Change of attitude vital to save environment

Change of attitude vital to save environment

By Rusdian Lubis

JAKARTA (JP): What can be gleaned from the recent list exposing the environmental sinners in Indonesia?

First, the program, dubbed Proper, diversifies environmental policy in Indonesia by modifying the traditional command and control approach. Since the promulgation of Law No. 4 on the Environment in 1982, Indonesian environmental strategy has been heavily based on the command and control approach.

Government decree no 29/1986 on Environmental Impact Assessments and various decrees concerning water pollution and industrial discharge, all regulated the establishment of environmental quality standards in Indonesia.

The government ran into major difficulties as it attempted to enforce its environmental regulations. The lack of qualified government personnel available to tackle the enormous problems made enforcement efforts harder than cleaning Augean's stables. The complexity of the legal process of bringing violators to litigation is another confounding factor.

The recent Proper list, on the other hand, is based largely on self-assessment and voluntary compliance by each industry. What needs to be changed is each industry's attitude toward the environment. They must be led from ignorance, to being aware and, ultimately, to being accountable for their actions. This must include a change in the corporate atmosphere.

In addition to conventional management strategies, corporate managers should ponder unconventional issues like compliance to environmental quality standards, preserving natural resources, and, in the extreme, not disturbing the ozone layer.

At first it might sound bombastic and cumbersome, however, with the implementation of ISO 14000 and other international standards regarding trade and the environment, as well as the rising demands for green products, a change of attitude is timely and will not go unrewarded.

Second, in issuing the list, Minister of Environment Sarwono exposed a number of environmental bad guys to the public, and by doing so attempted to revive the culture of shame which has been shamefully fading in Indonesian society. In the same vein, the Proper list is good publicity for industries which comply with the environmental regulations. This punishment and reward system is intended to be embedded in the corporate psyche.

Many expect public disclosure will ultimately induce public participation and motivate the community to become "pollution watchers". This is not baseless, since enhancing public participation is one of many aspects stated in Law Number 4/1982. Now that the bad guys are exposed, excessive community reaction must also be anticipated and controlled.

Can the Proper program be effective as a non-regulatory environmental strategy? It depends. As the initiator, the Environmental Impact Management Agency should maintain a strong commitment to improve the program. Many technical issues regarding the ranking criteria and the indicators used to measure performance need to be clarified.

One NGO member suggested that the criteria used in Proper is restricted; that it should include socioeconomic indicators as well as other qualitative indicators.

In my view, this would make the criteria fuzzy and complicated because socioeconomic criteria is notoriously difficult to measure. Although it is difficult to disentangle environmental and human rights issues, the latter should be handled by the National Commission for Human Rights.

The Proper list should compiled with only measurable and scientifically proven indicators. More transparent information regarding the choice of indicators, the selection of criteria and the ranking system used for the list would help greatly. The best way to gain public support undoubtedly lies in communicating with the public and the NGOs. Now that the environmental movement is also a social movement, government agencies can not work in isolation to achieve their collective goals.

Based on the U.S.-Environmental Protection Agency's experience with the Toxic Release Inventory-Superfund project, a voluntary compliance program will not work well in all situations. A regulatory base and clearly defined standards, complemented by a qualified command and control approach, is needed. Many businesses lack the initiative and the means to voluntarily follow the environmental regulations. What they need is gentle prodding.

If properly enforced, a modified command and control policy will effectively deter Indonesian violators and will enhance the government's image.

Dr. Rusdian Lubis is an economist and environmental policy analyst. He lectures at the graduate schools of Hasanuddin University in Ujungpandang and the University of Indonesia in Jakarta.