Ecological Interstate Systems as an Object of Legal Research

Shynggys K. Yergobek, Saltanat K. Atakhanova, Kamilya Zh. Altayeva,Lyazzat B. Nyssanbekova, Zhuldyz B. Umbetbayeva

1 Center for Accreditation and Quality of the Educational Programmes, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University; 050040,71 Al-Farabi Ave., Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan

2 Department of Civil Law and Civil Procedure, Labor Law, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University; 050040, 71 Al-Farabi Ave., Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan

3 Department of International Law, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University; 0500407, 71 Al-Farabi Ave., Almaty,Republic of Kazakhstan

1 Introduction

Analysis of modern research gives grounds to conclude that the significant obstacles to the implementation of existing legislation are the low level of environmental programs’ financing, the lack of scientific research in this area, as well as the unsatisfactory level of scientific development of resource-saving technologies, neglect of domestic and foreign best practices.

Particular attention in the understanding of ecological systems as a single component of the national ecological system and interstate relations is observed in the process of social production’s ecologization. The process of social production’s ecologization should be carried out taking into account a fundamentally new ideology of nature management in the context of implementing the foundations of resource-saving, resourcerenewing technologies. For this purpose, the countries of the former USSR should harmonize the national environmental legislation, and also adapt the requirements of environmental safety of economic and business activities to the standards of international space. Along with this, the ecological state of the environment, the level and character of nature use and environmental protection measures, the environmental safety of the technologies introduced, the level of entrepreneurship’s ecologization must also correspond to the generally recognized principles of sustainable development.

Foreign practice shows that the basis of the entire system of environmental protection in economically developed countries is active state regulation, in which significant priorities are given to economic stimulation and support of entrepreneurship, development towards the ecologization of social production.

Practice of entrepreneurial activity and world experience confirm the feasibility of implementing environmental and economic goals using such regulatory mechanisms as:

· direct state regulation (regulatory, supervisory and incentive measures, direct regulation, etc.);

· economic incentives for the use of market mechanisms;

· mixed mechanisms that combine the above approaches.

At the same time, there is a clear mechanism for the financial provision of such regulation (domestic savings, budget funds, domestic and foreign eco-investments, loans, trustees, etc.). Great importance is also attached to the actions of public environmental organizations, environmental culture, education, upbringing and education.

Foreign countries use a considerable arsenal of economic levers and means of regulation. They are quite effective and diverse. As a result, considerable experience has been accumulated in the use of various economic methods and instruments to regulate the process of entrepreneurship’s ecologization at macro and microlevel economies in many economically developed countries of the world. In the US, as in Europe, priorities have changed in the fight against atmospheric pollution. The main programs are not aimed at the introduction of cleaning equipment, but on the creation of environmentally friendly technologies.

The US Water Act provides for the implementation of 16 environmental programs. Criminal liability for deliberate discharges of pollutants that threaten the health and life of people has been established.

Having created the necessary economic mechanism, the Americans managed not only to stop further pollution of the environment, but also to significantly improve its quality. In the United States, targeted environmental protection measures are established by the Federal Agency for Nature Protection, and then each state separately offers specific measures for their implementation, linking them with the development plans of the industry. An effective means of controlling emissions is the introduction by the US Environmental Protection Agency of "permits" for the permissible amount of pollutants that can be released into the environment. This event enabled firms, whose pollutants’ emissions are less than the limit set for them, to sell their rights to other firms. The market for rights to environmental pollution has been created in the state. Having formed a bank of permits for environmental pollution, the US government improved the ecological situation in the country.

In the countries of Western Europe, special nature protection programs have been developed since 1973,in which the idea of sustainable development was generally recognized, according to which ecological and economic goals coincide in dynamics; and at the level of the European Union, its member countries developed principles and common measures for legislative acts in the field of nature protection.

In France, control over the water protection is carried out on the basis of the law adopted in 1964. Under this law, 6 basin administrations operate in the country. In the UK, according to the law on water resources(1973), the state of water quality is monitored by 10 regional water committees. In the Netherlands, in accordance with the law on surface water pollution, industrial enterprises and municipalities are required to have a license to discharge waste.

In Germany and the countries of the European Union, a strategy for environmentally oriented management and environmental entrepreneurship has been developed and is being implemented as one of the important areas of environmental modernization. This was facilitated by the growing role of environmental qualities and characteristics of goods and products on the market as prerequisites for their production and sales, increased public pressure on entrepreneurs who use natural resources, meet the environmental interests of the population and develop water legislation, increase the importance of environmental law and business.

