SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
AND EPA
CONCEPTS, IMPLICATIONS, AND
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
A PROJECT REPORT
by
Dr. Gary O'Neal, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region 10
for the
Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation
-------
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
AND EPA
CONCEPTS, IMPLICATIONS, AND
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
A PROJECT REPORT
by
Dr. Gary O'Neal, Director
Air and Toxics Division, Region 10
for the
Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Work on this project was conducted as part of a Senior Executive Service
rotational assignment. A large number of people both inside EPA and outside
contributed ideas and time as this work progressed. A number of people and
organizations deserve specific acknowledgement for their support and assistance. These
are:
1. The senior management of EPA Region 10, for providing the flexibility and
support for my participation in this assignment.
2. Dan Beardsley, Deputy Assistant Administrator for OPPE, for sponsoring
the project and providing on-going guidance and support.
3. Tom Kelly, Director, Office of Regulatory Management and Evaluation
(ORME), for his support and continual challenges to be intellectually
rigorous in thinking about sustainable development.
4. Tim Titus, Director, Science, Economics, and Statistics Division
(SESD/ORME) for helping to arrange this assignment, providing an
organizational home for it, and for his continual guidance on Headquarters
procedures.
5. Tim Barry, Chief, Science Policy Branch, SESD, and his staff for the
support they provided (both technical and administrative) which ensured
that this project could be completed on time.
6. Patrick McCabe, Research Assistant with the Bruce Company working
under a contract with EPA, for the key contributions he made by
challenging conventional thinking, being creative about new ideas and
concepts, and for helping an engineer understand the intricacies of
economics.
Thanks to all the above plus the many others unnamed. The project could not
have been completed without your help.
Gary O'Neal
-------
CONTENTS
(1) What is "sustainable development?" 1
(2) What are the origins of the concepts behind sustainable
development? 7
(3) How does sustainable development relate to current
EPA priorities for pollution prevention and risk reduction? 17
(4) What is the value-added of sustainable development
concepts and principles? What would they add to
environmental protection efforts currently in place? 19
(5) Is sustainable development primarily an international
issue, and if so, might efforts to develop a nationally
focussed sustainable development program be misplaced? 21
(6) What are the roles that EPA could play in a National
effort to promote sustainable development, given the fact
that sustainable development is largely a resource
management and population issue that falls outside the
Agency's purview? 23
(7) Would EPA compromise its effectiveness as an advocate
of the environment by adopting sustainable development
policies that include economic development as
an objective? 25
(8) What are some possible projects that would promote
sustainable development or the concepts behind it? 26
(9) What does a sustainable development focus imply for
EPA programs? Does an increased emphasis on
sustainable development mean reduced emphasis on
regulatory and compliance programs? 28
(10) Summary: what are the most important lessons found
in the sustainable development literature? 29
-------
NOTE
Unless specifically indicated, the material presented in this report reflects the
work and opinions of the author. The recommendations do not at this time represent
the official position of the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation or the
Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION SECTION I
CONCEPTS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SECTION II
• Concept Paper
• Sustainable Development: Some Key Questions for EPA
RESULTS OF INTERVIEWS AND DISCUSSIONS _____________________________ SECTION III
• General Themes and Ideas
• Suggestions for Policies, Programs, and Actions
• List of EPA Contacts
• List of Non-EPA Contacts
OPTIONS FOR ACTION ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- SECTION IV
lvH(\^\_IIVlIVlil
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
There is a growing awareness that many of our current ways of doing business,
both in this country and internationally, may not be sustainable either ecologically or
economically. The strong linkage between environmental protection and economic
development is becoming ever more apparent. The need for comprehensive efforts to
address our problems in this area were highlighted by the report of the U.N. sponsored
World Commission on Environment and Development entitled "Our Common Future".
This report challenged all countries to examine their priorities and reorient their
programs to increase the emphasis on long-term sustainable development. In the United
States we are just beginning this process. EPA will be a key part of the effort. The
purpose of the project which resulted in this report was to begin the process of
evaluating the potential implications of the sustainable development theme on EPA
programs and to recommend next steps.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
This project had several specific objectives. These were
Review some of the current thinking and writing on the basic theme of
sustainable development and related concepts.
Conduct interviews with a cross-section of EPA managers and staff and
others outside the Agency to gather current perceptions on the theme of
sustainable development.
Develop appropriate background papers which discuss the theme and
related concepts and issues and relate them to EPA's role, responsibilities,
and priorities.
Develop some options and recommendations for projects and actions which
will enhance both understanding of and emphasis on sustainable
development.
As indicated above, the overall objective was to provide a base of information and
related recommendations which will serve as a starting point for a broad examination of
this theme and its implications within the Agency.
REPORT ORGANIZATION
The rest of the project report is organized into four discrete sections with some
supporting appendices. The contents are outlined below.
1-1
-------
Section II: CONCEPTS. The basic theme of sustainable development raises
many questions at both the philosophical and the practical level. The
relationships between sustainable development and other perspectives is not
always clear. This Section contains a concept paper on sustainable development
and its implications and a related set of questions and answers on the subject.
The paper examines basic concepts, ways to think about sustainable development,
implications for EPA, and proposes a set of operating principles. Both the paper
and the "Qs & As" can be used independently of this report as a basis for further
discussion.
