This year we are to debate the topic

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its
economic engagement with Cuba, Mexico, or Venezuela.
Now, when we usually think of economic engagement, the first thing that come to
mind are investments. But in thinking of economic engagement in simple terms of the
investment into other countries, we often overlook some of the more intricate,
underlying oppression that every day workers face. In particular, my partner Leo and I
would like to bring to light the often neglected problems regarding the horrendous
work conditions of the maquiladora factories located throughout Mexico.
Our first observation is the status quo, or the current state of these maquilas.
Omar Gill, a worker in these maquiladoras factories, draws from personal experiences,
when he describes the utter horrors of working in such a workplace
(http://detagreens.tripod.com/maquiladora.htm)
But working in the maquiladoras, it's not really possible to go to school, mainly because of time. Also,
the pay is low, and my job is very insecure. Despite all this, I haven't lost hope yet that I'll be able to go
back. It's just that I'm not 100 percent sure anymore. Now there are other factors as well. I don't have
any time to rest, and I'm getting physically exhausted. It's very hard. I've been in these factories since I
was 19 years old, and now I'm 26. I've gotten more and more worried, because I don't have time for
any kind of personal life. I leave work so tired that on the weekends I don't want to even leave the
house to go anywhere. I just want to rest. All my personal development has been put on hold so that I
can just rest, just so I'll be able to work. I feel like my youth has passed me by. Back in 1993 I got my
first job in a maquiladora, at Delphi Auto Parts. They paid 360 pesos a week (about $40). There was a lot
of pressure from the foremen on the assembly lines to work hard and produce, and a lot of accidents
because of the bad design of the lines. The company didn't give us adequate protective equipment to
deal with the chemicals - we didn't really have any idea of the dangers, or how we should protect
ourselves. The union there did nothing to protect us . From Delphi I went to another company,
National Auto Parts. In that plant we made car radiators for Cadillacs and Camaros, and there was a lot
of sickness and accidents there too. I worked in the area with the metal presses. There were no
ventilators to take the fumes out of the plant, and they didn't give us any gloves. We had to handle
the parts with our bare hands, and people got cut up a lot. I worked in an area with a lot of lead. If
you work with lead, you're supposed to have special clothing and your clothes should be washed
separately. But the company didn't give us any of that. We had to work in our street clothes. For all
that they paid 400 pesos a week (about $43). We had no union, and there was the same pressure for
production from the foremen and the group leaders as I saw at Delphi. Now I work at TRW, where I've
been for about a month and a half. There's really no difference in the conditions in any of these plants -
if anything, my situation now is even worse. You could say it's forced labor, considering how the
foremen talk to the workers, and how much psychological pressure they put on people. We work an
average of 14-15 hours a day. There's no transport service to and from work, and we get off shift at 4
o'clock in the morning. Usually we have to wait until 7 AM before we can catch a public bus. And when a
bus does come, getting home costs 20 pesos. That makes a very big dent in your take-home pay - 380 to
400 pesos a week ($40-43). My job is bending steel cables for seatbelts for GM, Ford and some
European car models. The cable is about a centimeter thick, and I have to bend about 3500 a day.
Because of what's passing through my hands every day, I can hardly sleep at night - the pain is so bad.
Then I have to get up in the morning to do it again. In the future, I know that I can get carpal tunnel
problems, which is a very scary idea. I've asked to change to another position, but no one wants to
change because whoever works in this job gets a lot of pain in their wrists. I feel that in three or four
years my hands are going to be useless. I've been thinking that I'll have to get another job. What else can
I do?
Omar is not alone is his suffering. The maquiladoras system plagues hundreds of
thousands of people. Anja Frank and Andrea Spehar, respected journalists at the WIDE
foundation, describe that the horrors Omar faced are common throughout Mexico.