In addition, all German companies are obliged to pass an environmental audit. Basically, the national standards regulating ecological audit have been adopted. Thus, the basic principles and provisions for environmental accounting within the EU were adopted in June 1993, which entered into force in April 1995.According to the estimates of the German Environmental Agency in the field of environmental training and professional development of specialists, currently professional environmental interests are grouped according to the degree of their priority for those who study, thus:

· waste recycling;

· environmental law;

· water management and wastewater treatment;

· soil protection;

· energy saving; environmental protection in enterprises;

· regional environmental planning (environmental program);

· environmental impact assessment;

· fight against chemical pollution of the environment;

· environmental policy;

· ecological aspects of agricultural production;

· international aspects of water resources’ protection;

· protection of biodiversity;

· environmental education;

· environmental consultation;

· water saving programs.

The state standards include the introduction of environmental quality standards for the aquatic environment, environmental safety, and environmental impact assessment. Taking into account environmental problems, a certification system has been established for production and certain types of products in many countries.

According to the estimations of the International Monetary Fund, the consumption of natural resources per unit of finished goods in these countries annually declines by an average of 1.25%, which causes a significant environmental effect, since under such conditions, the ecologization of production is economically profitable.This process is facilitated by the state financial and economic policy of stimulating the environmental activities of producers and enterprises through an effective system of environmental regulation that combines administrative and legislative tools with economic, regulatory and market mechanisms.

The main types of economic instruments for environmental regulation are:

· insurance of: activities in accordance with the character of their use of nature; risk of entrepreneurial activity; environmental and economic consequences of entrepreneurial activity;

· sanctions – fines for violation of environmental legislation;

· certificates – emission rights; rights to pollution – to buy and to sell; marketing authorizations; rights to eco-oriented activities;

· compensation payments to recipients for: improving the quality of the environment through technological upgrading; achievements in the field of rational use of natural resources; preservation(achievement) of the optimal state of the natural environment;

· prices – price programming expansion of environmentally-oriented sectors of the market; price regulation of entrepreneurs’ environmental behavior; price stimulation of domestic production of eco tech, environmental technologies and "green" goods;

· taxes – which are oriented toward a positive motivation for environmental conservation activities (tax incentives for environmentally oriented trade operations, tax incentives for the functioning of environmental infrastructure, tax incentives for eco-investment,

· payments for emissions (discharges) of harmful substances into the atmosphere, water sources, soil;storing (burial) of harmful substances in natural landscapes; physical types of environmental pollution;

· loans and borrowings include: preferential (for the purchase of environmental technology and eco tech);

· subsidies (dotations, grants), which are directed to the implementation of: state international environmental projects, R&D organization and financing; training of specialists, entrepreneurs;responsibility for a portion of the risk with enterprises for "pilot" environmental projects; formation of ecological infrastructure; research of domestic "green" technologies, alternative types of energy,production of environmentally friendly products and environmentally perfect products; accelerated depreciation of environmentally friendly equipment; environmental activities of the public and the inhabitants, etc.;

· lobbying (assistance) – to environmental trading operations; expansion of environmentally oriented economy sectors.

2 Literature review

In the progressive economically developed countries of the world, the value of the stimulating effect of economic instruments of environmental regulation on the economy and entrepreneurship development is growing (Allenet al., 2012). It is they that help to ensure the correspondence between the cost of production and natural resources; compensation of costs for damage to the environment; compensation of environmental damage by the polluter, and not by the whole society (Dyke et al., 2007). However, the share of environmental taxes of all taxes varies from country to country (Nie, 2008). In particular, in 2004 it constituted: in Cyprus – 11.9%, in the Netherlands – 10.3%, in Denmark – 9.8%, in Latvia – 9.1%, in Slovenia – 8.7%, in Luxembourg – 8.2%, in Ireland – 8.1%, in the Czech Republic – 7.5%, in Finland –7.4%, in Great Britain – 7.3%, in Poland – 6.9%, in Italy – 6.9%, in Greece – 6.8% %, in Estonia – 6.7%, in Germany – 6.5%, in Lithuania – 6.0%, in Spain – 5,8%, in Austria – 5.6%, in Belgium – 5.3%, in France –4.9%.

Thus, the social and environmental-economic integration of the post-Soviet countries must necessarily take into account the foreign experience of environmental regulation mechanisms through systematic improvement and alignment with the international legal, regulatory and methodological and institutional framework for environmental management and safety (Kim, 2013).

