10020025
National Advisory Council
for Environmental Policy and Technology
September 30, 2002
Governor Christine Todd Whitman
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Governor Whitman:
I am pleased to present to you a pre-publication copy of our most recent report, The
Environmental Future: Emerging Challenges and Opportunities for EPA and an advice letter on
a process that EPA might employ to better identify emerging trends and issues.
The Environmental Future report offers a framework to analyze the environmental
implications of trends in world population and demographics, natural resources, science and
technology, information management and access, economics and commerce, and politics and
social evolution. There are sixty recommendations in the report on opportunities for EPA to
address changing environmental conditions.
The NACEPT Council believes that a viable futures process is critical to the ongoing
effectiveness of EPA. Futures analysis, the art and science of anticipating nascent environmental
issues, can help EPA prevent potential problems rather than responding after the fact. Many
assumptions presiding over government practices today may not apply in the future, particularly in
the areas of science and technology. The speed at which science, technology, and other drivers are
advancing, threatens to surpass the government's ability to adapt. To remain credible and
effective, government must anticipate such advances, and carefully consider future implications of
decisions made today. Failure to integrate futures thinking into daily decision-making increases
the risk that EPA will lose influence and relevancy in its goal of environmental protection.
-------
We encourage you and EPA's senior leadership to continue to refine the Agency's futures
analysis capabilities. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to advise you on this engaging
topic, and we look forward to your response to these recommendations.
Sincerely,
Dorothy Bowers, Chair
National Advisory Council for
Environmental Policy and Technology
Enclosures
cc: Eileen McGinnis, Chief of Staff
Chief Financial Officer
Assistant Administrators
Associate Administrators
Regional Administrators
Staff Office Directors
-------
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT)
Emerging Trends and Issues Advice Letter
The following advice letter was approved by the NACEPT Council on July 18,2002.
The Emerging Trends and Issues Workgroup of the National Advisory Council for
Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT) met with foresight specialists from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other government agencies at the Woodrow
Wilson Center in Washington, DC on June 6, 2002. From this meeting, previous research and
discussions, the Workgroup developed recommendations on a process that EPA might employ to
better identify future emerging trends and issues. The Workgroup's observations complement
NACEPT's recent report "The Environmental Future: Emerging Challenges and Opportunities
for EPA."
During the June 6th meeting, the Workgroup concluded that a viable futures process is
critical to the ongoing effectiveness of EPA. We also concluded that NACEPT could best
support the Agency by suggesting attributes of a viable futures process, rather than actually
designing a process for EPA. Being overly prescriptive at this point would limit value added by
agency input and constrain the flexibility needed to meet changing environmental and
institutional dynamics. NACEPT does, however, offer its continued support in developing and
implementing an EPA futures process.
The NACEPT Council believes that many assumptions presiding over government
practices today may not apply in the future, particularly in the areas of science and technology.
The speed at which science and technology are advancing challenges, and, in many cases,
threatens to surpass government's ability to adapt. To remain credible and effective, government
must anticipate such advances and carefully consider future implications of decisions made
today. Failure to integrate futures thinking into daily decision-making increases the risk that
EPA will lose influence and relevancy in its goal of environmental protection.
We have identified a number of potential barriers to optimally integrating futures into the
Agency's structure and operations:
• As is the case with many governmental agencies having finite resources and expanding
responsibilities, there is little time or incentive for EPA staff to lift its eyes from the day-to-
day workload long enough take a strategic look toward the future.
• The stove-pipe, programmatic nature of EPA's enabling legislation and resultant
organizational structure tends to thwart broad-based dialogue on shared needs and
overarching developments.
• The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and administrative constraints limit the
expenditure of funds not directly associated with specific authorized programs.
-------
• Years of litigation and court-imposed deadlines often have driven specific Agency policies
and programs without regard to broader Agency objectives.
In spite of these barriers and to the credit of the Agency and its staff, there are many
"pockets" of foresight expertise and activity within EPA. Unfortunately, these "pockets" are
generally isolated from one another, disconnected from the policy-making process, dependent
upon employee interests rather than Agency support, and too often unnoticed and ephemeral.
