ADDRESSING INDUSTRIAL AIR POLLUTION IN KAZAKHSTAN : reforming environmental payments policy guidelines.

Foreword
Acknowledgements
List of abbreviations
Executive summary
	Notes
Chapter 1.  What are the issues?
	1.1. The overall cost of air pollution – the single greatest environmental health risk
	1.2. Why is it important to address air pollution in Kazakhstan?
	1.3. A very much command-and-control environmental regulatory framework
	1.4. Environmentally related taxes for industrial air pollutants: Focusing on raising revenues
		1.4.1. ERT are now below OECD comparators
		1.4.2. However, their design for industrial air pollutants is complex and diverges from OECD/EU acquis
			EQS/MAC
			ELV
			Environmentally related taxes for air polluting emissions from stationary sources
		1.4.3. The system is largely discretionary and discriminatory
		1.4.4. High administrative costs discourage abatement
	1.5. Air pollution regulations and environmentally related taxes in the OECD
		1.5.1. The challenge of environmental fiscal reform, rationales and factors shaping the design of environmentally related taxes
		1.5.2. Choosing between market-based instruments and regulations
		1.5.3. Choosing among MBIs: Taxes/fees/charges, trading or tax incentives
	Notes
	References
Chapter 2.  How to charge taxes for air pollutants from stationary sources?
	2.1. Introduction
	2.2. Comparative analysis
		2.2.1. The “pure” tax rate model
		2.2.2. The ELV/BAT model without payments for emissions within the limits
		2.2.3. The ELV/BAT model with payments for emissions within the limits
	2.3. Proposed recommendations
		2.3.1. Reduce discretionary powers and avoid any forms of discrimination
		2.3.2. Further focus the tax base on priority pollutants
		2.3.3. Progressively increase the tax rates/charges in line with abatement costs
		2.3.4. Carefully assess the option of setting up environmental funds
		2.3.5. Sustain efforts towards OECD/EU acquis and analysis on AQS, BAT/ELV and IEP
			Air quality standards
			“Quick-wins” for process improvements, before the adoption of a BAT-model
		2.3.6. BAT/ELV
			Scope and benefits of BAT
			Derogation in OECD members
			Process followed
			Awareness development and communication
			Implementation period
			Specific recommendations to plan for BAT-led environmental regulations
			Framework conditions for innovation
	Notes
	References
Chapter 3.  Moving to a broader and more effective range of non-compliance responses
	3.1. Introduction
	3.2. Comparative analysis
		3.2.1. Enforcement pyramid and the choice of response
			In Kazakhstan
			OECD member countries and the non-compliance enforcement pyramid
		3.2.2. Administrative enforcement
			In Kazakhstan
			OECD member countries
		3.2.3. Penalty assessment
			In Kazakhstan
			OECD member countries
		3.2.4. Civil judicial enforcement
			In Kazakhstan
			OECD member countries
		3.2.5. Criminal enforcement
			In Kazakhstan
			OECD member countries
		3.2.6. Citizen enforcement
			In Kazakhstan
			OECD member countries
	3.3. Proposed recommendations
		3.3.1. Fully use compliance assurance and approaches of an enforcement pyramid
		3.3.2. Reform the system for penalties/fines following a min-max amount per day, non-discriminatory model with a gravity component
		3.3.3. Delink criminal liability from civil monetary damages
		3.3.4. Improve the effectiveness of penalties
		3.3.5. Adjust legislative acts, principles and tools for enforcement
			Principles of good regulation
			Risk management and compliance assurance
			Self-monitoring and use of third-party assurance
			Environmental auditing
			Better use of new technology and information, including digitalisation, artificial intelligence and remote sensing
	Notes
	References
Chapter 4.  What to do about monetary damages for industrial air pollutants?
	4.1. Introduction
	4.2. Comparative analysis
		4.2.1. Legal framework for environmental liability
			In Kazakhstan
			OECD member countries
		4.2.2. Assessment of environmental damage
			In Kazakhstan
				What and when
				The direct/indirect method
				The missing reference to equivalency analysis
				The very notion of environmental damage
			OECD member countries
		4.2.3. Environmental liability and financial security
			In Kazakhstan
			OECD member countries
	4.3. Proposed recommendations
		4.3.1. Eliminate any form of fault-based damages (e.g. liability arising from unauthorised emissions or exceeding a limit in an IEP) and discrimination
		4.3.2. Define further environmental damage
		4.3.3. Move towards equivalency analysis to assess damages instead of the indirect method
		4.3.4. Reserve power to bring lawsuits in the public interest to state authorities
		4.3.5. Strengthen the requirements for operators to make financial provisions
	Notes
	References
Chapter 5.  Conclusions and ways forward
	5.1. Introduction
	5.2. Deepening the implementation plans at sectoral level
	5.3. Communicating, co-operating and building multi-level capacity for enforcement
	5.4. Enhancing data availability and quality for adequate monitoring and evaluation
	5.5. Enforcing at ground level with adequate incentives
	5.6. Drawing resource implications for better compliance, possibly with cost recovery charges
	5.7. Furthering the work on air pollution from mobile sources
	Notes
	References
		Annex A. Historical overview of the evolution of payments for emission
Annex A. Historical overview of the evolution of payments for emission
	Evolution of the collection of payments for emissions in Kazakhstan
	Categorisation of environmental charges and payers
Annex B. Environment Agency (England): Interventions available for enforcement
	Advice and guidance
	Warnings
	Notices, powers and orders
	Civil penalties for climate change schemes
	Civil sanctions
	Criminal proceedings
	Notes
Annex C. Illustration of a penalty calculation with a gravity component
Annex D. Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) using equivalency analysis
	Equivalency analysis and the ELD
	Key steps in conducting an equivalency analysis
	Equivalency methods: Strengths and weaknesses
	Notes
Annex E. Means of evidencing financial provision
	Cash deposit
	Charge on assets (trust funds, escrow accounts and cash deposits)
	Risk transfer (insurance, letters of credit, bank guarantees and surety bonds)
	Financial test (self-insurance, self-bonds and parent company guarantees)
	Compensation funds
Annex F. Terminology
	Notes
	References