Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 11:58 am
Time: 11:58 am
Results for offences against the environment
17 results foundAuthor: Brown, David W. Title: Bridging the Information Gap: Combating Illegal Logging in Indonesia Summary: Spanning around 100 million hectares, the forests of Indonesia constitute 10 percent of the world’s remaining tropical forests and provide people with a variety of benefits or “ecosystem services.” For instance, local communities rely on the forests for food, medicine, fresh water, and building material. The global community relies on them for carbon sequestration, timber, and tourism. In addition, the forests of Indonesia are a biodiversity “hotspot,” with new species discovered every year. In view of the importance of its forests, Indonesia — both on its own and in partnership with donor countries and world experts — has incorporated themes of “sustainable forest management” and “combating illegal logging” into its forest governance since the mid-1990s. Despite these efforts, during the first half decade of the new millennium, deforestation rates increased year on year (from 0.2 million hectares in 2000/2001 to 1.2 million hectares in 2004/2005, the last year such data were reported). The causes of Indonesia’s forest loss are diverse, but it is widely recognized that illegal logging is a major contributor. Estimates of the scale of this illegal activity vary widely. One study found that three quarters or 40 million out of the 53 million cubic meters of logs consumed by Indonesia’s mills (and mostly exported in the form of moldings, sawn timber, plywood, pulp, and paper) in 2003, came from unknown and/ or illegal sources. This equated to $1.4 billion in lost revenue to the government in 2003 alone. Moreover, this estimate did not include the additional volume of logs illegally exported from Indonesia, which another study estimated at 10 million cubic meters per year. In order to pinpoint the identity of the actors perpetrating these crimes, and thereby reduce illegal trade, better information is needed in areas such as: changes in forest cover; timber concession and plantation boundaries; administrative boundaries; and sources of raw material for timber mills. Many stakeholders have recognized the importance of such information and several experts and policymakers have tried to develop such databases. However, forest data continues to be scattered throughout the archipelago and across different government departments and non-government organizations. Where information exists, much of it needs to be updated and improved. Details: Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, 2009. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: WRI Forest Note: Accessed September 29, 2011 at: http://pdf.wri.org/bridging_the_information_gap.pdf Year: 2009 Country: Indonesia URL: http://pdf.wri.org/bridging_the_information_gap.pdf Shelf Number: 122961 Keywords: Illegal Logging (Indonesia)Natural ResourcesOffences Against the Environment |
Author: Huglo Lepage & Partners Title: Study on Environmental Crime in the 27 Member States Summary: On 27 January 2003, on the initiative of the Kingdom of Denmark, the Council of the European Union adopted the framework Decision. Based on Title VI of the Treaty on European Union, the framework decision constitutes, as is clear from the first three recitals in its preamble, the instrument by which the European Union intends to respond with concerted action to the disturbing increase in offences posing a threat to the environment. The framework decision lays down a number of environmental offences, in respect of which the Member States are required to prescribe criminal penalties. The framework decision distinguished environmental offences committed intentionally from negligent offences. The requested study does not explicitly mention this distinction. We understand that it should cover both intentional and negligent offences. With regard to the environmental offences, the framework decision stated in its articles 2 to 7 that : Member States shall adopt necessary measures to qualify these infringement as criminal offences; Member States shall ensure that, under national legislation, participating or instigating the offences is punishable The criminal penalties laid down in each Member State shall be “effective, proportionate and dissuasive” and shall include, at least in serious cases, penalties involving deprivation of liberty which can give rise to extradition. Criminal penalties may be accompanied by other penalties or measures. Legal persons shall be liable as the result of an act or omission and the sanctions to which they are to be subject under national legislation shall include criminal and non-criminal fines and may include other sanctions. The other provisions of the framework decision were dealing with jurisdiction , extradition and prosecutions of persons who have committed environmental offences. In case C-176/03 the Commission, supported by the European Parliament, requested the Court to annul the framework decision in its entirety, claiming that article 2 to 7 of the act were falling within the Community’s competence. In its judgment given on 13 September 2005, the Court held that, although the Community legislature has no general competence in criminal matters, it is competent, under Article 175 EC, to require the Member States to prescribe penalties for infringements of Community environment-protection legislation if it takes the view that that is a necessary means of ensuring that the EC environmental legislation is effective. In other word the Court considered that the (partial) harmonisation of national criminal laws, in particular of the constituent elements of environmental offences and of the criminal penalties attached to these offences, is designed to support the EC environmental policy. It stems from the Judgment of the Court that the EC legislature can adopt a Directive based on article 175 EC if : The main purpose of this act is the protection of the environment; Member States national legislation differ as regards the constituent elements of various criminal offences committed to the detriment of the environment; The criminal penalties applicable to the various criminal offences differ greatly from one Member State to another and are not effective, proportionate and dissuasive • Aim and scope of the study The European Commission plans to submit to the European Parliament and the Council a proposal for a directive on environmental crime. In order to justify its proposal with regards to the above mentioned Court judgement, the Commission needs to demonstrate that a harmonisation of criminal laws of the Member States, in particular of the constituent elements of environmental offences and of the criminal penalties attached to these offences, is necessary to ensure the proper implementation of EC environmental legislation. Therefore, it is necessary for the Commission to be able to provide the Council and the Parliament with an overview of the current legislation in the Member states regarding criminal offences that differ from those covered in the Framework decision, in order to justify the harmonisation of these measures. A first step in a harmonisation effort is that the Commission should know how the non-respect of national rules implementing specific provisions of 4 Directives and 1 Regulation are sanctioned in the various member states today. The relevant environmental offences are: the unlawful discharge of hazardous substances into water; the unlawful dumping of waste; the illegal shipment of waste as defined in Article 2(35) of the Waste Shipment Regulations; the unlawful significant deterioration of a protected habitat; the unlawful trade in or use of ozone-depleting substances Three studies have already been carried out on this issue on behalf of the Commission in 2002 and 2003. However, theses studies did not cover the exact same offences and did not cover the now 27 Members States. Besides, the information contained in these previous studies had to be updated. The study covers the five listed offences and aims at conveying a clear overview of the national legislation in force and the levels of sanctions. Although the case law and the judicial practice may influence the effectiveness of penalties, this study covers only legislation and not case law or judicial practice. Details: Brussels: Huglo Lepage & Partners, 2007. 16p.; appendices Source: Internet Resource: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/crime/pdf/report_environmental_crime.pdf Year: 2007 Country: Europe URL: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/legal/crime/pdf/report_environmental_crime.pdf Shelf Number: 123676 Keywords: Hazardous WastesIllegal WastesOffences Against the EnvironmentOzone DepletionWaste Management |
