You are on page 1of 17

Department of Civil Engineering

Water and Environmental Management

[Industrial Environmental Management]

Student Name: SAURABH GUPTA Word Count: 4125 Submission Date: 7 May 2013

Introduction The Environmental Permit Regulations 2010 are designed to protect the environment, reduce resource use, prevent harmful emissions and discharges, and minimise waste, for certain industries that have the potential to be highly polluting. Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010 for England and Wales were introduced on 6 th April 2010 by replacing the old 2007 Regulations. A new customer can check whether for the new activity he plans to carry out requires to register an exemption or apply for an environmental Permit (Environment Agency (EA), UK) in England and Wales.

Q.1. Explain the main provisions of the regulations by applying them to a site or industry of your choice from the paper, print or oil / fuel storage sector. Ans. Paper Storage Sector: Environment Agency look after our environment in England and Wales and make it a better place for present and future generations. From 1 st April 2013, the functions carried out by the Environment Agency in Wales were taken over by a new body called Natural Resources Wales (data obtained by email from Environment Agency). Regulations for Paper, Pulp and Board Manufacturing Activities are outlined in Schedule 1, Section 6.1, Part A (1) (Environmental Permitting Regulations EPR, 2010). Environment Agency has also published Sector Guidance Note (SGN) for Paper and Pulp Activities in England and Wales; available at EA Website. An Environmental Permit is required for Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Activities and criteria for its requirement is mentioned in Schedule 1, Section 6.1 Part A (1). EPR regulations has a negative side for exempting paper industries producing less than 20 tonnes per day. These low income industry should also be regulated to reduce risks to the environment and EA should make them move towards efficient processes and update Best Available Techniques (BATs) as these industries may be 100 years old and using outdated machineries. The main operations in Pulp and Paper industry are as follows (SGN, EA): 1. Selection of raw materials 2. Preparation of fibre 3. Pulping

4. Bleaching 5. Papermaking 6. Coating Storage sector in this industry at various operation levels is considered here and is explained by applying main provisions of the EPR to reduce pollution: To ensure efficient use of raw materials and water, EPR regulation indicative BAT requires to maximise unclarified whitewater recycling by ensuring adequate whitewater storage capacity so that fresh water is not used for process make-up and ask to implement techniques to prevent deterioration of water quality during storage (SGN, EA). Optimum storage volume in process design be considered to prevent inhibiting factors.

During preparation of fibre, debarking is carried out by either wet (added water) or dry processes. This results in production of bark which has to be dewatered for energy recovery. These large quantities of waste bark are temporarily stored in bark storage and is a major cause of fugitive releases to air but is regulated under provisions of EPR. This helps in controlling localised odour from bark storage.

During the process of pulping and bleaching not much of storage is required and EPR does not provide indicative BAT for these.

Papermaking process release wastewater containing fibre, filler, chemicals and starches. EPR provides indicative BAT to minimize waste, load on the Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) and emissions to air from process of broke bleaching. Adequate storage capacity and level monitoring is to be provided for broke and whitewater tanks to minimise overflows.

EPR provisions during design and management phase and asks to provide enough storage for effluent buffer so that spills during transfer to ETP or controlled water can be prevented. There is also a provision of providing buffer storage to release stronger wastewaters and to cope with flow variability and composition. EPR requires an applicant to demonstrate how peak loads will be handled without overloading ETP in case no balancing is provided. These provisions help in controlling emissions to water. Also, sample storage is a requirement for monitoring purposes.

EPR, 2010 also regulates waste in relation to paper and cardboard. The main provision states that the waste is to be stored in a baled form and should be in a container or kept indoors. In the Table 4 of EPR 2010, limits are specified and up to 1000 tonnes may be stored outdoors only if it is in enclosure designed to prevent litter.

There are chances of negative effect on paper quality because EPR specifies a closed loop system for paper production and suggests zero discharge to the environment. EPR provides BAT and EA provides consultancy which was not available in the past, thus helping paper industries to grow and perform activities keeping pollution level at minimum.