They write that
Frank and Spehar (Anja K. Frank and Andrea Spehar, " Women's labour migration in the context of
globalisation" pg online @ http://www2.weed-
online.org/uploads/women_s_labour_migration_in_the_context_of_globalisation.pdf, published by the
WIDE network)
Declining real wages despite higher productivity, avoiding profit sharing and requiring overtime,
often without commensurate pay, are wage issues that reflect a broader concern. In their heady drive for
short-term profits, most maquiladoras operate without a social conscience. Health, safety and sexual harassment issues are endemic to
maquiladoras. Noise, loud and constant; inadequate ventilation; exposure to toxic materials;67 and
unprotected work environments under temperature extremes, all behind locked doors, are examples
of inhumane conditions in all too many maquiladoras. Chronic work-related illnesses and injuries
should be no surprise. Examples include musculo-skeletal, 13respiratory, reproductive, circulatory,
hearing and vision loss and persistent headaches. The American Friends Service Committee states thatstress related to
work is a major ailment perhaps exacerbated due to the high accident rate. 68 Data relating to poor health and safety conditions in
maquiladoras are largely gathered through interviews, usually in secret and under the seal of confidentiality. Retribution against
whistle blowers generally is harsh and swift. The result is that information tends to be in the form of
case studies or anecdotes. Such data are dismissed by companies and governments as biased and
unscientific. Yet maquiladora owners do not permit independent health and safety assessments of their factories and government
officials are not keen to conduct inspections and fine violators.69 Workers do have strong legal rights to workplace safety, at least on paper.
For example, Mexican laws were written to protect workers from hazardous waste and unsafe working conditions in non-discriminatory
work environments. The trouble is that governmental agencies regard worker safety laws as optional, at
the discretion of maquiladora management. An example of a crass violator to Mexican labour laws and the intent of NAALC
is US Breed Technologies. Numerous complaints failed to get the Mexican government to implement its
health and safety laws at Breeds Auto Trim plant in Matamorus and Custom Trim factory in Valle Hermoso. More than 20 complaints
were filed to the US NOA against Breed between 1994 and May 2002. Not a single one has produced significant results, aside from a bit of
publicity.70 A US agency that was assigned to investigate the charges against Breed confirmed unsafe and unhealthy working conditions in
violation to Mexican law.71 Yet the US Secretary of Labor has refused to take action. Her stonewalling is
legally allowed, however morally repugnant. Cases brought into the NAALC system have no deadlines for which some action
must be taken or judgement made. As with health and safety, sexual harassment is another abuse of human rights
largely ignored in maquiladoras. While forced pregnancy tests are violations of the law, other
abusive practices may not be. The problem is compounded in Mexican factories because sexual harassment is not
prohibited by law.72 Investigative reporter Debbie Nathan maintains that a climate of sexism is
promoted. Women wear different coloured uniforms than men. Supervisors freely flirt, fondle and
ask younger, single women for dates. More attractive workers are encouraged to compete in Miss
Maquiladora beauty contests. Sexualization allies workers with management and alienates them
from one another . . . (where) the job becomes a fantasy world.73

Historically, the United States federal government would neglect these issues of
human rights in Mexico, preferring policies that would make profit. Political
arguments that try to reject the affirmative are another systematic effort to exclude
their voices. It is necessary to reform such policymaking in order to help these peoples
from this suffering. Craig Arceneaux, professor at Cal Poly, writes in 2005 that.
Arceneaux and Pion-Berlin, 2005 (Craig, David, Transforming Latin America: The International and
Domestic Origins of Change, p.219-221)
Policy Implications Knowing when and why foreign forces matter to the conduct of events in Latin America
takes on policy salience as well. As Latin America moves into the twenty-first century, it faces problems of considerable gravity:
democracies that are weakly institutionalized, governments that perform poorly or not at all militaries that are asked to fill functional gaps,
crime and insecurity that sweep through once relatively safe and secure communities, courts that fail to bring perpetrators to justice, poverty
that reaches up and grabs vast portions of an erst-while middle class, double-digit unemployment rates, and indigenous populations at the very
bottom who will not wait any longer for a slice of the pie. The political life spans of Latin America's leaders have grown progressively shorter as
they either cannot or will not remedy these ills; worse still, they are sometimes part of the problem. It is always at times of great frustration
and great need when the question is asked: what will the wealthier industrialized countries offer this beleaguered region? And specifically,
what will the United States offer? The answer is not comforting, but it is at least more comprehensible once viewed through the lens of our
framework. The United States is not likely to invest any significant resources or effort in a campaign of direct
