Water Pollution by Homeless People in San Francisco

Abstract
Public policies are governmental actions implemented to help address issues facing the public or communities. San Francisco is currently facing water pollution brought by homeless population, which has increased in the city in the recent past. Rational-comprehensive approach for policy analysis is utilized to examine this public problem and help in constructing policy alternatives to address it. As part of the policy analysis process, homeless population, taxpaying public, city officials and the Environmental Protection Agency are identified as stakeholders involved in this public problem. Social context and governance context are discussed as the contexts for public policy formulation to address the water pollution issue in San Francisco. The reason for government involvement is moral/ethical reason while government management is the appropriate instrument and regulatory policy the appropriate policy typology. Using Political Systems Theory, the three policy alternatives to address this problem are environmental policy, increased funding for expansion of sewage collection and treatment facilities, and establishment of water and sanitation programs for homeless people.
Keywords: policy, policy analysis, public policy, public problem, policy alternatives, homeless people, water pollution, approach.
Table of Contents
Cover Page
Abstract
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Problem Statement 2
Background Information …………………………………………………………………….3
Stakeholders 4
Problem Identification ………………………………………………………………………4
Government Involvement…………………………………………………………………………7
Appropriate Instrument 8
Policy Typology 9
Theoretical Model 10
Policy Alternatives……………………………………………………………………………… 12
Alternative 1 – Environmental Policy 12
Alternative 2 – Expansion of Sewage Collection and Treatment Facilities 13
Alternative 3 – Water and Sanitation Programs for Homeless People 13
Conclusion 14
References 16
Tables, Figures and Graphs …………………………………………………………………….. 18
Introduction
Policy analysis is a term used to refer to different activities such as assessment of components of the policymaking process and evaluation of policy alternatives. During this process, information is collected and analyzed to clarify causes and impact of public problems in relation to policy alternatives. The analysis process focuses on determining the effect of using one or more policy alternatives to address the identified public problem. Given the multidisciplinary nature of policy alternatives, policy analysis incorporates ideas and techniques from different fields of study including economics, philosophy, sociology, and political science (Kraft & Furlong, 2015). To ensure effectiveness, policy analysis is carried out using different approaches that incorporate a series of steps. The use of such approaches is critical for public officials tasked with developing and implementing various kings of policies that are geared toward protecting citizens and enhancing the efficiency of government agencies.
One of the approaches used in policy analysis is the rational-comprehensive approach, which is a relatively more demanding method for analyzing policies. The rational-comprehensive approach or decision making model incorporates a series of analytical stages or steps. The first step in this process is defining and analyzing the problem. This stage focuses on identification of the public problem, where it exists, who and what it affects, and its major consequences. In addition, the first step in this process also clarifies the impact of policy action on the causes of the public problem. It is followed by the development of policy alternatives that could help address the problem. By this stage, policy action is deemed as a suitable measure for addressing the public problem and its causes. As a result, various policy alternatives to address the problem are constructed.
The nest stage in the rational-comprehensive approach for policy analysis is the creation of evaluative criteria. The criteria is created in relation to the problem and the policy alternatives identified in the previous stage. The evaluative criteria is also developed to help determine whether policy alternatives would be acceptable to the public as well as the effectiveness, equity, and social and political feasibility of the policy alternatives. Once the evaluative criteria is determined, the next stage in this approach to policy analysis is actual evaluation of the policy alternatives. At this point, the evaluate criteria is at hand as well as a list of possible policy actions to take. The actual evaluation of the policy alternatives is geared toward identifying the policy action that could generate the desired outcome. This phase of rational-comprehensive approach is also viewed as forecasting policy outcomes or evaluating impacts (Anderson, 2011). As part of the evaluation process, policy alternatives are presented based on their effectiveness, equity, and economic efficiency.
The final stage in the rational-comprehensive approach to policy analysis is drawing conclusions on the most desirable policy action. In this regard, the most suitable policy action in relation to the given circumstances and the evaluative criteria is identified. The conclusions also incorporate factors to be considered when selecting the policy action or alternatives. In most cases, policy analysts do not present a single policy alternative, but a summary of findings regarding the advantages and disadvantages of the identified policy proposals (Kraft & Furlong, 2015). This is largely because the choice of the most suitable policy action to address the problem is left to policymakers and the public.