Author: Goncalves, Marilyne Pereira Title: Justice for Forests: Improving Criminal Justice Efforts to Combat Illegal Logging Summary: Every two seconds, across the world, an area of forest the size of a football field is clear-cut by illegal loggers. In some countries, up to 90 percent of all the logging taking place is illegal. Estimates suggest that this criminal activity generates approximately US$10–15 billion annually worldwide—funds that are unregulated, untaxed, and often remain in the hands of organized criminal gangs. Thus far, domestic and international efforts to curb forest crimes have focused on preventative actions, but they have had little or no significant impact. While prevention is an essential part of enforcement efforts to tackle illegal logging, it has not halted the rapid disappearance of the world’s old-growth trees. New ideas and strategies are needed to preserve what is left of forests. This paper suggests that current practice be combined with a more targeted, punitive approach, through more effective use of the criminal justice system. It argues that the criminal justice system should form an integral part of any balanced and organized strategy for fighting forest crime. This strategy should include initiatives to enhance the efficiency of criminal justice in combating illegal logging—that is, the investigation, prosecution, and conviction of cases, as well as the confiscation of the proceeds of criminal activity. These initiatives should be deployed in parallel with preventive programs, and the two approaches should complement and reinforce each other. The criminal justice system has been used in the fight against illegal logging, but only in very sporadic instances and in limited and ineffective ways. Moreover, in those few cases, it has tended to target low-level criminals whose involvement in illegal logging is due to poverty. As such, it has created no real deterrent and has encouraged skeptics to further discount the relevance of criminal justice methods. Large-scale illegal operations are carried out by sophisticated criminal networks, and law enforcement actions need to be focused on the “masterminds” behind these networks—and the highlevel corrupt officials who enable and protect them. Pursuing these important targets through the criminal justice system will require creativity and a clear focus on those criminal justice rules and procedures that prove most effective. The objective of this paper is to inform policy makers and forestry and law enforcement actors how they can use the criminal justice system in fighting illegal logging. It seeks to mobilize them to take action and address the various criminal acts involved in illegal logging operations. The paper puts forward practical suggestions that can be implemented to achieve a tangible improvement in this fight. Rather than focusing on a single element of the criminal justice system, it provides a broad overview of the topic. Future papers may provide an opportunity to flesh out further detail. Because the role of the criminal system in fighting illegal logging has thus far been minimal, there are few documented successes, and little data to explain why the criminal justice system has not been more widely used in this context. To find new ideas as to how the criminal justice system can be used against illegal loggers, this paper therefore draws on experience gained from dealing with other types of crime (money laundering, corruption, and so forth). The policy and operational recommendations made in this paper are based on legal and operational frameworks that are already in place in almost every country in the world. By making good use of these existing frameworks, we can take an important step towards ensuring the preservation and the sustainable management of the world’s forests. Policy recommendations include: Develop an integrated criminal justice strategy for illegal logging that adopts and implements clear and comprehensive policies; Improve domestic cooperation; Enlist the private sector; Engage civil society actors; and Include criminal justice as part of development assistance programs to combat illegal logging. Operational recommendations include: Work together; Attack corruption; Proactively target vulnerabilities and significant offenders; Consider all applicable offenses—not just regulatory environmental offenses; Follow the money; Employ all available criminal tools to address these complex crimes; and Improve international cooperation. Details: Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 2012. 56p. Source: World Bank Study R67: Internet Resource: Accessed March 21, 2012 at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTFINANCIALSECTOR/Resources/Illegal_Logging.pdf Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTFINANCIALSECTOR/Resources/Illegal_Logging.pdf Shelf Number: 124631 Keywords: CorruptionCriminal Justice PolicyEnvironmental CrimeIllegal LoggingOffences Against the Environment |
Author: Environmental Investigation Agency Title: Borderlines: Vietnam's Booming Furniture Industry and Timber Smuggling in the Mekong Region Summary: EIA/Telapak have been probing the trade in stolen timber in East Asia since the late 1990s. Over the last decade, governments around the world have made a raft of pronouncements regarding the seriousness of illegal logging and their determination to tackle it. Yet the stark reality is 'business as usual' for the organised syndicates looting the remaining precious tropical forests for a quick profit. This report contains new information from field investigations carried out by the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) and its partner Telapak. It exposes how the rapid growth of Vietnam's wood processing industry is threatening some of the last intact forests in the Mekong region, especially those in neighbouring Laos. Since the mid-1990s, Vietnam has taken steps to conserve its remaining forests, whilst at the same time hugely expanding its wooden furniture production industry. Furniture exports from the country were US$ 2.4 billion in 2007, a startling ten-fold increase since 2000. It is unfortunately inevitable that due to the lack of controls on the global timber trade, illegal timber constitutes a significant component of the imported raw materials supplying Vietnam's furniture factories. Vietnam has an unenviable track record when it comes to dealing in stolen timber. In the late 1990s it was caught importing illegal timber from neighbouring Cambodia. In 2003 EIA/Telapak documented shipments of stolen logs from Indonesia entering Vietnam. As the price of raw timber increases, and some wood producing countries like Indonesia take steps to combat illegal logging, the trade in stolen timber shifts. New evidence from EIA/Telapak reveals that Vietnam is now exploiting the forests of neighbouring Laos to obtain valuable hardwoods for its outdoor furniture industry. This trade is in direct contravention of laws in Laos banning the export of logs and sawn timber. During 2007 EIA/Telapak investigators visited numerous furniture factories and found the majority to be using logs from Laos. In the Vietnamese port of Vinh, EIA/Telapak witnessed piles of huge logs from Laos awaiting sale. At the border crossing of Naphao, 45 trucks laden with logs were seen lining up on the Laos side waiting to cross into