In our time, it is extremely important to increase budgetary financing and invest in innovative programs for the production’s ecologization (Levin et al., 1984). The introduction of market environmental management regulators should be carried out not only by administrative pressure, but also by creating favorable business conditions in which it would be economically beneficial for economic entities to meet environmental requirements, achieve environmental and economic goals (Nilsson and Bohman, 2015).

Therefore, the state-regulative mechanism for the ecologization of entrepreneurship requires unequivocal legal, financial and economic, organizational and information support (Bommarito and Katz, 2017).

The need for theoretical justification and implementation of practical steps in the environmental policy formation that includes care for nature preservation, the environment quality, the rational use of existing and potential natural resources, the maintenance of ecological balance in nature and finally, the provision of conditions for the human existence is recognized in all highly developed countries (Devos et al., 2013).Nowadays, national programs for the protection of the natural environment and the rational use of natural resources have been developed in many countries of the world (Stakhiv and Major, 1997). They are of a completely new nature in comparison with the past nature preservation policy, which had a limited scope and proceeded from the concept of eliminating the consequences of the natural environment violations, ignoring the causes and sources of these violations (which actually occurs in the post-Soviet countries up to this time)(Martínez and Calle, 2016).

Regarding the regulation of ecological systems, it is not only a question of forming a unified system for assessing environmental standards, but also of the possibility of stratifying certain elements of national environmental legislation, which should take into account all of the above and form the possibility of a transboundary understanding of the ecosystem value, taking into account the economic and management mechanism. It is noted, that each of the ecosystems has unique features and can have different meanings for each of the parties. In this regard, it is worth pointing out that it is possible to define other priorities in the formation of a holistic understanding of the direction of ecosystems regulation in general.

3 Materials and methods

Combined methods of investigation are used in the work. If we talk about the possibility of studying transboundary ecological systems, then it is expedient to apply the geoinformation method, which was used in the work to allocate the subject of research. The legal and legislative provision of the work’s topic required the application of a historical, comparative and legal and integrated method. In this case, was considered the possibility of identifying block country entities, which, by common conditions, form an innovative environment that affects not only regulation of individual ecosystems, but also mechanisms for monitoring and forecasting individual environmental elements. And since all of the proposed measures have financial and economic consequences, the method of economic control was applied (for the integrated assessment) in the aspect of identifying the most rational economic decisions in regulating the management of transboundary ecological systems and specific natural components in general.

4 Results and discussions

An example of the practical implementation of ecosystem programs is the wetland conservation program adopted by the Government of Canada in 1991. The main objectives of this program are to create conditions for the nature exploitation, use of natural resources, territories, lands in such a way that it does not cause losses and deterioration of wetlands; renewal and reproduction of wetlands where their degradation continues or the existence of these territories is at a critical level. The main criteria that determine the direction of activity in the short term are prevention of further destruction of these natural lands and prevention of damage to natural resources, in the long run – increasing the quantity and quality of wetland resources (fish resources, provision of services, recreation, flora and fauna), so that the volume of environmental and economic losses is reduced, and incomes are increased (Kelly et al., 1987).

Similar programs have been developed in other countries: the United States of America – The US Wetlands Action Plan, The US Environment Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers; the Netherlands – Danish "no loss" wetlands policy; the EU – European Union principles for the implementing a no net loss policy (Commission of the European Communities).

The policy of preserving the natural environment, new in its content, is embodied in the form of national programs, which provide for interaction between government bodies, the private sector, science, and financial institutions. Codes of laws on nature protection and its separate components have been adopted in all countries, where the functions of the state for the regulation of environmental activities are fixed, as well as the rights and duties of nature users (Arruda et al., 2015). A number of the legislative pyramid is always crowned by a single general (main) law on nature protection, which defines the general principles and objectives of the policy and is designed to ensure the conceptual homogeneity and integrity of the legislative policy in the field of nature management. These are the two general laws in some countries:

· violation of the natural sphere (pollution, destruction of landscapes, etc.);

· on the protection of flora and fauna.

Such laws in the United States are the Law on National Environmental Policy (1970), Japan – the basic law on pollution control (1967), Sweden – the Law on Environmental Protection (1969). The main law is applicable to legislative acts that regulate certain aspects of nature management for certain regions and zones,for the relevant sectors of the economy, for certain environment components (air, water resources),environmental disturbances (noise background, thermal radiation pollution), pollution carriers (petroleum products, pesticides) (Tsatsou et al., 2010). In foreign countries, in addition to specially authorized state bodies, including the sectoral ones, which are responsible for the state of the environment, central government bodies with high powers are created, responsible for the overall management of the national environmental policy, for coordinating the actions of other interested legal bodies and individuals, institutions and agencies,for participating in international cooperation programs. Such bodies in the USA are – the federal agency for environmental protection, Japan – the department for environmental protection, France – the ministry of quality of life (Vayena and Gasser, 2016).

