Tambi\u00e9n hay dudas respecto de cu\u00e1nta autoridad tendr\u00eda realmente el nuevo ministerio. Como el poderoso Ministerio de Hacienda, tomar\u00eda decisiones que afectar\u00edan a muchas otras carteras pero, en un conflicto, \u00bfestar\u00eda empatado con -digamos- el m\u00e1s poderoso Ministerio de Salud?<\/P>
\n
Un incidente sugiere que no. Originalmente el proyecto de ley iba a incluir un nuevo servicio p\u00fablico para la protecci\u00f3n de la biodiversidad y los recursos naturales que habr\u00eda absorbido el rol del Corporaci\u00f3n Nacional Forestal (CONAF) sobre la administraci\u00f3n de parques nacionales.<\/P>
\n
Pero el Ministerio de Agricultura, del que depende CONAF, objet\u00f3 la medida. \u201cLa protecci\u00f3n de los recursos naturales fue uno de los grandes vac\u00edos de la ley de 1994 y ahora de este proyecto\u201d, se\u00f1ala Katz, \u201cy eso es algo que debi\u00f3 haberse discutido en el Consejo de Ministros, no s\u00f3lo con Agricultura\u201d.<\/P>
\n
Bueno para el Medio Ambiente?<\/STRONG><\/P> La prueba de fuego para el nuevo proyecto de ley es, por cierto, lo que har\u00e1 por el medio ambiente. Y, en ese sentido, dar\u00eda un importante paso en el fortalecimiento de su aplicaci\u00f3n.<\/P> Eso se identifica como uno de las debilidades clave del actual sistema. En su informe del 2005, la OCDE se quej\u00f3 de que la CONAMA no ten\u00eda suficientes inspectores y que, si bien otros servicios p\u00fablicos con responsabilidades relativas al medio ambiente ten\u00edan la capacidad t\u00e9cnica y el personal necesario, a menudo ten\u00edan otras prioridades.<\/P> La aplicaci\u00f3n de la ley es un problema en Am\u00e9rica Latina, destaca Baquedano. \u201cLa regi\u00f3n tiene algunas leyes ambientales muy buenas, pero no se cumplen\u201d, afirma.<\/P> En una apuesta por remediar este problema, la propuesta reforma de Chile incluir\u00eda la creaci\u00f3n de una nueva agencia reguladora, la Superintendencia de Medio Ambiente. Esta jugar\u00eda un rol crucial en lo que respecta a abordar los desaf\u00edos impuestos por los tratados de libre comercio de Chile y su competitividad internacional, dijo la ministra Uriarte en una reciente reuni\u00f3n del Comit\u00e9 de Asuntos Corporativos, RSE y Medio Ambiente de la <b>AmCham.<\/b><\/P> Seg\u00fan Uriarte, la Superintendencia tambi\u00e9n ayudar\u00eda a desenredar la compleja red de supervisi\u00f3n de distintos servicios p\u00fablicos a la que est\u00e1n sujetas en la actualidad las empresas en Chile. En el caso de proyectos que han recibido un permiso a trav\u00e9s del sistema de evaluaci\u00f3n de impacto ambiental, la Superintendencia tendr\u00eda poderes exclusivos de supervisi\u00f3n, dijo la funcionaria de Gobierno a bUSiness CHILE<\/STRONG>.<\/P> Otro importante avance, afirma Sandoval, es que, a trav\u00e9s del denominado proceso de evaluaci\u00f3n ambiental estrat\u00e9gica, se alentar\u00eda a los distintos ministerios a considerar el impacto ambiental y su posible mitigaci\u00f3n al momento de elaborar pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas. En la actualidad, los contratistas de proyectos que surgen como resultado de una pol\u00edtica p\u00fablica est\u00e1n obligados -tal como los proyectos de inversi\u00f3n privada- a conseguir un permiso ambiental, pero las implicancias ambientales de las propias pol\u00edticas no est\u00e1n sujetas a una evaluaci\u00f3n previa. <\/P> \u201cPor primera vez, este nuevo proceso introducir\u00eda -si se implementa de manera correcta- al medio ambiente como un factor en las decisiones de pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas a trav\u00e9s de distintos sectores\u201d, se\u00f1ala Sandoval. No obstante, la trampa es que, en virtud del proyecto de ley en su actual forma, los ministerios s\u00f3lo estar\u00edan obligados a adoptar el sistema en caso de pol\u00edticas relacionadas con el uso de tierra y, para todas las dem\u00e1s, tendr\u00eda car\u00e1cter voluntario.<\/P> Otro de los cambios importantes al proyecto de ley, seg\u00fan Sandoval, es que obligar\u00eda a las empresas a usar la mejor tecnolog\u00eda disponible desde el punto de vista del impacto sobre el medio ambiente. \u201cDe seguro ello generar\u00e1 mucha discusi\u00f3n en el Congreso\u201d, prev\u00e9 \u201cporque el proyecto de ley ser\u00e1 acusado de interferir con las decisiones de las empresas\u201d.<\/P> Sin embargo, seg\u00fan Katz, esta provisi\u00f3n no ser\u00eda muy convincente. \u201cPara conseguir un permiso ambiental, las empresas, en la pr\u00e1ctica, ya est\u00e1n usando la mejor tecnolog\u00eda disponible\u201d, aduce.