Perhaps the greatest challenge to better integrating futures into EPA operations is a
structure and culture rooted in the regulatory paradigm. Too often, it is assumed that the only
way to effectively deal with environmental problems is to regulate. Agency staff, Congress, and
members of the regulated community are often comfortable with, and deeply invested in, a
regulatory paradigm that is relatively predictable, legislatively authorized and constrained, and
built upon well-defined relationships.
Even at its best, the regulatory paradigm will prove an inadequate framework for EPA as
focus shifts from permitted to dispersed sources and from domestic to global pollution. The
regulatory paradigm tends to be reactive and subject to temporal economic and political
pressures. As such, it will likely prove ill-suited for addressing long-term environmental
behaviors and for transcending short-term regional or national interests in deference to overall,
long-term good. Effective environmental protection will always include regulation, but it will
increasingly require heightened technical capacity and an improved means to inform a diverse
population of stakeholders about the consequences of environmental insult and practicable
alternatives.
As science and technology continue to advance, the subtlety and complexity of
environmental stressors will be revealed at an exponential rate of speed. EPA will be called
upon to respond in a timely fashion to emerging understandings of health and environmental
pathologies. At the same time, impacted industries and economies will demand some reasonable
measure of proof before incurring costs related to altering facilities or operations. To the extent
that EPA can anticipate and monitor scientific and technological advances, it can better position
itself to act in a manner that is both timely and justifiable.
Anticipating and monitoring environmental challenges and opportunities requires a
systemic and strategic commitment to futures analysis. EPA must have the institutional courage
to anticipate and prevent significant environmental hazards rather than responding after the fact.
Toward that end, NACEPT respectfully offers the following advice to the EPA on the
characteristics of a process to identify emerging trends and issues:
• EPA should seek appropriate amendments to its enabling legislation authorizing the Agency
to fully embrace a futures strategy. At the same time, the need for EPA to engage in futures
analysis is so evident and urgent that the Agency should, to the greatest degree practicable
under current authorizations, move forward with all due speed to integrate futures analysis
into its work and strategic thinking.
-------
• EPA should develop and implement a futures strategy that is comprehensive, continuous, and
institutional Like a good radar system, EPA's futures strategy should continuously scan the
horizon in all directions for emerging environmental challenges and opportunities.
• EPA's futures strategy should be vertically and horizontally integrated throughout the
Agency and among its public and private sector partners. A broad, deep, interconnected
futurist activity within and outside the EPA will maximize the Agency's ability to anticipate
and respond to changing environmental dynamics.
• At a minimum, EPA should implement a futures strategy that includes Scanning, Scenario
Development, and Dephi (Expert) Panels. Each of these elements will only be as strong as
its complement of participants.
• EPA must not be precipitous in its actions, but neither should it let the lack of perfect data
paralyze efforts to protect the environment. The Agency should actively work with the
scientific community and marketplace to encourage development of promising science and
technologies. The Agency also should explore opportunities with the social science
community to seek effective incentives for improved patterns of social behavior that will
result in greater protection of the environment.
• EPA should create incentives and recognitions to encourage Agency managers, staff, and
partners to engage in futures analysis and discourse. Participants in the process should be
demographically and experientially diverse in order to bridge the stovepipe orientation of
EPA's architecture.
• EPA should make a targeted effort to include staff members who are familiar with emerging
technologies and computer applications in its futures work. To insure that those who will
ultimately live with the consequences of today's decisions have an adequate voice in the
process, the Agency may wish to consider soliciting input from college students and even
younger-aged citizens interested in environmental futures.
In closing, the NACEPT Council believes that EPA will face growing challenges in
connecting the dots that link science, technology, economics, devolution and globalism to
environmental protection. The Agency must develop a reliable mechanism for raising futures
issues, supporting broad-based consideration of those issues, and framing that consideration into
effective policy decisions. Failure to connect the dots leads to environmental surprises and a
decline in public confidence. Looking to the future creates a shared vision and brings greater
wisdom and cooperation to the decisions we make today.
NACEPT stands ready to assist EPA in meeting this challenge and would be willing to
continue to focus on this topic or particular elements as the Agency may wish. We look forward
to receiving guidance as to how NACEPT can be of the greatest assistance at this time.
-------
------- |