Q.2. Select a BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) or similar rapidly growing country. Compare legislation in that country with the UKs Environmental Permit Regulations 2010 (and other relevant legislation) and critically discuss its effectiveness in meeting the above EU/UK goals.

Ans. India is one of the rapidly growing countries and is chosen for comparison with UK and its effectiveness in meeting EU/UK goals. Why India and UK? India is facing problems of pollution and resource degradation of the environment despite having employed a number of regulatory bodies and regulations, mainly because of development and industrialization. Pollution has become a big threat to the countrymen and other living species which started in the early 1960s; at the same time UK was also struggling with pollution problems and an example to cite is the infamous London smog of 1954 (Sinha, 2003). In UK, pollution control dates back to 1863 when Alkali Act and the Alkali Inspectorate was established and the UK has put in place progressive environmental policy and laws in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Whereas, in India before 1970s environmental laws were unimaginative and so ineffectual that it can be considered to be virtually non-existent. The beginning and enactment of Environmental Laws came into existence after India signed treaty in United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm in June, 1972 (Ministry of Environment and Forests, (MoEF) India). Indian Government took a major step in drafting

laws for protection and improvement of human environment only after the painful incident of Bhopal Gas Tragedy in 1984 claiming thousands of lives and making hundreds of Bhopal residents permanently disabled (Sinha, 2003).

It is worth mentioning the Honourable Supreme Court of India said in relation to the poor working of laws in India: "If the mere enactment of laws relating to the protection of the environment was to ensure a clean and pollution free environment, then India would, perhaps, be the least polluted country in the world. But, this is not so. There are stated to be over 200 Central and State statutes, which have at least some concern with environmental protection, either directly or indirectly. The plethora of such enactments has, unfortunately, not resulted in preventing environmental degradation which, on the contrary, has increased over the years" (Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India, 1996).

Environmental laws of India and UK India: Indian parliament enacted three major anti-pollution laws that deals with different aspects of environmental pollution (MoEF, India). These are as follows: Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974

The problems related to Water Pollution are addressed by four major sources of law provided by Indian Legal system and is majorly dependent on the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986 relating to water quality (Sinha, 2003).

Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

Air pollution control is important from the view of public health hazards. In most of Indian cities, quality of air has deteriorated significantly over the decades and suspended particulate matter (SPM) levels are 3-5 times higher than the acceptable limit set by World Health Organisation (WHO) (Sinha, 2003).

Air Act operates in tandem with Environment Protection Act (EPA), 1986.

Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

This act is important and is umbrella legislation that authorises Central Government of India to frame and establish standards for the environment quality and for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants from any source. Environment Protection Rules are published by the Ministry of Environment and Forests that establish general and industry based standards for certain types of effluent discharge.

This Act provisions the Central Government to issue direct orders for the protection of Environment. Section 24 of EPA, 1986 states that provisions, rules and orders of this Act would override any other law in India (EPA MoEF, 1986).

There are other few mentionable Acts and are briefly described below (Sinha, 2003): The National Environment Appellate Authority Act 1997 This Act made Union Government of India to establish National Environment Appellate Authority to hear appeal against orders granting environmental clearance in designated areas where any industrial activity is prohibited by regulations made under the EPA, 1986. The Public Liability Insurance Act 1991 This Act is aimed at providing relief to the victims of any accident (involving hazardous substances) and makes owner to compensate the victims irrespective of any negligence or fault on their part. The National Environment Tribunal Act 1995 This Act indulge central government to set up a national tribunal at New Delhi. This body will entertain applications for compensation in case of accidents.

