?/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of
The Administrator
(1601F)
EPA 100-R-97-012
November 1997
Report And Recommendations
Of The Community-Based
Environmental Protection
Committee
The National Advisory Council
For Environmental Policy And
Technology (NACEPT)
-------
-------
•I • , .
E:anMin Researdi& Development Gorporation
Boston
Durham
San Francisco
711 Atlantic Avenue
Boston, MA 02111
617.423.6655
FAX 617.482.6179
Carol Browner, Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
EPA.A-100
401. M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Administrator Browner: - ' . •.
I am pleased to provide you with this report from the Community-Based Environmental
Protection (CBEP) Committee of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and
Technology (NACEPT). Between April, 1996, and May, 1997, the CBEP Committee formulated
these recommendations based on its charge to:
• -Examine the availability, accessibility and use of environmental information in support
of CBEP and a quest for a sustainable economic system.
• Identify public and private initiatives that can be used to help promote the
. community-based environmental protection work of the Agency, and
• Identify measurements of success in implementing and evaluating community-based
environmental protection programs
The CBEP Committee spoke with a wide range of stakeholders and participants in
community-based environmental protection activities. We noted that the word "community" can
define collaborative groups from small towns to large ecosystems. The stakeholders we heard
from included governmental representatives, inner city environmental activists and rural
community activists. We found local citizens taking responsibility for the environmental well-being
of their geographic area. Community-based projects exist all over the country, some without the
EPA's knowledge or guidance.
The Committee recognizes that both the Agency and citizen groups across the United
States have implemented CBEP initiatives. You may notice that some of the recommendations
and examples given in the attached report resemble existing activities. Please know that it is not
the intention of this Committee to disregard activities of the Agency or of local citizen groups
currently engaged in community environmental protection. The report is rather meant to
encourage EPA to compare the Committee's recommendations to existing Agency initiatives, and
suggests comparisons and process to further enhance EPA's community-based programs.
Thank you for your support of this Advisory Committee and community-based
environmental protection activities. We look forward to continued interactions with you and the
Agency to enhance this worthwhile initiative.
Sincerely,
/Uoan L. Bavaria, Chair
Community-Based Environmental Protection Committee
Enclosure
} Investing for a better world
-------
-------
NOTICE
This report and recommendations has been written as a part of the activities of the
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT), a public
advisory committee providing extramural policy information and advice to the Environmental
Protection Agency's Administrator and other officials of the EPA, The Council is structured to
provide balanced, expert assessment of policy matters related to the effectiveness of the
environmental programs of the United States. This report has not been reviewed for approval by
the EPA and, hence, the contents of this report and recommendations do not necessarily represent
the views and policies of the EPA, nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the federal
government, nor does mention of trade names, companies, or commercial products constitute a
recommendation for use.
-------
ABSTRACT
The Community-Based Environmental Protection (CBEP) Committee of the National Advisory Council
for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT) was requested by the EPA Administrator to develop
recommendations on how EPA can support and advance community-based environmental protection. The
Committee recognized CBEP as a valuable framework for community empowerment and integrated
ecosystem management. Community-based environmental protection is one of the most potentially
significant initiatives EPA has undertaken hi many years. But adopting the CBEP approach requires
changes in how EPA conducts its work, by increasing focus on places and the environmental problems
encountered in those places. Because EPA cannot be directly involved in every community, the Agency
must focus resources on building the capacity of others. EPA's goal with CBEP should be to help
communities achieve tangible and sustainable environmental improvement through collaborative, innovative
efforts. This process should be based on a framework of: Information, Incentives, Measuring the
integrated results of environmental, economic, and social welfare indicators, and Planning for evaluations
of CBEP activities. The Committee's recommendations in these areas are:
Information
• EPA should continue to develop and disseminate information products designed to increase
awareness.
• EPA should integrate relevant existing data to develop useful information products that will
empower communities to understand and address complex environmental issues.
• As EPA develops or enhances CBEP information products, the Agency should engage
representative users hi all phases of development.
Incentives
• EPA should focus on incentives to encourage community participation in CBEP activities.
• EPA should develop different incentives for different groups. EPA should tailor incentives
according to the opportunities, constraints, and objectives of each target group.
• EPA should create incentives that will encourage target groups to maintain (not just initiate)
desired behaviors.
Measurements
» EPA should provide assistance on what to measure, how to measure it, and how to use the
measurements.
• EPA should encourage communities and businesses to report to the public on environmental
impacts of their decisions and activities. EPA should also encourage regulated/delegated
activities to be reported from several scales.
• EPA should help communities consider tradeoffs among environmental/human health, economic,
and social impacts.
Plan for Evaluation
• EPA should, evaluate its success hi providing useful CBEP support to target audiences, the
success of this support in catalyzing initiation of and participation in community environmental
activities, and the success of this work hi improving environmental quality through CBEP
activities.
-------
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CHAPTER ONE—OVERVIEW
CHAPTER TWO—RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CBEP INFORMATION NEEDS
CHAPTER THREE—RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CBEP INCENTIVES
CHAPTER FOUR—RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CBEP MEASUREMENT
NEEDS
CHAPTER FIVE—PLANNING FOR EVALUATION
APPENDIX A—MEMBERS OF NACEPT'S COMMUNITY-BASED
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMITTEE
APPENDIX B—GLOSSARY
-------
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) created the National Advisory Council for Environmental
Policy and Technology (NACEPT) to provide environmental policy advice on a wide variety of environmental
issues. In 1995, at the request of EPA's Administrator, NACEPT offered preliminary recommendations on
how EPA can support and advance community-based environmental protection. In 1996, NACEPT created
the Community-Based Environmental Protection (CBEP) Committee to develop more detailed
recommendations. The Committee met several times in 1996 and 1997 to discuss its charge and to develop
recommendations. The Committee's recommendations are as follows:
Information
EPA should continue to develop and disseminate information products designed to increase
awareness.
Outreach products should focus on:
— The relationship between environmental quality and a community's physical,
social, and economic health:
— The ability of community-based environmental protection initiatives to improve
the community's overall-well-being.
— What information is needed to carry out these initiatives.
— How this.information can be used in efforts to improve environmental quality.
EPA should integrate relevant existing data to develop useful information products that will
empower communities to understand and address complex environmental issues.
This information may include written examples of CBEP activities in various geographic
areas, relevant data and indicators presented clearly and with appropriate context, and
templates for measuring progress.
As EPA develops or enhances CBEP information products, the Agency should engage
representative users in all phases of development.
Communities and EPA have different, often complementary/perspectives and expertise.
EPA should engage in dialogues with communities to understand their needs, learn from
their experiences, and obtain their input and feedback. EPA should test information
products in representative communities to ensure that information products are
thoughtfully targeted to the needs of the various audiences.
ES-1
-------
Incentives
Measurement
EPA should focus on incentives to encourage community participation in CBEP activities.
EPA should develop different incentives for different groups. EPA should tailor incentives
according to the opportunities, constraints, and objectives of each target group.
EPA should create incentives that will encourage target groups to maintain (not just initiate)
desired behaviors.
• EPA should provide assistance on what to measure, how to measure it, and how to use the
, measurements.
For example, leading indicators are early warning tools that can help users prevent
problems, while current/lagging indicators help users determine -whether environmental
protection activities are working. EPA should inform communities of where to get
existing environmental measurement data and how they can be used. Whether assisting in
new measurements or utilization of existing data, EPA should focus on helping decision-
makers obtain the information they need for sound decision-making.
• EPA should encourage communities and businesses to report to the public on environmental
impacts of their decisions and activities. EPA should also encourage regulated/delegated
activities to be reported from several scales.
By demonstrating the value of such reporting to communities and businesses alike, and by
providing examples of various formats, EPA can help create conditions that foster routine
public reporting.
» EPA should help communities consider tradeoffs among environmental/human health,
economic, and social impacts.
This type of guidance is an invaluable tool for decision-making and for forging
cooperative (rather than adversarial) relationships with the regulated community.
Plan for Evaluation
• EPA should evaluate its success in providing useful CBEP support to target audiences, the
success of this support in catalyzing initiation of and participation in community
environmental activities, and the success of this work in improving environmental quality
through CBEP activities.
The Committee recognizes that EPA already performs many of these activities—and that it coordinates with
other organizations (e.g., other federal agencies, environmental organizations such as the Nature
Conservancy, and others)., The Committee encourages the Agency to (1) identify where existing activities
coincide with the recommendations outlined in this report and (2) continue or, where appropriate, expand its
efforts in these areas.
ES-2
-------
CHAPTER ONE
OVERVIEW
1. BACKGROUND
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) created the National Advisory Council for Environmental
Policy and Technology (NACEPT) to provide environmental policy advice on a wide variety of environmental
issues. First chartered by EPA under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) on July 17,1988,
NACEPT currently consists of about 50 members representing government (state, local, tribal) agencies,
organized labor, business, industry, academia, public interest groups, and several other classes of
organizations to provide the balanced viewpoints that FACA requires of federal advisory committees.
In 1995 and 1996, at the request of EPA's Administrator, NACEPT focused on how the Agency can support
community-based environmental protection (CBEP) activities.1 In CBEP, communities partner with local
governments and industries, states, federal • •
agencies, and other stakeholders to identify
environmental problems and priorities in specific
places. The communities then identify and
implement management strategies to achieve
community objectives in these areas. Adopting
Community-based environmental protection is a
tool for improved environmental quality and
health through citizen activity. It is about
building constituencies-and fostering control.
