IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cir/cirpro/2002rp-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analyse économique du Risk Management Program (section 112® du « Clean Air Act »)

Author

Listed:
  • Nathalie de Marcellis-Warin
  • Ingrid Peignier
  • Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné

Abstract

The Civil Protection Act (Bill 173), passed on December 19, 2001, gives the government the power to adopt a by-law on technological risk management. In the elaboration of this by-law, the Ministry of Civil Protection wanted to obtain information on the American Risk Management Program (RMP) adopted in June 1999. Any project (or by-law), public or private in nature, must be evaluated to determine whether it is positive or negative for each agent, as well as for the society as a whole. In the case of the new Quebec by-law, the CIRANO was contracted to perform an economical evaluation of the RMP, meaning that it had to evaluate the costs associated with requirements of this type of by-law, as well as the benefits that it brought to the corporation. The report that was produced first presents the methodology used for the cost/benefit analysis of compliance with the regulation on industrial risks, as well as an application to the RMP. The report lists the direct and indirect costs, as well as the direct benefits ("negative costs"") and indirect benefits. The direct costs are those directly imputable to compliance with the requirements of the by-law, while indirect costs are those generated by the application of the by-law rather than to compliance itself (decrease of the productivity, delayed investments); indirect benefits might include improvement of the corporate image, reductions in insurance costs and technological innovations.Secondly, the report also explains the responsibilities of each group, as well as the means supplied to them to assume these responsibilities. It currently appears necessary, to improve the effectiveness of environmental regulation, amongst others, to reinforce the culture and the consciousness of risk, as well as to promote involvement by facilities, local communities and the broader public. In this context, the report examines the Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs), which are pivotal entities in the transfer of information between local communities, facilities and citizens. Additionally, when a new regulation comes into effect, a program of inspection must be set up to assure that the subjected facilities fulfil the new requirements. Consequently, the report examined one model of incentive audits, as well as the role of insurance companies in the prevention of major industrial accidents. The conclusion contains a discussion about the economic analysis of the RMP and isolates the main elements that must be accounted for." La loi sur la Sécurité Civile (Loi 173), en vigueur depuis le 19 décembre 2001, donne au gouvernement le pouvoir d'adopter un Règlement sur la gestion des risques technologiques. Dans le cadre de l'élaboration de ce Règlement, le Ministère de la Sécurité Publique désirait obtenir de l'information sur le « Risk Management Program » (RMP) américain (mis en place aux États-Unis depuis juin 1999).Tout projet (ou toute réglementation), qu'il soit public ou privé, doit être évalué dans son ensemble pour savoir s'il se traduit par un gain net ou par une perte nette pour la société et pour chacun des intervenants. Dans le cadre de la nouvelle réglementation québécoise, le CIRANO avait comme mandat de réaliser une évaluation économique du RMP, c'est à dire de réfléchir sur les coûts des mesures exigées par ce type de règlement et sur les différents bénéfices retirés par l'entreprise.Le rapport qui a été produit, présente en première partie la méthodologie de l'analyse coûts - bénéfices de la conformité à la réglementation des risques industriels ainsi qu'une application au RMP. Il répertorie les coûts directs et indirects ainsi que les bénéfices directs («coûts négatifs») et indirects pour les entreprises. Les coûts directs sont directement liés à la mise en conformité avec les exigences de la réglementation, alors que les coûts indirects ne résultent pas à proprement parler de la mise en conformité, mais sont subis par certaines installations suite à la mise en place du règlement (baisse de la productivité, investissements retardés) ; les bénéfices indirects peuvent inclure l'amélioration de l'image publique, la baisse des primes d'assurance ou encore l'innovation technologique.En seconde partie, le rapport explique les responsabilités de chacun des groupes d'acteurs ainsi que les moyens nécessaires pour les assumer. Il paraît nécessaire à l'heure actuelle, pour améliorer l'efficacité des régulations environnementales entre autres, de renforcer la culture de risque dans l'installation, mais aussi de mieux impliquer les communautés locales et le public. C'est dans ce contexte que sont étudiés dans ce rapport les « Local Emergency Planning Commitees » (LEPCs), entités pivot dans le transfert d'information entre les communautés locales, les entreprises et les citoyens. De plus, lorsqu'une nouvelle réglementation entre en vigueur, un programme de vérification doit être mis en place pour s'assurer que les exigences sont remplies par les installations assujetties. Par conséquent, ce rapport examine des schémas d'audit incitatifs ainsi que le rôle des compagnies d'assurance dans la prévention des risques d'accidents industriels majeurs. Pour conclure, une réflexion est menée sur cette analyse économique du RMP et permet de dégager les principaux éléments à prendre en compte.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathalie de Marcellis-Warin & Ingrid Peignier & Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné, 2002. "Analyse économique du Risk Management Program (section 112® du « Clean Air Act »)," CIRANO Project Reports 2002rp-12, CIRANO.