Section III: RESULTS OF INTERVIEWS AND DISCUSSIONS. This Section
presents a summary of the information obtained from the interviews in two
formats. The first is an overview of key themes drawn from the interviews. The
second is a compilation of recommendations for possible EPA actions by those
interviewed. Both serve to highlight the scope and the potential implications of
an increased emphasis on sustainable development and the creative thinking
stimulated by the concept. A list of those interviewed is also included.
Section IV: OPTIONS FOR ACTION. This Section presents several different
options for specific actions and projects. They range from specific policy analysis
and development activities to a comprehensive set of actions. They reflect a
range of potential roles for EPA from a lower profile, internally focussed effort to
an aggressive effort to provide national leadership in this area.
Section V: RECOMMENDATIONS. This Section presents recommendations for
future actions. The recommendation include both a proposed set of specific
projects and policy actions and a set of management and communication activities
to maintain progress in examination of this theme.
GUIDE TO PROJECT REPORT HIGHLIGHTS. For a quick overview of the project
results, review of the following segments is recommended:
The Executive Summary of the concept paper in Section II
The summary of findings from the interviews on sustainable development
(Section HI, pages ffl-2 to IH-4)
Section IV: OPTIONS FOR ACTION
Section V: RECOMMENDATIONS
1-2
-------
SECTION n
CONCEPTS
Sustainable development as a theme is both straight-forward and complex. At the
intuitive level, it seems obvious that it is a goal we should strive for. Consideration of its
implications at the operational level, however, raises a number of questions and issues.
What does the concept really imply? How does it relate to EPA's current mission? Is
there overlap with other management priorities and themes? The concepts need to be
understood and adequate answers to these and other questions need to be provided as
EPA proceeds toward a stronger focus on sustainable development The following
material in this section provides additional background in this area through two separate
but complementary papers.
The first of these is a concept paper. This paper provides an overview of the
evolution and importance of sustainable development, discusses questions of definitions
and many other basic issues, and presents a framework for looking at what needs to be
sustained and its implications for EPA. It then proceeds to a discussion of general
implications of sustainable development for EPA and recommends a set of operating
principles to guide EPA actions. This paper was prepared to provide a basic document
which could receive wide distribution to managers within EPA to stimulate further
discussion on sustainable development
The second paper is a set of questions and answers on some of the basic issues
associated with sustainable development It can be used for broader distribution to staff,
the public, etc, to provide an overview of the concepts and answers to key questions.
-------
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
AND THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
A CONCEPT PAPER
Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation
July, 1990
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. BASIC CONCEPTS 3
III. WHAT NEEDS TO BE SUSTAINED--AND RELATED THREATS 9
IV. EXPECTATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR EPA 10
V. SOME OPERATING PRINCIPLES 13
VI. SUMMARY 16
-------
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
I. INTRODUCTION
In 1987 the World Commission on Environment and Development, a temporary
organization established by the United Nations, published its report entitled Our Common
Future. This report, which highlighted the needs and problems associated with achieving
sustainable development, triggered a great deal of world-wide attention and debate. In it
sustainable development is defined as "development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." It is a
general definition, yet one with far reaching implications. It indicates the need for a broad,
integrated approach to meeting present and future needs for both economic development
and environmental protection.
Economic development is essential if resources (technology, materials, funds, food,
educated people) are to be available to meet basic human needs. This is particularly true
the developing countries. To ignore these needs and propose, as some do, a return to a
simpler life is to ignore reality. Environmental protection and maintenance of our resource
base are also essential if people are to live in a healthy environment, if ecosystems are to
provide their fundamental life support functions, and if natural resources which support
basic economic activity are to remain available. To ignore these needs and to focus, as
some do, only on economic development is also to ignore reality. The whole thrust of the
growing emphasis on sustainable development is to recognize that in today's world economic
development, environmental protection, and resource conservation are inextricably linked.
Those linkages and related processes need to be better understood and made to work if the
if sustainable development is to be achieved.
Some might wonder if the concerns about sustainable development are exaggerated.
Examples of current issues provide the counter argument:
The push for industrial development in Eastern Europe at all costs has
resulted in pollution disaster zones with the land poisoned and health
problems rampant.
Inadequate development in many third world countries has led to high levels
of poverty and massive migrations to urban centers. Support systems in these
areas are overwhelmed and quality of life and the environment are further
degraded.
Agricultural practices in parts of Australia and the U.S. result in excessive soil
erosion with related impacts on agricultural production and water quality.
Inadequately planned water diversions and over use of pesticides in parts of
the Soviet Union have fundamentally altered major ecosystems and their
related economies and seriously impacted public health.
II - Concept Paper -1
-------
Efforts by third-world countries to repay massive debts result in export-
oriented economic development that frequently degrades the local
environment.
Water use practices in the U.S. (for both residential and agricultural purposes)
are increasingly of concern in many areas. Economic production may be
threatened due to limited supplies in the face of rapid growth and increasing
uncertainty about water supplies due to possible global climate change. Water
quality degradation and soil salinization due to irrigation practices are also
prevalent.
