APPENDIX 12
Memorandum from the Tarka Foundation
1. The Tarka Foundation is a company
limited by guarantee as a social enterprise to support the natural,
social and economic environment.
2. Urban Mines is a not-for-profit
environmental body committed to finding practical, innovative
solutions for resource management in a manner which values people
and which respects the planet. Working with the public and private
sectors the aim of Urban Mines is to provide information, advice,
support, direction and financial solutions to problems.
3. In response to the Environmental Audit
Committee's request for memoranda from interested organisations
relating to the above matter we submit as an annex details of
a proposal made early in 2002 for pilot investigations that include
some of the issues raised. We have submitted details of the proposal
in order that the Environmental Audit Committee may be aware of
our interest, the scope of the suggested pilot project and that
social enterprises, working with statutory and other bodies, are
potentially in a strong position to offer support in the Government's
fight against anti-social behaviour in general and in this instance,
environmental crime in particular.
4. It should be expressly noted that our
submission is not in any way a criticism of the Minister, his
officials or other public bodies to whom it was submitted or of
the way in which the proposal was treated by the Minister, his
officials or others to whom it was submitted.
January 2004
Annex
ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME PROPOSAL
1. RATIONALE
2. On 5 February 2002 the Associate Parliamentary
Sustainable Waste Group, organised a half-day forum entitled:
Environmental Crime Britain's Next Threat? Speakers, including
The Rt Hon Michael Meacher MP Minister for the Environment and
Baroness Young, Chief Executive of the Environment Agency, expressed
concerns regarding the increased incidence of environmental crimes
and the costs in environmental, social and financial terms.
3. Following the Forum, Representatives
from The Tarka Foundation, Urban Mines and Birmingham City Council
met to discuss the formation of a working partnership to carry
out three pilots to investigate key issues as they relate to:
4. From the meetings and subsequent discussions
with the police and other interested parties with experience of
different types of behaviours and circumstances that may be partly
responsible for creating a range of environmental crimes, a number
of key questions were raised:
(a)
What is the definition of environmental crime? Is
it moral, legal or a mixture of both?
(c)
Is there sufficient public or judiciary understanding
about environmental crime and its implications?
5. Growth of environmental crime and other
forms of anti-social behaviour have a number of common denominators
which are not always directly related to financial gain or benefits
to the perpetrators, in some instances being more closely linked
to a lack of care. In some cases serious damage can result for
a basic lack of understanding, this is particularly so when those
committing environmental crimes are outside their usual environment.
(As an example, a study among 13-18 year old city dwellers indicated
that less than 1% had an understanding or in some cases any care
of the implications of litter to rural areas).
6. A proposal was submitted to the office
of the then Minister for the Environment requesting funds for
the three pilot programmes to be carried out to measure the scale
of the problem as well as to provide the basis for practical and
achievable implementation of ideas and reduction schemes. This
implementation of recommended strategies phase was seen as integral
to the proposal in order to measure the usefulness of potential
responses to the growing problem of environmental crime. This
phase would also provide robust recommendations that can then
be utilised by those involved with land management generally.
7. Regrettably the request for funding,
without which the proposal could not proceed, was not successful
and with no financial support forthcoming none of the organisations
were able to commit more of their limited budgets to continuing
discussions or undertaking the project.
8. A summary of the original proposal is
given below.
9. PROPOSAL
10. PHASE 1:
11. Definition and Classification of environmental
crime
12. This Phase will seek to define and classify
environmental crimes and their implications to the natural, social
and economic environment. Phase 1: to determine the shape of subsequent
phases and be based upon consultations with relevant stakeholders
and a review of available information. Definition and classification
of environmental crime will allow a more precise analysis and
a differentiation of practical options.
13. PHASE 2:
Case Studies
14. This continues from Phase 1 and would
initially define the research scope to include:
15. Continuing literature review.
16. Survey work of the case study areas
based on best practices utilising mapping to show the incidence
of environmental crime spatially and temporally in relation to
current land-use patterns.
17. Analysis of best practice in the UK
and overseas (including, where possible, a cost benefit analysis
of deterrent systems).
18. A secondary consultation phase with
offenders (both individuals and corporate) and victims including
land owners, National Park officers, local residents and visitors.
19. An examination of institutional and
other barriers currently restricting the efficient control/reduction
of environmental crime.
20. This part of Phase 2 to also look at
strategies for combating environmental crime and draw up the plans
for the practical implementation of recommended practices to reduce
environmental crime and its effects.
21. PHASE 3:
22. Cost benefits analysis of the recommended
practices implemented and a final report with recommendations
as to the most effective control measures to deal with environmental
crime.
23. The low costs for the work are because
two of the organisations are social enterprises with broad environmental
interests and as such are able to undertake this type of work
without the need for a profit factor.
| 