  • Handle: RePEc:cir:cirpro:2002rp-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cirano.qc.ca/files/publications/2002RP-12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Konar, Shameek & Cohen, Mark A., 1997. "Information As Regulation: The Effect of Community Right to Know Laws on Toxic Emissions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 109-124, January.
    2. Kopp, Raymond J. & Krupnick, Alan J. & Toman, Michael, 1997. "Cost-Benefit Analysis and Regulatory Reform: An Assessment of the Science and the Art," Discussion Papers 10851, Resources for the Future.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hajar Mouatassim Lahmini & Abdelmajid Ibenrissoul, 2017. "Quel effet de la Responsabilité Sociétale de l'Entreprise sur la performance financière d'un opérateur minier/ Approche par l'Analyse Coûts-Bénéfices," Post-Print hal-01746022, HAL.
    2. Nathalie de Marcellis-Warin & Ingrid Peignier & Pierre Alvarez & Marie-Hélène Leroux & Martin Trépanier, 2009. "Les enjeux de la santé et la sécurité du travail pour les entreprises utilisant des matières dangereuses au Québec," CIRANO Project Reports 2009rp-03, CIRANO.
    3. Amela Groso & Aristide Ouedraogo & Thierry Meyer, 2012. "Risk analysis in research environment," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 187-208, February.
    4. Hajar Mouatassim Lahmini & Abdelmajid Ibenrissoul, 2016. "Y a-t-il un impact de la RSE sur la performance financière de l'entreprise : Etude empirique sur les sociétés marocaines cotées à la bourse de Casablanca," Post-Print hal-01351951, HAL.
    5. Jean-Grégoire Bernard & Benoit Aubert & Simon Bourdeau & Éric Clément & Caroline Debuissy & Marie-Josée Dumoulin & Marc Laberge & Nathalie de Marcellis-Warin & Ingrid Peignier, 2002. "Le risque : un modèle conceptuel d'intégration," CIRANO Project Reports 2002rp-16, CIRANO.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    2. Coria, Jessica & Sterner, Thomas, 2008. "Tradable Permits in Developing Countries: Evidence from Air Pollution in Santiago, Chile," RFF Working Paper Series dp-08-51, Resources for the Future.
    3. Julien Jacob & Eve-Angéline Lambert & Mathieu Lefebvre & Sarah Driessche, 2023. "Information disclosure under liability: an experiment on public bads," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(1), pages 155-197, July.
    4. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    5. Toman, Michael & Lile, Ronald D. & King, Dennis M., 1998. "Assessing Sustainability: Some Conceptual and Empirical Challenges," Discussion Papers 10756, Resources for the Future.
    6. Fraas, Art & Egorenkov, Alex, 2015. "A Retrospective Study of EPA’s Air Toxics Program under the Revised Section 112 Requirements of the Clean Air Act," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-23, Resources for the Future.
    7. Belay, Dagim G. & Jensen, Jørgen D., 2020. "‘The scarlet letters’: Information disclosure and self-regulation: Evidence from antibiotic use in Denmark," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    8. Rafia Afrin & Ni Peng & Frances Bowen, 2022. "The Wealth Effect of Corporate Water Actions: How Past Corporate Responsibility and Irresponsibility Influence Stock Market Reactions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 105-124, September.
    9. Eng, Li Li & Fikru, Mahelet G. & Vichitsarawong, Thanyaluk, 2021. "The impact of toxic chemical releases and their management on financial performance," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    10. Dasgupta, Susmita & Hong, Jong Ho & Laplante, Benoit & Mamingi, Nlandu, 2006. "Disclosure of environmental violations and stock market in the Republic of Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 759-777, July.
    11. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert & Cavanagh, Sheila, 2001. "National Environmental Policy During the Clinton Years," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-38, Resources for the Future.
    12. Shunsuke Managi & Tatsuyoshi Okimoto & Akimi Matsuda, 2012. "Do socially responsible investment indexes outperform conventional indexes?," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(18), pages 1511-1527, September.
    13. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    14. Oriana Gava & Fabio Bartolini & Francesca Venturi & Gianluca Brunori & Angela Zinnai & Alberto Pardossi, 2018. "A Reflection of the Use of the Life Cycle Assessment Tool for Agri-Food Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Bennear, Lori S. & Olmstead, Sheila M., 2008. "The impacts of the "right to know": Information disclosure and the violation of drinking water standards," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 117-130, September.
    16. García, Jorge H. & Sterner, Thomas & Afsah, Shakeb, 2007. "Public disclosure of industrial pollution: the PROPER approach for Indonesia?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(6), pages 739-756, December.
    17. Jianyu Zhao & Jing Qu & Lei Wang, 2023. "Heterogeneous institutional investors, environmental information disclosure and debt financing pressure," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(1), pages 253-296, March.
    18. Roberts, Donna, 1998. "Implementation Of The Wto Agreement On The Application Of Sanitary And Phytosanitary Measures: The First Two Years," Working Papers 14588, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    19. Catherine Hausman & David S. Rapson, 2018. "Regression Discontinuity in Time: Considerations for Empirical Applications," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 533-552, October.
    20. Hidemichi Fujii & Kimbara Tatsuo, 2012. "Environmental Management Mechanisms in U.S. and Japanese Manufacturing Firms," International Journal of Business Administration, International Journal of Business Administration, Sciedu Press, vol. 3(6), pages 13-24, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cir:cirpro:2002rp-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciranca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.