Problem Statement
San Francisco experiences a water pollution problem brought by the homeless population who throw needles and waste into the sewer system. The city has already received an environmental notice of violation from the Environmental Protection Agency.
Background Information
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a notice of violation to San Francisco, California for breaching the Clean Water Act through permitting used needles to be thrown into the ocean (Eilperin, Dennis & Dawsey, 2019). The citation came at a time when California’s most valued beaches, rivers and streams are contaminated with levels of fecal bacteria (Almendrala, 2020). These levels of fecal bacteria exceed the established limits for environmental protection. In the letter by EPA, San Francisco water pollution problem is linked to the homeless population who have been allowed to throw needles and sewer waste into the ocean. As homeless people continue to throw waste into the ocean, the city has seemingly failed to appropriately operate and maintain its sewage collection and treatment facilities (Ho, 2019).
While the city’s officials contend that such waste are not flowing into the ocean en masse, the existing treatment facilities are ineffective to deal with these pollutants. The city’s homeless population are putting tremendous pollution into the ocean because of the storm sewer. Therefore, San Francisco is grappling with growing fecal contamination of the waterways by the homeless population. As one of the cities with the highest homeless population, fecal contamination of the waterways generates environmental protection and public health issues. Additionally, fecal contamination of San Francisco’s waterways worsens during rainy seasons. During such seasons, streets are swept into storm drains and affect the water system. Most of the street waste swept into storm drains during these seasons come from the huge population of homeless people in San Francisco. This generates additional demands and strain on San Francisco’s waterways. As a result, the city needs changes in its waste management system and treatment facilities to address the problem of needles and sewer waste thrown into the ocean by homeless people.
Stakeholders
This public problem involves several stakeholders as it affects different people in San Francisco. One of the stakeholders in this public problem is homeless population who are regarded as the source of waste thrown into the ocean or waterways. Homeless population is an important stakeholder in this issue because of their consideration as the cause of the problem. The second important stakeholders is the taxpaying public who are affected by water pollution. Taxpaying public expect policymakers in San Francisco to make decisions and implement policies that protect them and address their wellbeing. Water pollution problem affects the taxpaying public in San Francisco by increasing their risk to public health issues and environmental health issues.
City officials are the third stakeholders in this problem since they play a critical role in policy implementation. Currently, city officials deny the accusation that they have allowed homeless people to throw needles and sewer waste into the ocean causing water pollution. Their involvement in this issue would help identify a suitable approach to address the problem. The other stakeholders are the Environmental Protection Agency tasked with environmental protection across all states and cities in the United States.
Problem Identification
The problem is water pollution that is caused by the homeless population in San Francisco, California. Governmental intervention through establishing a public policy would help address the issue of pollution brought by homeless people in San Francisco, CA. As shown in the background, San Francisco has one of the highest number of homeless people in California. The size of this population continues to generate concerns as they place new demands for better housing or shelters. As the city grapples with an increase in this population, additional issues relating to their welfare and health also emerge. One of these issues is waste management as many homeless people in the city live in the streets. The problem of waste management among homeless people raises significant concerns for city officials because of its potential impact on public health and environmental protection.
Kraft & Furlong (2015) state that public policies are shaped by different contexts, which become the premise for governmental intervention. These contexts exist because public policies are not made in a vacuum as they have social, political and economic impacts. The public problem facing San Francisco water management system can be understood through examining it from relevant contexts of public policy. The incorporation of relevant contexts help in comprehensive analysis of the problem, its impacts, and formulating suitable policy alternatives to address it.
One of the relevant contexts of public policy for the city’s water pollution problem brought by homeless people is social context. Kraft & Furlong (2015) contend that social conditions are dynamic and affect policy decisions in various ways. The dynamic nature of the social context of public policy is attributable to the impact of social conditions on the lives of people. Social conditions have direct and indirect impacts on the lives of people and generate the need for policy actions to address emerging issues. In relation to the water pollution problem in San Francisco, the increasing homeless population is a major social issue fueling this public problem. Over the past few years, the city has witnessed a significant increase in the number of homeless people. Waste management for this population, especially during rainy seasons, is a major problem in addition to addressing their other needs and demands.
