Climate Change and Corporate Social Responsibility: The Intersection of Corporate Environmental Law

In 2006, an Australian Parliamentary inquiry and an inquiry from the Corporations and Markets Advisory Committee both investigated whether corporate law in Australia needed to be changed in order to encourage socially and environmentally responsible business practices and whether the scope of director's duties should be widened to take into account the interests of stakeholders and the wider community. The results of these enquiries - a "business as usual" approach, highlights the gap between the traditional corporate law view of short term shareholders' interests and the longer term view posited by environmental law. This paper argues that in order to achieve better corporate responsibility, there needs to be a focus on the intersections rather than the gaps between these two disciplines of law. Drawing on various sources, such as the author's earlier research on Norwegian companies and the opportunities and risks associated with climate change, the paper discusses some of these intersections and suggests the incentives that may help to move companies towards more positive environmental outcomes

Environmental Reporting as a Communications Tool: A Question of Enforcement?

This article examines the effect of mandatory corporate environmental reporting in the context of corporate accountability. It asks the question whether such reporting can be an effective communications tool, both internally and externally and whether this will lead to a greater awareness of environmental issues throughout an organisation, resulting in improved corporate decisions, practices and outcomes. In order to answer this question, the author draws on longitudinal research examining the performance of the top 100 Australian companies. The article then looks at the role of the regulator, arguing that mandatory environmental reporting should be coupled with guidance and enforcement by a regulating authority. The lack of this enforcement in Australia has resulted in the quality of the reporting being less than optimal. Throughout the article, the author has compared the Australian experience with that of Norway, which has similar mandatory corporate environmental reporting laws

The Impacts of carbon Pricing on Indigenous Communities: A Comparison of New Zealand and Australia

N

Carbon pricing and renewable energy innovation: A comparison of Australian, British and Canadian carbon pricing policies

© 2015, (publisher). All rights reserved. Introducing its now-abolished carbon price from July 2012, Australia argued that a price on carbon would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by improving energy efficiency and increasing investment in clean technology innovation. The United Kingdom has priced carbon since 2008 and is in the process of major electricity market reform with the aim of attracting £100 billion of infrastructure investment. British Columbia in Canada introduced a carbon tax in 2008, providing support for clean technology industries through a variety of allowances and operating subsidies.This article compares the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia, to assess the evidence base and policy experience of these jurisdictions in carbon pricing. In so doing, the article identifies what lessons can be learnt from these policy frameworks in order to promote investment in low-carbon innovation

The interplay of international law and domestic law: the case of Australia's efforts to protect whales

Whaling in general, and Japanese "scientific whaling" in particular, is a vexed issue that requires urgent attention. There seems to be insufficient international support for the conservation of whales. Australia's attempts to outlaw whaling in the AWS with the EPBe Act therefore stands out as a laudable step that should be emulated by the rest of the international community. Whaling in international waters, however, is an international issue. It is therefore doubtful if Australia can use the EPBe Act to archive the objective of protecting whales in the Antarctic without breaching its international obligations. In the struggle to achieve an international ban on commercial whaling, the case of Humane Society International v Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd is thus hardly a victory. The courtroom is not an appropriate battlefield if Australia is to win the battle to stop commercial whaling. The environmental movement needs to rethink its strategies with a new focus on international law and diplomacy