Vietnam. EIA/Telapak estimate that at least 500,000 cubic metres of logs move from Laos to Vietnam every year. It is not just Vietnam which is exploiting its neighbour. Traders from Thailand and Singapore are also cashing in. Posing as investors, EIA/Telapak investigators met with one Thai businessman who bragged of paying bribes to senior Laos military officials to secure supplies of timber worth potentially half a billion dollars. The cost of such unfettered greed is borne by poor rural communities in Laos who are dependent on the forests for their traditional livelihoods. They gain virtually no income from this trade: instead, the money goes to corrupt officials in Laos and businesses in Vietnam and Thailand. The ultimate responsibility for this dire state of affairs rests with the consumer markets which import wood products made from stolen timber. To some extent the dynamic growth of Vietnam's furniture industry is driven by the demand of end markets such as the European Union and US. Until these states clean up their act and shut their markets to wood products made from illegal timber, the loss of precious tropical Details: London: Environmental Investigation Agency; Bogor, Indonesia; Telepak, 2008. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 15, 2012 at: http://www.greengrants.org.cn/file/pub/Borderlines[1].pdf Year: 2008 Country: Vietnam URL: http://www.greengrants.org.cn/file/pub/Borderlines[1].pdf Shelf Number: 125268 Keywords: Illegal Logging (Vietnam)Offences Against the EnvironmentOrganized CrimeTimber Smuggling |
Author: Hirschberger, Peter Title: Illegal Wood for the European Market: An Analysis of the EU Import and Export of Illegal Wood and Related Products Summary: Illegal logging is a pervasive problem of major international concern, as it leads to deforestation, one of the main causes for climate change. Illegal logging for international markets is often a form of organised crime. Like other criminal activities it takes place covertly. This is why no one can calculate the quantity of wood of illegal origin in international trade with exact certainty. This study thus aims to give an estimate of the orders of magnitude of timber from illegal sources which reach the European market. All products in which wood was used as a raw material were included for this purpose. The European Union foreign trade data from 2006, calculated back to the quantity of raw timber that was needed to produce the imported products (raw timber equivalent), is used as a basis. The share of illegal logging in global wood production is estimated at 20% to 40%, and the economic loss through lost receipts for the state, industry and forest owners is estimated at US$ 15 billion (9, 5 billion euro) per year. Illegal logging pushes wood prices down worldwide by 7% to 16%. This economic loss for legitimately operating companies is compounded by the damage both to the image of wood as a sustainable raw material and to the responsible forestry sector. Details: Frankfurt am Main, WWF-Germany, 2008. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 15, 2012 at: http://www.illegal-logging.info/item_single.php?it_id=644&it=document Year: 2008 Country: Europe URL: http://www.illegal-logging.info/item_single.php?it_id=644&it=document Shelf Number: 125274 Keywords: Illegal Logging (Europe)Offences Against the EnvironmentOrganized Crime |
Author: Environmental Justice Foundation Title: Squandering the Seas: How Shrimp Trawling is Threatening Ecological Integrity and Food Security Around the World Summary: Shrimp trawlers, particularly those in the tropics, can catch over 400 marine species in their nets. These non-target species or ‘bycatch’ are often discarded by shrimp fishermen – either they are inedible or are simply not worth retaining when shrimp is worth up to 30 times more per kilogram. Shrimp fisheries typically produce bycatch-to-shrimp ratios of 5:1 in temperate areas and 10:1 in the tropics. However, higher ratios have been found, such as 21:1 in the case of the Australian Northern Prawn Fishery. This essentially means 21 kg of marine organisms are caught in order to obtain 1 kg of shrimp. Currently, tens of millions of tonnes of bycatch are taken by shrimp trawl fisheries worldwide each year. Most shrimp trawlers discard this non-target catch. Shrimp fisheries alone are responsible for one third of the world’s discarded catch, despite producing less than 2% of global seafood. Shrimp often ends up on the tables of wealthy consumers in the developed world. It is a luxury item. For poor fishing communities, fish is a necessity. Globally, 450 million people rely on fisheries as a source of food and income. In Bangladesh, the fisheries sector provides 78% of animal protein intake for the average person. Equally high dependencies are found in other developing nations, yet it is countries such as these that face food security issues linked to overfishing. People in the developing world witness shrimp trawlers – sometimes foreign- owned – destroy their traditional fishing grounds and incidentally catch and squander local fish stocks. In some cases this fishing is illegal, in other cases it is the result of fisheries agreements, such as those between the EU and African nations. Yet those who suffer the environmental costs of shrimp trawling are unlikely to see the financial rewards of these agreements. Shrimp trawling frequently takes place in shallow coastal waters, which act as nursery grounds for many commercial fish species. Trawling removes vast numbers of juvenile fish that are needed to sustain fish stocks. In addition, by dragging large, heavy nets along the seabed, habitats that support marine life are damaged. One study found that the pass of a single trawl could remove up to 25% of seabed life. In heavily-trawled areas, habitats have little chance to recover and in some cases may be permanently altered. Shrimp trawling is thought to disrupt entire marine communities, altering biomass, size structure and diversity. Populations of vulnerable species are rapidly reduced. These species tend to be slow-growing and long-lived with low reproductive output and/or those dependent on structurally diverse seabed habitats. Some of these, such as turtles, are already endangered as a result of other human activities. Shrimp trawling presents one of the greatest threats to their continued survival. Indeed, it is estimated that 150,000 sea turtles are killed annually by shrimp trawlers. A creature that has lived on Earth for millions of years could be wiped out by consumer demand for a high value seafood. Damage caused by shrimp trawling is so significant that leading scientists have compared it to clear-cutting forests. However, unlike deforestation, the impacts of shrimp fisheries are only just beginning to receive international attention. Details: London: Environmental Justice Foundations, 2003. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 26, 2013 at: http://ejfoundation.org/sites/default/files/public/squandering_the_seas.pdf Year: 2003 Country: International URL: http://ejfoundation.org/sites/default/files/public/squandering_the_seas.pdf Shelf Number: 127724 Keywords: Offences Against the EnvironmentOverfishingShrimp IndustryShrimp Trawling |
Author: United Nations Environment Programme Title: Experts' background report on illegal exploitation and trade in natural resources benefitting organized criminal groups and recommendations on MONUSCO's role in fostering stability and peace in eastern DR Congo Summary: This report examines the role of transnational environmental crime as one of the several key factors fuelling the protracted conflict cycle in eastern Democratic Congo. It makes recommendations on how MONUSCO, in its forthcoming down-sizing phase, might wick to endeavor supporting the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in addressing apparent segments of the Congolese political economy that are linked to transnational environmental crime. Details: Nairobi, Kenya: UNEP, 2015. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2015 at: http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/UNEP_DRCongo_MONUSCO_OSESG_final_report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Congo, Democratic Republic URL: http://postconflict.unep.ch/publications/UNEP_DRCongo_MONUSCO_OSESG_final_report.pdf Shelf Number: 135775 Keywords: Illegal TradeNatural ResourcesOffences Against the EnvironmentOrganized Crime |