In addition, governments in some countries have established advisory bodies: in the United States – the Council for Environmental Quality, in England – the Permanent Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (Onischenko, 2015).

In the basis of the environmental protection policy and financing of environmental measures lies the principle of the normative quality of the environment, the achievement of which is ensured either by the system of norms and standards for the maximum permissible levels of anthropogenic load, the composition of pollution, emissions, discharges, or the taxation system of enterprises that violate established environmental management requirements. Both principles can be organically combined (La Point and Perry, 1989).Regulation of environmental protection in foreign countries is accompanied and supported by a system of economic levers of incentives and administrative sanctions. States use various means to stimulate private capital, encouraging it to implement new legislation. In the countries of the European Commonwealth as a whole, there are more than 200 such mechanisms (Kelly and Harwell, 1989). Among them there are such as a direct subsidy for the construction and operation of environmental equipment, the construction of urban and district water treatment facilities, which free businesses from excessive costs; preferential targeted lending to the private sector; system of tax benefits. Levers of compulsory nature are also being processed in parallel with stimulation, which are applied to violators of environmental norms and standards. First of all, it is a ban on the production of any chemicals with increased toxicity, the requirement to stop the emission of pollutants into the environment in cities and regions where a critical situation in the sanitary-hygienic state has developed. In some countries, a progressive tax for excessive emissions of pollutants and other harmful substances is established for enterprises that pollute the environment (Devos et al., 2012). A number of legislative systems provide for fines in case of non-compliance with established environmental standards, and in some cases – imprisonment of law violators or prohibition of enterprises’ production activities. All developed countries take on the bulk of the costs of basic scientific research and training for the environmental protection sector and the rational use of natural resources, leaving the development and implementation of highly profitable applied scientific and technical works for private business (Trainar,2013). The amount of annual state appropriations for research in the field of ecology and conservation of natural resources is constantly increasing. For example, spending on environmental programs in Australia has more than doubled since 1996 (from $200 million to $420 million).

Special programs for the creation and development of national monitoring systems have been adopted in developed countries. The creation of a monitoring service means the allocation in all regions of the country where the concentration of sources of environmental pollution, the network of dosimetric and research stations, laboratories, points similar to hydrometeorological services (Banasiewicz, 2015). The incoming information is processed in special regional and national centers and brought to the attention of all citizens(Apitz, 2007).

The main efforts in Western Europe and the US are focused on reducing the volume of emissions of products’ residues in the biosphere. Priority is given to three main areas – combating atmosphere pollution, water resources pollution and the accumulation of solid waste. In Western Europe, the costs of protecting water resources from the harmful effects of residual products of production and consumption account for more than half of all national expenditures for environmental purposes. In the US, most of the expenditure is directed to reducing the level of air pollution. The main item of state spending on the water resources program is subsidies to local authorities for the construction of water treatment systems. Environmental protection measures are aimed at the environmental restriction of the individual’s activities, monopolies in order to maintain the ecological balance in nature, "rationing the use of natural resources". In order to create the most favorable conditions for the fulfillment of environmental requirements by monopolies, they receive significant support from the state in various forms. In many industrialized countries, industrial companies are provided with incentives in the form of accelerated depreciation of cleaning equipment, low interest or interest-free loans for environmental activities. A number of countries have a system of state guarantees for loans, which are provided for the purchase of "eco-technology" for private financial institutions. Such methods of economic stimulation of enterprises as exemption of owners of special environmental and control-diagnostic equipment from property taxes and taxes from profits are used.

The economic mechanism of nature management involves the inclusion of a significant portion of the total cost of restoring environmental quality in the state budgets’ expenditures and public financial and credit institutions, and also opens up ample opportunities for a profitable recovery of the total cost’s portion that is included in private capital expenditure. In developed countries, the nature and extent of the policy of preserving the environment are determined by the comparison of environmental interests with the material interests of the management system. Environmental requirements that go beyond this framework are partially implemented or not implemented at all, which ultimately has a stimulating effect on environmental policy and increases its effectiveness. In Japan, legislation and management of environmental protection are focused on the development of primarily health standards, additional emission limits for individual industries. It is in Japan that the world’s most severe sanitary and hygienic water quality standards are developed. The peculiarity of Japan’s environmental policy is the widespread use of a system of compensation for environmental damage that is paid to victims from industrial firms – environmental polluters.

