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.