James Lehane’s scientific contributions

Environmental Enforcement Networks (hereafter EENs or networks) generally have different foci in terms of commodities, sectors and regulated communities. Networks can also be quite specific in terms of the nature of their regulatory, compliance and enforcement activities, initiatives (e.g. undertaking joint inspections or collaborative projects) and responses (whether administrative, civil or criminal in nature) that the EEN undertakes. This chapter considers the past, present and future of EENs, as their role, purpose, utility and importance has been the subject of much discussion. Moreover, this discussion has increasingly resulted in the focused research of Regional EENs. This chapter commences with an overview of EENs in terms of their past and present before moving on to consider their future. Given the nature of EENs and the fact that they will largely shape their own future, the central issue of this chapter considers the research results and analysis arising from the input of the research participants who are actively engaged in Regional EENs. The chapter concludes with recommendations based upon their input.

Climate change regulation, like all forms of regulation, requires allegations of non-compliance to be investigated. Enforcing climate change law and regulations is already sufficiently challenging given a myriad of social, economic and environmental issues. However, climate change regulation is further complicated due to cross-jurisdictional issues, transnational factors and its intersection with traditional and crossover crimes such as fraud and money laundering. It is anticipated that both non-compliant entities and organised criminal enterprises will challenge and frustrate the efforts of government regulators as they attempt to enforce climate change legislation. Therefore climate change regulators have much to learn from the experiences of other enforcement and regulatory agencies that have cooperated and worked collaboratively through various Environmental Enforcement Networks to advance and maximise their enforcement effort. This chapter considers the opportunities for cooperation, it recommends the establishment of a Climate Change Enforcement Network, and provides information for consideration if such a network was established. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media New York. All rights are reserved.

Networks of various forms and functions have been utilised for enforcement action against environmental crimes through working cooperatively on better regulation, policy, procedures and practice. Networked responses are in place focusing on a range of issues relating to environmental crime, across various commodities, jurisdictions and professional streams.Over the past number of decades, the number of networks operating in the environmental law, policy and practice arena has increased. In our region, the Australasian Environmental Law Enforcement and Regulators neTwork (AELERT) was established in 2004 to bring together environmental law enforcement agencies to work together more cooperatively. Since its establishment, AELERT has grown significantly in terms of membership and areas of cooperation. Delivering tangible benefits to contributing member agencies, AELERT is now well recognised in various international forums as a successful network model.The recent documenting of the evolution of AELERT and publication of contemporary research on environmental compliance and enforcement networks supported the development of a Network Evaluation Matrix during early 2011. The Network Evaluation Matrix (NEM) provides guidance for networks to aid their future development and identification of areas requiring attention. Being first presented at the International Conference on Environmental Compliance and Enforcement, the NEM gained support from regional environmental enforcement networks around the globe, with a commitment to undertake a series of self-assessments to determine the level of network maturity.Bringing together a number of issues, the following question will be considered: Are networks a response of choice or need for environmental enforcement agencies in their efforts to combat environmental crimes?

This paper documents the evolution of the Australasian Environmental Law Enforcement and Regulators neTwork (AELERT), through several phases, focussing on both the accomplishments and challenges encountered along the way. Commencing as a national network with five Australian foundation member agencies in November 2004, by November 2010 membership of AELERT has grown to incorporate over 75 member agencies. Significantly, membership is truly representative as it includes members drawn from all three levels of government and each of the eight Australian jurisdictions and both levels of government in New Zealand. AELERT has evolved organically, rising from a ‘bottom-up’ practitioner base in the early years to being recognised by a ‘top-down’ Ministerial level body as a professional network of similarly aligned member agencies with an increasing regional and international profile.

Despite sharing relatively common purposes, Environmental Enforcement Networks are each unique. Part of this is because the circumstances vary under which they were established. A range of factors influence their development and ultimately determine their relative capability and potential maturity as a network.This paper postulates five possible phases of development through which Environmental Enforcement Networks may transition. Further, it suggests that the application of Capability Maturity Model processes, like those used as part of organizational assessments, is worthy of consideration by Environmental Enforcement Networks. The ability to determine the phase of development that an Environmental Enforcement Network is going through enables mapping the progression of the network through that phase.The authors consider that this conceptual model framework may assist and guide networks to reach their next level of maturity more effectively and efficiently. This paper proposes a Network Evaluation Matrix that has been informed by the foundational Capability Maturity Model framework.

Introducing proactive practices and procedures as part of delivering environmental compliance and enforcement should result in reducing risks and provide environmental regulatory agencies with the ability to better target high risk activities and more serious areas of non-compliance instead of continually reacting to emerging threats. This paper considers the concept of strategic intelligence as an organisational function and how it can be integrated into organisational risk management. Aimed to be a thought provoker and discussion prompter, this paper draws upon a range of literature across a spectrum of industries, commodities and professional streams.