—Comment made during CBEP Committee
discussions.
the CBEP approach requires changes in how EPA
conducts its work, with an increased focus on
places and the environmental problems encountered in those places. Because EPA cannot be directly
involved in every community, the Agency must focus resources on building the capacity of others. EPA's
goal with CBEP is to help communities achieve tangible and sustainable environmental results through
collaborative, innovative efforts. In 1995, NACEPT formed three committees to consider ecosystem
1 Throughout this report, NACEPT uses the term "community-based environmental protection (CBEP)" to
refer to the wide range of community-driven environmental protection efforts that take place in this country
and around the world. NACEPT recognizes that different individuals and groups may have different names
for these activities, such as place-based or geographic-based initiatives. These activities, whatever their
name, are not new and might or might not involve EPA. NACEPT simply uses the term CBEP for
convenience in discussing how EPA can promote and support such community-driven initiatives.
1-1
-------
management and ecological, economic, and social needs required for CBEP. As set forth in NACEPT's June
1996 report,2 Council recommendations addressed:
Changes needed in institutional roles and responsibilities.
EPA should take on new roles (as leader, convener, mediator, and educator) and develop
collaborative partnerships -with other federal agencies, states, local governments, private
parties, and communities.
Tools and resources needed,
including scientific models, data
and information, and training.
EPA can contribute to the
development and improvement of
these tools in several specific -ways
(outlined in the June 1996 report).
Steps needed to integrate economic
and ecosystem management goals.
EPA can play important roles in
promoting consensus, designing
accounting tools, developing
incentives, and measuring, .
evaluating, and modeling impacts.
The balance of nature is built of a series of
interrelationships between living things, and
between living things and their environment. You
can'tjust step in with some brute force and
change one thing -without changing a good many
others. Now this doesn't mean, of course, that we
must never interfere, that we must not attempt to
tilt that balance of nature in our favor. But when
we do make this, attempt, we must know what we 're
doing, we must know the consequences.
— Rachel Carson, The Sense of Wonder
NACEPT endorsed CBEP as a valuable framework for community empowerment and integrated ecosystem
management NACEPT considers focused and organized support of CBEP one of the most potentially
significant initiatives EPA has undertaken in many years.
2. NACEPT'S COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
COMMITTEE
In fiscal year 1996, the EPA Administrator asked NACEPT to follow up with more detailed
recommendations. NACEPT created the Community-Based Environmental Protection (CBEP) Committee to
develop recommendations. The Committee includes representatives from state and local agencies, academia
HJ.S. EPA. 1996. Promoting innovative approaches to environmental protection: A summary of
recommendations from the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology. EPA 100-
R-96-003. Office of Cooperative Environmental Management, Washington, DC. June.
1-2
-------
(business/economic and environmental fields), community environmental organizations, industry, and
consulting companies (Appendix A, Members of NACEPT's CBEP Committee). It is charged with:
Examining the elements of sustainable economies and opportunities for harmonizing
environmental policy, economic activity, and ecosystem management (an information
activity).
Identifying regulatory and nonregulatory public and private incentives that can be used to
promote community-based environmental protection work.
Identifying measures of success in implementing and evaluating CBEP programs.
3.
FRAMEWORK FOR DELIBERATIONS
The CBEP Committee met in April, July, September, and December of 1996 and March of 1997 to address
this charge. During the first meeting, the Committee developed a framework for structuring its discussions
and recommendations (Figure 1, Framework for CBEP Recommendations, page 1-4). This framework
identifies three broad components of CBEP work that EPA can promote and support:
• Information.
• Incentives.
• Integrated measurement of environmental, economic, and social welfare indicators
("measurement", for short).
These components are defined in Figure 1 and discussed further in Chapters 2 through 4 of this report. The
CBEP Committee chose these .components because they are ones that EPA should be able to pursue
effectively and efficiently. For each, the CBEP Committee considered what EPA can and should do to
promote and support CBEP work. During its deliberations, the Committee stressed the importance of
ensuring the efficacy and practicality of EPA activities to promote community-based environmental
protection. To underscore this point, the Committee placed the three components in the Framework for
CBEP Recommendations on a foundation consisting of:
• Plan for evaluation
• Execution
1-3
-------
00
c
O
"D
C
-------
As in any substantial project, the Committee acknowledged CBEP's need for a strong foundation. EPA must
develop benchmarks to evaluate the success of its activities (plan for evaluation) and specific steps it can take
to implement Committee recommendations and the CBEP program (execution).
The Committee recognizes that environmental problems and CBEP activities exist across the entire range of
geographic scales. EPA-sponsored information, incentives, and measurement resources designed to promote
environmental activities at one scale may be inappropriate for other scales ("one size does not fit all").
Therefore, the Committee developed recommendations for four representative scales:
• Microcommunity (e.g., a neighborhood or hydrological unit such as a small watershed)
• Local community (e.g., a town, city, or county)
" Regional community (e.g., a large watershed, county, or group of counties)
• Global community (e.g., across national boundaries, continent, or planet)
The Committee emphasized that communities must identify the scale of both the problem and its cause. This
will help to determine when the community can solve its environmental problems and when/if it must
collaborate to address cross-scale problems.
4. ASSUMPTIONS
The CBEP Committee recognizes that the recommendations described in this report are predicated on several
assumptions: *
• To achieve further improvements in environmental quality, additional initiatives are needed
• Community-based action can produce improvements in environmental quality as well as
other benefits (e.g., community empowerment, holistic examination of issues to generate
integrated solutions). As a result, CBEP activities are important initiatives, and EPA
support for these initiatives should help empower communities.
• EPA should first foster (when awareness of an issue is low) or reinforce community
awareness of the need to examine environmental issues, then proactively make information
on the sources, type, and extent of environmental problems available to communities.
1-5
-------
CBEP initiatives should involve
many different interests, and EPA
support of CBEP work should
promote diverse stakeholder
involvement Diverse interests can
come to agreements that all can
accept, even if the agreements do
not fulfill the sometimes competing
wishes of individual participants.
...Key stakeholders in the system must come
together and engage in a process "with a common
objective. These stakeholders must find common
ground, knowing that they -will not come away
with all of their positions endorsed.
-KarlHausker. 1997. Enterprise for the
Environment: Building a New Consensus.
Environmental Business Journal: January 1997.
• EPA may suggest programs, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^—a^—
document best practices, and
otherwise provide information, but communities will make their own choices about what will
work for them.
• EPA should participate in and support local initiatives. Where appropriate, the Agency
should build on information developed at the local level to help advance other local or
federal goals.
• EPA should support and leverage the many existing non-EPA programs, private or
governmental, as a preferred option to duplicating them or creating new solutions.
The CBEP Committee attempted to assimilate many perspectives to develop workable recommendations. As
is typical in a consensus process, no single set of solutions will work for all audiences or address all needs.
Throughout this report, the Committee offers examples to illustrate how its recommendations can be applied
in varied ways to respond to the different circumstances of individual communities.
1-6
-------
CHAPTER TWO
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CBEP INFORMATION NEEDS
1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter addresses the first component in the CBEP framework for advancing community-based
environmental protection, namely information (Figure 1, Framework for GBEP Recommendations, page 1-4).
For CBEP purposes, information consists of data and materials to support community-based
environmental protection activities and decision-
making. For example, communities need
information to understand existing environmental
conditions, assess the scope and causes of problems,
People cannot respond to information they do not
have, nor can they achieve goals or targets of
which they are not aware.
-Sustainable Seattle. 1996. A Primer for
Creating New Measurements of Progress.
identify possible solutions, and analyze and evaluate
results of environmental protection activities. In
particular, information on indicators and
benchmarks (see Chapter Four for further discussion) serves as a foundation for analysis, evaluation, and
reporting—and for anticipating emerging environmental issues.
To be effective, the content and presentation of information must be thoughtfully targeted to the needs of the
various participants in CBEP work (e.g., community organizers, ad hoc community groups, local
governments, stakeholder groups). Their needs exist across four scales: microcommunity, local, regional, and
global (Figure 2, Framework for CBEP Recommendations: Information Needs, page 2-2). The CBEP
Committee supports the interim recommendations of theNACEPT's Information Impacts Committee1 for
addressing these needs. The recommendations below provide additional suggestions for how EPA can use
information to facilitate community-based environmental protection efforts:
1 Information Impacts Committee (EC) of the National Advisory Council on Environmental Policy
and Technology (NACEPT). January 24,1997. Interim Report of Recommendations.
2-1
-------
Figure 2. Framework for CBEP Recommendations:
Information Needs
Information
Micro
Community
Example:
• Provide ease of
access to CBEP
information
Local
Community
Example:
• Conduct workshops
on the visioning
process
Regional
Community
Example:
• Provide interstate
watershed informa-
tion (e.g., Chesapeake]
Bay program)
Global
Community
Example:
• Provide international
expertise to address
global problems that
begin locally
2-2
-------
• Recommendation A: EPA should continue to develop and disseminate information products
designed to increase awareness.
Outreach products should focus on: .
— The relationship between environmental quality and a community's physical,
social, and economic health.
— The ability of community-based environmental protection initiatives to improve
the community's overall-well-being.
— What information is needed to carry out these initiatives.
— How this information can be used in efforts to improve environmental quality.