economic or social assistance targeted at in-need populations. This is not a bold prediction course; the foreign aid spigot was
more or less turned off years ago and remains closed. Naturally there have been both ideological and fiscal changes in the United States in
recent decades that can account for the diminished importance of foreign aid. But the problem goes beyond the hegemony of
fiscal conservatism to one of general hegemonic attention and motivation. U.S. governments-whether
Democratic or Republican controlledhave very little interest in any of the aforementioned problems, and less
interest still in doing anything about them. Their lack of interest derives from a perception that the burdens of the
region's poor, its workers, its unemployed, its peasants, its pensioners indeed its average citizens, generate no imminent
threats to U.S. national interests, and efforts to assist them generate no tangible benefits in return. These are low politics
difficulties that do not reach out and grab the attention of powerful executives or lawmakers from the
North. This view is not just a kind of bias toward the impoverished masses. The U.S. government demonstrates an equally indifferent
attitude toward the elites. It refuses to commit significant attention, expertise, or sums of money to strengthen and reform
Latin America's courts, legislatures, police units, defense ministries, and other institutions of the democratic state. Elites desperately need
stronger institutions if they are to govern effectively. But however vital democratic deepening may be to Latin America's future, it just does not
appear on Washington's radar screen because it too resides in the realm of low politics, meaning the stakes are appreciably lower for foreign
states. Scholars can wax eloquent about how the afflictions of poverty, unemployment, crime, the environment, institutional decay, and human
rights left unattended now will fester and create crises that will eventually harm U.S. interests. But the arguments fall on deaf ears
to policy makers who view the long term as very long indeed and who are eager to discount the
future costs to their current inaction . Unless Latin America's low politics problems can cause
considerable and immediate angst at a national level within the United States, they will not become a
political agenda item in Washington. Washington's attention deficit is selective, and issue sensitive.
Within the high politics realm of economics, the United States is willing (with some misgivings) to work toward
the creation of a free trade zone with its Latin American partners. It is ideologically predisposed to do so, and it
envisions a short- to medium-term gain in the form of new, expanded, and unrestricted markets for U.S.
exporters and investors. But it is much less willing to associate free trade with low politics reforms
within Latin American states that would humanize the workplace, boost wages, or create jobs. In the
longer term, assisting Latin American workers and unemployed should, in theory, rebound to the benefit of the United States by bolstering
disposable incomes, which in turn would mean greater consumption of very competitive U.S. goods. Even though there is a logical linkage
between these sets of issues, it is still perceived as an indirect and less urgent connection and one that
Washington policy makers seldom make. They would rather place their bets on a free trade deal alone
that quickly solidifies their nation's export earnings and profit remittances. Similar issue splits are visible
elsewhere. The United States wants Latin American armed forces to leap into wars against guerrillas and terrorists but shows little concern that
military immersion in these campaigns might have negative consequences for professionalism, democratic society, and civilian control in those
countries. It devotes scant resources to help fully professionalize those forces and less still to equip civilians with the tools they need to
institutionalize control over their soldiers. It wants its Southern neighbors to fight hard against transnational crime but will not help finance
judicial reform that would allow Latin American courts to process their criminal caseloads more efficiently and prosecute more frequently, or
help fund police reform to reduce the rampant corruption of those units. The United States visualizes the struggle against left-wing insurgents,
terrorists, and their criminal associates as high-stakes contests of high politics that must be won to enhance its own national security and that
of its allies in those struggles; it does not visualize improvements in Latin American civil-military relations or judicial and police systems in quite
the same way. In not addressing the latter issues, the United States may be cutting off its nose to spite its face. Without low politics reforms to
assist Latin American judges, police, investigators, soldiers, and their civilian managers, those groups will be less equipped to lend a hand in
transnational struggles deemed vital by Washington. But so it goes. The hegemon's indifference to these groups and their
problems persists, and the balance of influence remains tilted in the direction of domestic politics and
away from the foreign. On these issues, Latin America is left to fend for itself, and only time will tell whether its independence proves
to be a blessing or a curse.

AND Chairman of the International Executive Committee of Amnesty International,
Paul Hoffman, indicates that human rights are fundamental to EVERY human. The
protection of human rights is an ethical obligation we must always act on. He writes in
2004 that.