As the size of the homeless population in San Francisco increases, environmental issues also increase. Similar to other cities in California, the living conditions of homeless people has partly contributed to fecal contamination of waterways. Homeless people in the city seemingly lack appropriate waste disposal and management mechanisms. As a result, they end up throwing waste into the ocean including fecal waste. This in turn generates environmental pollution and pose significant public health issues, especially if the public drinks contaminated water. Therefore, a key aspect of the social context of this problem is the living conditions and waste disposal mechanisms of homeless people in the city. Poor living conditions and the absence of a suitable mechanism for waste disposal and management by homeless people continues to be a major threat to water systems in San Francisco.
The second relevant context of public policy to this issue in San Francisco is the governing context. Generally, the structure of governance in the United States is complex and has significant impacts on public policymaking processes. During public policymaking process, complexities in the governance structure can result in conflicts among relevant institutions and policy actors. In the case of water pollution problem brought by homeless people in San Francisco, complexities in policymaking is evident in the conflict between the Environmental Protection Agency and city officials. City officials have denied accusations of allowing homeless people to dump used needles and sewer waste into the ocean. They have contended that water pollution problem in the city is incorrectly linked to homeless people. According to these officials, water pollution issues occur during the rainy seasons as streets are swept into storm drains, which implies that water pollution is not brought by homeless population. On the contrary, the Trump Administration through the Environmental Protection Agency has already issued a notice to the city for violation of Clean Water Act. This situation has resulted in a conflict that could complicate efforts to identify and implement a suitable policy action to address the problem.
Government Involvement
Public policies are enacted to help address some of the major issues facing populations in a specific community. However, the creation of a public policy requires information regarding the specific problem and an assessment of whether government intervention will improve the situation (Bardach & Patashnik, 2020). Government involvement in addressing public problems through policy actions is fueled by various factors. Kraft & Furlong (2015) state that there are three reasons for government involvement in resolving public problems i.e. political reasons, moral or ethical reasons, and economic and market failures.
In the case of water pollution brought by the homeless population in San Francisco, the reason for government involvement is moral or ethical reasons. Government action in this situation is considered the right thing to do regardless of public pressure. While the issue has not generated any public pressure so far, government involvement is the right thing to help resolve the problem. According to Kraft & Furlong (2015), governments engage in some circumstances and problems for moral or ethical reasons. The government’s involvement in this situation is to help protect the public from environmental harm that could be caused by water pollution.
Moral or ethical reason is the suitable justification for governmental intervention in this public issue because of the nature of the problem. Since city officials do not necessarily consider this as a major problem, it could end up harming people because of the dangers posed by consumption of contaminated water. Therefore, governmental involvement in the situation is morally right to help safeguard the wellbeing of people in San Francisco. Additionally, governmental involvement is morally justifiable because of the need to safeguard the public from potential exposure to contaminated water. In this regard, the government acts in the interest of the common good of the public.
Appropriate Instrument
According to Kraft & Furlong (2015), there are various instruments of public policy that help determine the government’s role in addressing public problems. These instruments of public policy are applicable to policy initiatives depending on the nature of the public problem and its impact. As a public problem in San Francisco, the issue of water pollution by homeless people warrants government involvement through an appropriate instrument of public policy. The most suitable instrument of public policy to this issue is government management. Government management is an instrument of public policy that relates to direct services or management of resources. This instrument also entails ongoing public debate on privatization of public sector services. Some public sector services and programs have been contracted out or privatized by the government as part of efforts to enhance service delivery. Some examples of policies implemented by governments through providing services to citizens include education, public parks, municipal services like police and fire protection, and defense.
Government management is a suitable instrument of public policy for this issue because the problem primarily entails delivery of services to the public. In this case, government management would help promote effective management of water resources in the City of San Francisco. Through policy action to help lessen water pollution, the government would ensure that the relevant city stakeholders provide clean and safe water for drinking and use by residents. The provision of clean and safe water is a direct service provided by the City of San Francisco, which warrants effective government management. By implementing policy actions to address the issue, the government will essentially provide direct services to citizens and residents of the City of San Francisco. In light of the existing disagreement between city officials and the government, government management is essential to address this public problem.
