Not to Compare, But: Effective Environmental Policies to Inspire Philippine Legislation
The Philippines has yet to submit its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) to the UNFCCC, which is due for an update in next year’s COP26. Given the lack of activity in sustainability and environment-related bills, the Philippines can use a little prodding to update its laws in this area to include in the NDC. Strictly speaking, bills submitted for consideration to the Congress are rarely novel and are usually inspired by laws already enacted in other jurisdictions — this is one of the applications of comparative law.
We’ve listed some recent notable environmental policies in the world and explain how they can inspire the 18th Congress of the Philippines.
1. New Zealand: The Wellbeing Budget of 2019
New Zealand has changed the way that it has developed its most recent national budget. The Wellbeing Budget of 2019 is founded on the realization that a high standard of living is not necessarily an effect of economic gain. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s government has chosen to prioritize the wellbeing of the community in the belief that economic gain will follow.
One of these priorities is to transform the economy by “creating opportunities for productive businesses, regions, iwi, and others to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy.”
Under this priority, the government has pledged to help “farmers with the climate change challenge by investing in scientific research,” and encourage “sustainable land use with a $229m package.” (see p.6 of the Wellbeing Budget) With the $229.2 million package, the government will be investing in projects to support farmers and growers to ensure they have the tools to adapt to climate change.
The Philippine government would be wise to follow suit, given that agriculture is one of the key sectors in the country and is also highly vulnerable and most directly hit by climate change impacts. Instead of prioritizing it, however, the budget for the Department of Agriculture in 2019 was decreased by 1.7% from 2018. The proposed budget for 2020 increases the budget by 14.3%, but it prioritizes programs that give subsidies to farmers rather than adaptation and climate education programs.
2. European Union: Right to Repair Laws and New Waste Laws
The European Union (EU) has adopted right to repair laws and new waste laws, both of which stem from the Declaration By The Commission On A Policy Framework For The Circular Economy, which lines up with Sustainable Development Goal 12 (Sustainable Consumption and Production). The declaration includes the following, among others:
· A monitoring framework and development of a footprint indicator for products and organization;
· Eco-design working plan, wherein the government incentivizes the development of an environmentally-friendly design for products;
· In the context of European Strategy for Plastics in the Circular Economy, an integrated approach to address the micro-plastics issue through preventive actions, such as:
o Improving the economics and quality of plastics recycling through design and innovation, making plastic products easier to recycle
o Expanding and improving separate collection of plastic waste
o Modernizing the EU’s sorting and recycling capacity
o Creating a market for recycled & renewable plastics
o Requiring product design and marking
Right to Repair Laws
Europeans no longer have to worry about the short-term warranty of their appliances. From 2021 onwards, companies have to supply 10 years’ worth of spare parts for washing machines, dishwashers, refrigerators, and lighting appliances.
Additionally, the EU EcoDesign directive requires appliances to be more energy efficient, and ratings for energy efficiency are to be updated.
New Waste Laws
The EU has also adopted new waste laws to contribute to its greater efforts to achieve systematic circular economy — EU countries have until July 2020 to pass domestic legislation that corresponds to these laws.
The laws set the following targets:
· Recycle at least 55% of municipal waste by 2025, 60% by 2030 and 65% by 2035;
· A 10% cap on landfill by 2035;
· Mandatory separate collection of biowaste and stricter schemes to make producers pay for the collection of key recyclables (producer responsibility);
· Economic incentives for reuse, deposit-return schemes, food donations and the phase-out of subsidies that promote waste
Two countries which have already taken the lead are France and Italy. France’s law ‘ORPLAST’ allows for subsidies for companies (from large corporations to small startups) to use recycled plastic and to research new ways of using it. Italy’s new rules on public procurement, on the other hand, mandate a minimum environmentally-sound criteria in public procurement activities.
The Philippines is one of the top plastic polluters in the world, and the government can change this by enacting similar frameworks for recycling and making it easy for consumers to repair instead of discard. According to Zero Waste global network GAIA:
[T]he national government [should] implement a national policy that will regulate the use of plastic bags for primary and secondary packaging. This national policy should contain provisions that:
Prohibit the free use and distribution of plastic bags in the entire country, including socalled “oxo-degradable,” “biodegradable,” and “compostable” bags;
Implement a comprehensive process of consultation with stakeholders for a gradual phase-out of disposable bags, with the aim of allowing concerned industries and stakeholders to find viable reusable alternatives. Ideally, this process should be implemented not longer than a year to prevent further pollution; and
Encourage the creation of alternative delivery systems and alternative and/or reusable packaging that will promote the development of local enterprises, and support or promote local and indigenous practices. The creation or revival of an alternative packaging industry may also be instrumental in absorbing possible job losses from banning plastic bags.
