Environmental Regulation and the Competitive Market

The world of 2015 is centralized on industrialization, and advancements that improve the manner in which a product can be produced to turn the greatest profit. While many of these improvements in speed and quantity benefits society, we cannot turn a blind eye to some of the heavy costs that are associated with this type of mass production. To address some of the issues, like pollution, governments create laws to regulate the amount of negative externalities to its citizens. In the United States, there are multiple federal agencies charged with creating the specific standards and regulations that states and large companies must adhere to. One agency in particular, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), implements and enforces some of these standards “to protect human health and the environment”(US Environmental, 2015).

For years, the government has been regulating citizens and subsidizing companies that they like. Each time they restrict or support a company, they hurt the free market, which then hurts the economy and like a Rube Goldberg machine the entire country is affected. The most common and harmful regulations are those set by the environmental protection agency (EPA). The EPA tries to stop natural selection and save animals through human intervention. Nearly all of the regulations have an effect on how everyone goes about their day. For example, in California the EPA saved a small fish with a minuscule population by pumping 71 billion gallons of fresh water into the ocean, this started one of the biggest droughts in California ever. The EPA

Market based environmentalism is a term which concentrates on the attainment of protection of the environment by means of freely operating markets (Bruekner 2010, 61). Market based environmental policy approaches help promote both environmentalism and competitiveness by putting emphasis on the positive results rather than on the technologies (Bruekner 2010, 62). This essay shall explain the advantages and weaknesses of natural step and natural capitalism and why they are considered as market-based environmentalism.

Effective economic and legal mechanism is capable of maintaining a proper measure of correlation between economy and ecology at a reasonable level with lesser amounts of direct investments. To implement this condition in the economic and legal mechanism of environmental regulation, it is required to combine three basic functions:

The competition policy that will impact the business is the Competition Act 1998. There are two main United Kingdom (UK) laws to protect the competition which is known as the Competition Act 1998 and also the Enterprise Act 2002. The Competition Act 1998 is one of the main source of competition policy where it gives the business a modernize plan to identify and compromise with the restriction of business practices and the abusing of the dominant position in the market. The purpose of this act allows to harmonize the competition policy between the United Kingdom (UK) and European Union (EU) competition policy. This act promotes to competing fairly in the marketplace by prohibiting the anti-competitive behavior that occur between businesses.

While implementing environmental regulations may seem like an ethical choice, these standards could slow economic growth and hinder competition in society. In an article written by Craig Loehle and Erik B. Schilling titled “Beyond the low-hanging fruit: how should policymakers judge environmental regulations when marginal costs are rising and marginal benefits are falling?” Loehle and Schilling report the findings of a study conducted on the EPA’s current regulations. As Loehle and Schilling explain, the study shows the effects of the EPA’s regulations that attack obvious pollution issues. In the first 30 years after the EPA’s debut, these regulations negatively affected competitiveness and industrial profitability. Some of the EPA’s recent regulations have even higher costs (2). In other words, Loehle and Schilling are maintaining that many of EPA’s most basic regulations impede economic progress. This is not to say that all environmental regulations impair the economy, but rather to say that the most obvious solutions to ecological problems may be a drag on society’s progress. Nevertheless, the data shows that the enactment of stricter

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created to improve human health through ensuring a safe environment. One of the EPA’s main priorities is to develop and enforce regulations (Adler). The regulations put into place are mandatory requirements that must be obeyed. Regulations can apply to anything, including businesses, state or local governments, private institutions, or individuals (“Regulations”). Even though the EPA serves to help humans by protecting the environment, it can also harm humans. The damages done to our economic lifestyles are getting worse as the EPA gains more power. Because the EPA is the only regulatory agency for the environment, they can make the rules as strict as they want. This can be problematic for

Incentive based regulations such as taxes or a fee, which charges the polluter if he or she is polluting the air, and this fee or tax is assigned by the regulator depending on the quantity of pollution. Marketable permits which allow for companies to pollute within a certain level that is not detrimental to the atmosphere and is not costly. Finally the last incentive based regulations is liability which sets up a standard of allowable pollution that provides the best benefit to society as well holding corporations to the allowable standard or pay the consequence.

The competition policy is about the law placing rules to assure that an organization or business do compete their business market fairly among each other’s. With this, it strengthen endeavour and proficiency, to make a more widely extensive choice for consumers and also help diminishes costs and enhance its quality. Besides, the competition policies are also known as the government policies that help avoid and make reduction of abusing of a monopoly power among market. Thus, the competitions act 1998 as the competition policies to make arrangement about the competitor and manhandle of a prevailing position among the markets. (Legislation.gov.uk, 2016)

The curiosity on rather or not government regulation is good or bad has been in circulation. Government regulation is a rule of order having the force of law, authorized by a superior or competent of authority. On one side you may hear that government regulation is a totally good idea and on the other side, you have those who oppose. Those who oppose believe that government regulation is a bad idea and should be put to an end. When dealing with the government and the law every rule and regulation serve a purpose. Embellishing the business world government regulation helps protect businesses and increase the productivity of the business. Government regulation is a way to not only to help and support businesses but also to keep our environment

Companies have to keep up with the market and meet consumer demands. The competition along the value chain means to work smarter to design and create automobile around the budget of faster, better, cheaper which in return would be less work. If inputs intensify, the company’s profitability will crumble. The Government Polices cannot control competition through subsidies.

regulations significantly determines the level of FDI from the US. This implies that an economic incentive for pollution exists. The presence of an economic incentive can drive an activity with less regard for other aspects of

One may be that profits will be reduced, if latest ‘green’ methods of production or waste disposals are always being purchased. Without high profits businesses will be less able to expand and produce higher amount and quality of goods. In many countries, legal protection of the environment is weak and inspection systems are inadequate. There will, as a result, be less risk of legal action and heavy fines against business activity in these countries. Furthermore, in developing countries it is argued that economic development is more important that protecting the environment. Businesses can achieve more 'good' by producing cheaply in these countries that if they were forced to always adopt the 'greenest' production strategy.

The importance of this issue comes from the growing concern of society and firms about the excessive exploitation of natural resources and the consequent depletion of the same. The insanely fast economic development during the last decades led to a growth in welfare and wealth, but it has been merely based on the logic of obtaining the maximum profit, forgetting at the same time about the correct use of natural resources.

* Environmental factors also include local and global competitors. With the advent of globalization. There has been a substantiate increase in these competitors