Policy Typology
Kraft & Furlong (2015) postulate that there are different policy typologies, which refers to policy options in terms of tools at disposal of policymakers. Policy typologies are selected and applied in policy initiatives depending on political conditions and differences among policies. The issue of water pollution brought by homeless people in San Francisco would be considered a regulatory policy. Kraft & Furlong (2015) define regulatory policy typology as government restrictions on individual choice to help prevent certain conduct from going beyond acceptable grounds. Since San Francisco’s waterways are characterized by high levels of fecal contamination, policy action is required to help limit the level of contamination from exceeding established limits by the Environmental Protection Agency. This would help provide environmental protection and safeguard the health of the City’s residents. Without protection, the issue of water pollution through fecal contamination could spread and result in numerous public health and environmental protection issues.
At the heart of the water pollution is the fact that city officials have seemingly allowed homeless people to throw used needles and sewer waste into the ocean. This has generated public risks as the waterways are filled with fecal contamination, which could harm people. Therefore, the actions by city officials to permit disposal of such waste into the waterways should be addressed. Regulatory policy provides a suitable approach to address the issue since it would help control the behavior and actions of officials in the City of San Francisco. Rahimi & Noruzi (2011) contend that regulatory policies are established to constrain the discretion of individuals and agencies or compel particular type of behavior. When enacted in the City of San Francisco, regulatory policy would limit the discretion of its officials in terms of permitting waste to be thrown into the ocean resulting in contaminated waterways.
Theoretical Model
Political and social scientists have created different models, approaches and theories for examining policymaking (Anyebe, 2018). These theories, models and approaches are required to guide the study of public policy as well as understand the mechanism with which policy solutions would be considered when constructing public policy. There are different kinds of theories that are applicable when constructing public policies to mitigate and solve a public problem. The applicability of these theories, models and approaches is dependent on the specific public problem to be addressed, its impact, and the desired outcomes.
For the issue of water pollution by homeless people in San Francisco, California, the most suitable theoretical model for constructing policy alternatives/actions is the Political Systems Theory. Based on this theory, public policy is considered as a political system’s response to environmental demands (Kraft & Furlong, 2015; Anyebe, 2018). As a result, Political Systems Theory emphasizes social, economic, and cultural context. In this regard, the political system responding to demands arising from the environment comprises identifiable and interrelated institutions that make binding authoritative allocations of values on the society (Anyebe, 2018). On the other hand, the environment generating demands on the political system include the social system, biological setting or the economic system. These systems are external to the limits of the political system and generate demands that influence/shape public policy initiatives and actions. Political Systems Theory implies that mutual causation exists between environmental variables and public policy.
Political Systems Theory is relevant in constructing public policy to address water pollution by homeless people in San Francisco. In relation to this theory, water pollution in this city will be addressed from the context of political systems and environmental demands. In this regard, environmental demands are generated by the social system affected by fecal contamination of waterways. The social system generally comprises members of the public who are likely to be affected by water pollution. Members of the public recognize the potential environmental and public health issues associated with fecal contamination of waterways by homeless people who throw used needles and sewer waste into the ocean. As a result, they generate demands on the political system to find suitable ways for management of water resources by protecting waterways from contamination. While members of the public have not explicitly stated such demands, the political system (government) considers the construction of policy as the appropriate thing to do to address this perceived demand. Therefore, the government acts as the political system responding to the demand/need to protect the city’s waterways from pollution and avoid dangers posed by the fecal contamination of water.
Under the Political Systems Theory, policy solutions are instituted in the form of societal values and allocation of resources (Anyebe, 2018). In this regard, the values of the society are taken into consideration when examining a public problem. This implies that societal values are the lenses through which a public problem is examined to determine its prevalence and impact. Once the problem is examined through the lenses of societal values, public policy making initiatives are considered from the premise of resource allocation. The political system considers the need for policy actions and the potential impact of policies in addressing the identified problem. The resources required to implement the policy action and their availability are taken into consideration when instituting public policy. Therefore, this theory plays an important role in turning inquiry into policy formulation as important facets of the political system gain insights regarding the environment and its demands. The political system then converts environmental demands into public policy through which it addresses public problems.
