive, in the long-run. The ability of firms to absorb adverse competitiveness effects depends on factors such as the rate of growth and the openness of the economy, and on their capacity to generate innovative responses to environmental policies. In the case of developing countries, fostering a climate for innovation is easier if they have already embarked on a path of sustained growth.
Governments may nevertheless be faced with claims that environmental policies may worsen the competitiveness of domestic firms or industries compared to firms in countries where standards are lower or not enforced. Such claims have indeed led to calls by environmental groups and others for measures to level the playing field. There are legitimate reasons for diversity in environmental regulations across countries. Moreover, such calls for levelling the playing field overlook the fact that, even if countries were to attain similar levels of environmental quality, the cost would vary from country to country. Thus, environmental countervailing duties, or similar measures, against products from a country with lower abatement costs may simply be protecting an inefficient industry. Such measures, moreover, would be inconsistent with the rules of the WTO.
Empirical analysis of the factors affecting the link between environmental policies and competitiveness also shows that the same measure may affect two countries differently, and that the competitiveness effects of external environmental policies may be relatively more onerous than those of domestic policies.
The overall competitiveness effects of environmental policies, both domestic and external, depend on a number of factors such as the composition and destination of exports, firm size, availability of raw materials, the growth and openness of an economy, information and transaction costs arising from variations in environmental regulations across countries, industrial restructuring, and innovation. In the context of increased globalisation and trade liberalisation, openness was found to play an important role in the link between environmental policies and competitiveness. The more open the economy, the better is its access to information, inputs and technology. Increased openness implies greater commercial and investment links with countries with stringent standards, leading to greater diffusion of environmental standards to developing countries. Openness may also involve increased competition in domestic markets and may consequently encourage cost effective solutions to environmental problems.
The effects of environmental policies vary between large and small firms. Small firms are more likely to be adversely affected than large firms because of poorer access to information, raw materials, capital and technology. Moreover, the economic use of environmentally-sound technologies may require a minimum scale of operation, often beyond that of small firms.
The competitiveness effects of environmental policies depend to a large extent on structural factors. Therefore, in making environmental policies effective and in addressing their competitiveness effects, it would seem necessary to give due attention to such factors, a number of which would go hand in hand with economic development. For example, investments in sanitation, in the provision of clean water and in education in developing countries are more likely to produce higher marginal returns for the environment than investments in reducing industrial emissions. Thus, insisting that specific process-related environmental standards be met by exports from developing countries might take more resources away from more pressing development needs with larger environmental returns both at the local and at the global level.
 |
| Дунав, фебруар 2013 |
International conventions may have significant effects on the trade and competitiveness of developing countries. Compensatory mechanisms, such as financial and technological transfers, are needed to induce compliance with the obligations undertaken by developing countries.
Export diversification of both products and markets may result in reduced dependence on a few products and in the export of higher value added products, thus making it easier to internalise environmental externalities. Co-operative efforts between importing and exporting countries should be encouraged, particularly with a view to diversifying exports from developing countries. Transparency, technical co-operation and an improved dissemination of information on standards and requirements at both national and international levels will mitigate the cost of obtaining information particularly for small firms. It will also facilitate the process of adaptation to national and international standards.
Нема коментара:
Постави коментар