🚀 go-pugleaf

--------------385C19AD919E8ACC96BF0DBD
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Traditional "right-to-know" initiatives, aimed at providing information
about industrial environmental risks to the public, often fail to
enhance environmental safety, according to a pair of studies by Reason
Public Policy Institute (RPPI), a national nonprofit research and
education organization specializing in environmental policy. In the
series, Environmental Information: The Toxics Release Inventory,
Stakeholder Participation, and the Right to Know, RPPI argues that these
laws provide a distorted picture of public health and that simply
dictating more comprehensive disclosure will do little to enhance
environmental safety.

 "Right-to-know laws treat the use of certain chemicals, like N-hexane,
as bad, even when there is no public exposure to significant risk. In
doing so, they stray from the goal of reduced environmental risk,"
stated Lynn Scarlett, executive director of RPPI and one of the authors
of the series. "These rules also do not differentiate between a good
environmental steward and an environmental bandit."

Environmental Information, written by Alexander Volokh, Kenneth Green,
D. Env., and Lynn Scarlett, argues that right-to-know laws fail to
distinguish safe and environmentally sensitive chemical use from
irresponsible or dangerous use. In doing so, they place the same,
inherently punitive burdens on an environmentally friendly company as
one that skirts environmental rules. These rules also fail to answer the
fundamental question of whether reducing the use of certain chemicals
will improve social well-being, given the benefits of the products they
make possible, products like safety glass, fireproof clothing, and
pharmaceuticals.

"Environmental regulation should maximize the amount of environmental
safety that we can provide. Providing environmental information is an
important element in that strategy and one that deserves better
implementation." Scarlett continued, "The current �gotcha� focus has
opened a Pandora�s box of environmental lawsuits and confuses chemical
use with environmental degradation. By doing so, these laws may turn
attention away from real and important problems."

In addition to offering numerous critiques of the manner in which
traditional right-to-know laws are implemented, the RPPI studies also
offer a host of innovative and nonregulatory approaches that provide
higher-value environmental information, while avoiding many of the
pitfalls associated with traditional approaches. Such examples discussed
in the studies include:

*  Environmental Performance Measures, where agencies monitor tangible
environmental results rather than mere permit statistics;
*  Private Environmental Management Systems and codes which industries
voluntarily comply with to promote increased environmental friendliness
and reduced  environmental risk;
*  "Good Neighbor policies" where companies involve the effected
communities in environmental decision making.

"Private sector innovation has always been a forerunner in the effort to
protect the environment. It is the wellspring from which much
environmental progress is drawn and one that effective environmental
regulation should encourage," concluded Scarlett.

Reason Public Policy Institute is a national, nonprofit research and
education organization that conducts academic, peer-reviewed research
into a variety of environmental policy areas and has been at the
forefront of the emerging market-based environmental movement. RPPI also
conducts research into the areas of land use and economic development,
transportation, government reform and privatization, education, and
social services. With a philosophy supporting market competition,
localized decision making, and personal responsibility, RPPI promotes
innovative and forward-looking solutions to public policy challenges.

The National Environmental Policy Institute (NEPI) of Washington, DC,
was also actively involved in the preparation of these studies,
featuring them at an Environmental Information & Management Workshop,
which was attended by environmental leaders in government, industry, and
nonprofit organizations from across the nation.


--------------385C19AD919E8ACC96BF0DBD
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<HTML>
Traditional "right-to-know" initiatives, aimed at providing information
about industrial environmental risks to the public, often fail to enhance
environmental safety, according to a pair of studies by <A HREF="http://www.rppi.org">Reason
Public Policy Institute (RPPI)</A>, a national nonprofit research and education
organization specializing in environmental policy. In the series, <A HREF="http://www.rppi.org/righttoknow.html">Environmental
Information: The Toxics Release Inventory, Stakeholder Participation, and
the Right to Know</A>, RPPI argues that these laws provide a distorted
picture of public health and that simply dictating more comprehensive disclosure
will do little to enhance environmental safety.

<P>&nbsp;"Right-to-know laws treat the use of certain chemicals, like N-hexane,
as bad, even when there is no public exposure to significant risk. In doing
so, they stray from the goal of reduced environmental risk," stated Lynn
Scarlett, executive director of RPPI and one of the authors of the series.
"These rules also do not differentiate between a good environmental steward
and an environmental bandit."

<P>Environmental Information, written by Alexander Volokh, Kenneth Green,
D. Env., and Lynn Scarlett, argues that right-to-know laws fail to distinguish
safe and environmentally sensitive chemical use from irresponsible or dangerous
use. In doing so, they place the same, inherently punitive burdens on an
environmentally friendly company as one that skirts environmental rules.
These rules also fail to answer the fundamental question of whether reducing
the use of certain chemicals will improve social well-being, given the
benefits of the products they make possible, products like safety glass,
fireproof clothing, and pharmaceuticals.

<P>"Environmental regulation should maximize the amount of environmental
safety that we can provide. Providing environmental information is an important
element in that strategy and one that deserves better implementation."
Scarlett continued, "The current �gotcha� focus has opened a Pandora�s
box of environmental lawsuits and confuses chemical use with environmental
degradation. By doing so, these laws may turn attention away from real
and important problems."

<P>In addition to offering numerous critiques of the manner in which traditional
right-to-know laws are implemented, the RPPI studies also offer a host
of innovative and nonregulatory approaches that provide higher-value environmental
information, while avoiding many of the pitfalls associated with traditional
approaches. Such examples discussed in the studies include:

<P>*&nbsp; Environmental Performance Measures, where agencies monitor tangible
environmental results rather than mere permit statistics;
<BR>*&nbsp; Private Environmental Management Systems and codes which industries
voluntarily comply with to promote increased environmental friendliness
and reduced&nbsp; environmental risk;
<BR>*&nbsp; "Good Neighbor policies" where companies involve the effected
communities in environmental decision making.

<P>"Private sector innovation has always been a forerunner in the effort
to protect the environment. It is the wellspring from which much environmental
progress is drawn and one that effective environmental regulation should
encourage," concluded Scarlett.

<P>Reason Public Policy Institute is a national, nonprofit research and
education organization that conducts academic, peer-reviewed research into
a variety of environmental policy areas and has been at the forefront of
the emerging market-based environmental movement. RPPI also conducts research
into the areas of land use and economic development, transportation, government
reform and privatization, education, and social services. With a philosophy
supporting market competition, localized decision making, and personal
responsibility, RPPI promotes innovative and forward-looking solutions
to public policy challenges.

<P>The National Environmental Policy Institute (NEPI) of Washington, DC,
was also actively involved in the preparation of these studies, featuring
them at an Environmental Information &amp; Management Workshop, which was
attended by environmental leaders in government, industry, and nonprofit
organizations from across the nation.
<BR>&nbsp;</HTML>

--------------385C19AD919E8ACC96BF0DBD--