• Recommendation B: EPA should integrate relevant existing data to develop useful
information products that will empower communities to understand and address complex
environmental issues. .
This information may include written examples ofCBEP activities in various geographic
areas, relevant data and indicators presented clearly and with appropriate context, and
templates for measuring progress.
• Recommendation C: As EPA develops or enhances CBEP information products, the
Agency should engage representative users in all phases of development
Communities and EPA have different, often complementary, perspectives and expertise.
EPA should engage in dialogues with communities to understand their needs, learn from
their experiences, and'obtain their input and'feedback. EPA should test information
products in representative communities to ensure that information products are
thoughtfully targeted to the needs of the various audiences.
These recommendations are described in Section 2 below. Section 3 (Execution) of this chapter suggests
actions to carry out a successful CBEP information program.
2-3
-------
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATION A: EPA should continue to develop and
disseminate information products designed to increase awareness.
Outreach products should focus on:
— The relationship between environmental quality and a community's physical, social,
and economic health.
— The ability of community-based environmental protection initiatives to improve the
community's overall well-being.
— What information is needed to carry out these initiatives.
— How this information can be used in efforts to improve environmental quality.
Scale of Application: Micro, local, regional, and global.
Information is a powerful tool the Agency can use to motivate and empower communities and stakeholders at
all geographic levels to identify, prevent, and correct environmental problems. Information from EPA can
help communities make decisions to implement their own environmental solutions based on economic
viability, environmental integrity, social equity, and .
cultural uniqueness. Communities vary
tremendously, however, in their awareness of and
participation in CBEP as a means of solving
problems. As part of its larger effort to organize and
present CBEP information for communities,
therefore, EPA must convey why CBEP is
important EPA should stress that CBEP is a
positive, effective way for citizens to ensure the
overall health of their community, given that government cannot (and should not) do everything. CBEP is an
opportunity to identify relationships between environmental quality and the community's social, physical, and
economic health.
The Agency must answer "so what" questions that
communities might have: What is the purpose of
CBEP? Why should we bother? What is the point
of collecting CBEP information, how does it relate
to us, and how can we use it in our unique
situation?
—Comment made during CBEP Committee
discussions.
2-4
-------
EPA must establish a connection between having information and using it. The Agency must explain what
information is needed, how to use it, and when. Only with a two-pronged information campaign—to increase
awareness of the effectiveness of community-based environmental protection and the uses of CBEP
information (Recommendation A) and to disseminate scientific and other information that communities will
need to conduct CBEP projects (Recommendation B)—will EPA maximize its role as a CBEP information
provider. Where possible, EPA should help communities connect with each other (e.g., by identifying
networking or mentoring opportunities) to leverage community experience and promote information sharing.
RECOMMENDATION B: EPA should integrate relevant existing
data to develop useful information products that will empower
communities to understand and address complex environmental
issues.
This information may include written examples of CBEP activities in various geographic
areas, relevant data and indicators presented clearly and with appropriate context, and
templates for measuring progress.
Scale of Application: Micro, local, and regional.
Communities embarking on CBEP efforts need strategies for improving environmental quality, information
on organizing people and building community support, and scientific information and analytical tools.
Although CBEP is most powerful when communities use an integrated approach to examine their situations
holistically, for illustrative purposes, the following uses a specific issue (wetlands preservation) to illustrate
topics that EPA could address to help meet community information needs:
Visioning, the process of community goal-setting for the future in which communities decide
what they would like their future to look like (including, for example, how to balance
wetlands preservation with future development needs).
Strategies for scoping out existing community problems and their causes (e.g., how to obtain
information from EPA's Surf Your Watershed Web site to assess the relative extent of a
point source or chemical release problem in local waters)!
Methods of organizing people and building community support for an environmental
protection effort (e.g., how to generate awareness of the short- and long-term economic as
well as environmental ramifications of wetlands disappearance, how to publicize the issue,
and how to create forums for input and participation).
2-5
-------
• Approaches to working cooperatively with others when problems transcend geographic
boundaries (e.g., how to organize charrettes, which bring people together to analyze a
problem and decide on a unified approach).
• Methods of evaluating the success of a community's environmental protection efforts
(e.g., how to measure the size and health of wetlands in the community before, during, and
after a CBEP project).
• Examples of innovative solutions to technical problems, and other case studies and success
stories (e.g., how a community designed an ordinance to promote wetlands preservation, case
studies of successful local land trusts).
EPA should promote the development of integrated information for communities to provide a meaningful
context for scientific data. NACEPT's Information Impacts Committee addressed this issue in its report to
Deputy Administrator Hansen; see Recommendation 3 of that report for more details.
EPA should focus its CBEP information efforts on those tasks that are unlikely to be undertaken by other
agencies or organizations and that the Agency can accomplish more efficiently than state or local agencies or
organizations working individually. Appropriate Agency tasks include, for example:
• Thoughtfully eliciting symptoms ("where does it hurt" information) to assist communities in
identifying environmental problems—and interactions between indicators as they play out in
the community.
• Determining what types of information are most needed by CBEP stakeholders, such as
merchants, city planners, local government officials, clergy, sport enthusiasts (e.g., anglers),
and community conservation organizations.
In this area as in others, EPA should coordinate with existing efforts (e.g., demonstration
projects undertaken by the President's Council on Sustainable Development) to leverage
those resources.
• Developing and implementing strategies to disseminate information to CBEP stakeholders
on a nationwide basis, recognizing the access and equity issues inherent in the use of today's
technology.
• Taking steps (e.g., via research, incentives, training, or reengineering of database systems) to
make available to communities information that is needed but currently unavailable or
inaccessible.
Examples of useful projects EPA could undertake to provide CBEP information can be found in
Table 1, Examples of Potential EPA CBEP Information Projects, on page 2-7.
2-6
-------
TABLE 1
EXAMPLES OF POTENTIAL EPA CBEP INFORMATION PROJECTS
These examples of potential EPA CBEP information projects are presented for illustrative purposes.
Where available, the Agency should leverage resources from other sources.
Provide Information About Sources of Environmental Problems
Data on the sources, type, and extent of environmental problems are important to identify and diagnose
environmental problems at the community level. EPA already has substantial information of this nature in its
regulatory databases. EPA should proactively make this information available to communities (e.g., via Geographic
Information Systems [GIS] or Internet tools). Also, EPA can ensure that the importance of collecting CBEP-related
information from the regulated community is not diminished as the Agency strives to reduce the regulatory reporting
and recordkeeping burden. EPA is currently developing policy for a one-stop reporting program.
Provide Guidance and Information About Leading Indicators of Potential Environmental
Problems
EPA can advise communities on what information types serve as leading indicators of environmental problems that
may occur in the future. For example, erosion in runoff from construction sites can be an indicator of potential
water problems that may have broader ecological ramifications. Within EPA, indicators are constantly being
identified and promoted as part of an ongoing process. The Agency can make available data it has on leading
indicators. Both guidance and data would help communities prevent environmental problems.
Identify or Flag Place-Based Information
Easily accessed environmental data are critical to communities seeking to identify, diagnose, prevent, and/or resolve
environmental problems. EPA can tag data pertinent to a particular geographic area so that the data may be readily
retrieved and utilized for CBEP purposes. One approach, for example, is to increase Agency efforts to tag data by
hydrologic units. Also, when developing new environmental databases, EPA should ensure easy access to
geographic and other data.
Develop a Resource Guide for Small and Medium-Sized Companies
Because of limited resources, small and medium-sized companies often have much greater difficulty than larger
companies in identifying and implementing opportunities for environmental improvement EPA can produce
sector-specific resource guides and other materials for small and medium-sized companies describing affordable
opportunities for environmental improvement that can benefit both the company and the local-community.
*- .
Support Corporate Initiatives To Report Environmental Results on a Facility Basis
At the local level, communities need information about corporate environmental performance on a facility basis.
EPA can encourage corporate reporting on a facility basis (e.g., by providing models, guidance, and incentives) to
help make this type of information available to communities.
2-7
-------
RECOMMENDATION C: As EPA develops or enhances CBEP
information products, the Agency should engage representative users
in all phases of development
Communities and EPA have different, often complementary, perspectives and expertise.
EPA should engage in dialogues with communities to understand their needs, learn from
their experiences, and obtain their input and feedback. EPA should test information
products in representative communities to ensure that information products are
thoughtfully targeted to the needs of the various audiences.
Scale of Application: Micro and local.
Audiences for CBEP information include community organizers, ad hoc community groups that organize for
particular environmental purposes, local governments, and stakeholder groups (e.g., neighborhood, resident,
and homeowners associations; students and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^_
teachers; nonprofit organizations such as land
trusts). CBEP information will be effective only if
both the content and presentation are thoughtfully
targeted to the needs of these various audiences.
Careful targeting will help ensure that the
Talk to us in our terms, in language -we can
understand.
—Yolanda Allen, Community Coalition for
EnvironmentalJustice, speaking at a CBEP
Committee meeting.
information is interpreted and used in ways that
promote environmental improvement. Involving representative users in all phases of development is the best
way to ensure the effectiveness of CBEP information products.
NACEPT's Information Impacts Committee discussed the importance of stakeholder involvement
in the development implementation, and evaluation of information policies and mechanisms. See
Recommendation 5 of that committee's report to Deputy Administrator Hansen for details. Also see
Recommendation 4 for suggestions for broadening public access to EPA information.