These are just a few of many examples which highlight the linkages between ecological
systems and economic development. If our society is to adequately meet future needs and
responsibilities and function in a sustainable way, these linkages must be made to work so
that both ecological and economic needs are met.
In response to the WCED report, and to the growing public dialogue and concern
regarding environmental issues, countries at all levels of development are examining their
internal and international policies and programs to see how progress toward sustainable
development can be accelerated. Here in the United States, many of the programs carried
out by EPA and other federal and state agencies are key components of any comprehensive
approach to sustainable development. However, both EPA and the country at large need
to test current programs and priorities against the implications of this concept Do we have
it right? Are there things we can and should do to better focus our efforts on the long-
term goal of sustainable development? The purpose of this paper is to start the process
within EPA of addressing this issue in a more comprehensive and focussed way than has
been done to date.
Sustainable development is a topic which has meaning at several levels. It is (or can
be) an ideal toward which we want to move, a general societal goal, a process, or the
objective of a specific project or action. This makes difficult the determination of its
implications for the Agency or for the country. Many questions evolve from the necessary
debate and discussion surrounding a new topic such as this. The following are some of the
key questions regarding sustainable development and EPA:
How do we define sustainable development hi operational terms?
Is this just another buzz-word and isn't EPA already doing this?
Isn't sustainable development primarily an international issue?
How does sustainable development relate to current priorities like pollution
prevention and risk reduction?
Why should we focus on this since it relates primarily to resource management
agencies and is really outside our mandate and jurisdiction?
If we focus on sustainable development, wouldn't we compromise our
environmental protection posture?
What should our role be? Implemented Catalyst? Communicator?
As we work through the implications of the concept for EPA, many more general and
n - Concept Paper - 2
-------
program specific questions will be identified. This paper will provide some preliminary
answers to some of these questions and hopefully stimulate further thinking on the topic.
The rest of this paper will focus on several discrete aspects of this subject. The next
section provides an overview of a number of the basic concepts inherent in sustainable
development. This is followed by a section which highlights some ways to look at the
question of what needs to be sustained and identification of related threats. The next two
sections then deal more explicitly with implications and expectations for EPA and some
principles to guide EPA efforts in this area.
H. BASIC CONCEPTS
Sustainable development is simple to comprehend at an intuitive level and very
difficult to understand at a more specific, operational level. Discussions of the subject often
cover both specific implementation issues and debates over basic philosophical principles.
A number of common questions and concerns regarding sustainable development concepts
generally emerge from this dialogue process. The following is an overview of some of these
issues.
More on Definitions
Because sustainable development can be many things (goal, process, planned action),
attempts to define it more explicitly have resulted hi a wide variety of proposed definitions.
Many have concluded that attempts to find the perfect consensus definition are a waste of
time. Despite this conclusion there are, however, some examples that more specifically
suggest both the meaning and implications of the concept.
At the general, or "visionary" level, Jim MacNeill, Secretary General of the World
Commission on Environment and Development, indicates that "sustainable development is
growth based on forms and processes of development that do not undermine the integrity
of the environment on which they depend." This definition and the WCED definition cited
previously serve to illustrate two key concepts found in most of the literature on sustainable
development. First, each emphasizes the importance of environment as an integral
contributor, rather than just a constraint, to economic development. Second, each stresses
the need for longer time horizons to ensure that environmental and development decision-
making is consistent with our own long-term interests and our stewardship responsibilities
to future generations.
In general, the "visionary" definitions such as these are most helpful for articulating
in a succinct fashion the concepts behind sustainable development These concepts are
relevant to a wide range of policy and management decision makers in both the public and
private sectors. Without further refinement, however, general concepts are difficult to
incorporate into policies and specific management decisions currently driven by more
conventional objectives and criteria. For these purposes, operational definitions that focus
on sustainable development as a process or as a goal are most useful.
Ideally, policies and programs on sustainable development should be formulated
around a clearly defined set of long-term goals. These must reflect the integration of
environmental and resource use considerations with the need for sound economic
II - Concept Paper - 3
-------
development. Establishing such goals is both difficult and controversial. If they are to be
both credible and politically tenable, the goals will have to reflect a blend of scientific
assessments, general social priorities, and attitudes about uncertainty. Since social priorities,
including ethical concerns for future generations, play an important pan in goal setting, an
appropriate arena for the establishment of these goals might be the legislature, with
guidance and input from the environmental sciences and the public at large.
A variety of sustainable development goals have been suggested by several sources.
These range in nature from strictly environmental goals (reduce emissions by X%, recycle
Y% of waste, etc.) and natural resource oriented goals (reduce fossil fuel use by X%, shift
to Y% renewable resource use, etc.) to general economic goals (sustain current rate of
productivity growth, maintain Y% economic growth after deduction of depreciation of
environmental capital and cleanup costs, etc.). Such suggestions contribute to an
understanding of the implications of sustainable development. To date, however, no
integrated and comprehensive set of sustainable development goals for the U.S. has been
proposed.