Author: Marijnissen, Chantal Title: Facing Reality: How to halt the import of illegal timber in the EU Summary: By mid-2004, the European Commission is due to report back to the Council of the European Union with its proposals for implementing the EU Action Plan on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) that it released in May 2003. FERN, Greenpeace and WWF welcome the Plan and aim, with this report, to provide further recommendations to EU policy makers that will assist their efforts to ensure its successful implementation. Given the stage of development of the FLEGT Action Plan, this report will focus primarily on criminal aspects of the timber industry. However, it is important to remember that much legal logging is also highly destructive - and that ultimately it is the issue of forest sustainability that needs to be addressed. As the environmental NGO community has repeatedly shown, the impacts of illegal logging on wildlife and human welfare are devastating. Illegal logging contributes to deforestation and loss of biodiversity; fuels civil wars and threatens international security through bribery, organised crime and human rights abuses; cuts tax revenue of producer countries; destabilises international markets and undermines both legitimate business and responsible forest management. As a major buyer and importer of illegal forest products, and with European timber companies heavily implicated in this trade, the European Union has the duty as well as the power to curtail criminal activities linked to it. We believe that, to be successful, the FLEGT process cannot be restricted to voluntary mechanisms. Illegal logging has reached an unprecedented high level, proving that voluntary measures, together with industry self-regulation, have been insufficient to stop illegal logging. Therefore, although we welcome the planned EU regulation for a voluntary licensing scheme and the development of voluntary partnership agreements, we believe that the EU must develop a regulation to outlaw the import of illegally sourced timber and forest products. This regulation must be implemented at the same time as the regulation for the voluntary licensing scheme and should allow EU enforcement officials to seize illegally sourced forest products and to prosecute those that trade in them. We also ask the European Union to build political support within producer countries for the voluntary partnership agreements proposed by the FLEGT Action Plan. The negotiations of these agreements should bring together all stakeholders in producer and consumer countries in developing solutions and promoting responsible forest management. Details: Brussels: FERN, 2004. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2015 at: http://www.fern.org/sites/fern.org/files/pubs/reports/facing_reality.pdf Year: 2004 Country: Europe URL: http://www.fern.org/sites/fern.org/files/pubs/reports/facing_reality.pdf Shelf Number: 136456 Keywords: DeforestationForest ManagementForestsIllegal LoggingIllegal ProductsOffences Against the Environment |
Author: Friends of the Earth Netherlands Title: Commodity Crimes: Illicit Land Grabs, Illegal Palm Oil, and Endangered Orangutans Summary: Two of the world's leading distributors of palm oil, a staple ingredient in many consumer food and personal care products and an important feedstock for biofuels in Europe, are obtaining the commodity from illegal sources - growers who are clearing vast areas of rain forests, including sensitive orangutan habitat and protected forest reserves, in violation of the law, the criteria of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and their financiers' investment policies. Our investigation used satellite imagery, trade data and on-the-ground reporting to uncover how, at the other end of a long chain of culpability, unwitting consumers are being sold products that are killing orangutans and destroying some of the world's last forested lands. Friends of the Earth has alerted the companies involved about the problems detailed in this report. We have also alerted financiers to their role in land grabbing previously. Their comments are summarized in this report. The chain extends thousands of miles, through many actors: - The producer, Bumitama Agri Ltd, one of the largest owners of palm oil plantations in Indonesia. - The palm oil industry's "sustainability" association, the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, which does little to prevent illegal activity and has proven ineffective at providing comprehensive protections for the environment and human rights. - The traders, such as Wilmar International who distribute palm oil to a global market which is expected to more than double by 2030 - a serious and growing threat to human rights and tropical forests. - The financiers and investors - including HSBC, Rabobank, Deutsche Bank as well as the largest pension funds in the Netherlands and Sweden - who provide the needed capital for Bumitama's key shareholders like IOI and clients like Wilmar. All three companies are violating not only voluntary standards like RSPO and the financiers' own Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) policies, but also national legislation. Bumitama Agri Ltd, (BUMI.SI) is headquartered in Jakarta, Indonesia and operates through a number of subsidiaries. Bumitama controls over 200,000 hectares of plantation land bank in Central Kalimantan, West Kalimantan and Riau, Indonesia. Since 1990, development of palm plantations by Bumitama and others has cleared about 16,000 square kilometers of forested land in Kalimantan. The company has been a member of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil since 2007, and sells to global palm oil traders including IOI Corp. of Malaysia and Wilmar International of Singapore. This investigation specifically documents that: - Bumitama has knowingly destroyed forest that is the home for endangered orangutans. In April 2013, in response to a complaint filed at the RSPO, Bumitama promised it would not clear land near forest reserves in West Kalimantan until studies were completed to appraise the land's ecological importance. These reserves host one of the largest, and last, populations of the Central Bornean orangutan in the region. However, satellite imagery shows that hundreds of hectares of peatland and forests in the area were cleared between May and September 2013. So while Bumitama was negotiating with the RSPO to address the complaint, the company continued to clear land, despite its pledge to stop the cutting. - Bumitama's actions are unpermitted. The plantation in West Kalimantan that is managed by Bumitama was cleared in violation of national laws, without permits or proper approval of the Ministry of Forestry and the Environmental Monitoring Agency. This land bank consists of at least 7,000 hectares of "ghost estates" - plantations that lack valid permits. Selling palm oil from unpermitted plantations is illegal. - Bumitama's investors knowingly or unknowingly purchased shares of an illegal operation. Prospective investors were informed through Bumitama's prospectus in April 2012 that Bumitama's expansion plans included preferential rights to manage and harvest from a plantation that was operating illegally, without the required licenses for its operation and management, and that the Hariyanto family - the majority owner of Bumitama Agri - would bear the liability risk while the permits were sorted out. Despite this admission of illegality, all the shares were sold. - After gaining control over thousands of hectares of unpermitted plantation landbank Bumitama continued the illegal production of palm oil without the necessary permits and engaged in further illegal land grabbing and clearing. Wilmar