Voluntary Regulatory Partnership Programs (VRPP)

Even though the federal government is the main source of promotion and regulation of industry in America, regulation almost inescapably obstructs success

1. The elimination of potential regulatory gap or overlaps arising from member regulation and market regulation

In today 's business world regulations set the benchmark that guarantees a secure, coherent and fair marketplace for everyone (Canada Business Ontario, n.d). Whether you are starting or developing a company, associations need to meet certain regulations and guidelines to remain compliant, and to build the productivity and validity of their business (Government of Canada, 2014). This paper examines the struggle Mineral Mountain Resources Ltd. faced with the new Ontario mining regulation.

Regulators continue to raise expectations on the industry’s ability to know its customers—and its own ability to find nefarious activity and impose sanctions. Complying with the law in both letter and spirit is a difficult task, and new expectations continue to evolve.

The issue surrounding high levels of fraternization between the agency and the industry is the risk of acting in ways that threaten public interest. If the firms within the industry are too influential in the formation of regulations, their interests outweigh that of the public. It is a common concern that this capturing could lead to policies that hinder competition to the benefit of a particular firm or give one firm a substantial advantage in the market. It is evident that regulatory capture is a failure in policy making because the purpose of regulation is to distinguish between programs that regulate and those that promote business enterprise. If the industry is promoted in the regulation process, there is a clear conflict of interest and evidence of

Nevertheless, they even get around the law. For instance the “Water Pollution Control Act”, the “Brownfield and Contaminated Site Remediation Act”, “Industrial Site Recovery Act”, and “Solid Waste Management Act”, “Major Hazardous Waste Facilities Closure and Contingency Fund Act.” To name a few, but it appears that they are broken by corporations every day. Today we get word of the court case and the fines, but what is being exercised to protect the

government regulation was defined by Grajzl & Murrell (2007) as the study of “comparative regulatory design,” a topic rarely discussed amongst academics, economists, or politicians alike. While government regulation is discussed broadly across many different fields, rarely is it analyzed in direct comparison to self-regulation. However, some academic papers have discussed this topic of “comparative regulatory design”: Gehrig & Jost (1995), Segerson & Miceli (1998), and Stefan's (2003), to name a few. These articles have all taken a different perspective of analysis and in the end concluded that self-regulation, when applied properly, can be far more effective than any form of government regulation. In their paper titled “Quacks, Lemons, and Self-Regulation: A Welfare Analysis,” Gehrig & Jost (1995) make the observation that if the information regarding an environmental issue is relatively simple and widespread, it may be best to leave the regulatory powers up to the government. If, on the other hand, the science and knowledge behind the issue is complex and limited, a self-regulatory body within the industry would be far better suited in resolving the environmental damage. In other words, the decision regarding which political body should be placed in charge of resolving an environmental issue should be determined by whichever body holds the most knowledge regarding the issue. Following these guidelines, the self-regulatory bodies should

Is the SEC and executive agency or an independent regulatory agency? Does it matter to the outcome of this dispute? Explain.

According to Paehlke, R. (1990), regulation is the policy tool of choice when it concerns environmental protection. Regulation is frequently essential even though there is a collection of policy tools obtainable. Non-regulatory methods might in some situations, be more suitable or aid as beneficial enhancements to an operational governing system. According to the author, there are three types of non-regulatory approaches, which are recognized as indirect, participatory, and authoritative.

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

Porket, J. L. “The Pros and Cons of Government Regulation.” Institute of Economic Affairs. 23 Jan. 2003, pp. 1–20., iea.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/upldbook341pdf.pdf. Accessed 10 Apr. 2017.

There are plans for implementing and maintaining regulation processes. Systems of management increase the likelihood of regulations being adhered to. Research suggests that “single regulatory policies are seldom useful. Strengths of another can complement weaknesses of one strategy. "A variety of strategies such as monitoring performance indicators and targets, incident reporting systems, and stricter measures as criminal penalties should together contribute to the effectiveness of regulation” Bouwman, Bomhoff, de Jong, Robben, Friele, (2015; paragraph 2, page 2).

Direct implementation and risk management of regulatory compliance for an $8 billion infrastructure and capital improvement program with more than 300 contracts across 17 major projects

One of the “worst business law decisions to emerge in the past decade” is Western Ecosystems Technology v. GreenHunter Wind Energy LCC. GreenHunter Resources, Inc. is a publicly-traded company from Delaware that focuses on water management solutions for oil and gas operations in the Eagle Ford, Marcellus and Bakken shale basins. GreenHunter Resources Inc. was formed to be “the first publicly traded renewable energy company based in the United States that provides to investors a portfolio of diversified assets in the alternative energy sector.” Their business plan was to acquire businesses and operate assests in the wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and biofuels (biodiesel and ethanol) renewable energy sectors. They aimed to change the way power and renewable energy fuels are produced and distributed. Their main goal was to be more efficient and facilitate increased stockholder value.

The mining industry in the United States has a long history beginning in the 1600s when iron ore was mined in Jamestown and sent overseas to England (Bolles, 1879). Often in this century it is easy to forget where the energy one is utilizing came from or where the metal which makes items people use every single day come from. Unfortunately, with obtaining necessary metals and coal comes the risk of accidents and the different ethics involved in the industry in order to keep not only workers safe but keep the environment safe as well.