At this point, it is perhaps most useful to think of sustainable development as a
process. In this dynamic context, the transitions needed to move toward sustainability begin
to provide definition and meaning to the basic concept. Gus Speth, President of the World
Resources Institute, provides one view of the types of societal transitions needed. These
are:1
a shift away from the era of growing fossil fuel use toward an era of energy
efficiency and renewable energy;
a move away from an era of capital- and materials-intensive "high throughput"
technologies to an era of new "closed technologies";
a change to a future in which societies actually apply their best science to
design with nature;
a move to an environmentally honest economy where
- policies do not subsidize raw materials and waste
- prices include costs of pollution and resource depletion
- national accounts include costs of depreciation of natural assets;
a move toward more international approaches to reducing pollution;
a demographic transition to a stable world population.
Speth's suggestions help clarify the scope and implications of sustainable development.
Material presented in Sections III and IV will provide additional insights in this area.
'Gus Speth, 1988, •Environmental Pollution: High and Rising,* in Crossroads: Environmental Priorities for
the Future, ed. Peter Borrelli, Island Press.
II - Concept Paper - 4
-------
The Concept of Stewardship
Inherent in any definition of sustainable development is the need for wise use and
stewardship of our natural resources. This is certainly not a new idea. In discussions of
sustainable development, however, a number of concepts and ideas are highlighted by
consideration of stewardship responsibilities. Chief among these is the fundamental
question of intergenerational equity. At issue is the stewardship of our renewable resources
and ecosystems so that future generations may continue to benefit from and be supported
by them. This mandates a long-term perspective and development of a clear vision of the
economic and ecological systems this generation wants to leave to its inheritors.
The wise use of our resources to achieve this vision or goal requires a cooperative
approach to economic development and environmental protection that has not often been
seen. At present it is fair to say that in the United States today none of these issues has
been clearly resolved. There is no clear consensus on how to account for costs and benefits
in a way that adequately addresses both economic and ecological values and an equitable
balance between present and future generations. In general there is not a clearly articulated
vision of what we want the future to be in either environmental or economic terms. True
stewardship in the context of long-term sustainability requires that these issues be addressed.
The Ecological/Economic Development Linkage (continued')
This subject has been addressed to some degree in both the Introduction section and
the section above on Stewardship. Three additional aspects deserve attention. The first is
mutual understanding, the second is truth-in-accounting, and the third is the use of
incentives.
Over the past twenty years, much of the interaction between environmental
protection and conservation interests and those whose interests have primarily been
economic growth and development oriented has been adversarial and contentious in nature.
This conflict is in part due to fundamentally different missions or interpretations of data,
scientific research, etc. It is also caused, however, by a lack of mutual understanding of the
concerns and interests of both groups. Too little effort has been spent working to establish
common ground and build consensus. Movement toward sustainable development will
require increased communication and understanding between economic and environmental
interests.
Truth-in-accounting refers to the need to adequately reflect both the benefits derived
from environmental protection efforts and the long-term costs of ecological degradation and
resource depletion in a variety of economic indicators and analyses. Currently this is either
not done at all or is only marginally adequate. Since at a fundamental level our society is
driven by economic processes, our accounting of those processes needs to reflect the true
and full costs associated with them. This implies changes in everything from the way we
determine and report the value of our national income to changes in price structure to
adequately reflect costs of pollution and resource depletion. Bringing about these changes
will be a fundamental component in progress toward sustainable development.
The third element which will strengthen the linkage between environmental
II - Concept Paper - 5
-------
protection and economic development is increasing the use of environmentally sound
incentives. A variety of mechanisms (tax policies, permit fees, use related fees, etc.) can
be used to promote more effective resource use and environmental protection.
Appropriately designed and applied, these incentives can strengthen the consideration of
environmental values in overall planning for economic development A significant amount
of effort (legislative activity, regulatory development, etc.) is currently underway in this area.
Growth versus Development
To some, the very term sustainable development in fact implies a dynamic that is
unsustainable. It conjures up visions of ever increasing demands for use of resources and
the related destruction or contamination of ecological systems. This concern frequently
centers on the potential growth in the numbers of people seeking a developed country
lifestyle with its high per capita resource demands. In this describing this scenario, "growth"
and "development" are often used interchangeably. The concerns highlighted by this point
of view are real: if increased attention is not focussed on sustainability, such growth in
global per capita resource use and degradation is a path we will very likely follow.
Another and more useful way to think about growth, development and sustainability
has been presented by Herman Daly,J currently a Senior Economist at the World Bank. In
this perspective, growth is defined in a manner similar to that above. The continued growth
in population and in the scale of human demands, activities and impacts relative to the
earth's ability to absorb them is clearly ultimately unsustainable. "Development," however,
is used by Daly to refer to "qualitative improvement," and he contrasts this term with
"growth," that is, quantitative expansion in the "physical dimensions of the economy."
Development as envisioned by Daly will include increases in the efficiency of resource use
and continual progress toward environmentally benign technologies and patterns of
economic activity. In this scenario, quality of life improvements are possible even as the
scale of human impacts on the environment is stabilized or, where necessary, reduced.
Sustainable development concepts and thinking focus on achieving this scenario as opposed
to unlimited growth in per capita resource use. The distinction is critically important.
Population. Poverty, and Sustainable Development
At its most basic level, any consideration of sustainable development must address
the issues of population growth, poverty, and the resulting impacts on resource and
development needs, on quality of life, and on the health of ecological support systems.