International and IOI Corp. bought shares of Bumitama despite their likely knowledge of the illegal landgrab. Before Bumitama's public offering in April 2012, IOI Corp. became one of Bumitama's controlling shareholders, with a current stake of 31 percent of the company. At the same time, Wilmar bought between 0.9 percent and 4.3 percent of shares of Bumitama's stock. This makes IOI and Wilmar not just purchasers of the palm oil illegally produced by Bumitama, but significant investors in its illegal operations. - The RSPO provides greenwash for the industry's illegal, unethical and environmentally harmful practices. The Bumitama Group, IOI Corp. and Wilmar International are all members of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. They have been involved in several illegal landgrabs in Kalimantan over the past five years, but the RSPO has been unable to prevent this, nor has it taken any effective enforcement action. The revelations about Bumitama Agri in this report illustrate how palm plantation companies and commodity traders use the lack of legal enforcement, complicated transfers of land and assets, and inter-company agreements to take illegal control over land, regardless of its legal status, traditional use or ecological importance. The report also highlights the role of financiers, including banks and equity investors, in Bumitama Agri, IOI and Wilmar, and on the kind and amount of money invested in these companies, their Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Policies and the responses investors gave to inquiries by Friends of the Earth on this case. The bottom line is that the current system of producing palm oil as a global commodity is unjust and unsustainable and all actors involved should take immediate action to address this. Details: Amsterdam: The Friends, 2013. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 17, 2016 at: https://milieudefensie.nl/publicaties/rapporten/comodity-crimes.-illicit-land-grabs-illegal-palm-oil-and-endangered-orangutans Year: 2013 Country: International URL: https://milieudefensie.nl/publicaties/rapporten/comodity-crimes.-illicit-land-grabs-illegal-palm-oil-and-endangered-orangutans Shelf Number: 147930 Keywords: Environmental CrimesIllegal Land GrabsIllegal Palm OilIllegal ProductsOffences Against the EnvironmentWildlife Crime |
Author: Baker, James Title: Pollution in the Ocean: Everything Flows Downhill Summary: In May 2009, the Aquarium brought together a group of leading marine scientists, informal educators, communicators, exhibit designers, and public policy experts to identify and explore major ocean issues and to develop documents and strategies to engage the public in these issues. Support for the conference was provided by NOAA, NSF, Southern California Edison, the Marine Conservation Research Institute of the Aquarium of the Pacific, Kings Seafood, and Santa Monica Seafood. The first four reports - (1) Coastal Hazards, (2) Ecosystems and Fisheries, (3) Critical Condition: Ocean Health and Human Health, and (4) Pollution-are based very loosely on booklets in the National Academies Ocean Science Series which can be found at http://dels.nas.edu/osb. Other reports based upon the conference will be added to this Aquarium of the Pacific website. Details: S.L.: 2009. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/images/mcri_uploads/Pollution-Ocean.pdf Year: 2009 Country: International URL: http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/mcri/info/pollution_in_the_ocean_everything_flows_downhill/forums Shelf Number: 155478 Keywords: Environmental Crime Green CriminologyIllegal Dumping Illegal WasteMarine PollutionOffences Against the Environment Pollution |
Author: Lundgren, Karin Title: The Global Impact of E-Waste: Addressing the Challenge Summary: Executive Summary Electrical and electronic waste (e-waste) is currently the largest growing waste stream. It is hazardous, complex and expensive to treat in an environmentally sound manner, and there is a general lack of legislation or enforcement surrounding it. Today, most e-waste is being discarded in the general waste stream. Of the e-waste in developed countries that is sent for recycling, 80 per cent ends up being shipped (often illegally) to developing countries such as China, India, Ghana and Nigeria for recycling. Within the informal economy of such countries, it is recycled for its many valuable materials by recyclers using rudimentary techniques. Such globalization of e-waste has adverse environmental and health implications. Furthermore, developing countries are shouldering a disproportionate burden of a global problem without having the technology to deal with it. In addition, developing countries themselves are increasingly generating significant quantities of e-waste. This paper explores the volumes, sources and flows of e-waste, the risks it poses to e-waste workers and the environment, occupational safety and health (OSH) issues, labour issues and regulatory frameworks, and links this growing global problem with the International Labour Organisation (ILO)'s current and future work. It is clear that the future of e-waste management depends not only on the effectiveness of local government authorities working with the operators of recycling services but also on community participation, together with national, regional and global initiatives. The solution to the e-waste problem is not simply the banning of transboundary movements of e-waste, as domestic generation accounts for a significant proportion of e-waste in all countries. Fundamental to a sustainable solution will be tackling the fact that current practices and the illegal trade provide economic stimulus. It is important to recognize local and regional contexts and the social implications of the issue; implementing a high-tech, capital-intensive recycling process will not be appropriate in every country or region. Effective regulation must be combined with incentives for recyclers in the informal sector not to engage in destructive processes. Cheap, safe and simple processing methods for introduction into the informal sector are currently lacking; hence, it is necessary to create a financial incentive for recyclers operating in the informal sector to deliver recovered parts to central collection sites rather than process them themselves. Multidisciplinary solutions are vital in addition to technical solutions, as is addressing the underlying social inequities inherent in the e-waste business. Recycling operations in the informal sector of the economy enable employment for hundreds of thousands of people in poverty. A possible entry point to address their negative impacts is to address occupational risks, targeting poverty as the root cause of hazardous work and, in the process, developing decent working conditions. More generally, solutions to the global e-waste problem involve awareness-raising among both consumers and e-waste recyclers in the informal economy, integration of the informal sector with the formal, creating green jobs, enforcing legislation and labour standards, and eliminating practices which are harmful to human health and the environment. It is also imperative to target electrical and electronics manufacturers by introducing Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation and encouraging initial designs to be green, long lived, upgradeable and built for recycling. In considering solutions to the e-waste problem, this paper focuses on worker protection through appropriate legislation, formalization of the informal recycling sector and the opportunities represented by cooperative organization of e-waste workers. Details: Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Office, 2012. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: https://www.ilo.org/sector/Resources/publications/WCMS_196105/lang--en/index.htm Year: 2012 Country: International URL: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---sector/documents/publication/wcms_196105.pdf Shelf Number: 155482 Keywords: E-WasteElectrical WasteElectronic WasteEnvironmental CrimesGreen CriminologyOffences Against the EnvironmentPollution |