Paul Hoffman 04, Chair of the International Executive Committee of Amnesty International, HUMAN
RIGHTS QUARTERLY, November 2004, p. 932-935. (DRGCL/B1073)
For hundreds of millions of people in the world today, the most important source of insecurity is not a
terrorist threat but grinding, extreme poverty. More than a billion of the world's six billion people live
on less than one dollar a day. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the entire human rights
framework is based on the indivisibility of human rights. This includes not only civil and political rights but also economic, social,
and cultural rights. The discrepancy between these human rights promises and the reality of life for more than one-sixth of the world's people must be eliminated if
terrorism is to be controlled. Every human being is entitled to a standard of living that allows for their health and wellbei ng, including food, shelter, and medical
care. Yet more than three thousand African children die of malaria each day. Only a tiny percentage of the twenty-six million people infected with HIV/AIDS have
access to the health care and medicine they need to survive. Many additional examples could be given. Many governments have adopted the Millennium
Development Goals to be achieved by 2015. The goals include targets for child and infant mortality, the availability of primary education for all children, halving the
number of people without access to clean water along with many others. According to the World Bank, these goals will not be achieved, in part because the "war on
terrorism" is shifting attention and resources away from long-term development issues. How can we eradicate violent challenges to the existing world order if
education is not universal? Without education and peaceful exchanges between peoples, the "war on terrorism" will only succeed in creating new generations of
warriors. Why is terrorism given more attention than the scourge of violence against women? Millions of women are terrorized in their daily lives, yet no "war" on
violence against women is being waged. Clearly, this problem is more widespread than terrorist violence and invariably makes women insecure as well as second-
class citizens in every corner of the world. If some of the resources and attention devoted to the "war on terrorism" were diverted to the eradication of world
poverty or eliminating violence against women, would the world be more secure? There is no easy answer to this question, but the "war on terrorism" seems to
sideline any serious discussions, along with any serious action on the other pressing causes of human insecurity. True security depends on all of
the world's peoples having a stake in the international system and receiving the basic rights promised
by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, regardless of race, gender, religion, or any other
status.

Because of these harms, my partner and I present the following plan:
The United States federal government should give necessary funds to the United
Mexican States federal government for the purpose of implementing, incentivizing,
and regulating the Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and
Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights in maquiladoras.
The last observation we will present is Solvency, where we outline how our plan will
solve the problems weve brought up.
First, according to Joe Bandy, a professor of sociology at Bowdoin College,
maquiladora reform, specifically in Mexico, sets an international standard for worker
rights. He writes in 2002 that..
Joe Bandy 2002 Department of Sociology/Anthropology, Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine So What Is
to Be Done?:Maquila Justice Movements, Transnational Solidarity, and Dynamics of Resistance
http://www.academia.edu/1353488/So_What_Is_To_Be_Done_Maquila_Justice_Movements_Transnati
onal_Solidarity_And_Dynamics_Of_Resistance
Endeavors of labor networks to empower maquila workers have had mixed results. Given the repression they face, their
limited resources, and continuing internal conflicts, the very survival of cross-border labor networks
for maquila justice has been a positive result. Beyond survival, however, some episodes of labor
conflict have resulted in changes that workers have regarded as progressive. There have been
corporatere forms to toxic dumping and abusive labor relations; workers have received precedent-
setting legal verdicts and settlements in both national and international tribunals ; labor rights
education has informed countless citizens; and as we will see, workers have had qualified successes in
unionization and collective bargaining. In these efforts, coalition has functioned to magnify the strengths of
individual organizations, and each success has fortified hopes in a growing transnational civil society
that can help to institute a more democratic form of development. In many instances, however, workers goals have
not been achieved and the hopes of regulating transnational capital are dim. In these cases, corporations have fired and intimidated activists;
Mexican government leaders and official unions have obstructed independent unionization and harassed workers; activists have had limited
resources to devote to organizing; or workers coalitions have conflicted over strategy, organizational development, or identity issues such as
nationality, disrupting their unity and power. Indeed, at this moment in history, the forces of economic liberalization appear far stronger than
those of democratic regulation, prompting social movements worldwide to ask, not unlike Lenin (1929), what is to be done?To this question
there may be as many answers as there are movements. Yet, among labor organizations, each episode of conflict with
corporations and government has facilitated the development of common, coordinated strategies of
resistance. To understand the most current phase of labor movement activism and the power dynamics between labor and capital in the
maquilas, it will be helpful to discuss two of the most recent and prominent cases of labor mobilizations in the maquilas that at the HanYoung
plant in Tijuana, Baja California from 1997 to 1999, and that against the 3Kukdong/Mexmode maquila in Atlixco, Puebla from 2000 to 2002.