<\/P> Impacto sobre las Empresas<\/STRONG><\/P> M\u00e1s normas, una aplicaci\u00f3n m\u00e1s estricta y mayores sanciones sugieren costos m\u00e1s altos para las empresas. Sin embargo, el sector privado est\u00e1 mucho m\u00e1s preocupado sobre los propuestos cambios de la reforma al sistema de obtenci\u00f3n de permisos para invertir en proyectos. <\/P> Seg\u00fan la ley, el Ministerio de Medio Ambiente no ser\u00eda responsable de evaluar los estudios de impacto ambiental presentados por nuevos proyectos. Esa responsabilidad, en cambio, se escindir\u00eda a un Servicio de Impacto Ambiental aut\u00f3nomo que, promete la ministra Uriarte, entregar\u00eda un servicio m\u00e1s eficiente y, posiblemente, m\u00e1s r\u00e1pido que el actual sistema coordinado por la CONAMA.<\/P> Ese no es el problema. Lo que es un problema, dicen las empresas, es que esto ir\u00eda de la mano con la abolici\u00f3n de las Comisiones Regionales de Medio Ambiente (COREMA) que actualmente son responsables de decidir, basadas en la informaci\u00f3n entregada por los distintos servicios p\u00fablicos, si entregan el visto bueno a un proyecto que se localizar\u00eda en su regi\u00f3n.<\/P> Esta decisi\u00f3n, en cambio, quedar\u00eda en manos de un comit\u00e9 formado por los representantes regionales de los principales ministerios del Gobierno que -a diferencia de las COREMA- no incluir\u00edan al intendente de la regi\u00f3n, los gobernadores de sus provincias o miembros del Consejo Regional (CORE). La idea, se\u00f1ala Sandoval, era asegurar una decisi\u00f3n m\u00e1s t\u00e9cnica que pol\u00edtica.<\/P> Pero ese es un tema debatible, admite. \u201cNi siquiera las decisiones de los t\u00e9cnicos son neutrales\u201d, afirma, \u201cporque act\u00faan sobre la base de la visi\u00f3n que tienen del mundo\u201d.<\/P> M\u00e1s a\u00fan, la propuesta ha sido ampliamente criticada por aumentar el poder del Gobierno en Santiago a costa de las regiones. Eso no es necesariamente algo malo, argumenta Sandoval: \u201cLa visi\u00f3n en una regi\u00f3n puede ser influida por preocupaciones locales y una perspectiva nacional m\u00e1s amplia tambi\u00e9n es necesaria\u201d, destaca.<\/P> Pero la legitimaci\u00f3n local es importante, asevera Charles Kimber de Arauco. \u201cAun cuando el rol del intendente regional es pol\u00edtico, es importante a nivel local y el actual sistema ha funcionado bien\u201d, dice.<\/P> Y una preocupaci\u00f3n a\u00fan mayor, seg\u00fan Kimber, es que la nueva Superintendencia de Medio Ambiente tendr\u00eda el poder de suspender e incluso confiscar, un permiso ambiental en caso de un impacto no previsto en el estudio presentado por un proyecto. Eso es complicado, sostiene, porque los problemas ambientales pueden ser complejos y no siempre es f\u00e1cil identificar su causa.<\/P> Ricardo Katz tambi\u00e9n se hace eco de su preocupaci\u00f3n. \u201cEn virtud del actual sistema, un permiso ambiental es, en la pr\u00e1ctica, un contrato entre el servicio que lo adjudic\u00f3 y la empresa que lo recibe mientras que, seg\u00fan el proyecto de ley, habr\u00eda un tercero -la Superintendencia- con el poder de interpretar ese contrato\u201d, destaca.<\/P> Y todav\u00eda hay otra pregunta: \u00bfcu\u00e1ndo ver\u00e1 la luz la nueva ley? Con unas 80 enmiendas ya presentadas, es posible que el debate en el Congreso sea prolongado y hay una alta probabilidad de que el proyecto de ley no se apruebe antes del t\u00e9rmino del actual Gobierno en marzo del 2010.<\/P> Eso no es bueno para la inversi\u00f3n. \u201cCuando estamos hablando de un \u00e1rea como el medio ambiente que es tan importante para la competitividad, los inversionistas necesitan reglas claras\u201d, subraya Kimber.<\/P> Y tambi\u00e9n es malo para el medio ambiente, a\u00f1ade Katz. \u201cPor los pr\u00f3ximos dos a\u00f1os, estaremos preocupados por la nueva ley, en lugar de proteger el medio ambiente\u201d, se lamenta.<\/P> Ruth Bradley<\/STRONG> es editora general de bUSiness CHILE<\/STRONG> adem\u00e1s de corresponsal en Santiago de The Economist.