Population growth creates the need for economic development by increasing needs for basic
services and thus tends to expand resource consumption. Increased population and resource
depletion may also lead to further ecologically disruptive demographic shifts. The poverty
existing in so many r arts of the world makes day-to-day survival the top priority. This often
precludes any consideration of longer range sustainability. The magnitude of these problems
is sometimes so overwhelming that change may be appear unlikely, but opportunities for
progress do exist. The only certainty is that if attempts to move toward sustainability are
not made the situation will continue to worsen.
'Herman Daly, 1990, "Sustainable Development: From Concept and Theory toward Operational Principles,"
forthcoming in Population and Development Review.
II - Concept Paper - 6
-------
It is useful to break this issue down into three components. One is just the total
number of people. Any emphasis on sustainable development must include increased efforts
to stabilize world population. This is an essential component of the equation for success.
The second component deals with the economic well-being of the people represented by
those numbers. Economic systems must ensure, on a sustainable basis, that people have
reasonable access to and the ability to pay for basic needs of food, shelter, transportation,
etc. The third component, linked to the second, is the per capita impact on ecological
support systems. Growing numbers plus growing per capita impacts equals unsustainable
development. All of the three components are linked. As we examine the implications of
moving toward sustainable development, we need to keep the larger picture in mind but
focus efforts on the components on which we can make a difference.
The Choice of Appropriate Scale: International vs. National vs. Local
A common issue in sustainable development discussions is the effectiveness of actions
taken at a scale below the international level. Clearly there is a strong international
component to the concept of sustainable development. Many of the efforts to promote
sustainable development continue to focus on its meaning in the Third World context. The
causes and effects of rapid population growth, rampant poverty, and environmental
degradation are closely linked in many developing countries. Rapid economic development
is called for to combat these problems simultaneously, yet development must be
environmentally sound if it is to be maintained over the long term. Achievement of
sustainable development in the developing countries will require major adjustments in
international policies and institutions that affect trade, foreign assistance, and the transfer
of economically and environmentally appropriate technologies. It will also require
substantial strengthening of the domestic environmental management and protection
capabilities of these countries.
Ultimately, many sustainable development priorities are shared by all countries,
developing and developed, and are global in nature. We have already identified several
threats to global life support systems that cannot be isolated nationally or even regionally;
these include stratospheric ozone depletion, global warming, pollution of the oceans, and
reductions in biodiversity. Effective mitigation of these problems requires internationally
coordinated responses and cooperative research and technical work.
Efforts in developed countries at several levels are also essential, however, to achieve
sustainability internally as well as internationally. Many elements of U.S. society are not
functioning in a manner consistent with sustainable development. Examples include our
high and often inefficient per capita use of energy and water, non-sustainable agricultural
practices, economic priorities that favor short-term growth and profits over long-term
sustainability, local growth patterns that continue to eliminate vital wetlands, etc.
Addressing these and a myriad of other local, regional, and national issues relevant to
achieving sustainable development should be a high priority. Thinking globally and acting
locally is definitely applicable to the pursuit of sustainable development.
II - Concept Paper - 7
-------
Technological Fix vs. Eco-Doom
The two divergent views in the subtitle represent the polarity often found in
discussions of sustainability. Some claim that technology and innovation will solve all our
problems, be they related to food production, energy supply, transportation or whatever.
The rich history of innovation in the U.S. is strongly supportive of this view. Unfortunately,
the full cost to society of some of our technological innovations and fixes (e.g. the
development of chlorofluorocarbons) is only now being recognized. At the other extreme
are those who believe that any technological development results in the unacceptable
destruction of our ecological support systems, and call for a return to a much smaller,
technologically more simple society. This thinking is at the heart of the deep ecology
movement. It fails to recognize, however, the significant contributions of technological
development to improving the basic quality of life and to resolving environmental problems
caused by earlier technologies.
For purposes of a constructive examination of sustainable development, neither
position is particularly useful. If significant progress toward sustainability is to be achieved,
technological growth and innovation must be enhanced. New technologies must, however,
be environmentally more benign, increase the efficiency with which we use resources, and
help reduce the scale of human environmental impacts. Increasing the importance of
ecological considerations and constraints in economic planning and development is also
necessary to ensure maintenance of our resource and life support base. Sustainable
development cannot be built on extreme views that either reject or place undue faith in
technological development; instead it will require greater cooperation in the development
of technologies that meet both economic and environmental needs.
Environmental Protection. Public Health, and Natural Resources
Another area of debate regarding sustainable development concerns the scope of
policy implications. Much of the national and international sustainable development
discussion centers on the relationship between economic development and resource
conservation and use. This might be construed to imply that these are the only areas of.
interest and that sustainable development concepts are not relevant to traditional
environmental protection and public health concerns. This approach represents a very
narrow, myopic interpretation of sustainable development concepts. As with other aspects
of sustainable development discussed previously, the key is again the linkages between these
three elements. A comprehensive approach to sustainability requires a better understanding
of these interactions. Development or protection actions in one area clearly can be
impacted by or influence actions in another area. Achieving and sustaining an acceptable
level of public health is a fundamental component of sustainable development Effective
policies on natural resource usage should be part of any effort to promote sustainable
development, but they will also strengthen traditional environmental protection programs.