Potential Policy Alternatives
Almendrala (2020) contends that fecal contamination of waterways is a widespread problem in San Francisco and other states a huge number of homeless people. The presence of fecal bacteria in the city’s water is an indicator of problems with septic tanks and sewer systems. As the city’s homeless population continues to grow, there is need to develop policy actions to address water pollution. Policy actions are required since much of the fecal bacteria in water could be associated with homeless encampments. Policy alternatives should focus on addressing the environmental impact of homeless population with respect to management of water resources in the City. One of the policy alternatives is an environmental policy to help prevent/lessen the amount of waste flowing into the ocean from homeless encampments. The other policy alternatives are increased funding for expansion of sewage collection and treatment facilities, and establishing water and sanitation programs for homeless people as shown in Table 1.
Alternative One: Environmental Policy
The first policy alternative to address the issue of water pollution by homeless people in San Francisco is the implementation of an environmental policy to prevent waste from flowing into the ocean. An environmental policy would be suitable for the issue because preventing or lessening the amount of waste flowing into the ocean would help enhance environmental protection through reduction of water pollution (Boucher, 2013). In the new environmental policy, San Francisco should continue filtering waste through its sewage system. However, during periods of storms, storm water should be permitted to flow into rivers to avoid the leakage that occurs when such water is captured in combined systems and mixed with household sewage and other human waste. City officials would then enforce regulations requiring separation of household sewage and human waste from the city’s water treatment systems and facilities.
Alternative Two: Expansion of Sewage Collection and Treatment Facilities
The second probable policy action that could address this problem is increasing funding toward expansion of sewage collection and treatment facilities. This would require identifying the capacity of existing facilities vis-à-vis demands, especially during rainy seasons. Policy initiatives should then be developed to help address the gap between the capacity of the current facilities and demands. The policy should increase allocation of financial resources relating environmental protection to the development of new sewage collection and treatment facilities. Expansion of sewage collection and treatment facilities would be suitable because existing facilities have been unable to handle waste flowing into the ocean en masse during rainy seasons. Expansion of these facilities would in turn result in increased capacity to handle waste, which will effectively reduce fecal contamination of waterways by homeless people in the City.
Alternative Three: Water and Sanitation Programs for Homeless People
Third, water pollution by homeless people can be addressed through implementing policies to promote the establishment of water and sanitation programs for these people. Pitzer (2019) states that California should implement policies that require local communities to establish minimum standards for water and sanitation for homeless people. Policies should promote the identification of ways to enhance water and sanitation for homeless people such as providing bathrooms. Additional measures that could be implemented in the policy as part of water and sanitation programs for the homeless is provision of free RV dump stations and sanitation services for encampments (Almendrala, 2020). Once such a policy is enacted into law, local municipalities and communities in San Francisco and other cities in the state should be required to adopt such projects or face fines. This would help ensure the enforcement of the regulation and reduce water pollution by homeless populations in the City.
Conclusion
Public policies are enacted to help address some of the major issues facing populations in a specific community. The enactment of a public policy requires information regarding the specific problem and an assessment of whether government intervention will improve the situation. As a result, policymakers engage in the process of policy analysis, which refers to different activities such as assessment of components of the policymaking process and evaluation of policy alternatives. The process of policy analysis entails collection and analysis of information to clarify causes and impact of public problems in relation to policy alternatives. While different approaches for policy analysis exist, rational-comprehensive approach was employed in this project. It incorporates a series of stages i.e. defining and analyzing the problem, developing policy alternatives, creating evaluative criteria, evaluating policy alternatives, and drawing conclusions.
San Francisco experiences a water pollution problem brought by the homeless population who throw needles and waste into the sewer system. The city has already received an environmental notice of violation from the Environmental Protection Agency. This problem comes at a time when the number of homeless people in the city continues to increase while fecal contamination of waterways has become widespread. The stakeholders involved in this public problem are the homeless population, the taxpaying public, City officials, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Given the nature of the issue, the context for government’s involvement is the social context and governance context. In addition, governmental intervention in addressing the water pollution issue in San Francisco is justified on moral and ethical grounds. Since the issue has potential environmental and public health impacts, government intervention is the right thing to do.