UK Laws: In England and Wales, a significant proportion of environmental legislation originates from the European Union Law and is directly implemented or applicable through national legislation. Environmental regulatory framework is divided into regimes and the principal environmental regimes (Stansfield and Hardacre, 2012) are: Environmental Permitting Regime (EPR)

EPR came into force on 6th of April, 2008 combining Pollution Prevention and Control (PPC) regime and waste management (WM) licensing. This automatically converted PPC permits and WM licences into Environmental Permits (EPs). It was on 6 th April, 2010 when radioactive substances registration and authorisation, water discharge activities and groundwater discharge activities were also brought under the EPR regime and old consents were converted into EPs. Environment Agency generally regulates Environmental Permits although Local Authority (LA) regulates some less polluting activities such as Part A (2) and B installations (Stansfield and Hardacre, 2012). Water

Groundwater discharge activities and Water discharge activities are permitted through the EPR. Waste (aspects not dealt under EPR)

Waste management activities are also regulated under the EPR and Environment Agency is always the regulator even if the waste operation is a Part A (2) or Part B installation. Contaminated land

Legislation for clean-up of contaminated land overlaps between Environment Protection Act 1990 and the Environment Damage Regulations. Conservation of nature, wildlife and habitats

Environmental impact assessments (EIAs)

There is a need of submitting Environmental Statement (ES) with an application for seeking planning permission or development consent for development activities that requires an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to be carried out under the EIA Regulations (2011 in England and Wales) as set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2. Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR), 2010 (as amended in 2011 and 2012): In England and Wales, EPR regulations replaced and revoked the previously amended 2007 regulations combining several different permitting regimes into one set of regulations and it changed the way in which for example, waste disposal activities is demonstrated in relation to its technical competence. EPR regulations, 2010 for waste activities cover the following EU directives and decisions (CIWM, 2012): Landfill Directive Waste Acceptance Criteria Landfill Pre-Treatment Waste Framework Directive (2006/12/EC) Waste Framework Directive (exemptions) Waste Incineration Directive Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive

Law making and regulating bodies in India and UK: In India, Ministry of Environment and Forest under Government of India is responsible for evolving policies and laws in relation to the protection of Environment and Forests. However, there are autonomous State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) in different states that are responsible for the enforcement of various environmental laws of air, water, waste etc. Central Pollution Control Board is an autonomous body that advises Government of India on environmental matters and helps SPCBs in enforcing environmental regulations (Sinha, 2003). Whereas, in the UK at the central government level the Department of Environment, Transport and Regions is reorganised into the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Government for England and Wales in the year 1991 announced creation of a unified authority for the protection of environment and the Environment Act, 1995 established the Environment Agency (EA) that became operational in April 1996 (Sinha, 2003). EA is a corporate or an executive non-departmental body accountable to

DEFRA and the National Assembly for Wales that aims for the improvement of environment and promotes sustainable development. The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) advises the government on pollution (Sinha, 2003). In India, development planning does not come under any formal legislation and many development plans evolved at the State and District levels do not have regard to ill effects of development plans or to environmental pollution. The legislation that exists in India to control pollution is fragmented into three principal Acts as mentioned before and it gives polluter a narrow escape to discharge pollutants into air and water without any treatment, because if water pollution is to be controlled than the pollutants find their way onto land and vice versa. However, the Environment Protection Act (EPA) 1986 tried to integrate the problems by defining environment as environment includes water, air and land and the inter relationship which exists among and between water, air and land, and human beings, other living creatures, plants, microorganisms and property'. But this EPA Act, 1986 is not able to reach its logical culmination by providing a statutory mechanism to address pollution problems as environment definition is contained in the Act. Whereas in England and Wales, there is an integrated environmental permitting regime (EPR) that controls a range of activities and is efficient way of permitting environmental activities under one roof for which RCEP also argued to view environment as a whole. This holistic approach has helped UK to curb environmental degradation, which India still does not have and there is an urgent need for major reforms in laws and establishment of environment organisations to strictly adhere and enforce environmental regulations at all places. Effectiveness of Indian Environmental Regulations in meeting EU/UK goals: It is there that environment in India is deteriorating at the cost of infrastructure development and economy boosting. But on an international platform, India has signed more than 17 treaties or agreements that have a direct impact on the environment. These include: Protocol of 1978 relating to Pollution from Ships Convention for the Protection of Ozone Layer Montreal Protocol Basel Convention 1992 Convention on Climate Change 1992 Convention on Biodiversity 1992 International Tropical Timber Agreement etc.