Environmental policy of the UK is based primarily on the qualitative characteristics of environmental objects. Here it is recognized as necessary to assess the environment before the design of any construction,and in the future it is necessary to carry out periodic monitoring of the state of the environment. In environmental planning and management in England, the initial version of the environmental impact assessment is compared with other options for assessments, which allows optimal determination of the anthropogenic impact’s parameters. The environmental policy of Sweden is focused on the development of environmentally friendly technical and technological processes and equipment that contribute to the prevention of anthropogenic pollution of the atmosphere, waters, soils and other natural objects. Legal regulation of environmental protection in France is associated with the social concept of the life quality, the level of environmental awareness and education of the population, the reflection in the current legislation of the objective needs of protecting the environment of life and human activities. In India, a national committee for environmental planning and coordination has been established, tasked with developing recommendations for the government on legal, administrative and technical-environmental problems of the environment. In Mexico, all the programs for improving the environment are led by a coordinating committee chaired by the Minister of Health. National coordinating committees for the preservation of the environment exist in Brazil,Kenya, Zaire, Cameroon, Ghana and other countries. In Hungary, the management of nature conservation activities is distributed among various ministries and departments. In Poland, the issues of the use and protection of the environment are regulated by the Constitution, laws and other national legislative acts.Compliance with laws and regulations is controlled by the State Environmental Protection Inspectorate.

The increasing impact of human activities on the environment causes such undesirable changes in the natural environment, such as air pollution, oceans pollution, depletion of natural resources on a global scale.A violation of the ecological balance causes huge damage to the genetic pool of all living things, including humans. Therefore, the problem of harmonization of society and nature, the protection of the environment has acquired global significance, has found itself in effective international mechanisms that would ensure the preservation of ecological balance. For several decades, there has been a clear trend towards addressing many environmental issues at the international environmental level. The Stockholm Conference of 1972 was the stimulating impetus to international cooperation at the state level on the issues of ecology and nature protection. The Stockholm Declaration enshrined the fundamental right of people not only to adequate living conditions in their environment, but also to freedom and equality of the quality that would ensure their welfare and dignity. But international cooperation in the field of environmental protection itself began in the end of the XIX century, it was carried out through the channels of public organizations – the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, the World Wildlife Fund and the Scientific Committee on Environmental Problems. The objective need for international systems in the field of environmental protection at the international level follows from the global nature of the environmental crisis and the inability to protect the populations of migratory animals in another way.

The ideas of the Stockholm Conference were also developed in the decision of the Vienna Conference on the Protection of the Ozone Layer (1985), the Geneva Conference on Transboundary Air Pollution (1979-1983), the Montreal Protocol on Limits on the Use of Chlorofluorocarbons (1987). In 1982, the UN adopted the "World Charter of Nature", which proclaimed the responsibility of mankind for the state of nature for the first time at the international level. An important role was played by the International Law Forum in the field of environmental protection (held in Italy in 1990), and the report of the Burdand Commission, and the 1990 Moscow Declaration of the Global Environment Forum in Rio de Janeiro, which was attended by 100 countries and representatives of 50 states, and a number of other initiatives. At this conference, the program document "Agenda for the XXI Century" was adopted, containing a plan for international action on the environment at the turn of the XX and XXI centuries. The program "Humanity and global changes" is being implemented, the purpose of which is to study the relationship in the "person-environment of life" system. In 1995, the Council of Europe announced the opening of a new European Year of Nature Conservation, the main purpose of which is the protection of nature outside protected areas. Priority topics are: environmentally friendly agricultural production, industrial areas and natural environment, forestry and hunting, cultural and natural heritage, tourism and recreational areas, urban areas. This organization unites more than 30 states and operates in the interests of European unity.

Separately, we need to link the details of the economic evaluation of such a legislative initiative. There is an understanding that each of the proposed documents, which were analyzed above, has a character on the international level declarative. And at the level of local regulations, the economic basis is primarily a priority.

The inefficient economic system of the post-Soviet countries has led to inefficient use of resources and excessive energy consumption. In the system of state and regional management, incentive instruments for the conservation and economical use of natural resources were not created, the orientation toward extensive production and increasing gross indicators prevailed. A low level of environmental awareness of the society caused environmental degradation in post-Soviet countries, pollution of surface and groundwater, air and land, accumulation of harmful, including highly toxic, waste products in large quantities. Considering this, it is important to establish optimal interrelations between the economy and the environment, meet the needs of society and protect the environment.

