Instruments of state responsibility for natural and social environments in the context of the theory of internalisation of external costs
In this article, the theory is referred of internalisation of external costs and the research gap made by the doctrine of social responsibility in relation to the goods and services of ecosystems used by organisations located on the territory of the state. Six premises for taking up the topic were indicated. Firstly, it was the concept of the state understood as the organisation of a global society and subject to superior power. Secondly, it was the social responsibility of the territory, and therefore, striving to create at the local level a system of well-being and high quality of life based on good management and social participation and social economy that contradict the vision of the territory operating under market competition conditions. Thirdly, it was the opinion that the biotic community includes all living organisms in a given territory, which means that community members are not seen as autonomous beings separated from nature. Fourthly, it was recognized that the organization's goals are considered to implement a global development strategy when in fact they cannot follow their national success outside the home region. Fifthly, the ambiguous term environment is a key factor in knowing the society what requires thinking about economic events that shape the society lives in nature. The sixth premise for the explanation of the issue in question is the term protection understood, among other things, as all social relations affecting the behaviour, attitudes and experiences of members of society in the state.
On the basis of these premises, reference was made to the problem of: administrative permits to cause damage to the state's ecosystems; investments to remove damage caused to ecosystems; economics of ecosystem services and damage removal; administrative fines for damages caused when there is no authorisation for them; integrated permits to deal with damage to ecosystems. The discussion drew attention to the necessity to look for innovative empirical tools based on the theory of external costs and the history of ecosystems in the genetic and qualitative sense, and on explaining social behaviour to claim rights to protect natural and social environments.
In the context of the article, the definition of the social responsibility of the state was proposed.
Keywords: external costs, internalisation determinants, mining damages, social expenditures, economic instruments, state management.
Słowa kluczowe: koszty zewnętrzne, determinanty internalizacji, szkody górnicze, nakłady społeczne, instrumenty ekonomiczne, zarządzanie państwem.