Entire Book - Southwest Consortium for Environmental Research ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Introduction maquiladoras, to hire managers who commute across the border every day. However, at the state and national level, the potential for misunderstanding is more prevalent. Distance and lack of familiarity diminishes understanding. State and national government views of the border tend to be complicated by issues of nationalism, rather than what is best for border residents. On the U.S. side, the situation is exacerbated by poverty. The border poor, like the poor elsewhere, tend to be less politically powerful, and hence command less time from politicians. The border also often gets tied up in the public mind with issues related to illegal immigration. In the popular mind, more fences and other controls are needed, not greater transborder cooperation. The discussion is often tinged with racism. At best, the policy adopted by state and national governments can be characterized as benign neglect. Border residents often joke that they have more in common with their counterparts in their neighboring country than with their respective state and national governments. 1 The second problem in policy coordination is the fact that the U.S. and Mexican economies are at fundamentally different levels of development. This means the two nations have different priorities. In Mexico, the major environmental problems involve the provision of potable water and sewage treatment. In the United States, these more basic environmental goals have been largely achieved. Indeed, potable water and sewage treatment are generally taken for granted. Other environmental goals—such as improvement in air quality— are now viewed as priorities in the United States. Such goals, however, are something only a developed country is likely to have sufficient resources to pursue. This is not to say that Mexico does not view air quality as important. Mexico has implemented a major effort to improve air quality in Mexico City. Oxygenated gasoline, catalytic converters, vehicle inspections, and greater industrial enforcement have all been implemented over the last 20 years in an attempt to improve air quality in the Mexican capital. The result has been a positive trend in air quality there. Lead, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, and sulfur dioxide levels have fallen, although ozone remains a problem (Soto 2000). Along the border, a major environmental movement has developed, and the Paso del Norte leads it. The Joint Advisory Committee (JAC) on Air Quality 9
Improving Transboundary Air Quality with Binational Emission Reduction Credit Trading Improvement—comprised of local government, industry, and public representatives—was established to give environmental policy advice to environmental officials on both sides of the border. JAC has promoted a number of programs for improving air quality, including strengthening vehicle inspection, promoting dedicated commuter lanes, and the seasonal use of oxygenated gasoline (NEJAC 2003). The efforts outlined above, while important at the local level, only address a minority of the air quality issues on the border or elsewhere in Mexico. An important point, which will be taken up in detail in subsequent chapters, is that U.S. and Mexican environmental standards are similar—there is little disagreement about what is desirable. But Mexico, a developing country, has not set the same priority on monitoring, enforcing, and therefore achieving air quality goals as the United States, nor is it reasonable to think it should. The reality is that Mexico does not have the resources to meet all of its environmental goals and has placed a higher priority on solving problems with potable water and sewers, believing that these will have a greater impact on public health and quality of life than improved air quality. Nevertheless, improved air quality is an important goal for border communities. The question then is, How can policy coordination be achieved along the U.S.-Mexican border in an effort to improve air quality? The answer is that there is no single answer. In some circumstances command-and-control may be the best solution, in others it might be corrective taxes and subsidies that make the most sense. The authors argue that the best solution for the border often turns out to be emission reduction credit trading, and that is the focus of this monograph—using emissions trading as a policy coordination device on the U.S.-Mexican border. That is, this monograph is about how to design, construct, and administer emissions trading programs so that the shared goals of achieving good air quality can be met. Emissions trading is an increasingly popular policy choice. The 1990 U.S. Clear Air Act and Amendments (CAAA) encouraged states to adopt market-based mechanisms, such as emissions trading, to assist in attaining and maintaining air quality standards (EPA 2002c). In the context of CAAA, concern centers on the criteria pollutants—carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), nitrogen oxide (NO x ), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), lead (Pb), ozone (O 3 ), and especially particulate matter 10
Page 1 and 2: THE SCERP MISSION The Southwest Con
Page 3 and 4: Authors SCERP Monograph Series, no.
Page 5 and 6: Published by San Diego State Univer
Page 8: Contents Foreword v Prefacio ix Pre
Page 11 and 12: Improving Transboundary Air Quality
Page 14 and 15: Prefacio “Si vale la pena tener u
Page 16: Prefacio pudiera ser difícil, cost
Page 22 and 23: I Introduction THE VIEW FROM EL PAS
Page 24 and 25: Introduction Resource Conservation
Page 26 and 27: Introduction approaches to correcti
Page 28 and 29: Introduction into the environment.
Page 32 and 33: Introduction (PM 10 and PM 2.5 )—
Page 34 and 35: Introduction installing scrubbers,
Page 36 and 37: Introduction The existence of emiss
Page 38 and 39: Introduction would require an initi
Page 40 and 41: Introduction EPE generated emission
Page 42 and 43: OVERVIEW Introduction This volume i
Page 44 and 45: II A Snapshot of the Border THE MEA
Page 46 and 47: A Snapshot of the Border states—B
Page 48 and 49: A Snapshot of the Border Table 1. U
Page 50 and 51: A Snapshot of the Border Interestin
Page 52 and 53: Table 3. Percentage Change in Borde
Page 54 and 55: A Snapshot of the Border Another so
Page 56 and 57: A Snapshot of the Border plants tha
Page 58 and 59: A Snapshot of the Border Air Qualit
Page 60 and 61: A Snapshot of the Border quality. T
Page 62 and 63: A Snapshot of the Border million in
Page 64: A Snapshot of the Border THE ENVIRO
Page 81 and 82:
Improving Transboundary Air Quality
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 92 and 93:
Appendix A Excerpts from the Border
Page 94 and 95:
Environmental Regulation and the Bo
Page 96:
Environmental Regulation and the Bo
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Nearly 90% think Mexican environmen
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 114 and 115:
Appendix B Survey Instrument Encues
Page 116 and 117:
Manquiladora Attitudes 13) ¿Tu com
Page 118 and 119:
Manquiladora Attitudes 22)¿Habías
Page 120 and 121:
V Designing a Transborder Trading S
Page 122 and 123:
Designing a Transborder Trading Sch
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 162 and 163:
abatement activities, 4, 6-7, 16, 1
Page 164 and 165:
automobile and truck, 47 banking, 2
Page 166 and 167:
nitrogen oxide (NO x), 9-10, 16-18,
show all

Entire Book - Southwest Consortium for Environmental Research ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?