Clearly, there have been many precedent-setting labor struggles in Mexican maquilas since the late
1970sthat could be discussed here Solidev, Sony, ALCOA, GE, Maxiswitch, or Duro yet Han Young and Kukdong are
arguably the most instructive. Each movement was able to achieve new precedents of unionization,
one government recognition, the other a labor contract. Further, each demonstrates slightly different
paradigms of resistance to export processing, with distinct strategic opportunities, regional influences,
and outcomes. HanYoung represents at once one of the greatest successes and failures of maquila labo rmovements, while many regard
that of Kukdong/Mexmode to be a new model for laborinternationalism in North America. Thus, a comparative analysis of these cases
willprovide insights into the industrial conflict in the maquila sector. This discussion is grounded in ten extended (2-3 hour) interviews of the
lead activists and workers participating in each conflict, conducted during 1997-8 for the Han Young case and during 2001 for Kukdong.
Additionally, government reports and movement documents communiqus, monitoring reports, action alerts, protest faxes/letters, media
packages,etc. will be discussed. Lastly, this research was conducted as part of a much larger study of U.S.-Mexico labor coalitions involving
over one-hundred interviews with activists, maquila managers, and government officials, as well as over six years of selective participation in
workers movements, providing many other relevant insights. Driving Hyundai to the Brink: The Case of Han Young
Unfortunately, these reforms are burdened by shortages in funding. The affirmative
plan is able to overcome these tribulation and help both regulate and incentivize
protection. Experts about the maquila systems write that..
http://en.maquilasolidarity.org/FAQ/sweatshops

Yes. Governments should regulate good working conditions and enforce those regulations. Actually,
many garment-producing nations have good legislation in this regard. The problem is that it isn't
enforced properly. A major reason is that many countries where garments and sportswear are
produced try to create an environment that is attractive to foreign investment. Incentives for foreign
investors include not only low wages and taxes, but also the suspension of certain workplace and
environmental regulations. If a government does attempt to strictly enforce these regulations, many
investors will quickly pack their bags for another country that is even less strict and is more
accommodating. As a result, all these countries compete against one another in a "race to the
bottom." Bad working conditions are an international problem that will not be solved on a national
level alone. But it's also wrong to assume that governments have absolutely no control over foreign
investments. And not all companies pack up and leave at the first signs of government regulations. So
it is valuable to encourage governments to pressure companies to take responsibility for their labour
policies and ensure compliance.
Stanley Joseph Rapiey, a respected government analyst, explicitly states that U.S.
financial assistance will improve maquiladoras. In 2011, he writes that..
Rapiey 11[Stanley Joseph Rapiey, government employee/analyst, Maquiladoras and National
Security: Design Theory as a Guide,25/10/11, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a555400.pdf, KP]
First of all, the United States government must encourage American companies to continue business
with Mexican companies in the northern border states in order to guarantee economic stability and
help the maquiladoras transform into more complex entities. The President should work with the
Secretary of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative to develop a program by which U.S.
companies are provided fiscal motivation to continue working with Mexican maquiladoras, instead
of shifting their assembly operations to Asia. The incentives will most likely be in the form of tax
benefits and should be tied to relationships with Mexican maquiladoras that meet strict criteria.
Because this is connected to altering the tax code, Congress must pass related legislation. The two
most important criteria for the maquiladoras associated with this program are that they pay a living
wage to their local employees and that they are engaged in a program designed to increase the
complexity of their production. These factories will be able to pay better wages because of the
continued investment from U.S. companies who will receive the tax benefit, and these wages will help
stabilize the local economy. The U.S. Department of Commerce can assist the Government of Mexico
with concrete plans to improve the maquiladoras, in concert with current Mexican goals to
revitalize its export industry through increased government financing.42 Because the Mexican
Government has already come to the realization that the simple assembly model must evolve into
something more technologically complex, these plans can quickly be organized. 43 In order to
effectively advocate this course of action, the focus should be placed on the stimulation of the U.S.
economy through tax relief to American companies and the need to preserve a secure environment
along the border.
