Environmental conservation policy and implementation

Environmental Conservation Policy

Federal vs. State Policy

The first definition is whether the policy is 'Federal' or 'State'.

Federal policy acts across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Federal policy acts as a national policy and is formulated by the House of Representatives and the Senate, and generally takes longer to form the policy. Examples of Federal policy are 'The Clean Water Act'

(CWA) and 'The Clean Air Act'

(CAA).

The CWA is the cornerstone of surface water quality protection in the U.S.A. It was passed in 1972 and is currently the law of the land. It should be noted that the law doesn't deal with groundwater (from wells or aquifers) nor does it deal with water quantity issues as faced by San Diego and Southern Calif.

The CWA implements a number of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to reduce pollution into waterways. It funds municipal water treatment facilities. The goal is to keep waterways clean and non-polluted so that the fish, shellfish, wildlife and people can enjoy the water. Over the last 10 years or so there has been a shift from the program-by-program activity to a more holistic approach. Holistic means an approach based on watershed protection.

One major problem that is faced by the CWA (and CAA) is the lack of cooperation by many of the companies that are affected by the laws. These companies see the laws - in fact many of the environmental laws - as an insurmountable cost to operations. This brings into play a 'market' vs. 'community' ethic. This ethic marks a profound difference between a company (or corporate ethic) and the community ethic.

The corporate ethic places the value of making money ahead of all else, it makes money and places the management of the company in the position of being responsible to the shareholders of the company. The shareholders are likely to discount the value of the rules, and are looking to gain the maximum revenue possible. This means that they are likely to view environmental laws as a cost, and see no benefit in complying with the law which places little value on complying with anything that is not a legal requirement.

The CWA is administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA is administered by the party that is currently in power - this party appoints senior government post holders to the EPA. Under the rule of President George Bush appointments were likely to be 'industry friendly' and under Barack Obama appointments were likely to be less industry friendly. This problem has gotten worse in recent years along with the polarization of the two parties that rule the U.S.A.

The role that the public get in formulating the Federal law is also minimized. The law is formulated after many members of the public, scientific community demand that the government 'do something'. This filters up through state representatives to the House of Representatives. Here it all goes awry. The first step is that laws get formulated by the House of Representatives or the Senate. The law needs a senior representative to get any work done on it, and it needs to be popular, or at least non-controversial, to get any time in front of the various committees of interest. It may take anywhere up to 10 years to gain major environmental legislation.

It is important that Federal legislation is available. The economic impact of civil cases, and criminal cases, is huge. The fine for Consent Decrees is typically between $1 million and $5 million and results in the company spending up to $85 million.

This is important from the point-of-view that large companies that are in default are taken to task by a Federal agency that has unlimited power and funds. In theory the EPA has no friends. The EPA may also take Consent Degrees from companies that are running operations across state borders.

State Policy

State legislation offers a better chance for success for state specific problems. For instance Washington State has a number of companies that are in violation of the EPA various laws. The state does not have to worry about these companies - it simply reports these companies to the EPA and lets the EPA fine, or force, the business into compliance.

Washington State has a number of areas though which are not of interest to Federal agencies or cross boundaries. The waters of Puget Sound 4 is of interest to Washington, and it has implemented a number of laws related to keeping it clean. People for Puget Sound state "On December 1, 2008, the Puget Sound Partnership released its "Action Agenda" to guide protection and restoration actions that will bring Puget Sound back to health by the year 2020. People For Puget Sound strongly supports a great many of the actions in the Action Agenda and we will work hard to see the Sound's health restored."5

The waters may not be of interest to the Federal agencies (except at a CWA/CAA level) but they are interest to state. They are also of interest to multiple agencies and communities of Puget Sound. They should be of interest to the residents of the islands that fall within the sound, the counties that border it, sports enthusiasts (sailors, swimmers, sub-aqua), and riders on the Washington State Ferry service. These specific groups form approx. 2/3 of the states population.

It's important to realize that not everyone will support any or all of the environmental regulations. Conservative members of the public are less likely to support conservation rules and democratic more likely to support to them. Even in these groups though individuals may fall into or out of expected boundaries. The way a message is sold to the members of the public, or the effect that the proposed law has on its recipients may affect individuals. Any individual is a complex sum of all their experiences - the environment they grew up in, their parents, education, friends and the media around them as they grew up.

Media

It's important for public organizations to recognize that they will never write a law that will appeal to everyone. But everyone is not the goal, a majority of the citizens is a worthy goal. The bigger the majority, the better. Another worthy goal is that the conventional and social media is fed a diet of interesting, persuasive, well-researched stories that it is willing to publish. Conventional media means television, radio, newspapers, and magazines with a regional bias. Social media means Twitter6, Facebook,7 LinkedIn, 8 etc.

Getting the Facts

A very important part of gauging the public interest is finding out what they want and how far they are prepared to go for it. Public workshops could be held in various parts of the constituents home territory, perhaps for an hour or two . The public could be invited through the media, or by direct mail. A series of presentations could be given, breaks held, and then the public is invited by different methods to give their feedback.

It is important to realize that the public can get emotional about even the simplest of topics. The Natural Step 9 and the NCI Charrette Institute 10 both offer steps to enable the public to give their feedback in small and efficient steps.

Even though the meetings are small[ish] they need to be very well organized. Suitable - and neutral - venues need to be chosen. The number of the public attending the meeting needs to be estimated, chairs need to be organized, presentation media need to be organized (PowerPoint projectors), and take away literature organized. It is important not to prejudge the public since that angers them. It is also important to get the presenters to present in short, easy to understand topics. Say 20 minutes rather than 30 or 40 minutes. Engineers tend to be the worst presenters, it may be worth teaching the staff members how to present.