2-8
-------
3. EXECUTION
The formation of a Center for Environmental Information and Statistics (CEIS) within EPA is a positive step
toward providing the organization and leadership needed to execute the Agency's role as a CBEP information
provider. The following are specific suggestions for how CEIS and others in EPA can implement the
recommendations in this report:
• Engage and support communities
» Publicize the availability of CBEP information
• Target the information to the audience's needs
• Survey and integrate existing CBEP information
• Organize and display the information
• Partner with other organizations
• Use innovative approaches
Some of these suggestions coincide with approaches that CEIS already plans to use. In those cases, the
suggestions are intended to support those plans. The CBEP Committee also supports the ideas presented in
the interim recommendations report of NACEPT's Information Impacts Committee (see especially
Recommendations 3,4, and 5).
Engage and Support Communities
Communities can resolve significant problems at their community level. Many communities have worked to
do so, and can serve as information resources and mentors to other communities and EPA. Some
communities have less experience with community-based environmental protection. EPA can engage and
support such communities by, for example, identifying what problems can be addressed at the local level and
by facilitating communication between communities affected by the same problem. To ensure success, EPA
must place a high priority on motivating and/or supporting communities to help them access and use CBEP
information that the Agency and others make available. For example:
2-9
-------
• EPA regional staff have met and should continue to meet with community leaders and
stakeholders to help identify their environmental problems.
Support and guidance by EPA regional staff can be particularly important -when
community activities have unintended environmental impacts (e.g., -when rapid
development exacerbates local environmental problems).
• An EPA CBEP outreach campaign could include information products on the ability of
community-based environmental protection to holistically address environmental, social, and
economic concerns.
The campaign could also include mechanisms (such as awards and media recognition) to
publicize and acknowledge successful community efforts.
• Regional workshops and leadership training opportunities would motivate communities,
increase awareness of community-based environmental protection issues, and connect
individuals representing communities of different geographic scales and levels of awareness:
Publicize the Availability of CBEP Information
In addition to motivating communities, the Agency should publicize the availability of CBEP information
(e.g., via articles/ads in nationally known magazines and local newspapers) to promote maximum use of these
resources. To ensure effective publicity, EPA should partner with other organizations doing related outreach
work. Also, if appropriate, EPA could hire a professional outreach, public relations, or marketing firm to
design a campaign—targeted to local communities and other potential users—to publicize community-based
environmental activities and how to get information about them. Mechanisms for publicity may include, for
example, a magazine ad campaign, radio and television public service announcements, announcements on the
Internet, announcements in association newsletters, and publicity at the local level via schools, religious
institutions, community or regional leaders, companies, grocery stores, and environmental organizations.
Target the Information to the Audience's Needs
Types of Audiences. Audiences for CBEP information include community organizers, ad hoc community
groups that organize for CBEP purposes, local governments, and other stakeholder groups. When awareness
of a particular issue is low or nonexistent, these audiences first need to become aware of how they can utilize
a CBEP approach to meet their needs. Then they need information explaining how to detect and investigate
environmental problems, how to organize and sustain CBEP groups, and how to get results.
2-10
-------
Other audiences for C3EP information include sectors, such as businesses and industry, that may be willing
to initiate efforts for environmental improvement. For example, businesses need information about why
environmental improvement is important, what the benefits are, and how improvement can be accomplished
(e.g., via environmental management systems, environmental cost accounting).
Information Needs. Different audiences will have different information needs. Novices to CBEP activities
will need easy access to information that is brief, presented in lay terms, and broad in scope. With more
experience, practitioners will need detailed guidance or data on specific topics. Whatever their level of CBEP
experience, most users will access EPA-provided information without Agency assistance. Therefore, any
CBEP information, guidance, or systems developed by EPA must be as user-friendly and comprehensible as
possible.
As mentioned in Recommendation C, a cross section of communities should be engaged at each level of
product development to ascertain what information they need, in what form, and in what level of detail. The
results of this interaction should provide the basis for EPA's CBEP information products.
Distribution Mechanisms. EPA already uses some, if not all, of these mechanisms. However, to provide for
the various audiences of EPA's CBEP information efforts, the Agency should continue to use a variety of
mechanisms to package and distribute information:
The Internet is an increasingly valuable and versatile medium that enables widespread
distribution of both summary and detailed information. Many local libraries now offer
access to the Internet.
Publications (e.g., national newsletters and magazines for state and county governments)
remain an important mechanism for advertising and distributing information.
Meetings (e.g., training seminars) provide face-to-face interaction.
Other formats should be considered, such as demonstration projects, train-the-trainer
workshops, and a hotline number for CBEP information queries.
2-11
-------
Survey and Integrate Existing CBEP Information
The needs of the audiences of CBEP information must drive EPA efforts to provide information. EPA should
organize information currently available within the Agency in a way that makes relevant information more
accessible to these audiences. EPA need not produce a paper catalog of available data, but should cross-
reference and make available related data with appropriate contextual information (see Recommendation 3 in
the Information Impacts Committee's interim report). Where feasible, EPA should also identify and integrate
applicable information from outside the Agency.
Organizing existing information will be difficult, but it will be valuable because:
• As a federal-level agency, EPA can play an important role in synthesizing and disseminating
its existing information.
For example, the Agency should examine its existing CBEP information materials
(publications, videos, etc.) to determine -what mil be most useful to communities.
» A study of currently available information will help identify CBEP information areas that are
not being addressed.
For example, EPA might identify gaps in information on indicators of environmental
quality at different scales or economic benefits of environmental health. EPA then can
determine -whether it should conduct research or initiate specific projects to provide this
information.
• A study of currently available information will help EPA avoid wasting resources by
duplicating efforts and information.
EPA should play a shared coordinating role in making available information from outside the Agency. While
making its own information more accessible, EPA should serve as a "pointer" to information and success
stories from other organizations. Similarly, the Agency should facilitate networking by connecting
individuals/organizations doing similar types of work. For example, EPA could contribute to a major federal
effort already underway to connect people working on sustainability to develop a "catalog" of indicators and
measures of sustainability.
2-12
-------
Organize and Display the Information
Whatever the form of the information (e.g., a citizen's handbook or Internet tool), EPA should develop a
method for clearly organizing and displaying available information. This will enable users to readily identify
which information will be most useful to them and obtain more detailed information as they need it. For
electronic searches, a transparent and user-friendly information access mechanism will ensure that users have
maximum autonomy in locating and accessing the information they need.
Partner With Other Organizations
Many organizations and institutions at all geographic levels are conducting or initiating CBEP-related efforts.
Activities include specific place-based projects (e.g., cleaning up the Elizabeth River in Virginia), as well as
the development of guidance and other informational tools (e.g., databases, software programs, mailing lists)
for community environmental projects. These efforts provide EPA with important opportunities to leverage
funds and personnel resources in meeting CBEP information needs. Therefore, EPA should coordinate,
collaborate, and partner with organizations across sectors and geographic levels to take maximum advantage
of these opportunities.
Use Innovative Approaches
Historically, many of EPA's environmental protection activities have taken the form of national- or regional-
level programs driven by regulatory authorities and mandates. In contrast, the success of CBEP
efforts—particularly those at local or microcommunity levels—relies on site- and situation-specific solutions
crafted and executed by the community's stakeholders.
EPA is currently trying to engage appropriate stakeholders. To successfully meet CBEP information needs,
the Agency must renew and strengthen its commitment to involve the appropriate regions and agencies across
multiple geographic scales. Also, EPA should not be constrained by single-media or regulatory-based
approaches. Instead, EPA should be creative and flexible in developing and implementing effective
informational strategies and products to meet the various levels of CBEP information needs.
2-13
-------
-------
CHAPTER THREE
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CBEP INCENTIVES
1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter addresses the second component in the CBEP framework for advancing community-based
environmental protection, namely incentives (Figure 1, Framework for CBEP Recommendations, page 1-4).
Incentives are actions, strategies, policies, and/or regulations that induce or empower individuals and
organizations to change their behavior. For CBEP purposes, incentives exist across four scales:
microcommunity, local, regional, and global (Figure 3, Framework for CBEP Recommendations: Incentives,
page 3-2). The recommendations below indicate how EPA can use incentives to promote participation in
CBEP efforts:
Recommendation A: EPA should focus on incentives to encourage community participation
in CBEP activities.
Recommendation B: EPA should develop different incentives for different groups. EPA
should tailor incentives according to the opportunities, constraints, and objectives of each
target group.
Recommendation C: EPA should create incentives that will encourage target groups to
maintain (not just initiate) desired behaviors.
These recommendations are described in Section 2 below. Section 3 (Execution) of this chapter suggests
actions to carry out a successful CBEP incentives program.
3-1
-------
Figure 3. Framework for CBEP Recommendations:
Incentives
Incentives
Micro
Community
Example:
• Provide information
on voluntary land
preservation options
available to landowners j
Local
Community
Example:
• Restructure funding
paths to emphasize
community participa-
tion and representation
Regional
Community
Example:
• Provide regulatory
flexibility in meeting
standards
Global
Community
Example:
• Harmonize proce-
dures and coordinate
resources from
different governments
3-2
-------
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATION A: EPA should focus on incentives to
encourage community participation in CBEP activities.
Scale of Application: Micro, local, regional, and global.
