But how do legislators and regulators determine the risk associated with a particular activity? And how is their process for evaluating environmental risk different from that of the regulated community?
The legislators and regulators strictly adhere to existing laws and regulations to determine the risk associated with a particular activity. They evaluate situations and measure the extent of harm which will be inflicted on the community as a whole. Any activity that is said to introduce detrimental effects to the environment is considered harmful and illegal if it goes against environmental laws. The process used by legislators and regulators has more scrutiny and careful examination, and it’s also diverse and attentive to detail.
In enacting laws and regulations, legislators and environmental regulators tend to focus primarily on the first element of risk evaluation—what is the likelihood that something will go wrong?
In most occasions, legislators and environmental regulators fail to identify the undesirable events or even the things that are likely to go wrong and then examine the potential impacts associated with such activities. There is the need always to ensure that the root causes of risks are identified since this is a critical success factor (Coglianese & Lazer, 2003). There are many incidences where risk identification aims at preventing omissions by looking at symptoms ignoring the root causes. There is a high likelihood that something will go wrong because treating the symptoms offers an appealing appearance of the activity but fail to eliminate the root causes of the problem. Risk screening is one of the approaches that can be used to identify the root causes of the existing problem.
But do these failures also constitute callous disregard for consequences? Are these environmental crimes?
In the past, the community has suffered as a result of the failure to focus on the first element of risk evaluation. Massive deaths and destruction of property have been witnessed. Such incidences demonstrate that the legislators and environmental regulators have not succeeded in coming up with a proper plan that will prevent the disastrous results of such activities. It is, therefore, sensible to conclude that these scenarios are perfect examples of environmental crimes since no person deserves to suffer from environmental hazards influenced by human factors.
References
Coglianese, C., & Lazer, D. (2003). Management‐based regulation: Prescribing private management to achieve public goals. Law & Society Review, 37(4), 691-730.