<\/P> A bill before Congress to reform Chile\u2019s environmental regulatory system raises more questions than it answers. That, at least, is the conclusion if differences of opinion are any guide. <\/p>\n While the government claims that the bill would take the politics out of the award of environmental permits without affecting the say of the country\u2019s regions, its critics maintain that it would make the process not only more political but also more subject to central government control. <\/p>\n And, while Environment Minister Ana Lya Uriarte says the reform would help businesses by making the process simpler and clearer, businesspeople themselves are concerned that it would reduce clarity by allowing a new institution – a Superintendency for the Environment – to suspend and even confiscate a permit once it has been granted. <\/p>\n And the questions go even deeper. Is a new law really necessary? And would the bill currently before Congress make things better or worse? <\/p>\n Where there is no disagreement is on the fact that the present system of environmental regulation, headed by the National Commission for the Environment (CONAMA), needs some fine-tuning. Since its creation in the mid-1990s, Chile\u2019s international integration has increased and consumers in the country\u2019s export markets have become far more concerned about the way goods are produced and their impact on the environment.<\/p>\n That is a particularly important consideration now that Chile is seeking membership of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) which, in a report in 2005 on Chile\u2019s environmental performance, wasn\u2019t exactly full of praise. \u201cGiven that, on some issues, Chile has a long way to go before reaching the standards of most OECD countries, it needs to strengthen and considerably expand its environmental institutions,\u201d stated the report. <\/p>\n Local experts agree that the present system has not delivered in some areas. CONAMA\u2019s Council of Ministers – its equivalent of a board of directors – has not fulfilled its function of drawing up environmental policies, says Ricardo Katz, a researcher at the Centro de Estudios P\u00fablicos, a think-tank.<\/p>\n There is also consensus that CONAMA has been slow in issuing environmental norms, a problem also noted by the OECD. \u201cBut you don\u2019t need a new law to resolve that; it\u2019s just a question of resources,\u201d counters Katz. <\/p>\n Nor do you need a new law to improve management and technical standards, says Charles Kimber, corporate affairs and marketing director at the Arauco forestry company and chair of AmCham\u2019s Corporate Affairs, CSR and Environmental Committee. These are, in his view, the two key areas in which the present system has room for improvement. <\/p>\n Coordination or control? <\/b><\/font><\/p>\n The discrepancies are hardly surprising. The bill that the government presented to Congress in June would, after all, go beyond a face-lift to the present system; it would change the very principle on which it is based. <\/p>\n Environmental regulators can be divided into two basic types – those that coordinate the disperse powers of other public services and those that have their own clout. CONAMA falls into the former category.<\/p>\n For environmentalists, that is synonymous with demeaning the importance of the environment. \u201cToday, the environment needs to be on a par with areas like the economy, defense and agriculture,\u201d argues Manuel Baquedano, president of the Institute of Political Ecology, an environmental NGO.<\/p>\n In other words, it needs a ministry, not a mere coordinating agency, and that is precisely what President Michelle Bachelet promised in her election campaign. In March 2007, she made Ana Lya Uriarte, the executive director of CONAMA, a minister and, in the bill before Congress, is now seeking its authorization to create the ministry to go with her title. <\/p>\n According to Hern\u00e1n Sandoval, who chairs Chile Ambiente, an environmental NGO, and helped CONAMA draw up the bill, one important consideration in designing the proposed new regulatory structure was Chile\u2019s legal tradition. Inherited from Spain, it is grounded in authority, not coordination, he says. <\/p>\n Under the bill, a number of other ministries, such as Health, Housing and Agriculture, would cede some – although by no means all – of their powers to the new Ministry for the Environment. Because the environment pervades so many issues, it was not easy to know where to draw the line, admits Sandoval, adding that he expects the new distribution of ministerial powers to be the subject of intense debate in Congress, <\/p>\n Ricardo Katz, one of the authors of the 1994 law that created CONAMA, says he has no objection per se to the creation of a ministry, if it helps to raise the profile of environmental issues. \u201cBut it\u2019s important to maintain coordination,\u201d