A sustainable development focus can provide a clear, constructive framework within which
the relationships between economic development, resource use, and ecosystem protection
can be addressed.
II - Concept Paper • 8
-------
m. WHAT NEEDS TO BE SUSTAINED-AND RELATED THREATS
At a general level, it is fairly easy to postulate what needs to be sustained: the
integrity of ecological systems and the capability for economic development. A more
rigorous analysis is needed, however, to be useful in understanding specific implications of
sustainable development. The question must be approached from both the economic and
ecological perspectives to allow identification of areas of common and diverging interests.
Outlined below are examples of this type of analysis. They follow a pattern-first setting
forth a broad fundamental goal, and then identifying the support systems and components
of support systems that need to be sustained to attain that goal.
From the ecological perspective, the starting point selected was the goal of sustaining
life. Table 1 summarizes a framework based on this objective. The sustenance of human
life may require other support systems, such as social or spiritual support systems, but since
the sustainable development debate is focussed primarily on the ecological/economic
relationship, this discussion remains limited to those components. In examining this
framework, the basic question to be addressed is how EPA programs, or our potential
leadership role, can support sustaining these components for the long-term. To identify
these opportunities requires further delineation of the sustainable development framework.
Figures 1 and 2 provide examples, for selected support system components, of how this
might be done. As one moves down these figures, the emphasis shifts from what needs to
be sustained to what needs to be done to sustain it and reveals a number of relevant areas
where EPA is or could become active.
Similar analyses of what needs to be sustained can be done from the economic
perspective, starting with the basic goal of sustaining adequate economic development.
Table 2 presents a possible framework developed from this perspective. Figures 3 provides
an example of how this framework can be expanded. As in the previous example, the areas
of current or potential EPA action become apparent on the diagram. Environmental
protection and the sustaining of key ecosystem functions are clearly integral to the sustaining
of economic productivity and development.
The framework outlined provides a long-term perspective on the support systems
needed to achieve and maintain a society based on sustainable development concepts. In
some cases the ultimate goal (the level at which we want to sustain these components) is
fairly clear. In others, it may be years before a national goal is clearly defined. Despite
that, however, the direction in which we must move is often clear. It is movement away
from actions and programs that do not support sustainability (as best we can currently define
it) and towards those that do support it. This implies an iterative transition process towards
sustainability.
To better understand the potential nature and scope of EPA's role in this process,
we also need to identify the most significant threats to each of these major components.
With these as a starting point we can begin to further refine an understanding of what
EPA's role is, or could be, in addressing these concerns. Presented in Tables 3-6, in outline
form, is an initial identification of these threats. They are not ranked at this time. As both
the framework and list of threats are refined over time the results of comparative risk
studies and other analyses can be used to begin setting priorities. Underlying all of the
H - Concept Paper - 9
-------
threats is the dominant impact of continued population growth and major demographic
shifts.
It is true that analyses such as those shown above may tend to point out the obvious,
and that identification of many of the key components to be sustained simply represents the
exercise of common sense. It is equally true, however, that we rarely analyze what is needed
to ensure the continued functioning of fundamental ecological or economic support systems.
The pressures of legislative dictates often constrain and narrow our focus. Advancing our
analyses and thinking, through a system as outlined above or some similar approach, can
broaden our view of the Agency's mission.
IV. EXPECTATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR EPA
Consideration of sustainable development leads to a number of basic questions about
what it means for EPA. Several of these are addressed below.
What Is the Value Added by Emphasizing Sustainable Development?
This is an often asked, and very legitimate, question. In an absolute, quantifiable
sense it is difficult to answer since, up to this point, we have not really adopted and pushed
the concept. If sustainable development turns out to be nothing but platitudes that will not
really change anything, it is of little value. As indicated in previous sections, however, there
are a number of ways in which a sustainable development focus might improve the
effectiveness of our programs. Some of these potential benefits are discussed briefly below.
- A broader perspective of our mission. At present our thinking and planning is
driven by legislative goals and requirements. If we consider sustainability (both
ecological and economic) along with regulations, standards, etc, a different
perception of priorities, approaches and opportunities might be suggested. We
should be willing to challenge our thinking in this way.
- Longer-range goals and plans. Inherent in the concept of sustainability is a longer-
range perspective. Too often EPA, and other organizations, are driven by short
term goals or mandates. A clearer definition of where we want to be in the long-
term, and identification of the kinds of programs and actions that are needed to
get there, are vital if we are to effectively use limited resources. A focus on
sustainable development can provide a context in which to accomplish this.
- A better tie-in with natural resource issues. Development of natural resources is
a fundamental component of much economic activity. At the same time, it is also
frequently the source of significant and sometimes irreversible impacts on the
environment Many of these impacts are not immediately obvious but show up
later or result from secondary development actions. The primary responsibility
for natural resource management rests with other agencies with missions more
focussed on economic development As a result, EPA and the natural resource
agencies are frequently in adversarial positions regarding proposed programs and
projects. Consideration of sustainable development concepts can, over time,
provide a constructive approach to resolving some of the existing controversies and
II - Concept Paper -10
-------
preventing some of the future ones.