The way out of the ecological crisis that is continuing in the post-Soviet countries is possible through the ecological renewal of equipment, the production infrastructure, the reform of the environmental management system, the improvement of legislative and legal and economic mechanisms for regulating environmental activities, the use of natural resources and their wastes. Formation of an effective environmental management system is impossible without studying foreign experience – spatial geoinformation data analysis, identifying specific features and causes that determine the choice of specific control mechanisms.

Only in the European Union countries there are more than 150 different environmental management mechanisms, which are divided into administrative, economic, market and based on active public participation. All states apply those management mechanisms that are optimally adapted to the model and state of development of the country, on their territory.

In recent years, in the management of environmental protection processes in Western European countries,the trend to narrow the direct state administration in the environmental sphere and to gradually switch to a wider use of market management mechanisms and mechanisms to increase the participation of citizens and enterprises in the protection environment has become important.

In foreign countries, a significant arsenal of economic levers and regulatory instruments, which are quite effective and diverse, is used. As a result, the importance of the stimulating effect of economic instruments of environmental regulation on the development of the economy is increasing.

In European countries, such economic mechanisms for environmental management are the most common:

· environmental charges for air pollution, pollution of water resources, noise pollution, waste disposal,etc.;

· payments for consumption of water, mineral and raw materials, land and fish resources;

· a system of pledge, which provides for the establishment of surcharges to retail prices for goods, the utilization of which is expedient after a period of operation. The collateral system is applied in France,Germany, Italy, Finland, Austria, Great Britain and other countries of the European Union. In Sweden,the collateral system is used in the car sales market. Thanks to these measures, more than 90% of cars sold in the country are subsequently handed over for recycling;

· soft loans and subsidies provided on a competitive basis for the implementation of various environmental programs. In some countries, subsidies are given to those firms that refuse to use pesticides and chemical pesticides. In recent years, Western European countries tend to abandon state subsidies in the sale of fertilizers. Failure to subsidize fertilizer consumption is perceived as a way by which soil can be saved from contamination as a result of excessive use of fertilizers and encourage biological methods to increase yields;

· taxes for harmful products (various types of fuel, fertilizers, pesticides, detergents, and the like);

Table 1 The income and distribution of environmental taxes in the EU countries in 2017

· penalties for administrative violations of environmental legislation that are levied on an ongoing basis when payments are not applied, as well as local charges for the disposal, cleaning of solid and soil wastes.

The need to introduce an environmental tax at the official level was first confirmed in the first European Union Environmental Action Program (1973), which was linked to the implementation of the "polluter pays"principle. The intensification of attention to environmental taxes and payments in the EU countries occurred in the second half of the 1980s of the XX century in connection with the ongoing transition in the field of environmental protection from command-administrative to economic management methods.

The Directorate of Taxes and Customs Duties of the European Commission has divided environmental taxes into seven groups by areas of use:

· energy taxes (for motor fuel, fossil fuels, electricity);

· transport taxes (taxes for miles traveled, annual tax on owners, excise taxes when buying a car);

· payment for pollution (emissions of pollutants into the atmosphere and emissions of harmful substances into water pools);

· payment for waste disposal in landfills and their processing and taxes on a number of special products(packaging, batteries, tires, lubricating oils, etc.);

· taxes on emissions of substances that lead to global changes (substances that deplete the ozone layer and greenhouse gases);

· noise tax;

· payments for the use of natural resources.

In 2008, in EU countries, revenues from environmental taxes accounted for about 2.4% of GDP as a whole for the EU (Table 1). Among the member states, the share of environmental taxes in GDP was highest in Denmark (5.7%), the Netherlands (3.9%), Bulgaria and Malta (3.5% each), and the lowest in Spain (1.6%),Lithuania (1.7%), Romania (1.8%), Latvia (1.9%).

The most common in Europe are transport and energy taxes. In 2008, energy taxes accounted for 72% of the total amount of environmental taxes in the EU, transport – 23%, and taxes on environmental pollution and use of natural resources – 5%. Energy taxes account for the largest part of environmental taxes in all member states, with the exception of Malta. The highest share of taxes on energy consumption was registered in Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic (93% of total revenues from environmental taxes) and Slovakia(90%). Transport taxes accounted for almost half of all environmental taxes in Cyprus (50%), Malta (48%)and Ireland (47%). The share of taxes on pollution and resource use was the largest in Denmark (31%), the Netherlands (17%) and Estonia (14%).

Certain taxes have been introduced in eight EU member states owing to the worsening of the environmental pollution problem by noise: in Bulgaria – payment for non-compliance with noise pollution standards, France – air noise pollution tax, Germany – air noise charges, Hungary – noise reduction duty,Italy and the Netherlands – taxes on aircraft noise, Romania – charge for non-compliance with noise pollution standards, in Sweden – noise pollution charges associated with aircraft landing. Pollution by noise is associated with the use of air transport, telecommunications and radar equipment.