he insists. <\/p>\n And that, he fears, could suffer under the proposed new structure. CONAMA\u2019s 13-strong Council of Ministers may not have been good at drawing up policies but it has played an important role as a place to thrash out conflicts and in ensuring that decisions, once taken, are understood and implemented by different public services, he says. <\/p>\n There are, moreover, doubts as to how much authority the new ministry would really have. Like the powerful Finance Ministry, it would be taking decisions that affect many other portfolios but, in a conflict, would it be a match for, say, the weightier Health Ministry? <\/p>\n One incident suggests that not. The bill was originally intended to include a new public service for the protection of biodiversity and natural resources that would have absorbed the role of the National Forest Service (CONAF) in managing national parks. <\/p>\n But the Ministry of Agriculture, to which CONAF reports, objected. \u201cThe protection of natural resources was one of the big gaps of the 1994 law and now of this bill,\u201d says Katz, \u201cand it\u2019s something that should have been discussed in the Council of Ministers, not just with Agriculture.\u201d <\/p>\n Good for the environment?<\/b><\/font><\/p>\n The acid test of the new bill is, of course, what it would do for the environment. And, there, it would take an important step by strengthening enforcement. <\/p>\n That is identified as one of the key weaknesses of the present system. In its 2005 report, the OECD complained that CONAMA did not have sufficient inspectors and that, while other public services with responsibilities related to the environment did have the necessary staff and technical capacity, they often had other priorities. <\/p>\n Enforcement is a problem around Latin America, notes Baquedano. \u201cThe region has some very good environmental laws but they\u2019re not complied with,\u201d he argues.<\/p>\n In a bid to remedy this problem, Chile\u2019s proposed reform would include the creation of a new enforcement agency, the Superintendency of the Environment. It would play a crucial role in addressing the challenges posed by Chile\u2019s free trade agreements and its international competitiveness, said Minister Uriarte at a recent meeting of AmCham\u2019s<\/b> Corporate Affairs, CSR and Environmental Committee.<\/p>\n According to Uriarte, the Superintendency would also help to unravel the complex network of supervision by different public services to which companies in Chile are currently subject. In the case of projects that have received a permit through the system for evaluation of environment impact, the Superintendency would have exclusive supervision powers, she told bUSiness CHILE. <\/b><\/p>\n Another important advance, says Sandoval, is that, through the so-called process of strategic environment evaluation, different ministries would be encouraged to take environmental impact and its possible mitigation into account when drawing up public policies. At present, contractors for projects that result from a public policy are – like private-sector investment projects – obliged to obtain an environmental permit, but the environmental implications of the policies themselves are not subject to prior evaluation. <\/p>\n \u201cFor the first time, this new process would – if implemented correctly – introduce the environment as a factor in public policy decisions across different sectors,\u201d says Sandoval. The catch, though, is that, under the bill in its present form, ministries would only be obliged to adopt the system in the case of land-use policies and, for all others, it would be voluntary. <\/p>\n Another of the bill\u2019s important changes, according to Sandoval, is that it would oblige companies to use the \u201cbest available\u201d technology from the point of view of impact on the environment. \u201cThere\u2019s bound to be a lot of discussion about that in Congress,\u201d he predicts, \u201cbecause the bill will be accused of interfering with business decisions.\u201d <\/p>\n However, according to Katz, this provision wouldn\u2019t cut much ice. \u201cTo get an environmental permit, companies are, in practice, already using the best available technology,\u201d he argues.