Author: Basel Action Network Title: The Summary: INTRODUCTION The BAN e-Trash Transparency Project In 2016, BAN published its groundbreaking reports entitled "Disconnect: Goodwill and Dell, Exporting the Public's E-Waste to Developing Countries," (May) and "Scam Recycling: e-Dumping on Asia by US Recyclers," (September). These reports followed several years of research, development and implementation of GPS/cell phone-based tracking technology. They involved placing 205 different GPS tracking devices inside of old printers, LCD, and CRT monitors, delivering them to US charities, retailers and recyclers and following them to their endpoints across the globe. Such research activities and subsequent publication of the results can be said to be a form of citizen enforcement because the trade of hazardous wastes, including most electronic waste, to developing countries from developed countries is illegal under international norms (Basel Convention) and under laws of most developed countries. Certainly, under the rules of the Basel Convention, it is illegal for developing countries to import hazardous e-wastes from the United States. 96% of the exports revealed by BAN 's 2016 study were deemed as likely illegal. The study as summarized in "Scam Recycling" witnessed 34% of the 205 deployments moving offshore with 31% of the total going to developing countries. Looking at those that were exported only 93% of the exports went to developing countries. 87% to Asia, 3% to Africa and 1% to the Middle East, and 1% to the Latin America/Caribbean region. 7% moved to the developed countries of Mexico and Canada. Most of the exports ended up in Hong Kong's rural northern area called New Territories. BAN's investigators visited GPS locations where the trackers ended up and found hundreds of e-waste junkyards in New Territories where the hazardous equipment is unfortunately smashed by hand, exposing workers to dangerous mercury laden dust, vapors and hazardous toners. Much of the e-waste was simply dumped in fields and wastelands. Of the 152 trackers delivered directly to recyclers and not to charities, 40% were exported significantly higher than the 15% rate for the 53 trackers delivered to charities or retailers. In the course of the entire pathways (chains) of the 205 tracker movements, the trackers passed through the hands of 168 different identifiable US recyclers. Of these companies, over 45% were part of a movement that went offshore (export chain). That study revealed also that R2 certified recyclers had a higher-than-average export rate. Uncertified recyclers had a lower-than-average export rate, and e-Stewards Certified Recyclers had the lowest average export rate of all three categories. With respect to the Certifications held by the "last holder" (apparent exporter), R2 exceeded e-Stewards 9-1. Finally, the report reveals the false claims and "green washing" of many of the companies that claim that they never would allow the public's waste electronics to be exported. The complete reports and media generated from them, including the PBS Newshour video segment that followed BAN to Hong Kong, can be found on our website's Trash Transparency Project pages. These reports include in detail, a full disclosure of the study findings including lists of all companies involved, the environmental harm caused, methodology, conclusions, and recommendations. BAN's work tracking e-waste in the United States and around the world with GPS trackers continues. BAN's ethical recycling certification program known as e-Stewards now uses trackers routinely to verify performance of the trade requirements in the standard (e.g. no export of hazardous e-waste to developing countries). At the same time, BAN continues to deploy trackers across North America to reveal for consumers and lawmakers alike, the illegal and/or unethical trade practices of some recyclers. It is our intention to continue to report on these trackers. The most recent deployment involved 60 trackers deployed in Texas, Georgia, and Florida in the US. 31 of these were R2 Certified (52%), 4 were both e-Stewards and R2 (6.66%), 1 was eStewards only (1.67 percent), and 24 were uncertified (40%). On September 6 of 2017, the first update of new tracker findings since our September 15, 2016 report was published. In that report we revealed 16 more chains of export (15 LCD monitors and one printer) involving 7 target recycling companies. 5 of these were in California, one in Ohio and one in Texas. An additional two companies (Skill Office Machines and VKL Exports) were also identified. Details: Seattle, Washington: Basel Action Network, 2017. 18p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: http://wiki.ban.org/images/1/13/TheScamRecyclingContinuesUpdate_1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: International URL: https://www.ban.org/trash-transparency Shelf Number: 155487 Keywords: E-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Green CriminologyHazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offences Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment WEEE |
Author: Palmer, Hayley Title: Illegal Export of e-Waste from Australia: A Story Told by GPS Trackers Summary: In September and October of 2017 BAN deployed 35 pieces of non-functional electronic waste equipment including CRT monitors, LCD monitors and printers with GPS trackers imbedded within them across Australia. All of the equipment qualified under the Basel Convention as hazardous waste. 14 units of equipment were deployed in the Brisbane area, 13 in the Sydney area, 3 in Adelaide, and 5 in Perth. Out of these 35 trackers 2 were exported (5.71%), 1 moved to a seaport and was likely exported (2.86%), 11 moved to a Recycler (31.4%), 4 moved to a landfill (11.4%), 7 never moved, (20%), 6 had no signal after delivery (17.1%) and 2 moved to an unknown location (5.71%). 2 are still reporting regularly and the rest have gone quiet, meaning they could be bulldozed into a landfill, buried deep in a warehouse, or shredded or disassembled by a recycler. Exports from OfficeWorks -- Three of the devices appear to have been exported, with two definitely going to Hong Kong's New Territories area. Both of these were LCDs monitors from the Brisbane area and one of these was later re-exported to an e-waste processing facility in Thailand. The two exported LCDs were deployed at different OfficeWorks stores in the Brisbane area. Officeworks' "Bring I.T Back" as a "Drop Zone" location is an official Australian Government public drop-off location that the public is encouraged to use for their electronic recycling. Officeworks, according to their website, considers itself to be a very sustainable company. The third device, another LCD left at Endeavor Foundation Industries, another government approved e-waste dropoff location, last signaled at a container dock at the port of Brisbane and was likely exported- though it has yet to signal again. Site Visits BAN traveled to the two locations in Asia where the two exported LCDs ended up. Both of these, without showing any other stopping points after their respective OfficeWorks deliveries, were joined in one intermodal container and shipped to the Ping Che area of New Territories, Hong Kong. Ping Che is an infamous area of Hong Kong for e-waste trafficking where most commonly undocumented laborers are involved in the crude and harmful breakdown of the equipment, often exposing them to dangerous toner dust, and, in the case of LCDs -- the toxic metal mercury. However, when we visited the location a few months after the arrival of the LCDs, there was no trace of e-waste in the facility - apparently, it had been cleaned out and one of the tracked devices stopped signaling. The other one, however, we visited its second location in Thailand. In Thailand that LCD monitor arrived at a location that was involved in crude smelting of circuit boards, creating deadly dioxins and furans, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Illegal Exportation There can be little doubt that these exports were illegal due to the fact that all three countries concerned, Australia, China (including Hong Kong), and Thailand are all parties to the Basel Convention. Due to the presence of mercury in the backlights of these LCD monitors and the lead in the circuit boards of the monitors, and because the equipment was rendered non-functional, the equipment was clearly a hazardous waste under the definitions of the Basel Convention. As such, all exports would require that they be notified prior to export by the government of Australia and consented to by the initially receiving government of Hong Kong. Thailand, in recent weeks, has made it abundantly clear that they are not happy receiving e-waste imported illegally en masse to primitive processing facilities that have been springing up all over their territory following China's own importation ban (see Current Trends in the e-Waste Trade). Details: Seattle, Washington: Basel Action Network, 2018. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: http://wiki.ban.org/images/7/7c/Australian_e-Waste_Report_-_2018.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://www.ban.org/trash-transparency Shelf Number: 155489 Keywords: AustraliaE-Waste Electronic Waste Environmental Crime Green CriminologyHazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Waste Offences Against the Environment Pollution Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment WEEE |
Author: Hammerle, Mara Title: Stopping the Spread: The Issue of Death by Plastic in Commonwealth Marine Areas and the Great Barrier Reef Summary: Plastic pollution, both land-based and in our oceans, is one of the most significant environmental challenges the world faces. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has even called it a critical problem, comparable to climate change. While plastic pollution is not the only type of marine litter, it is the most abundant form and poses a worldwide threat to marine environments. Mass production of plastic materials, coupled with inefficient disposal systems and widespread limited environmental awareness, exacerbate the issue. Marine litter is "any persistent, manufactured or processed solid material discarded, disposed of, or abandoned in, the marine and coastal environment". It is found across the planet, including in remote regions far from civilisation - such as Antarctica, remote mountain-tops and the deep-sea ocean floor. In marine environments, the litter accumulates in high densities posing detrimental consequences for marine life. Many species either accidentally swallow or become entangled in the litter, resulting in injury and sometimes death. It also has economic consequences, for example by limiting fishery productivity. There is an urgent need to address marine litter both through the strengthening of existing strategies and through new innovations and technology. As marine litter is rooted in production and consumption patterns and the disposal and management of waste, it is these areas where interventions are necessary. The aim of the report is to look at what could be done at the federal level to reduce marine litter in our oceans by examining lessons from international case studies. The strategies are categorised in five themes: prevention (preventing the production of plastic and other litter in the first place), mitigation (minimising the amount of litter entering water sources), removal (removing litter from marine environments), education (educating the public and other key stakeholders) and research (understanding the extent and impact of marine litter). It is however important that the potential negative impacts of any policy recommendations are assessed before adoption. However, the Constitution prescribes no specific environmental regulatory powers to the Federal Government and those powers that the Federal Government does have through the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 are limited and weak. As stressed by numerous environmental organisations, including the Boomerang Alliance, Places You Love and Environmental Defenders Offices, there is an urgent need for national leadership both on marine litter and on environmental matters more generally. Details: Queensland, Australia: McKell Institute, 2018. 29p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: https://mckellinstitute.org.au/app/uploads/Stopping-the-Spread-1.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://apo.org.au/node/204446 Shelf Number: 155492 Keywords: Australia Environmental Crime Green CriminologyHazardous Waste Marine LitterMarine Pollution Offences Against the Environment Plastic PollutionPolluted Oceans |
Author: Macfadyen, Graeme Title: Abandoned, Lost or Otherwise Discarded Fishing Gear Summary: Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear (ALDFG) is a problem that is increasingly of concern. Various United Nations General Assembly resolutions now provide a mandate for, and indeed require, action to reduce ALDFG and marine debris in general. Consequently, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) entered into an agreement to carry out a study in relation to ALDFG in order to raise awareness of the extent of the problem and to recommend action to mitigate the problem of ALDFG by flag states, regional fisheries management bodies and organizations, and international organizations, such as UNEP, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and FAO. This report reviews the magnitude and composition of ALDFG, and while noting that information is not comprehensive and does not allow for any global estimates, suggests that gillnets and fishing traps/pots may be the most common type of ALDFG, although netting fragments may also be common in some locations. The impacts of ALDFG are also considered and include: continued catching of target and non-target species (such as turtles, seabirds and marine mammals); alterations to the benthic environment; navigational hazards; beach debris/litter; introduction of synthetic material into the marine food web; introduction of alien species transported by ALDFG; and a variety of costs related to clean-up operations and impacts on business activities. In general, gillnets and pots/traps are most likely to "ghost fish" while other gear, such as trawls and longlines, are more likely to cause entanglement of marine organisms, including protected species, and habitat damage. The factors which cause fishing gear to be abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded are numerous and include: adverse weather; operational fishing factors including the cost of gear retrieval; gear conflicts; illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing; vandalism/theft; and access to and cost and availability of shoreside collection facilities. Weather, operational fishing factors and gear conflicts are probably the most significant factors, but the causes of ALDFG accumulation are poorly documented and not well understood. A detailed understanding of why gear is abandoned, lost or discarded is needed when designing and tailoring effective measures to reduce ALDFG in particular locations. A variety of measures are currently in place to reduce ALDFG, and these are profiled in this report. They include those which are preventative or ex-ante, and those which are curative or ex-post. Evidence suggests that while both are important, much of the emphasis to date has been placed on curative measures such as gear retrieval programmes and clean-up of beach litter, while preventative measures may generally be more cost-effective in reducing ALDFG debris and its impacts. This report concludes with a number of recommendations for future action to reduce ALDFG debris, be it on a mandatory or voluntary basis. It also considers at what scale and which stakeholders (e.g. international organizations, national government, the private sector, research institutions) might be best placed to address the wide range of possible measures to reduce the amount of ALDFG debris. Details: Rome, Italy: United Nations Environment Programme, 2009. 117p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2019 at: http://www.fao.org/3/i0620e/i0620e00.htm Year: 2009 Country: International URL: http://www.fao.org/3/i0620e/i0620e00.htm#Contents Shelf Number: 155493 Keywords: Crimes Against the EnvironmentEnvironmental Crime Fishing NetsGreen CriminologyHazardous Waste Illegal Dumping Illegal Unregulated and Unreported FishingIUU FishingMarine PollutionOceans Pollution Offences Against the Environment Pollution |