EPA-fashionea incentives are aimed at inducing or empowering affected parties to engage in effective
community environmental protection or improvement activities. Such incentives work by affecting the
opportunities, constraints, and objectives of the affected parties. They may, for example, increase job or sales
opportunities, reduce the cost or difficulty of complying with regulations, produce financial rewards, save
time, generate favorable PR or good will, or provide a sense of control or empowerment.
Incentives can be positive (i.e., providing rewards to encourage or reinforce desired behavior) or negative
(i.e., regulating or penalizing undesired behavior). Consistent with the general trend toward cooperative rather
than command-and-control strategies, EPA should focus primarily on voluntary, positive incentives.
Where possible, the Agency should replace barriers (disincentives) in its strategies, policies, and
regulations with positive incentives. Doing so will encourage individuals and organizations to participate
more in CBEP activities. Examples include:
• Promote long-term, continued interaction between EPA personnel and communities.
Often, EPA promotions depend on a-willingness to move or assume other responsibilities.
This disrupts the Agency's personal, long-term relationships with community
environmental groups. '
• Encourage other federal agencies to promote community interaction.
• Rectify communities' and businesses' uncertainty about procedural issues or evaluation
criteria.
For example, some communities do not apply for grants because they are unclear about
how to complete an application. Similarly, some businesses do not adopt environmentally
- friendlier production practices because they are too uncertain about the new practices
meeting regulatory standards.
3-3
-------
Establishing suitable rewards will also create more favorable conditions for engaging in community
environmental activities. Incentives could include training and other resources for community groups wishing
to spearhead environmental initiatives; positive publicity for businesses that use environmentally friendlier
production practices or produce environmentally friendly products; flexibility in meeting regulatory standards
to states, businesses, and communities that undertake environmental protection work; and recognition or
rewards for government agency staff who engage in CBEP efforts. EPA should continue and improve its
performance partnership activities to provide greater flexibility to states, tribes, and other entities tackling
environmental problems in new (e.g., cross-media) or innovative ways.
Positive incentives will not be sufficient to change everyone's behavior. The CBEP Committee realizes that
regulatory enforcement will still be needed to deter or penalize the minority of individuals and organizations
that are less well-intentioned.
RECOMMENDATION B: EPA should develop different incentives
for different groups. EPA should tailor incentives according to the
opportunities, constraints, and objectives of each target group.
Scale of Application: Micro, local, regional, and global.
Incentives work by affecting the opportunities, constraints, and objectives of each target group. Therefore,
various incentives are needed for different groups. Targets of EPA incentives may include individuals and
organizations within and outside EPA. During its
discussions, the CBEP Committee identified numerous
possible targets of EPA incentives, and listed examples
of incentives fhat might be suitable for each target
group. The Committee found overlaps in the incentives
and so grouped these targets to present examples more
efficiently. The result is Table 2, beginning on page 3-5. The table is intended to show as many examples of
incentives as possible. It is not all-inclusive, nor is it possible for EPA to implement all of the examples.
Sometimes '-we'are 'they'.
-Comment made during CBEP Committee
discussions on target groups.
3-4
-------
TABLE2
EXAMPLES OF INCENTIVES FOR SPECIFIC TARGETS
c E:ote The CBEP Committee considers examples marked with asterisks (*) high priorities for EPA
consideration and implementation.
Target
Examples of Incentives That EPA May Provide or Encourage When Appropriate
Internal EPA Targets
EPA
Headquarters
and Regions
*Motivate and engage staff:
• Establish performance evaluation criteriathat reward staff/programs for participation
in CBEP activities and interoffice personnel agreements (IPAs)
• Provide reward money or time off for staff who conduct integrated assessments, involve
a broad range of partners and stakeholders, and perform CBEP work that yields
positive results
• Provide recognition or rewards for taking risks (including terminating one's own
project if the project appears less effective than hoped)
• Stabilize funding and staffing (e.g., so that personnel can plan and implement CBEP
work without fear of reduced project support)
*Inform staff about EPA's Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) program, which
diverts a proportion of penalty money to the community for local environmental
projects
Facilitate improved organizational management:
• Establish organizational structures and mechanisms for cross-program communication
and cooperation
« Provide opportunities to participate in CBEP work at regional/local levels
Facilitate cross-media work by restructuring regulatory requirements that hinder such
work or that create burdens that discourage community involvement
Promote prompt action by establishing procedures that require EPA to refund fees
(e.g., permits) if the Agency does not meet review deadlines
Provide guidelines (linked to funding) for diversity in the boards/leadership of GBEP
groups
Inform landowners about long-term land use planning, management practices, and
incentives under their control (e.g., provide information about conservation easements,
provide case studies of success stories')
3-5
-------
TABLE 2 (continued)
Examples of Incentives That EPA May Provide or Encourage When Appropriate
il EPA Targets
Other
Federal
Agencies
(*•§•<
Department
oflnterior,
Department
ofTranspor-
tation,
others)
Facilitate improved environmental practices by revising processes under cross-cutting
Acts that are at cross purposes (e.g., processes under ISTEA that funnel funds into
activities that harm the environment unnecessarily):
* • Gain support from other agencies for increased upfront EPA involvement and feedback
to provide greater certainty that stakeholder efforts will be acceptable and approved
• Provide greater clarity in criteria, goals, and practices (e.g., to remove uncertainty
about whether a permit application will meet EPA's requirements and be accepted)
• Advocate changes to procedures and regulations that constrain conservation-minded
management (e.g., Forest Service practices that conflict with conservation)
*Facilitate improved land use practices based on sound science and community values:
• Provide information about how to examine short- versus long-term costs and benefits
of land use options
• Facilitate assignment of nonmarket/hontangible land values (e.g., value to the
community as a park, value of cultural amenities, value of enjoyment of the
environment) as well as traditional monetary values
• Provide information about how to perform nonmarket and market analyses of land
values and natural resource conservation—and how to determine fair charges (that
reflect all types of costs) of land use
• Facilitate the development of usable, accessible, locally relevant methodologies and
models that can be used for full cost accounting
• Provide information about specific situations that the agency might encounter
(e.g., what happens if an endangered species lives on the land)
*Work to motivate other agencies to provide more funding for cooperative conservation
efforts
Where possible, encourage the use of full cost accounting in priority-setting and
decision-making ,
3-6
-------
TABLE 2 (continued)
Target
Examples of Incentives That EPA May Provide or Encourage When Appropriate
Facilitate professional development:
States
• Provide professional development opportunities (e.g., regional training
conferences)
• Provide implementation assistance (e.g., staff, funds, training)
*Enable states to more easily obtain funding:
» Clarify funding opportunities and processes
• Provide training oh grant writing
• Restructure funding paths (e.g., along community-based paths) to increase the
likelihood of community environmental projects being funded
Facilitate innovation by providing increased regulatory flexibility
3-7
-------
TABLE 2 (continued)
Target
Examples of Incentives That EPA May Provide or Encourage When Appropriate
County,
Municipal,
and Other
Local
Governments
Incentives provided to states (see above)
*Empower communities to maintain local control over their economic, cultural, and
- -vironmental future by providing:
• Leadership training for local government officials and community leaders
• Resources for capacity building, especially resources tailored to the size and
sophistication of the community
• Financial and technical support for the "visioning" process, including
identifying links between the local and global community
• Opportunities for local decision-making
• Flexibility in how to meet standards
• Clarification of EPA's decision-making process and criteria, with opportunities
for local governments to provide feedback to EPA
« More grants, and increased emphasis on community involvement in the
evaluation of grant applications
• Information on EPA's Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) program,
which diverts a proportion of penalty money to the community for local
environmental projects
Facilitate collaborative participation in local land use discussions, providing successful
solutions for communities to use as a resource
3-8
-------
TABLE 2 (continued)
Target
Examples of Incentives That EPA May Provide or Encourage When Appropriate
Citizens and
Advocates
(Special
Interest
Groups)
*Inform citizens about how environmental issues affect their lives and how they can
shape their economic, cultural, and environmental futures
*Facilitate participation in meetings by providing conditions conducive to relationship
building (e.g., provide a comfortable meeting space with childcare, parking; schedule
meetings at times and locations convenient for the community)
Facilitate the collection of environmental information on and environmental evaluations
of local companies and products
Facilitate private efforts to prepare understandable reports on the environmental
performance of local companies
Facilitate broadbased consensus by providing resources:
• To improve representation (in underrepresented areas) in discussions of social and
cultural values
• For independent assessments of EPA plans
Facilitate cooperation by demonstrating a willingness to listen and by promptly
following through on discussions and agreements
Provide accurate, consistent, timely information (see Chapter 1)
Facilitate access to grants:
• Make grants available to nonprofit organizations
• Provide training on grant writing
• Reduce red tape ,
• Offer more fixed price awards (that provide money at the start rather than
reimbursement for expenditures)
*Inform citizens about EPA's SEP program, which diverts a proportion of penalty
money to the community for local environmental projects
Showcase individuals' activities by offering award or recognition programs
Support other entities (e.g., governments, businesses) trying to develop incentives for
citizens: support the design of "trickle down" incentives and strategies
3-9
-------
TABLE 2 (continued)
Industry and
Small
Business
*Provide regulatory flexibility to improve business practices (e.g., to facilitate
development of product lifecycle strategies that will internalize environmental costs or
promote recycling)
*Facilitate company self-measurement and self-reporting; inform companies about self-
audit legislation
Empower companies to perform their own analyses of downstream or "outyear" costs
and the scale of a problem by providing:
• Analysis software and other resources
• Case studies on how companies have increased profits by adopting
environmentally beneficial practices
• Information on the costs of not adopting such practices (e.g., bad PR, costs of
regulations necessitated by environmental problems, costs to business if city
goes into nonattainment due in part to company's emissions)
Facilitate improved small business practices and regulatory compliance:
» Provide free surveys and assessments or tools to identify opportunities for
saving money while making environmental improvements
• Facilitate mentoring by informing big businesses of the benefits of helping
small businesses improve their practices and by helping to pair big business
managers with small business managers
Facilitate communication and cooperation with the community:
• Provide resources to hire a professional mediator to promote conflict resolution
rather than litigation (e.g., when there is a serious conflict between an
industry/business and a community)
• Reward firms for community-based environmental protection efforts
(e.g., provide free publicity on environmentally beneficial actions)
*Facilitate development of market incentives that the marketplace would not
spontaneously generate on the basis of economic return alone (e.g., ecolabeling)
Facilitate development of tax incentives (e.g., lower capital gains taxes for those using
environmentally beneficial practices) —
3-10
-------
TABLE 2 (continued)
Target
Examples of Incentives That EPA May Provide or Encourage When Appropriate
Landowners
*Provide regulatory flexibility to encourage ecological land management
(e.g., allowing burns, construction of fences)
Promote awareness of tax and financial strategies for protecting land from development
or otherwise encouraging maintenance of the highest possible environmental values
Help landowners understand how to apply tax and financial strategies for protecting
land
Inform landowners about the environmental impacts of transfer development rights
(TDRs) versus purchase development rights (PDRs); provide support for PDR
matching funds
*Facilitate Brownfields restoration:
• Provide assurance that land cleaned up to an agreed-upon lower standard for
industrial reuse will not be subject to liability issues
• Facilitate the development of strategies to promote community acceptance of
reuse plan .