<\/p>\n Impact on business<\/b><\/font><\/p>\n More norms, tighter enforcement and increased sanctions suggest higher costs for businesses. The private sector is, however, far more concerned about the reform\u2019s proposed changes to the system for obtaining a permit for investment projects. <\/p>\n Under the bill, the Ministry for the Environment would not be responsible for evaluating the environmental impact studies presented by new projects. Instead, that responsibility would be spun off to an autonomous Environmental Impact Service which would, promises Minister Uriarte, provide a more efficient and, potentially, quicker service than the present system coordinated by CONAMA.<\/p>\n That isn\u2019t the problem. What is a problem, say businesses, is that this would go hand-in-hand with the abolition of the Regional Commissions for the Environment (COREMAs) currently responsible for deciding, on the basis of information provided by different public services, whether to give the go-ahead to a project that would be located in their region. <\/p>\n This decision would, instead, be left in the hands of a committee formed by the regional representatives of main government ministries that – unlike the COREMAs – would not include the region\u2019s governor, the governors of its provinces or members of the Regional Council (CORE). The idea, says Sandoval, was to ensure a more technical, rather than political, decision. <\/p>\n But that is a debatable issue, he admits. \u201cEven the decisions of technicians aren\u2019t neutral,\u201d he says, \u201cbecause they act on the basis of their view of the world.\u201d <\/p>\n Moreover, the proposal has been widely criticized as increasing the power of the government in Santiago at the expense of the regions. That is not necessarily a bad thing, argues Sandoval – \u201cthe view in a region can be swayed by local concerns and a broader national perspective is also needed,\u201d he says. <\/p>\n But local legitimacy is important, argues Arauco\u2019s Charles Kimber. \u201cEven if the regional governor\u2019s role is political, it\u2019s important locally and the present system has worked well,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n An even bigger concern, according to Kimber, is that the new Superintendency of the Environment would have the power to suspend, and even confiscate, an environmental permit in the case of an impact not foreseen in the study presented by a project. That is tricky, he says, because environmental problems can be complex and it\u2019s not always easy to identify their cause. And there is yet another question – when would the new law see the light of day? With some 80 amendments already presented, the debate in Congress is likely to be lengthy and there is a high chance that the bill won\u2019t be approved before the end of the present government in March 2010.<\/p>\n That isn\u2019t good for investment. \u201cWhen we\u2019re talking about an area like the environment that is so important for competitiveness, investors need clear rules,\u201d points out Kimber. <\/p>\n And it\u2019s also bad for the environment, adds Katz. \u201cFor the next two years, we\u2019re going to be worrying about the new law, instead of looking after the environment,\u201d he laments. <\/p>\n Ruth Bradley<\/b> is general editor of bUSiness CHILE<\/b>. She is also the Santiago correspondent for The Economist.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Tambi\u00e9n hay dudas respecto de cu\u00e1nta autoridad tendr\u00eda realmente el nuevo ministerio. Como el poderoso Ministerio de Hacienda, tomar\u00eda decisiones que afectar\u00edan a muchas otras carteras pero, en un conflicto, \u00bfestar\u00eda empatado con -digamos- el m\u00e1s poderoso Ministerio de Salud?<\/P> Un incidente sugiere que no.A bill before Congress may face a long haul but has focused attention on the virtues, as well as the shortcomings, of Chile\u2019s environmental regulation and its role in the country\u2019s international competitiveness.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"template":"","news_tax":[],"user_type":[],"class_list":["post-3994","news","type-news","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\nA bill before Congress may face a long haul but has focused attention on the virtues, as well as the shortcomings, of Chile\u2019s environmental regulation and its role in the country\u2019s international competitiveness.<\/b><\/I> <\/p>\n
\nHis concern is echoed by Ricardo Katz. \u201cUnder the present system, an environmental permit is, in practice, a contract between the service that awarded it and the company that receives it whereas, under the bill, there would be a third party – the Superintendency – with the power to interpret that contract,\u201d he points out. <\/p>\n
\n