- A framework for addressing growth issues. EPA is often precluded by law from
direct involvement in land use and growth issues. Yet, as with those concerning
natural resources, land use and development decisions made locally or regionally
can have significant environmental impacts over longer time periods and larger
areas than originally anticipated. Strengthening the focus on sustainable
development can help create a context in which both environmental concerns and
those related to land use planning and growth management can be dealt with
more constructively than in the past.
- Stimulating creative thinking. Consideration of sustainability questions with respect
to a proposed action or program frequently results in some very creative thinking.
It provides a new frame of reference for examining the many issues EPA must
face. Given both the complexity of these issues and the frequent difficulty in
finding workable solutions, generation of some new ideas should be fostered.
The above are a few examples of the ways in which stronger consideration of
sustainable development might provide valuable contributions to EPA's programs.
Consideration of sustainable development could potentially have enormous value-added in
terms of environmental results. There are innumerable instances where a proactive focus
on sustainability could have avoided major environmental impacts. Adoption by our society
of sustainable development as a fundamental ethic and an operational target would increase
our emphasis on longer range analysis and problem identification and prevention. We
would achieve, as it might be defined in the broadest sense, a nationwide pollution
prevention program.
What Is EPA's Role Vis a Vis Sustainable Development?
The nature and extent of EPA's role in any efforts to advance the national emphasis
on sustainable development will be an important issue. A number of possibilities exist. The
Agency could attempt to serve as the national leader or focal point for sustainable
development activities. In this context we would aggressively promote national actions such
as the establishment of national goals for sustainable development, push development of
comprehensive plans and policies supporting achievement of those goals, initiate major
public education programs on the concept, etc. On the international level, we could push
for the U.S. to take a proactive leadership role on many of the environmental and economic
development issues linked with long-term sustainability. In many of these areas, EPA (and
the U.S. government) is already active and viewed as a world leader. In other areas, the
U.S. has not established a leadership role, sometimes because our national efforts are not
organized in a sustainable development framework. A leadership role would require more
explicit adoption and promotion of sustainable development as a national and Agency ethic.
A different role for EPA would be that of a catalyst While this role would require
some Agency activities similar to those needed to fulfill a national leadership role, in
general the catalyst role would give the Agency a lower profile. Instead of serving as the
national lead on sustainable development activities, the Agency would undertake a range
of efforts to motivate other agencies and the private sector to increase their focus on
II - Concept Paper - 11
-------
sustainability. This approach would be based on the premise that most of the policies,
programs, and decisions that affect sustainability are the responsibility of organizations other
than EPA. Our role would be to get them to address the issue of sustainable development.
We are already doing this in many ways but, again, not as part of a broader sustainable
development framework. As indicated in the previous subsection, the broader perspective
that a focus on sustainable development brings would no doubt suggest many other areas
where we might play the catalyst role.
A third possible approach for EPA would be an internal focus, directed to enhance
the way our own programs promote or support sustainability. This would imply evaluation
of everything from our planning and guidance procedures to specific regulatory and
enforcement actions for consistency with sustainable development concepts and principles.
We would lead indirectly by example, and our efforts to promote sustainable development
could serve as a model for similar work by other agencies.
One single, clearly delineated role in promoting sustainable development is not likely
to suffice for EPA. The Agency role will probably vary on different issues, in different
contexts (internal, interagency, international), and according to the status of relevant
programs. Public and Congressional expectations will also have a significant influence on
our role. In the near future most of our activities in this area will likely be some mix of
internal projects and analyses and selected efforts as part of a catalyst role.
How Does Sustainable Development Relate to Pollution Prevention and Risk Reduction?
Risk reduction and pollution prevention are high priority themes within EPA's
management structure. A wide variety of training, planning, and specific programs and
actions has been built up around these concepts. If we increase our emphasis on sustainable
development will the priority for risk reduction or pollution prevention change? How do
the three themes relate to each other? The answers to these questions are needed before
we proceed with a new initiative.
In one context, the titles of these three themes represent general goals. At this level,
pollution prevention and risk reduction represent two of many goals which must be achieved
in order to attain the even broader goal of sustainable development The actions they entail
are very significant subsets of a comprehensive sustainable development emphasis and are
often complementary.
At a more specific level, differences begin to emerge. Both risk reduction and
sustainable development still tend to imply goals but two key elements distinguish the two
paradigms. First, risk reduction has a metric risk. Though Agency programs seek to reduce
various types of (not necessarily comparable) risk, priorities and progress can be monitored
using the risk metric. No such standard of measurement exists for sustainable development
What is "fifty percent sustainable?" Are we becoming "less sustainable?" At this point the
answers can be no more analytical than our common sense; sustainable development is too
broad a concept to reduce to a single measure.
A second difference between risk reduction and sustainable development is the
dynamics of the goals on which each is based. Though risk assessments may be responsive
H - Concept Paper -12
-------
to dynamic variables, the risk reduction goal itself can be static (e.g., reduce lifetime cancer
risk due to exposure to particular chemical to 10*). Moreover, risk reduction responds to
risks as they are currently perceived: unanticipated risks cannot be assessed, and though
reduction of unanticipated risks may be possible (by reducing pollution loadings on natural
systems that are not fully understood, for example), this type of goal is generally not
identified. Sustainable development, however, is inherently a dynamic goal—a moving target.