" Provide resources for mediation of disputes with communities on cleanup
standards
• Segregate Superfund monies for municipalities needing to clean up abandoned
properties (e.g., gasoline stations)
• A How flexibility in payment schedules
3-11
-------
RECOMMENDATION C: EPA should create incentives that will
encourage target groups to maintain (not just initiate) desired
behaviors.
Scale of Application: Micro, local, regional, and global.
Inducing environmentally responsive (or other desired) behaviors on a short-term or one-time basis is
comparatively easy when there is an immediate reward. These behaviors often falter if sustained commitment
is required. EPA should ensure that any incentives program includes a range of short-term and long-term
incentives that will encourage both initiation and maintenance of community environmental activities.
3. EXECUTION
The following five steps are a suggested framework for EPA to use in crafting and evaluating CBEP
incentives. The CBEP Committee recommends that EPA apply this process to items in Table 2 (pages 3-5 to
3-11) to develop specific incentives that are likely to be effective. EPA can also use this framework to
determine where existing incentives may be having unintended consequences; based on this examination, the
Agency can then make changes (as was done, for example, in creating the Brownfields Economic
Redevelopment Initiative). The availability of a "tool kit" of effective incentives for communities will
encourage use of a CBEP approach to solve environmental problems mat remain unresolved by
environmental regulations.
• Define the problem (e.g., resource depletion, habitat/water quality degradation).
• Identify the root cause(s) of the problem (e.g., specific business or household decisions).
• Identify the motivations of those causing the problem (e.g., profit, convenience).
• Identify incentives that will change these motivations (e.g., outreach, community action,
pricing public goods).
• Consider whether the incentives are sufficient to change behavior and address the problem.
3-12
-------
Step 1—Define the Problem
As a first step, a clear, specific definition of the problem will help EPA identify an incentive that will be
appropriately targeted to the community.
Step 2—Identify the Root Cause(s) of the Problem
Similarly, an accurate, understanding of the root cause(s) of the problem (and its geographic scale) is required
to identify incentives that will motivate changes in the problem behavior(s). For example, EPA could conduct
independent studies or develop survey instruments. By identifying problem behaviors), EPA will also
identify the individuals and organizations contributing to the problem and at what scale. These groups (or the
subset contributing most to the problem) then become the target of the incentives.
Step 3—Identify the Opportunities, Constraints, and Objectives Motivating the Behavior(s) Causing
the Problem
To identify incentives that will work, EPA must examine the opportunities, constraints, and objectives of the
groups identified in Step 2. Unless the policy response affects one or more of Ihese three factors, no change
in behavior can be expected Therefore, no improvement in the problem will occur.
Step 4—Identify Incentives That Will Change the Opportunities, Constraints, and Objectives
Identified
Many of the incentives identified earlier in this chapter (e.g., inviting parties to the table, providing
facilitation, providing technical assistance) are good things to do, but they may not result in the changes
necessary to address the problem. EPA should select those responsible activities that can reasonably be
expected to change the specific opportunities, constraints, and objectives identified in Step 3 above in the
desired direction.
By carefully selecting incentives, EPA will help ensure that the incentives will be accepted. In the past, some
incentives have failed to produce the desired change because they did not mesh with the target group's
opportunities, constraints, and objectives. For example, years of facilitated meetings with stakeholders may
have clarified the nature and causes of a problem without providing incentives for change. On the other hand,
there are numerous examples of incentives that have worked. In Chattanooga, Tennessee, for example,
3-13
-------
citizens made significant changes in commuting patterns, industrial activities, and land usage when motivated
to do so by compelling health objectives.
Step 5—Consider Whether the Incentives Are Sufficient To Change the Behavior
Step 4 may produce several possible incentives, but some may be insufficient (at least individually) to
motivate changes in behavior in a community. EPA must determine which incentive or combination of
incentives will be of sufficient magnitude to motivate the desired change. In some cases, this may require
striking a balance between what is theoretically possible and what is practical and feasible.
By following the above five steps, EPA should produce effective CBEP incentives. The Agency should
examine its existing actions, strategies, policies, and regulations to determine whether they produce incentives
that promote positive change.. EPA can do so by following a similar set of steps to determine whether:
» The policy (or strategy, regulation, etc.) leads to action
• The action produces positive incentives
• The incentives are sufficient to motivate changes in behavior
• The behavior changes are sufficient to affect the environmental issue
• The environment has improved
3-14
-------
CHAPTER FOUR
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CBEP MEASUREMENT NEEDS
1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter addresses the third component in the CBEP framework for advancing community-based
environmental protection, namely measurement (Figure 1, Framework for CBEP Recommendations, page
1-4). For CBEP purposes, measurement clarifies environmental conditions, causes of environmental
problems, and changes in environmental quality resulting from human activities. CBEP measurement
of environmental impacts extends across four scales: microcommunity, local, regional, and global (Figure 4,
Framework for CBEP Recommendations: Measurement Needs, page 4-2). The recommendations below
indicate how EPA can support and promote activities to measure the results of CBEP efforts:
• Recommendation A: EPA should provide assistance on what to measure, how to measure
it, and how to use the measurements.
For example, leading indicators are early warning tools that can help users prevent
problems, while current/lagging indicators help users determine whether environmental
protection activities are working. EPA should inform communities of where to get
existing environmental measurement data and how they can be used. Whether assisting in
new measurements or utilization of existing data, EPA should focus on helping decision-
makers obtain the information they need for sound decision-making.
• Recommendation B: EPA should encourage communities and businesses to report to the
public on environmental impacts of their decisions and activities. EPA should also
encourage regulated/delegated activities to be reported from several scales.
By demonstrating the value of such reporting to communities and businesses alike, and by
providing examples of various formats, EPA can help create conditions that foster routine
public reporting.
• Recommendation C: EPA should help communities consider tradeoffs among
environmental/human health, economic, and social impacts.
This type of guidance is an invaluable tool for decision-making and for forging
cooperative (rather than adversarial) relationships with the regulated community.
These recommendations are described in Section 2 below. Section 3 (Execution) of this chapter suggests
actions to implement these recommendations to establish a successful CBEP program.
4-1
-------
Figure 4. Framework for CBEP Recommendations:
Measurement Needs
Measurement
Micro
Community
Example:
• Provide survey tools
to determine
environmental/social
values
Local
Community
Example:
• Provide local
human health risk
assessment tools
Regional
Community
Example:
• Provide tools to mea-
sure the transport of
pollutants from one
area to another
Global
| Community
Example:
• Encourage measure-
ment of global
costs/impacts
4-2
-------
2. RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATION A: EPA should provide assistance on what
to measure, how to measure it, and how to use the measurements.
For example, leading indicators are early -warning tools that can help users prevent
problems, while current/lagging indicators help users determine whether environmental
protection activities are working. EPA should inform communities of where to get existing
environmental measurement data and how they can be used. Whether assisting in new
measurements or utilization of existing data, EPA should focus on helping decision-makers
obtain the information they need for sound decision-making.
Scale of Application: Micro, local, and regional.
Measurement is crucial to understanding both environmental problems and impacts of human activities.
Measurements conducted before, during, and after activities can be used to:
Characterize environmental
conditions as they exist now,
based on sound science.
Identify causes of environmental
problems, including pressures on
individual components of the
overall environmental picture.
If-we could first know WHERE we are, and
WHITHER we are tending, we could BETTER
JUDGE WHAT to do, andHOWto do it...
—Abraham Lincoln, 1858
Focus attention and motivate action, including market action.