In many countries, the state subsidizes the development of equipment, technologies, alternative sources of energy supplies, energy saving measures (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada). A type of subsidy such as tax incentives is common. Reducing taxes on more environmentally friendly cars is used in Germany, Austria, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands. In the US, there is a kind of government subsidies,such as the withdrawal of the total amount of taxes on dividends received on bonds. These sums of dividends are directed to combating pollution of water and land resources, atmospheric air, etc.

In Spain, along with tax incentives, special subsidies of up to 30% of investment costs for research activities on environmental monitoring, reduction of emissions and prevention of environmental pollution are provided. Subsidies to programs in the field of environmental protection are allocated to enterprises from the state budget or from special funds of ministries for the nature protection. For example, in Austria there is an environmental fund, in Sweden – a fund for the prevention of pollution from fuel combustion, in Turkey – a fund for the prevention of environmental pollution.

Institutions that provide subsidies are given certain functions similar to licensing. In most countries using subsidies, the current procedure is that according to which failure to meet established requirements entails the termination of financial assistance.

In France, Germany, Italy, Finland, Austria, Great Britain and a number of other countries, taxes have been imposed on lubricating oils, crude oil and petroleum products. This tax regulates the collection, storage and disposal of used oils. In Norway and Sweden, there is a tax on mineral fertilizers and pesticides. A fuel tax is currently being applied in the Netherlands, the proceeds of which are used to finance public environmental expenditures and encourage the reduction of sulfur dioxide emissions. The tax covers 50% of the expenses of the Ministry of Ecology, including the costs of preventing and reimbursing damage,subsidizing the introduction of advanced progressive technologies for cleaning and processing, as well as financing the temporary placement of chemical waste.

5 Conclusion

For several decades, internationally, there has been a clear trend towards addressing many environmental problems. And this is a positive moment, because both the post-Soviet countries and most foreign countries have many similar problems that arise because of insufficient regulation of the nature management system and the state’s environmental function. Assessing the effectiveness of decisions taken by foreign countries in the field of environmental management, it is easier to imagine the problems that can arise if similar methods of state regulation are applied in the post-Soviet countries; and, consequently, to identify the most promising directions for reforming the environmental management system within the framework of understanding transboundary ecological systems as a single object in the human environment.

The modern economic mechanism for environmental management, which exists in the post-Soviet countries, is characterized by the inflexibility of its tools, its non-constructiveness in overcoming the contradictions of the society interaction with the environment. In the current economic mechanism of the post-Soviet countries there are no such instruments as lending to environmental measures and concessional taxation.Therefore, it is necessary to improve the mechanisms of environmental protection management based on the use of foreign experience.

Moving in this direction, it is necessary to make changes in the system of environmental taxation in the post-Soviet countries, namely:

· introduce products and packaging taxation, replace environmentally hazardous substances;

· introduce concessional lending to enterprises that effectively conduct environmental protection (reducing the interest for the use of credit or interest-free provision of credit resources);

· develop a system of tax incentives for enterprises using resource-saving technologies and installing equipment with a high level of safety;

· introduce an environmental excise tax on environmentally friendly technologies for production and consumption. In European countries there is a tax on the production of harmful products, in particular various types of fuel – in the UK; packing, mineral fertilizers, pesticides – in Norway and Sweden;

· establish limits on emissions and discharges of harmful substances, increase tax rates for excess volumes;

· introduce a tax on noise impact (for example, in Hungary, the noise pollution tax was introduced as early as 1988).

Allen, C.R., Fontaine, J.J. and Garmestani, A.S. (2012),Ecosystems ecosystem Adaptive Management ecosystem adaptive management.In R.A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology (pp. 3342-3357). New York, NY: Springer New York.

Apitz, S.E. (2007),Conceptual Frameworks to Balance Ecosystem and Security Goals.In I. Linkov, R.J. Wenning, & G.A. Kiker(Eds.), Managing Critical Infrastructure Risks: Decision Tools and Applications for Port Security (pp. 147-173). Dordrecht:Springer Netherlands.

Arruda, C., Nogueira, V.S., Cozzi, A. and Costa, V. (2015).The Brazilian Entrepreneurial Ecosystem of Startups: An Analysis of Entrepreneurship Determinants in Brazil and the Perceptions Around the Brazilian Regulatory Framework. In R. Lèbre La Rovere, L. de Magalhães Ozório, & L. de Jesus Melo (Eds.), Entrepreneurship in BRICS: Policy and Research to Support Entrepreneurs (pp. 9-26). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Banasiewicz, A.D. (2015), The ecosystem of executive threats: A conceptual overview,Risk Management17(2), 109-143.