3. Canada: Clean BC
The Clean BC plan reduces climate pollution and makes clean solutions more accessible, financially available and more convenient for locals in the province of British Columbia, Canada. There are several cross-sector actions used in order to achieve these goals, as well as specific actions taken in a number of key sectors.
Through CleanBC, federal and local governments are investing in expanding rapid transit service between major locations. Within the next decade, the province will invest more than $8 billion CDs to further expand and improve transportation systems, including rapid transit lines, new SkyTrain cars in the Metro Vancouver area, new buses, exchanges and shelters across the rest of the province. BC is reviewing opportunities to have cleaner options for newer buses.
CleanBC just this year set up an active transportation strategy to support incentives and safety improvements for people walking, biking or taking other outdoor forms of active transportation. Incentives include ones for local governments and public-sector organizations to reduce the need for commuting through cars. In particular, Clean BC set up a program that makes biking the preferred, safer and most convenient option for such commuters. The government has invested millions in cycling grants and infrastructure projects to make this happen.
Obviously, each country faces the climate crisis in ways that are unique to each area, and heavily depends on funding availability. Thus, not every sector of CleanBC would be applicable or suitable for adoption in the Philippines. Still, the Philippines should consider following the lines of CleanBC’s transportation actions, as the country’s public transportation systems do not meet the demand of population. For one, more accessible transportation lines would be a great first step in the Philippines.
Making the streets safer for pedestrians to walk and bike is another viable option, but it is easier said than done. The government would have to invest millions in new infrastructure, bigger sidewalks, and roads with distinct bike lanes. Another societal factor has to do with bikers and pedestrians feeling safe to commute by bike or foot; crime rates in bigger cities may affect people using these options, even if they were more readily available. Thus, more safety improvements would need to be taken for such commuting methods to be viable.
Like any new policy, there will always be incidental effects that will impact its success early on. This is why it is key that the government anticipate the scenarios above and come up with solutions. Provinces such as BC that have already taken these programs for a test drive, failures and mistakes included, provide the Philippines with a wealth of knowledge and lessons it can learn when trying to implement something similar.
The measures that need to be taken to ensure success seem commensurate to the benefits of adopting CleanBC’s transportation actions, or a localized version thereof. Making such changes could take so many vehicles off the roads, especially in heavy-traffic areas like Metro Manila. With an approximate population of almost 105 million, the Philippines can tremendously decrease its Carbon footprint by adopting a “CleanPH” program. Less pollution would lead to an increase in air quality, which would likely encourage more and more people to commute using public transportation or venturing to places by foot or bike.
4. United States: Production Tax Credit
Unfortunately, most U.S. environmental policies that have historically been successful or still fairly new still do not work at the federal level due to the current administration. However, since renewable energy subsidies are about to expire, a new RE policy is afoot that many experts are advocating for.
Production Tax Credit
A Production Tax Credit (PTC) is a different way of approaching renewable energy. With the main goal being to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, a PTC is a federal incentive that gives financial support for the development of renewable energy projects. It rewards RE producers by allocating money based on how much a project produces. Since producers are incentivized to yield as much renewable energy as possible, there is less dependence on gas and coal power plants.
The Philippines should consider implementing a Production Tax Credit because it is much less likely to be affected by political corruption; any financial incentive is conditional upon the actual production of renewable energy. This would make on-the-ground inspections much more straightforward. So long as there is even remote oversight to make sure producers are reporting levels of production accurately , it is nearly impossible to scam the system. Furthermore, it requires a significant investment for producers even if they had the intention of fudging the numbers.
For example, someone trying to scam the system would to buy all of the equipment to install fake solar panels or construct wind turbines so those doing remote oversight could still see a structure in place. But even then, it would be very easy for those doing the oversight to see whether or not energy is coming from such a structure. Thus, it is a big investment in the first place to scam the Production Tax credit system, and not nearly as easy to do so compared with other proposals.
-
The agriculture sector is one of the most vulnerable sectors to climate change. The increasing frequency of natural… https://t.co/A6qFPqT6zp
-
RT @youth4climatePH: 𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐀𝐌𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐒𝐀𝐋𝐀𝐌𝐀𝐓, 𝐊𝐀𝐁𝐀𝐓𝐀𝐀𝐍𝐆 𝐏𝐈𝐋𝐈𝐏𝐈𝐍𝐎! Hindi man tayo nagkasama-sama sa lansangan, ating ipagpapatuloy ang laban… https://t.co/ZC7BGJXMME
-
The rehabilitation of sections of the shore along Manila Bay has made many of us wonder just what it takes to make… https://t.co/q2ZXt2rNM5
-
RT @UNBiodiversity: #BREAKING‼️ Humanity at a Crossroads: #UN’s 5th Global Biodiversity Outlook report outlines eight major transition… https://t.co/mKv3kxPjV4
-
The protection and rehabilitation of Manila has long been a "wicked problem," that no one has been able to fully un… https://t.co/0vIO0uW5rX
