NEW REGULATORY MECHANISMS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

NEW REGULATORY MECHANISMS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Выбор валюты
Дата публикации статьи в журнале: 4.07.2019
Название журнала: Американский Научный Журнал, Выпуск: № (26) / 2019, Том: 1, Страницы в выпуске: 34-46
Автор:
, State Corporation “Rosatom” Center for Global Ecology, Lomonosov Moscow State University,
Автор: N.I. Kurysheva
, Burnazyan Medical and Biological Center,
Автор:
, ,
Анотация: The regulatory mechanisms for environmental protection have been reformed since 2014. These reforms engage the ecological aspects of the enterprise’s activities that have a negative environmental impact (NEI). This includes enterprises from the nuclear industry. The list of priority actions has been developed in order to stop using outdated and inefficient technologies. Enterprises are switching to the principle of using the best available technologies (BAT) and implementing modern technologies. Laws and regulations for defining the acceptable environmental impact with the use of BAT principles are being developed. The main BAT principles are being integrated into the national regulatory system for products (goods) manufacturing, work execution and provision of services.
Ключевые слова:                     
DOI:
Данные для цитирования: V.A. Grachev N.I. Kurysheva . NEW REGULATORY MECHANISMS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. Американский Научный Журнал. Науки о Земле. 4.07.2019; № (26) / 2019(1):34-46.

Список литературы: References 1. Law of the Russian Federation “On Environmental Protection FZ-7”, 2002 2. Law of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic “On air protection”, 1982 3. Land Code of the Russian Federation, 2001 4. Federal Law “On Subsurface Resources”, 1995 5. Forest Code of the Russian Federation, 1997 6. Federal Law “On Natural Curative Resources, Curative-Health Locations and Resorts”, 1995 7. Federal Law “On Specially Protected Natural Territories”, 1995 8. Federal Law “On the Animal World”, 1995 9. Water Code of the Russian Federation, 1995 10. Federal Law “On Ecological Expertise”, 1995 11. Federal Law “On the Use of Atomic Energy”, 1995 12. Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of the Consumer s’ Rights”, 1996 13. Law of the Russian Federation “On Standardization”, 1993 14. Law of the Russian Federation “On Certification of Products and Services”, 1993 15. Law of the Russian Federation “On Urban Planning in the Russian Federation”, 1992 16. Environmental Protection Management in the USA, N.V.Kruchinina, 2012, http://naukarus.com/upravlenie-ohranoy-okruzhayuschey-sredy-v-ssha 17. Journal of Environmental Engineering ASCE (URL:http://ascelibrary.org/toc/joeedu/0/0 (date: September 26, 2016) 18. Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programs on the environment URL:http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32001L0042&qid=1 474873910552&from=EN (date: September 26, 2016) 19. Directive 85/337/EEC On the assessment of the effects of certain public and. private projects on the environment URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:31985L0337&from= EN (date: September 26, 2016) 20. N. Forcada, A. Alvarez, P. Love , and D. Edwards D. (2016). “Rework in Urban Renewal Projects in Colombia”. J. Infrastruct. Syst., 10.1061 / (ASCE) IS.1943-555X. 0000332. 04016034. 21. Ion Viorel Matei, Laura Ungureanu Survey on integrated modelling applied in environmental engineering and management / Environmental engineering and management journal 13(4): 1027-1038 April 2014. 22. Desta Mebratu Sustainability and sustainable development: Historical and conceptual review // Environmental Impact Assessment Review Volume 18, Issue 6, November 1998, pages 493-520. 23. R. Burdge, F. Vanclay. Social impact assessment: a contribution to the state of the art series. Impact Assessment, 1996, p. 45; N. Taylor, H. Bryan, C. Goodrich. Social assessment: theory, process and technologies, 3rd edition. Middleton, USA: Social Ecology Press, 2004, p. 140. 24. C. Wood. Environmental Impact Assessment: a comparative review, 2nd edition. Essex, UK: Pearson Education Limited, 2003, p. 230. 25. D. Buchan. Buy-in and social capital: by-products of social impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 2003, p. 169. 26. F. Vanclay. International principles for social impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Assessment, 2003, p. 5. 27. Umberto Baresia, Karen J. Vellab, Neil G. Sipea. Bridging the divide between theory and guidance in strategic environmental assessment: A path for Italian regions / Environmental Impact Assessment Review Volume 62, January 2017, pages 14-24. 28. Francois Retiefa, Alan Bondb, Jenny Poped, Angus Morrison-Saunderse, Nicholas King. Global megatrends and their implications for environmental assessment practice / Environmental Impact Assessment Review Volume 61, November 2016, pages 52- 60. 29. Urmila Jha-Thakur, B. Thomas Fischer. 25 years of the UK EIA System: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats / Environmental Impact Assessment Review Volume 61, November 2016, pages 19-26. 30. Mari Kågström Between ‘best’ and ‘good enough’: How consultants guide quality in environmental assessment / Environmental Impact Assessment Review Volume 60, September 2016, pages 169-175. Online magazine “NAUKOVEDENIYE” http://naukovedenie.ru Volume 9, No.1 (January – February) publishing@naukovedenie.ru 31.Tataina Perminovaa, Natalia Sirinaa, Bertrand Larattea, Natalia Baranovskaya, Leonid Rikhvanov Methods for land use impact assessment: A review / Environmental Impact Assessment Review Volume 60, September 2016, pages 64-74.