Bommarito II, M.J. and Katz, D.M. (2017), Measuring and Modeling the U.S. Regulatory Ecosystem,Journal of Statistical Physics168(5), 1125-1135.

Devos, Y., Craig, W. and Schiemann, J. (2012),Transgenic Crops transgenic crop, Risk Assessment transgenic crop breeding risk assessment and Regulatory Framework in the European Union transgenic crop breeding regulatory framework in the European Union. In R. A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology (pp. 10765-10796). New York, NY:Springer New York.

Devos, Y., Craig, W. and Schiemann, J. (2013),Transgenic Crops transgenic crop, Risk Assessment transgenic crop breeding risk assessment and Regulatory Framework in the European Union transgenic crop breeding regulatory framework in the European Union. In P. Christou, R. Savin, B.A. Costa-Pierce, I. Misztal, & C.B. A. Whitelaw (Eds.), Sustainable Food Production (pp.1666-1697). New York, NY: Springer New York.

Dyke, J., McDonald-Gibson, J., Di Paolo, E. and Harvey, I. (2007),Increasing Complexity Can Increase Stability in a Self-Regulating Ecosystem.In F. Almeida e Costa, L. M. Rocha, E. Costa, I. Harvey, & A. Coutinho (Eds.), Advances in Artificial Life: 9th European Conference, ECAL 2007, Lisbon, Portugal, September 10-14, 2007. Proceedings (pp. 133-142). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Kelly, J.R. and Harwell, M.A. (1989),Indicators of Ecosystem Response and Recovery.In S.A. Levin, J.R. Kelly, M.A. Harwell, &K.D. Kimball (Eds.), Ecotoxicology: Problems and Approaches (pp. 9-35). New York, NY: Springer New York.

Kelly, J.R., Duke, T.W., Harwell, M.A. and Harwell, C.C. (1987), An ecosystem perspective on potential impacts of drilling fluid discharges on seagrasses,Environmental Management11(4), 537-562.

Kim, J.-E. (2013), The incongruity between the ecosystem approach to high seas marine protected areas and the existing high seas conservation regime,Aegean Review of the Law of the Sea and Maritime Law2(1), 1-36.

La Point, T.W. and Perry, J.A. (1989), Use of experimental ecosystems in regulatory decision making,Environmental Management13(5), 539-544.

Levin, S.A., Kimball, K.D., McDowell, W.H. and Kimball, S.F. (1984), New perspectives in ecotoxicology,Environmental Management8(5), 375-442.

Nie, M. (2008), The underappreciated role of regulatory enforcement in natural resource conservation,Policy Sciences41(2), 139-164.

Nilsson, A.K. and Bohman, B. (2015), Legal prerequisites for ecosystem-based management in the Baltic Sea area: The example of eutrophication,Ambio44(3), 370-380.

Onischenko, N. (2015), Correlation of the national and international law: the scientific realities of our time,Journal of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine1(80), 29-36.

Pérez Martínez, J.E. and Serrano Calle, S. (2016),Future Paths of Evolution in the Digital Ecosystem.In M. Gómez-Uranga, J.M.Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, & J. Barrutia (Eds.), Dynamics of Big Internet Industry Groups and Future Trends: A View from Epigenetic Economics (pp. 179-200). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Stakhiv, E.Z. and Major, D.C. (1997),Ecosystem Evaluation, Climate Change and Water Resources Planning.In K.D. Frederick, D.C.Major, & E.Z. Stakhiv (Eds.), Climate Change and Water Resources Planning Criteria (pp. 103-120). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

Trainar, N. (2013),New Regulatory Approaches in an Evolving Market Structure.In E. Bertin, N. Crespi, & T. Magedanz (Eds.),Evolution of Telecommunication Services: The Convergence of Telecom and Internet: Technologies and Ecosystems (pp. 155-181). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Tsatsou, P., Elaluf-Calderwood, S. and Liebenau, J. (2010), Towards a taxonomy for regulatory issues in a digital business ecosystem in the EU,Journal of Information Technology25(3), 288-307.

Vayena, E. and Gasser, U. (2016),Strictly Biomedical? Sketching the Ethics of the Big Data Ecosystem in Biomedicine. In B. D. Mittelstadt & L. Floridi (Eds.), The Ethics of Biomedical Big Data (pp. 17-39). Cham: Springer International Publishing.