In order to meet UK/EU environment goals which are more significant and are in favour of saving environment whilst continuing sustainable development, the leading norms in the context of India in relation to environmental laws are as follows (Sinha, 2003): Any development or activity can take place under their jurisdiction but should not cause damage to the environment nationally or of areas beyond national jurisdictions (Principle 21 of the 1972 Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment). Every state should consult with other states in case the activity may harm the environment of other country.

Monitor and publish specific environmental conditions

Polluter pay principle, Precautionary principle, EIA, Principle of Sustainable development.

A number of workshops and conferences are organised in India through EU-India cooperation in the field of Environment. On 11th May, 2009 a workshop on Market Based Mechanisms as a Tool to Address Climate Change was organised by the British High Commission and the European Union (EU). EU supports Indias efforts towards building mutual understanding on global environmental issues and to grow towards sustainable development and slow down climate change (Source: Europa Website). Indian environmental policies, laws and regulations need substantial restructuring because they are not able to mitigate environmental problems, rather it is increasing. Germany has already restructured their laws on British lines and India should follow the same. India- UK ties are strong, but significant efforts shall be made in the field of legal transplantation of laws, ideas and institutions in respect of the environmental management from the UK to India. Q.3. Given the global acceptance that resource use and pollution must be substantially reduced over coming decades, outline and justify your strategy for governments of BRIC and other rapidly growing countries to achieve these reductions. Ans.

It is known to people of different countries and their Governments who make policies, laws and regulations that reducing resource use and pollution control should be the most prioritized area to dialogue and to mitigate environmental problems that arise and affects human health and other living species on earth. But, it is found that there is a divide between the interests and obligations of developed and rapidly developing countries. Kyoto Protocol (KP) sets binding emission targets for developed nations. As, it is likely for Kyoto Protocol to enter into force, the focus is going to shift on rapidly growing countries emissions (Chandler and Shukla, 2002). My strategy for the governments in BRIC and other rapidly growing countries is to introduce policies based on market-based economic incentives in order to abate pollution and reduce resource use. This approach is better than the conventional command-and-control policies that exist in most of these nations. Economists regard this policy as the most cost-effective method to control environmental problems. The application of market-based policy has largely been accomplished in United States and Europe, and it is found that pollution reduction goals are achieved at much lower costs by implementing this approach (West and Wplverton, 2002, pp.2-40). This market-based economic incentives approach includes the following five commonly prescribed incentives (West and Wolverton, 2002): The Emissions Tax

This tax will force a firm or consumer to pay per unit of pollution emitted (external cost of its emissions). This tax shall be set in such a way that polluter pays the value of the marginal external damage (costs for worsened human health, lower property values, loss of crop yield and reduce visibility) caused by that unit of pollution. To avoid this tax, polluter have to find the cheapest way to reduce pollution and for any residual pollution, the polluter pays the tax. Thus, government earn revenues and money can be used to reduce other pollution or to reduce other taxes. Environmental Subsidies

The government shall subsidize cleaner fuel and purchase of control technology, then firms will switch from dirtier fuel to the cleaner one and adapt technology that is cheap, clean and better. Tax and Subsidy Combinations

Here, emissions tax and subsidy can be combined to achieve better pollution levels. If a firm provides a proof of the use of a cleaner form of production, subsidy can be granted. Also, the tax increases the cost of output and induces the firm to reduce use of both dirty and clean inputs. Permits

Permits allow firms to discharge up to allowable emissions and there is no need of a policy maker to measure the marginal external damages of a unit of pollution. When permits are to be provided to firms, government can auction instead of allocating them, because in allocation there is no revenue generated from the proceedings. Hybrid Instruments

The best practicable method is to combine command-and-control and market-based policies. Hybrid policies are: Combining Standards and Emissions Taxes

The setting up of standards imposes large costs on polluters, on the other hand emissions taxes restrict costs by allowing polluters to pay a tax rather than undertaking an expensive abatement. By combining these two policies, all polluters has to pay same emissions standard but is set in such a way that an average polluter does not have to pay huge abatement costs. Information as Regulation