In addition to motivating individuals and organizations to change their behavior, for
example, surveys (whether from EPA or another source) that demonstrate a market for
"environmentally-friendly "products can spur interest in developing such products. Data
on product success, in turn, can motivate more businesses to enter this market or improve
their business practices to retain public approval and market shares.
Determine priorities (i.e., weigh tradeoffs, choose among options, make risk-based
decisions).
Encourage use of best practices, particularly when performance measurements demonstrate
their value compared to traditional approaches.
Determine if actions are having their desired effects and, if not, take corrective actions.
4-3
-------
EPA-sponsored assistance on what to measure, how to measure it, and how to use the measurements will help
communities:
• Understand the range of available measurements and identify those appropriate for their
situations.
• Take full advantage of measurements as a tool for their own community-based
environmental protection programs.
' • Identify relationships among environmental problems, causes of problems, and whether they
are in a direct 'and/or extended relationship. In so doing, communities can coordinate and
"nest" CBEP measurement activities across scales and form alliances.
Developing indicators is an ongoing process. Disseminating readily available data that EPA and others have
should be a top priority so that communities are immediately empowered to perform measurement activities.
To provide measurements efficiently, EPA should:
• Conduct a review of indicators and abandon those that are not useful.
• Take advantage of the government-wide effort to develop and implement a National
Integrated Environmental Monitoring Plan under the coordination of the Committee on
Environment and Natural Resources (CENR).
This initiative provides a powerful new opportunity to provide measurements of the
success of environmental protection. EPA should ensure that this monitoring information
and associated assessments are readily accessible and useful for measurement of
outcomes of CBEP.
as
EPA-sponsored guidance should address measurement at all levels—providing both general approaches
well as very specific measures, indicators, methods, models, risk assessment tools, and metrics that can be
used in various situations. This "measurement menu" should include indicators of environmental/human
health, economic, and social impacts (Table 3, Examples of Indicators That Could Be Used in CBEP
Projects, page 4-5), Other indicators may be specific to business activities, health, and the environment.
EPA's guidance should:
• Identify/define each indicator
• Describe how to identify the indicator, its application, and expected outcome(s)
• Identify interrelationships with other indicators
4-4
-------
TABLES
EXAMPLES OF INDICATORS THAT COULD BE USED IN CBEP PROJECTS
Micro Community
Local Community
Regional Community
Global Community
Environmental/
Human Health
• Number of wild
salmon returning to
spawn
• Biodiversity
• Volume of waste at
sites
• Cancer rate
• Air pollutant levels
• Number of
hospitalizations for
acute asthma attacks
• Water temperature
• Coastal flooding/soil
erosion
Economic
• Employment
concentration
• Number of children
living in poverty
• Median income per
household
• Housing
affordability
• Households below
the poverty level
• Healthcare
expenditures
• Emergency room use
for non-emergency
purposes
• Distribution of
personal income
• Work required to
meet basic needs
Social
• Limited recreational
opportunities, such
as
swimming/fishing
advisories
• Youth involvement
in neighborhood
projects
• Attendance at
community action
group meetings
• Student/teacher
ratio
• . Membership in
social and civic
groups and clubs
» Votingjate
• Crime rate
• Population count
• Adult literacy
4-5
-------
Given such a menu, communities can choose
which measurement strategies to use based on
their own circumstances and values. EPA may
provide guidance on conducting community
surveys and other methods of measuring
community values.
What should-we measure? Economic vitality,
ecological integrity, social equity, and cultural
uniqueness.
- Comment made during CBEP Committee
discussions.
In developing and refining a measurement menu, EPA should solicit the input and feedback of state and other
entities with regulated/delegated responsibilities. These entities should encourage community environmental
activities and coordination with EPA for consistency and compatibility of indicators and metrics. The
process of reviewing the menu will also facilitate learning. Communities can then learn what to assess and
how to utilize information to motivate action. Their experience and feedback will help EPA learn more about
what is most useful to communities. The demand for indicators will continually change with education,
experience, changing circumstances. EPA and its partners should use the feedback to improve and update the
menu.
In addition to a menu of measurement options, EPA should provide locally relevant frameworks for data
collection, measurement, and evaluation to help communities design their own, realistic environmental
measurement efforts. The frameworks should encourage measurements of impacts that extend beyond the
geographic boundaries of the community. The measurement results will help communities recognize the
range of consequences of their actions/decisions. For example, measurement results could show that
pollutant dumping in an upper river reach affects communities downriver. Examples, illustrations, and
demonstrations of how to perform measurements at different levels/complexities should be included in EPA's
frameworks.
4-6
-------
RECOMMENDATION B: EPA should encourage communities and
businesses to report to the public on environmental impacts of their
decisions and activities. EPA should also encourage
regulated/delegated activities to be reported from several scales.
By demonstrating the value of such reporting to communities and businesses alike, and by
providing examples of various formats, EPA can help create conditions that foster routine
public reporting.
Scale of Application: Micro, local, regional, and global.
The business community is becoming aware of the need to measure and report environmental impacts of their
activities. While broadening awareness and encouraging routine reporting by municipalities and businesses,
EPA should encourage businesses to review their activities' lifecycles. By understanding the full cost of an"
activity now, businesses and municipalities may
be able to avoid or anticipate future problems.
Lifecycle planning by businesses and communities
will save economic and environmental resources.
What gets measured gets managed.
—Comment made during CBEP Committee
Several existing initiatives, such as the Global discussions.
Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI),
the Public Environmental Reporting Initiative (PERI), and the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible
Economies (CERES), already encourage such planning and reporting. Other actions could facilitate reporting
at the municipal level:
Municipalities could take impacts into account when planning a project and awarding the
contract Project bidders should be encouraged and trained to provide information on
environmental impacts.
EPA could provide guidance to municipalities on what to measure for reporting to the public
and how to present this information in usable, succinct, yet comprehensive formats.
4-7
-------
RECOMMENDATION C: EPA should help communities consider
tradeoffs among environmental/human health, economic, and social
impacts.
This type of guidance is an invaluable tool for decision-making and for forging cooperative
(rather than adversarial) relationships with the regulated community.
Scale of Application: Micro, local, regional, and global.
EPA should provide guidance and tools to determine tradeoffs that communities may want to consider.
Assessmentmethods, decision trees, examples, and demonstrations will help communities weigh possibilities
for decision-making. This guidance should help ^HMMI^BMMMMMH
communities and businesses find solutions that
harmonize environmental, economic, and social
Indicators inform priorities, focus attention, and
motivate action.
concerns.
-Comment made during CBEP Committee
discussions.
3. EXECUTION
The following are suggestions for how EPA could execute its role in providing measurement tools and
guidance and encouraging their use:
• Determine community measurement needs
• Share existing measurement tools that are working
• Develop additional tools (or tailor existing tools) to meet unmet measurement needs
• Publicize the availability of and disseminate measurement tools
Determine Community Measurement Needs
Measurement tools must be relevant to communities. As a first step (or concurrently with the effort
described below to share existing tools), EPA should solicit input from and collaborate with communities to
determine their measurement needs for CBEP projects. EPA can accomplish this in several ways. For
example, EPA can solicit community input and participation by creating clearinghouses, conducting surveys,
4-8
-------
convening task forces, and holding focus groups and town meetings. Other organizations have successfully
used these and other similar strategies:
« Sustainable Seattle developed its indicators guidebook using a citizen-based process.
• The Yakima River Watershed Council successfully formed an active, consensus-based
organization involving irrigators, food processors, the Yakama Indian Nation, electric
utilities, timber companies, local business and financial institutions, environmental
organizations, and other citizens with water interests.
• The Community Coalition for Environmental Justice works within urban neighborhoods to
stimulate activism among communities of color and others affected by environmental
injustice.
EPA should draw on success stories such as these to use as models for soliciting community involvement in
the needs analysis process—and later in the development of relevant measurement tools. Existing
environmental information-sharing networks (such as the Positive Futures Network) can be used to publicize
and broaden participation in these efforts.
Share Existing Measurement Tools That Are Working
Numerous government and nongovernment organizations have developed measurement tools that could be
used in community environmental projects. For example, Sustainable Seattle, a volunteer network and civic
forum in the Pacific Northwest, has developed a resource guide called Indicators of Sustainable Community.
This 1995 publication defines and describes indicators of cultural, economic, environmental, and social
health. It also provides information on how to evaluate and interpret these indicators and how each is linked
to other indicators and issues. Government organizations, environmental groups, industry, and communities
have developed similar documents on indicators and a wide range of data and tools that could be useful at
different scales. To avoid duplicating work that has already been done and to quickly make available the
widest possible array of environmental measurement tools, EPA should:
• Research measurement tools currently available inside and outside the Agency
• Determine which are relevant to communities
• Make these tools available to communities
4-9
-------
Develop Additional Tools (or Tailor Existing Tools) To Meet Unmet Measurement Needs
While performing the two tasks described above, EPA can identify redundancies and gaps in existing
measurement tools. EPA can also identify opportunities for collaboration in the development of new tools.
EPA should then partner with other government and nongovernment organizations to develop new
measurement tools to fill unmet community measurement needs. In some cases, this may be accomplished by
tailoring existing tools to better meet community needs rather than designing and developing completely new
tools. Flexibility is required to make CBEP work. Different communities (and different problems) require
different "yardsticks": what works in one community will not necessarily work in another. Small
communities, for example, often need very simple metrics; factories may need complex, expensive
measurement tools and strategies. EPA must tailor measurement tools to the needs of different audiences
who vary greatly in their knowledge and technical sophistication.