The relevant political typology for governmental involvement in water pollution issue brought by homeless people in San Francisco is regulatory policy, which would help constrain the discretion of individuals and agencies or compel particular type of behavior among city officials. Since city officials are allowing homeless people to throw used needles and sewer waste into the ocean, regulatory policy would help limit their discretion and compel them to adopt suitable measures to prevent water pollution in San Francisco.
The theoretical model supporting government intervention in addressing water pollution by homeless people in San Francisco is Political Systems Theory. This theory emphasizes that public policy is political system’s response to environmental demands. Therefore, there is a strong causation link between public policy and environmental demands. The political system in this public problem include city officials and the government through the Environmental Protection Agency. On the other hand, the environmental system generating demands for the issue to be addressed as the homeless population and the taxpaying public.
In light of the nature of this issue, there are three possible policy alternatives that should be considered by the city’s policymakers. One of these policy alternatives is an environmental policy to help prevent/lessen the amount of waste flowing into the ocean from homeless encampments. This would require minimal changes to the existing policies, but improve enforcement of environmental protection laws relating to water pollution in the City of San Francisco. The second alternative is increased funding for expansion of sewage collection and treatment facilities. This policy alternative would be suitable given that one of the factors contributing to the problem is the inability of current facilities to meet demand. The other policy alternative is creation of water and sanitation programs for homeless people, which will be enforced by local municipalities and communities.
References
Almendrala, A. (2020, January 6). Fecal Bacteria in California’s Waterways Increases With Homeless Crisis. Retrieved April 15, 2020, from https://californiahealthline.org/news/fecal-bacteria-in-californias-waterways-increases-with-homeless-crisis/ (Helpful Resource)
Anderson, J.E. (2011). Public policymaking: An introduction (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. (K&F)
Anyebe, A.A. (2018, January). An Overview of Approaches to the Study of Public Policy. International Journal of Political Science, 4(1), 8-17. (Scholarly)
Bardach, E. & Patashnik, E.M. (2020). A practical guide for policy analysis: The eightfold path to more effective problem solving (6th ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press. (B&P)
Boucher, M. (2013, March 12). Homelessness and Water Pollution: Thinking Outside the Channel. Retrieved from Contra Costa County website: https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/29632/Homeless-Presentation-Walnut-Creek-Community-Meeting-2014-03-12?bidId= (Helpful Resource)
Eilperin, J., Dennis, B. & Dawsey, J. (2019, September 26). EPA Tells California it is ‘Failing to Meet its Obligations’ to Protect the Environment. The Washington Post. Retrieved April 15, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/epa-tells-california-it-is-failing-to-meet-its-obligations-to-stem-water-pollution/2019/09/26/b3ffca1e-dfac-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html (Helpful Resource)
Ho, V. (2019, October 3). EPA Cites San Francisco for ‘Water Pollution’, Fulfilling Trump’s Threat. The Guardian. Retrieved March 24, 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/02/san-francisco-epa-water-pollution-trump (Helpful Resource)
Kraft, M.E. & Furlong, S.R. (2018). Public policy: Politics, analysis and alternatives (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press. (K&F)
Pitzer, G. (2019, June 27). Can Providing Bathrooms to Homeless Protect California’s Water Quality? Retrieved April 15, 2020, from https://www.watereducation.org/western-water/can-providing-bathrooms-homeless-protect-californias-water-quality (Non-academic)
Rahimi, G.R. & Noruzi, M.R. (2011, June). A Brief Look on Policy, Typology of Policy, and Its Related Affairs. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(11), 173-176. (Scholarly)
Tables, Figures and Graph
Table 1: Policy Alternatives
Alternatives
Description
Alternative One: Environmental Policy
- To help prevent/lessen the amount of waste flowing into the ocean from homeless encampments.
- Requires minimal changes to existing policies.
- Enhanced enforcement of environmental protection laws on water pollution.
Alternative Two: Expansion of Sewage Collection and Treatment Facilities
- Improves current systems for sewage collection and treatment.
- Reduces amount of fecal contamination of waterways.
Alternative Three: Water and Sanitation Programs for Homeless People
- Establishes projects to enhance the standards of water and sanitation among homeless people.
- Requires local communities and municipalities to ensure enforcement or face fines.