In conclusion:
With more and more workers unable to access basic human rights every day, funding
the United Mexican Government to combat these atrocities has become a necessary
act in United States policy. This will not only help workers in Mexico , but also aid in
the fight for human rights around the globe
It is for these reasons that I urge an affirmative ballot. I am not open for cross
examination and points of clarification.


T Shit
Human Rights Policy is a critical part of economic engagement
Aguirre 12[1/20/12, Lecturer in International Law and Human Rights at Regent's College,
http://jurist.org/forum/2013/01/human-rights-the-asean-way.php, Human Rights the ASEAN Way

ASEAN's policy with its recalcitrant members has always been one of economic engagement. It is argued
that this policy can coax dictatorial states out of isolation. Critics argue that engagement permits human rights violations to continue for
decades while regional elites enrich themselves. Either way, these states now seem willing to recognize a regional
human rights protection system if it will increases legitimacy and promote foreign investment. In this
context, the existence of the AICHR risks legitimizing the status quo. It may provide window dressing that would reduce pressure to reform
from other states, from international organizations, and civil society. Human rights treaties serve to signal change. This can result in
substantial economic benefits through development aid or foreign investment. Development aid or the
proceeds of foreign investment in the hands of extremely corrupted officials for example Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar ranking respectively
numbers 154, 164 and 180 out of 182 countries in the 2011 Corruption Perception Index can reinforce human rights-violating
authoritarian regimes.
Norms entail
First, well describe what these norms exactly entail.
University of Minnesota 03[Commentary on the Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational
Corporation and Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights, U.N. Doc.
E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/38/Rev.2 (2003). http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/links/commentary-
Aug2003.html, KP]
(a) Transnational corporations and other business enterprises shall respect the right to a clean and
healthy environment in the light of the relationship between the environment and human rights; concerns for intergenerational
equity; internationally recognized environmental standards, for example with regard to air pollution, water pollution, land
use, biodiversity and hazardous wastes; and the wider goal of sustainable development, that is,
development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs. (b) Transnational corporations and other business enterprises
shall be responsible for the environmental and human health impact of all of their activities, including any
products or services they introduce into commerce, such as packaging, transportation and by-products of the manufacturing process. (c)
Consistent with paragraph 16 (i), in decision-making processes and on a periodic basis (preferably annually or biannually), transnational
corporations and other business enterprises shall assess the impact of their activities on the environment and human health including impacts
from siting decisions, natural resource extraction activities, the production and sale of products or services, and the generation, storage,
transport and disposal of hazardous and toxic substances. Transnational corporations and other business enterprises shall ensure that the
burden of negative environmental consequences shall not fall on vulnerable racial, ethnic and socio-economic groups.(d) Assessments shall,
inter alia, address particularly the impact of proposed activities on certain groups, such as children, older persons, indigenous peoples and
communities (particularly in regard to their land and natural resources), and/or women. Transnational corporations and other business
enterprises shall distribute such reports in a timely manner and in a manner that is accessible to the United Nations Environmental Programme,
the ILO, other interested international bodies, the national Government hosting each company, the national Government where the business
maintains its principal office and other affected groups. The reports shall be accessible to the general public.
(e) Transnational corporations and other business enterprises shall respect the prevention principle,
for example by preventing and/or mitigating deleterious impacts identified in any assessment. They shall
also respect the precautionary principle when dealing, for example, with preliminary risk assessments that may indicate unacceptable effects
on health or the environment. Further, they shall not use the lack of full scientific certainty as a reason to delay the introduction of cost-
effective measures intended to prevent such effects. (f) Upon the expiration of the useful life of their products or
services, transnational corporations and other business enterprises shall ensure effective means of
collecting or arranging for the collection of the remains of the product or services for recycling, reuse
and/or environmentally responsible disposal.(g) Transnational corporations and other business
enterprises shall take appropriate measures in their activities to reduce the risk of accidents and
damage to the environment by adopting best management practices and technologies. In particular, they
shall use best management practices and appropriate technologies and enable their component entities to meet these environmental
objectives through the sharing of technology, knowledge and assistance, as well as through environmental management systems, sustainability
reporting, and reporting of anticipated or actual releases of hazardous and toxic substances. In addition, they shall educate and train workers to
ensure their compliance with these objectives.