In developing/tailoring measurement tools, building and strengthening partnerships should be an Agency
priority. Partnering is already highly valued by many groups, such as Chesapeake Bay Program, Positive
Futures Network, Small Towns Environment Programs (STEP), Yakima River Watershed Council,
Community Coalition for Environmental Justice, Tennessee Valley Authority's Clean Water Initiative, and
many others. Partnering will help ensure the cost-effectiveness and acceptance of EPA's mission. In
particular, EPA should continue to work with states and tribes in their metric activities. Local units of
government, interested citizens and groups, nonprofit organizations, business/industry, and others will
provide a "reality check" for the Agency's CBEP measurement projects. As more communities become
involved, awareness, interest, and investment in conducting environmental measurements will increase.
Publicize the Availability of and Disseminate Measurement Resources
Finally, EPA will need to do the actual work of publicizing the availability of and disseminating
CBEP measurement tools. Much of this can be accomplished using the methods discussed in
Chapter 2: Recommendations for CBEP Information Needs. Additional suggestions include:
4-10
-------
Sponsoring informational or training workshops to empower communities.
At these workshops, participants should be encouraged to share information and
experiences and to form ongoing alliances and partnerships.
Giving resources to people and organizations as close to the problem (local levels) as
possible.
Providing modest resources (guidance, tools, fimding) can make the difference in the
success or failure of a CBEP project.
Many communities are already actively seeking new, effective measurement tools and will readily respond to
information about the availability of new tools. Where interest is not yet high, the Agency should make every
effort to include community representatives or organizations in the needs analysis and tool development
process to increase awareness of the value of measurement tools. Where appropriate, EPA should solicit the
help of community liaisons who can "talk the talk" of the community to help explain measurement issues in
the context of their community. Different levels of information (complex strategies, specific tools, simple
metrics) in different formats (print, electronic, verbal, video) should be available to different audiences.
4-11
-------
-------
CHAPTER FIVE
PLANNING FOR EVALUATION
The Agency should establish a plan for evaluation before it executes its CBEP support projects. Evaluation
provides the feedback the Agency can use to finetune and, where appropriate, substantially modify or expand
its activities to efficiently meet the needs of environmental stakeholders at all levels. Periodic evaluations will
allow for continual improvement of EPA's efforts to meet the CBEP needs discussed in this report, whether
they relate to CBEP information, incentives, or measurement
RECOMMENDATION A: EPA should evaluate:
• Its success in providing useful CBEP support to target audiences.
• The success of this support in catalyzing initiation of and
participation in community environmental activities.
• The success of this work in improving environmental quality.
Evaluation can be quantitative or qualitative. EPA should determine the type and extent of evaluation that is
appropriate based on the urgency and nature of each CBEP project EPA can then identify what is needed to
accomplish the evaluatioa Based on this determination, EPA can plan how and when to collect evaluation
data. For example, EPA might decide to conduct '
before-and-after surveys to measure:
Awareness of environmental
protection opportunities.
The number of new CBEP
initiatives started.
When considering the performance of specific
programs, measures of success should in some
way reflect the interests and values of the public
as they relate to thatprogram...the final arbiter of
success is the public and their representatives.
—Engaging the Public in Indicator Development.
1996. Synergy 1(2):11.
The level of participation in
community environmental -
initiatives before and after the community received EPA support
5-1
-------
This general approach to planning for evaluation applies to any EPA effort to support CBEP. Once EPA has
developed a plan for evaluation, the Agency should integrate it into its execution plans. For instance, EPA
can incorporate CBEP activities into the core program measures and initiatives of its National Goals Project.
As EPA collects and analyzes evaluation data, the feedback will determine whether and how to enhance the
CBEP support EPA is providing.
5-2
-------
APPENDKA
MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND TECHNOLOGY'S
COMMUNITY-BASED ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMITTEE
Deborah Ross
Designated Federal Officer
Office of Cooperative Environmental Management
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
I Robert Banks
Vice President
Health, Environment & Safety
Sun Company, Inc.
Philadelphia, PA
Joan Bavaria (Chair)
President
Franklin Research and Development Corporation
Boston, MA
Dana Beach
Executive Director
South Carolina Coastal Conservation League
Charleston, SC
Donald Boesch
President
Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies
University of Maryland
Cambridge, MD
Gerard Bulanowski
Director
Environmental Assessment Program
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Denver, CO
A-l
-------
Marc Epstein
INSEAD
Accounting and Control Area
France
Gloria Fauss
The Nature Conservancy
Arlington, VA
Beth Gallegos
Founder
Citizens Against Contamination
Denver, CO
Linda Hixon
Executive Director
Friends of the North Chickamauga Creek Greenway, Inc.
Chattanooga, TN
Dennis King
Center for Environmental Estuarine Studies
University of Maryland
Solomons, MD
Elizabeth Lowery
Practice Area Manager
Environment and Energy
General Motors Corporation
Detroit, MI
KathyMagruder
Director
Queen Anne's County Office of Tourism
Grasonville, MD
Francis McLeod
Mni-Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition, Inc.
Rapid City, SD
A-2
-------
Earl Richardson
President
Morgan State University
Baltimore, MD
Ted Strong
Executive Director
Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
Portland, OR '
Nancy Tosta
Director
Forecasting and Growth Strategy
Puget Sound Regional Council
Seattle, WA
Ed Whitelaw
President
ECONorthwest
Professor of Economics
University of Oregon
Eugene, OR
Note: Italics indicate that the member's term on the Committee expired on October 1,1996.
A-3
-------
-------
APPENDIX B
GLOSSARY
Note: Some terms are defined narrowly (to refer specifically to community-based environmental
protection) and are thus specific to this report.
advocate
benchmark
brownfield
Brownfields Economic
Redevelopment Initiative
CBEP1
an individual or group representing or promoting a special interest
or perspective
a point of reference or a standard against which measurements can
be compared
a site (or portion of a site) that has actual or perceived
contamination and an active potential for redevelopment or reuse
an EPA initiative designed to empower states, communities,
and other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together
in a timely manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and
sustainably reuse brownfields; initiative strategies can include
funding pilot programs and other research, clarifying liability
issues, entering into partnerships, conducting outreach activities,
developing job training programs, and addressing environmental
justice concerns . .
community-based environmental protection:
process in which a community identifies environmental issues and
priorities in a specific place (the geographic area defined by the
issues, the interested and affected people, and the natural landscape
in which the issues developed), then identifies and implements
management strategies to achieve community objectives; the
process is typically open and inclusive, is driven by the place and
the people who care about it, integrates environmental management
with human needs, considers long-term ecosystem health, and
highlights positive correlations between economic prosperity and
environmental well-being
'NACEPT uses the term "community-based environmental protection (CBEP)" to refer to the wide range
of community-driven environmental protection efforts that take place in this country and around the world.
NACEPT recognizes that different individuals and groups may have different names for these activities, such
as place-based or geographic-based initiatives. These activities, whatever their name, are occurring across
the nation, but EPA does not participate in most of them. NACEPT simply uses the term CBEP for
convenience in discussing how EPA can promote and support such community-driven initiatives.
B-l
-------
CENR
charrette
community
cross-media
EPA
FACA
full cost accounting
GIS
incentives
indicator
information
measurement
mitigation
NACEPT
Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
type of meeting that brings people together to analyze a problem
and decide on a unified approach
a place and the people who live there under a common government
or united by a common interest
related to more than one medium (air, water, land)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Advisory Committee Act
an approach to financial accounting that factors in the full cost of a
process or activity, including direct and indirect costs, upstream
and downstream costs, etc.
geographic information system
in the context of CBEP, actions, strategies, policies, and
regulations mat induce or empower individuals and organizations
to change their behavior (i.e., to engage in effective CBEP
initiatives or to otherwise act to improve environmental quality)
a measurement that reflects the status of a system; in CBEP, an
indicator may relate to the health or vitality of an ecosystem, social
structure, economic system, and/or culture
in the context of CBEP, data and materials to support CBEP
activities and decision-making
for CBEP purposes, activities that clarify environmental
conditions, causes of environmental problems, and changes in
environmental quality resulting from human activities (including
CBEP activities)
the creation, restoration, enhancement, and sometimes preservation
of an environmental resource to compensate for anticipated impacts
to other similar resources (e.g., protection of one wetland to make
up for harming another by building on it)
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and
Technology
B-2
-------
Performance Partnership
scale
stakeholder
STEP
sustainability
sustainable development
visioning
an EPA grant program designed to give states greater flexibility in
allocating funds; to reflect local priorities while still pursuing
national policy objectives and fulfilling all federal statutory
requirements; the program includes performance measures to
simplify reporting requirements while ensuring continued
environmental protection
the size, degree, or scope of an issue or object; for the purpose of
this report, the geographic span of the community, problem, or
activity
an individual, group, or organization with an interest (stake) in an
issue or the outcome of a process or activity
Small Towns Environment Programs (Washington State) -
the ability to remain in existence or maintain a desired level of
health and vitality (environmental, cultural, economic, and social)
physical, economic, or social change (often building or growth) that
maintains or increases quality of life without damaging the
environment, culture, or social structure
the process of community goal-setting for the future in which
communities decide what they would like their future to look like
B-3
-------
------- |