Author: Piotrowski, Matt Title: Nearing the Tipping Point: Drivers of Deforestation in the Amazon Region Summary: The largest tropical rainforest on the planet, the Amazon plays a critical role as a storehouse of carbon and mediator of the global water cycle and holds a greater share of the world's known biodiversity than any other ecosystem. However, according to "Nearing the Tipping Point: Drivers of Deforestation in the Amazon Region," a new report by the Inter-American Dialogue in collaboration with the Andes Amazon Fund, unchecked development is placing the Amazon under threat, pushing deforestation rates to near-record levels throughout the region. The main causes of deforestation vary between countries-from cattle ranching and soy production to infrastructure development, land grabbing, and illegal gold mining, the report finds. A lack of oversight-often due to inadequate resources for environmental regulation-is a pervasive challenge in Amazonian countries, and signs suggest this problem is only growing. In his first months in office, Brazil's president, Jair Bolsonaro, reduced the already strained budgets of national environmental and indigenous offices. In Colombia, the peace agreement with the FARC created a vacuum of governability now occupied by illegal armed groups, resulting in land grabbing. Details: Washington, DC: Inter-American Dialogue, 2019. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 16, 2019 at: https://www.thedialogue.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Nearing-the-Tipping-Point-FINAL-3.pdf Year: 2019 Country: South America URL: https://www.thedialogue.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Nearing-the-Tipping-Point-FINAL-3.pdf Shelf Number: 155878 Keywords: Deforestation Environmental Crime Environmental Protection Green Criminology Illegal Mining Land Grabbing Offences Against the Environment |
Author: Beasley Associates Title: Tip of the Binberg: Exploring the Full Cost of Waste Crime in Greater Manchester Summary: Beasley Associates and RGR were commissioned by Dsposal, supported by the GC Business Growth Hub, to deliver a study on waste crime in Greater Manchester with a focus on flytipping. The research assessed the costs of waste crime in the region, considered why and how waste crime happens, analysed public awareness of their legal duties with waste and identified opportunities to intervene, recognising that local authorities, businesses and communities are tackling the challenge and building momentum for their efforts. Fly-tipping is a significant and persistent problem in Greater Manchester, with local authorities reporting nearly 53,000 separate incidents in 2016/17 - 144 incidents for every single day of the year, producing an estimated average of nearly 20,000 tonnes of illegally dumped waste that year. This endemic illegal activity has a notable negative effect on the Greater Manchester economy. It cost the councils of Greater Manchester nearly 4.9 million pounds in 2016/17 in clearance and enforcement costs, with the revenue from fines and Fixed Penalty Notices barely making a dent in this cost. In addition, a conservative average estimate of around 750,000 pounds represents income lost by not recycling these materials and further to this, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs loses out on VAT and Income Tax on an element of the estimated 3 million pounds a year generated in cash sales by 'man and a van' operators providing waste clearance services in and around Greater Manchester. The circumstances in which this persistent but relatively low-level waste crime breeds are encouraged by the prioritisation by the public of low cost and convenience when choosing waste clearance services (as evidenced by the research commissioned from YouGov), rather than compliance with the public's Duty of Care. Awareness of public legal obligations on waste is low and confused and this is capitalised upon by several 'man and van' waste clearance operators who obfuscate even the best-intentioned members of the public trying to 'do the right thing' and deal with their waste properly and legally. The councils of Greater Manchester are tackling the challenge of fly-tipping and have achieved some success despite the severe restrictions on the resources available to them and the limited effect so far of national campaigns to raise awareness of legal responsibilities on waste for business and householders alike. To make further headway in tackling fly-tipping across Greater Manchester requires all those with an interest to collaborate and build on the substantial efforts already being made in the face of an endemic problem. We have offered some broad recommendations for further consideration. a) Highlight the cost of fly-tipping clearance in any new communications campaigns, as this is money that could be better spent on other local authority services. This approach of using hard hitting financial facts does seem to resonate and find traction with residents who may be less receptive to environmental campaigns. b) Seek to recover more of the costs of clearance through fines and enforcement activities, which presently contribute only modestly towards the total costs. This will require a greater investment in enforcement activities, however it is possible for a sound business case to be developed based on future cost avoidance. c) Devise new communications to localise messages about the importance of staying within the law and being aware of Carriers' Licences and Waste Transfer Notes. This could include targeted social and print media advertising, alongside the waste clearance adverts so that they have prominence in juxtaposition to the classified advertisements and social media pages. d) Focus general communications activity on the need for local action, and highlight distinctive local issues such as back alleys, utilising the existing good practice work of agencies such as Keep Britain Tidy and well developed local campaigns such as Hertfordshire Waste Partnership's Fly-Tipping Campaign. e) Engage the Environment Agency (EA) by consistently supporting them with intelligence on illegal operators, including reporting advertisers erroneously using the EA logo to gain credibility for their service. f) Simplify how householders and businesses can access quality assured information about legal, compliant collectors and waste managers. This could involve some form of validation service for collectors and operators, involving a new collaboration between the GMCA, the ten local district authorities of Greater Manchester, the Environment Agency, representative trade bodies such as the ESA and the Chartered Institution of Wastes Management, utilising the expertise of service providers such as Disposal. g) Further research should be commissioned which investigates the true level of knowledge and understanding amongst businesses about their duty of care and explores their main drivers in terms of selecting disposal services. This will provide evidence to judge whether there is any parity between the householder view and local businesses and help provide focus for any subsequent targeted campaign work. Details: Manchester, England: Beasley Associates & Ray Georgeson Resources for Disposal & GC Business Growth Hub, 2018. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 28, 2019 at: https://ciwm-journal.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Tip-of-the-Binberg-Full-Report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://dsposal.uk/articles/tip-of-the-binberg/ Shelf Number: 156039 Keywords: Environmental CrimeFly-tippingIllegal DumpingIllegal WasteOffences Against the EnvironmentWaste Management |