From a fossil-fuel to a biobased economy : the politics of industrial biotechnology

Industrial biotechnology involves the replacement of petrochemical processes and inputs with more energy-efficient and renewable biological ones. It is already being used in the production of biofuels and bioplastics and has been touted as a means by which modern economies can be shifted toward a more competitive, low-carbon growth model. This paper does two things. First, it outlines the policy framework established in the European Union and the narrative of a knowledge-based bioeconomy (KBBE) underpinning this. Second, it argues that the ‘win – win’ rhetoric contained within the KBBE narrative is misleading. Among the different groups commenting on the use of industrial biotechnology, the paper locates cleavages between farmers and agribusiness, between those convinced and those sceptical of environmental technofixes, and between procorporate and anticorporate NGOs. Taken together, they show the purported transition from a fossil-fuel to a bio-based economy to be a resolutely political one

Supporting the UN's Sustainable Development Goals: reconceptualising a 'sustainable development assessment tool' for the health and care system in England

Aims: As one of the biggest organisations in the world, the NHS in England can contribute considerably to the United Nations’ Global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In order to optimise this, this study evaluated and reconceptualised a sustainable development assessment tool for health and care settings in England. Methods: A quantitative survey and user/expert discussion panels were conducted to evaluate and reconceptualise the existing sustainable development assessment tool used by the NHS in England, the so-called ‘Good Corporate Citizenship Assessment Tool’, between 2007 and 2016 including potential improvements such as the integration of the UN SDGs. Results: A reconceptualised self-assessment tool integrating the UN’s SDGs was developed and implemented online as the ‘Sustainable Development Assessment Tool (SDAT)’. Further improvements included a process orientated redesign and the creation of new modules and cross-sections aligning them with the leads responsible for the implementation of key initiatives in NHS organisations, which would contribute to achieving the targets of the SDGs. Conclusions: User/expert involvement has enabled an informed approach to a reconceptualisation of a sustainable assessment tool for health and care settings. The tool will support organisations to build their mandatory Sustainable Development Management Plans, as part of the national Public Health Outcomes Framework. Alignment of the tool to the UN Sustainable Development Goals provides an opportunity for health and care organisations to demonstrate accountability and progress against the UN’s set of transformational goals. Furthermore, the tool could be adapted to other public service providers

Criminal redress in cases of environmental victimisation: a defence

In recent years growing concern has been voiced in the environmental justice literature regarding the ability of criminal justice mechanisms to adequately address environmental harms, especially when such harms are perpetrated by large corporations. Commentators argue that criminal justice processes are often ill-suited to the particular features of environmental cases, where the chain of causation between wrongful actions/omissions and environmentally harmful consequence can be very complex and extend over the course of many years. As an alternative, many such commentators now favour the adoption of more administrative resolutions when corporate bodies breach their environmental obligations (which may or may not amount to ‘crimes’). Others favour the use of civil sanction regimes, which is now the preferred approach of the UK Environment Agency. In this paper I will argue that the debate on how best to respond to environmental harm has so far neglected to factor in the perspective of the victims of those harms and, in particular, their need for redress. I will argue that by incorporating such a perspective, as opposed to focusing largely on questions of efficiency and cost-effectiveness, the criminal justice route still has much to recommended it, especially in relation to the provision of meaningful redress and/or compensation to the victims of environmental harm. Consequently, this paper will provide a victimological defence of the criminal justice process, and of criminal penalties, in their application to cases of environmental harms

Environmental harm and environmental victims: scoping out a ‘green victimology'

In this paper I intend to discuss the adaptability of victimological study to the question of ‘environmental victimisation’. The impact on those affected by environment crime, or other environmentally damaging activities, is one that has received scarce attention in the mainstream victimological literature (see Williams, 1996). The role or position of such victims in criminal justice and/or other processes has likewise rarely been topic of academic debate. I have recently expanded upon various aspects of this subject and surrounding issues at greater length (Hall, 2013) but for the purposes of this article I wish to expand specifically on what a so-called ‘green victimology’ might look like, together with some of the particular questions and challenges it will face

Making Brexit Work for the Environment and Livelihoods : Delivering a Stakeholder Informed Vision for Agriculture and Fisheries

1. The UK’s decision to leave the EU has far-reaching, and often shared, implications for agriculture and fisheries. To ensure the future sustainability of UK agricultural and fisheries systems, we argue that it is essential to grasp the opportunity that Brexit is providing to develop integrated policies that improve the management and protection of the natural environments, upon which these industries rely. 2. This article advances a stakeholder informed vision of the future design of UK agriculture and fisheries policies. We assess how currently emerging UK policy will need to be adapted in order to implement this vision. Our starting point is that Brexit provides the opportunity to redesign current unsustainable practices and can, in principle, deliver a sustainable future for agriculture and fisheries. 3. Underpinning policies with an ecosystem approach, explicit inclusion of public goods provision and social welfare equity were found to be key provisions for environmental, agricultural and fishery sustainability. Recognition of the needs of, and innovative practices in, the devolved UK nations is also required as the new policy and regulatory landscape is established. 4. Achieving the proposed vision will necessitate drawing on best practice and creating more coherent and integrated food, environment and rural and coastal economic policies. Our findings demonstrate that “bottom-up” and co-production approaches will be key to the development of more environmentally sustainable agriculture and fisheries policies to underpin prosperous livelihoods. 5. However, delivering this vision will involve overcoming significant challenges. The current uncertainty over the nature and timing of the UK’s Brexit agreement hinders forward planning and investment while diverting attention away from further in-depth consideration of environmental sustainability. In the face of this uncertainty, much of the UK’s new policy on the environment, agriculture and fisheries is therefore ambitious in vision but light on detail. Full commitment to co-production of policy with devolved nations and stakeholders also appears to be lacking, but will be essential for effective policy development and implementation