Privatization — the transfer of state owned and managed enterprises into the hands of the private sector — is a central task for the emerging democracies of Central and Eastern Europe. This process, which requires the untangling of 45 years of state control and management, is even more difficult than was earlier imagined because of the parallel legacy of 45 or more years of environmental neglect.

Editors' Summary: From June 1 to June 12, 1992, the United Nations (U.N.) Conference on Environment and Development, commonly referred to as the Earth Summit, is scheduled to meet in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. This conference has been hailed as a "constitutional convention" for the global environment. Conference organizers estimate that 15,000 representatives from more than 150 nations will participate. Issues on the agenda include such high-profile topics as climate change, forest conservation, and biodiversity.

Editors' Summary: 1993 will mark the 20th anniversary of Oregon's experiment in managing growth and land use through a statewide planning program. As a pioneering effort, Oregon's program has evolved and weathered implementation battles in court, as well as repeal initiatives at the ballot box. Yet, the original proponents of Oregon's program knew that wresting control over local land use decisions from local governments in order to achieve statewide growth management policies would not be easy.

Editors' Summary: EPA has set numerous records in recent years in assessing civil penalties against violators of environmental laws. This Comment explains how EPA uses guidance documents called civil penalty policies to calculate civil penalties. The various federal environmental statutes leave EPA with considerable discretion in setting a civil penalty amount. The author describes this statutory framework and then discusses the role of EPA's civil penalty policies in administrative and judicial enforcement actions.

You have just received a telephone call from an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official asking whether your company or trade association is interested in participating in a regulatory negotiation to develop a new or amended regulation that the Agency will issue under an environmental statute. Or your client asks your advice on whether to participate. What will you say? It is increasingly likely that you may receive such a call.

Editors' Summary: The European Community (EC or the Community), in building its supranational political structure in preparation for full economic integration, increasingly regulates the conduct of individuals and corporations and obligates member nations to implement its regulatory decisions. This regulation is most evident in the environmental arena, and perhaps most significant to those doing business in Europe.

Editors' Summary: On the last day of its 1992 Spring Term, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its long-awaited decision on land-use regulation in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 22 ELR 21104. In Lucas, a 5-4 majority of the Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment requires states to pay compensation when regulations enacted for public purposes, such as environmental protection, deprive landowners of all economically beneficial uses of their property.

Editors' Summary: Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council evoked great interest during the U.S. Supreme Court's 1991-92 Term, attracting dozens of amicus briefs and producing speculation about whether the case would be a referendum on the entire environmental movement. In Lucas, the Court reversed the South Carolina Supreme Court's ruling that no compensation is due under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution when a landowner's private use threatens serious public harm.

Editors' Summary: Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council evoked great interest during the U.S. Supreme Court's 1991-92 Term, attracting dozens of amicus briefs and producing speculation about whether the case would be a referendum on the entire environmental movement. In Lucas, the Court reversed the South Carolina Supreme Court's ruling that no compensation is due under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution when a landowner's private use threatens serious public harm.

In negotiating a comprehensive trade accord, the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States have taken an important step to link and boost their economies. Although many believe the new pact — the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) — would benefit the United States, NAFTA may run into formidable opposition in Congress on ecological grounds.¹ This opposition has been brought to light by numerous environmental and consumer groups which have questioned whether NAFTA does enough to protect the environment and public health.