This instrument requires firms to provide information on pollution and abatement activities to the government and public. These reporting requirements helps in minimising inefficiencies, where firms has more and better information on what and how much it pollutes than the government of public. Whereas possible this should be accompanied by spot checks to ensure that monitoring is being done properly and report results are accurate, this can be an effective form of regulation. Experiences in the United States and Europe In the U.S., Environment Protection Agency allowed new or existing plants to locate in non-attainment areas if the firm has made more than equivalent reductions in

emissions at other existing plants. In 1990, amendments were made to the Clean Air Act with a tradable permit system outlined to acid rain (West, 2002). In Europe, it was in 1970 when they designed cost covering charges to cover the cost incurred in monitoring and controlling an environment asset. By the year 2001, eight countries in the EU implemented carbon taxes which was only four in 1996. Thus, market-based instrument for controlling environmental problems is more costeffective for the government and these incentive-based policies lessen the freedom that polluter has at present in most of the rapidly growing countries in regard of environment pollution and resource use. BRIC countries should strictly implement this strategy to cope up with international obligations and in terms of reducing transboundary pollution.

Q.4 Critically discuss how such reductions can be progressed politically and socially in terms of sharing out the carbon reduction agenda. Ans. Reductions in pollution, resource use and waste generation can be achieved by implementing stringent environmental policies in BRIC and other rapidly growing countries. Whereas, it is also important to consider social and political equity in law formation and acceptance of regulations. Integrating of social equity into carbon reduction interventions shall help in increasing the quality and extent of impacts by building the societal engagement that is critical to maintain a momentum for change. Exacerbation of existing inequalities may evolve mainly because of lack of attention to social equity in low carbon initiatives and also a political back lash that will slow down the efforts to decarbonise and the potential for reaching scale (Colab, 2011). Following are the five arguments for integrating social equity in low-carbon development: Moral Imperative: Human society have an obligation in ensuring that policies and institutions formed by government do not disadvantage and exclude weaker sections.

Reach and Impact: By introduction of social equity the reach and overall impact of carbon initiatives will be extended

Political support: Any transition will burden consumers, industries and regulators that will require political support. Low-income communities have apolitical voice in case of resisting change and driving through new policies.

Mobilising hidden assets: It is largely under-utilised in low-carbon strategies and economic assets held by low-income communities such land, funds, purchasing power, social networks, skills and knowledge needs to be recognised.

System Impacts: Equitable approaches shall help in increasing the efficiency and impact of carbon reduction investment by generating new wealth and social and economic benefits.

The best method to mitigate environmental and carbon pollution is by Carbon taxing. This method was first introduced in 1992 Rio Summit and is similar to the polluter pays principle. Carbon taxing makes the polluter to pay environmental costs in the form of full social cost of their actions (Pettinger, 2013). When a particular country implements Carbon reduction agenda and increases the carbon emission cost to develop more efficient alternatives to consuming carbon emissions then other countries in the league if not sharing the same principle in their agenda will be encouraging shift of production from the former to the later country. Thus, sharing of carbon reduction agenda is a vital ingredient in overall reduction of carbon by not putting pressure on any individual country (Pettinger, 2013). Any introduction of tax leads to protest from people as it hampers their budgets but it is to be understood that carbon taxing is revenue neutral (Carbon tax can be used to reduce other taxes) and makes people pay the social cost and overcomes the excess consumption. Sharing of carbon reduction agenda between countries will surely help in collateral reduction of carbon emissions, but it is effective only when politically driven and is socially accepted. In the fourth BRICS summit in New Delhi, BRICS have unanimously rejected the EU scheme to charge airlines for carbon emissions, and China has strongly refused to pay EU carbon tax. (Source: MOEF, India). But, it was approved by all the BRICS leaders that

trade cooperation will abide to the principles of a green economy. Thus, it is required to inculcate more strategies and accept carbon reduction policies by all the rapidly growing countries to maintain harmony in economy growth but not at the cost of environmental degradation. Politically, the chances of sharing carbon reduction agenda is high as BRICs summit enters into its 5th year in 2013 and in context of society, people accept that they will abide by the policies reformed in favour of environment and is not only extending taxes on their pockets. Social behaviour towards political reality of not keeping new taxes as revenue neutral is the main dilemma of introducing carbon taxes and government shall stand on the obligations made to its countrymen on the platform of strictly enforcement of environmental laws and reduction of carbon emissions for a better and sustainable future.

Batterbury and Thomson (2013) Environmental transformations in Developing Countries. The Geographical Journal, 163 (2), Available at: [Accessed: 3 May 2013]. Blackman, A. (2013) Alternative Pollution Control Policies in Developing Countries. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 4 (2), p.234-253. Available at: [Accessed: 5 may 2013]. Breton, A. (2007) Environmental governance and decentralisation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. (2012) BRICS countries oppose EU carbon tax | BRICS-PED. [Online] Available at: [Accessed: 3 May 2013]. Chandler, W. and Hukla, P., et al. (2002) Climate change mitigation in developing countries. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Available at: [Accessed: 3 May 2013]. Civitas (1972) EU Facts: Environmental Policy. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 7 May 2013]. CIWM (2012) Waste Related Secondary Legislation Summary for England and Wales. [e-book] CIWM.[Dec'12]_181212.pdf [Accessed: 4 May 2013]. Colab (2011) Integrating Social Equity in Carbon Reduction Initiatives. [e-book] MIT: e Environmental Change Institute conference on People and Energy. Available through: [Accessed: 5 May 2013]. EA (2009) Paper and Pulp (EPR 6.01). [e-book] Bristol: Environment Agency. Available through: Environment Agency website http://a0768b4a8a31e106d8b0- [Accessed: 3rd May 2013]. (1986) THE ENVIRONMENT (PROTECTION) ACT, 1986. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 4 May 2013]. Environment Agency (2010) The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010. [ebook] Available through: [Accessed: 4 may 2013]. (2013) Environment Agency - Home. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 7 May 2013]. Eskeland, G. and Jimenez, . (1992) Policy Instruments for Pollution Control in Developing Countries. The World Bank Research Observer,, 7 (2), p.145-169. Available at: %202011%20Readings/EskelandJimenez1992.pdf [Accessed: 5 may 2013]. Harry (2012) pollution | The Modern Libertarian. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 7 May 2013]. (2013) EU-India Cooperation in the Field of Environment. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 4 May 2013]. (1996) Indian Council For Enviro-Legal ... vs Union Of India And Ors.Etc on 13 February, 1996. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 2 May 2013]. Leonard, H. (1981) Emergence of Environmental Concern in Developing Countries. A Political Perspective, Available at: collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/stanit17&div=22&id=&page= [Accessed: 4 May 2013]. (2011) Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 3 May 2013]. Pettinger, T. (2012) Carbon Tax - Pros and Cons - Economics Blog. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 7 May 2013]. (2012) PLC - Environmental law and practice in UK (England and Wales): overview. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 7 May 2013]. Priyadarshini, K. and Gupta, O. (2003) Compliance to Environmental Regulations: The Indian Context.International Journal of Business and Economics, 2 (1), p.9-26. Available at: [Accessed: 3 may 2013]. (2003) Climate Change: The Political Situation. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 7 May 2013]. SINHA, G. (2003) A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS OF INDIA AND THE UK WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THEIR ENFORCEMENT. Master of Laws. University of Birmingham. (n.d.) Benefits of Introducing EPR to an Industry - The Paper and Pulp Industry. [online] Available at: %20depth/environmental%20permitting/benefits%20of%20introducing%20epr.html [Accessed: 3 May 2013]. (2006) Vladimir Portyakov - China and the BRICS summit in Delhi - Strategic Culture Foundation - on-line journal > China and the BRICS summit in Delhi > - Strategic Culture Foundation. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 4 May 2013]. Tietenberg, T. and Folmer, H. (2002) The international yearbook of environmental and resource economics 2002/2003. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Unknown. (2013) What is the EU doing about climate change?. [online] Available at: [Accessed: 5 May 2013]. West, S. and Wolverton, A. (2002) Market-Based Policies for Pollution Control in Latin America . [ebook] Macalester: p.2-40. Available through: [Accessed: 3 May 2013].