"Achievement of sustainable development" has little intrinsic meaning since "development"
is itself dynamic; instead we speak of "progress" toward sustainable development as
measured against politically determined, long-term goals that serve as the interim metric for
(and interim operational definition of) sustainability. These goals would have to reflect
society's long-term ethical priorities as well as a collective social response to uncertainty and
the possibility of unanticipated risks. They will also necessarily be interim in nature due to
the dynamic nature of sustainable development, since development that now appears
sustainable may be found to be otherwise—and vice versa-a generation from now (our target
may move). Once interim goals are established, however, they serve to fix the moving
sustainable development target temporarily, and at this point the risk paradigm may even
play a role in reducing the risk of failure to attain those goals.
Further differences among the three themes are also apparent at an operational level.
The Agency has established evolving strategies for both pollution prevention and risk
reduction. Objectives have been set, plans developed, accountability assigned, etc. That has
clearly not happened yet with respect to sustainable development. When (or if) it does, the
emphasis will be on development of actions and programs which complement rather than
replace ongoing risk reduction and pollution prevention efforts.
In summary, at the level of program goals, pollution prevention and risk reduction
represent major components of a broader sustainable development effort. At an operational
level, management strategies and plans developed under these three themes will be
complementary rather than hierarchically related. All three are integral parts of a
comprehensive environmental protection program. What is needed is a better understanding
of the linkages between them.
V. SOME OPERATING PRINCIPLES
The identification of what we want to sustain, the evolving set of goals regarding the
levels at which we want to sustain it, and identification of the major threats to the
achievement of those goals are analogous to the preliminary architectural renderings of a
new building. They are not complete but a general shape is visible. Whether or not we
explicitly make sustainable development an agency priority, we can begin to evaluate and
design and refine our structure and systems to enhance progress toward it The set of
operating principles presented below provide some direction for that effort. They emphasize
once again the breadth of vision with which we must approach this topic. They provide a
frame of reference for an ongoing evaluation of our programs and priorities. As indicated
previously, many programs and initiatives already underway are consistent with the intent
of the principles. Careful analyses will show, however, that for many others, a strengthened
emphasis on sustainability needs to be supported through new initiatives or program
II - Concept Paper - 13
-------
redirection. Operating in conformance with these principles is something the Agency would
move toward over a multi-year transition period.
Principles
(1) Programs will develop, adopt, and promote policies and long-term strategic plans
that, to the extent possible,
(a) foster, encourage, or require efficient use and conservation of natural
resources and energy;
(b) encourage utilization of renewable natural resources at rates that do not
exceed their regeneration rates;
(c) foster or encourage development of substitutes for nonrenewable natural
resources;
(d) limit emissions of wastes into the environment to rates that do not have
unacceptable effects on key ecosystem functions; and
(e) employ pollution prevention techniques, including source reduction and reuse
or recycling or wastes, to help accomplish objectives (a) through (d).
(2) Policies and strategic planning will be directed towards achievement of long-term,
parallel economic and environmental goals that
(a) are developed concurrently in an integrated process;
(b) take into account
(i) scientific and economic assessments of long-term needs, potential
threats to the satisfaction of those needs, and uncertainty regarding
both needs and threats;
(ii) general concerns and priorities of the public, and
(iii) ethical responsibilities to future generations (e.g. as established in the
National Environmental Policy Act §101); and
(c) are pursued simultaneously.
(3) Decisions concerning actions including, but not necessarily limited to, establishment
of sustainable development goals; development of long-term strategic plans; and
adoption and implementation of policies, programs, and regulations with the potential
for significant long-term impacts will consider
(a) the projected economic and environmental needs of at least two generations
born subsequent to the establishment or commencement of the action, or
when this is not possible, economic and environmental needs as far into the
future as they can reasonably be projected, and
(b) the potential direct and indirect impacts of the action on satisfaction of the
needs identified in paragraph (a).
(4) Whenever possible, policies and strategic planning will support innovation and
development of environmentally benign and resource-conserving technologies;
however, unforeseeable, infeasible, or speculative technological developments shall
not be considered solutions to long-term problems inhibiting achievement of
sustainable development goals as identified under Principle (2).
(5) The long-term implications of population growth, demographic shifts and related
H - Concept Paper • 14
-------
factors (e.g. per capita consumption and waste generation patterns, incidence of
poverty, etc.) affecting the environment or economic development will be explicitly
taken into account and addressed in
(a) any efforts to establish sustainable development goals, and
(b) decision making affecting policies, strategic planning, programs, and proposed
regulations.
(6) Wherever possible, policies, strategic planning, and programs will create market and
other incentives designed to encourage public and private practices and decisions that
are consistent with progress towards sustainable development and achievement of
sustainable development goals as identified under Principle (2).
(7) Economic analyses (including analyses of the costs and benefits of proposed
regulations) used in policy, programmatic, or strategic decision making will
(a) take into account the values of the full range of services provided by impacted
ecosystems;
(b) consider all costs and benefits accruing over the full duration of time specified
under Principle (3); and
(c) explicitly identify any unequal distribution of these costs and benefits over the
duration of time specified under Principle (3).
(8) To the extent possible, programs and policies will adopt a conservative approach to
reduce the risk of unpredicted adverse impacts on ecological functions and services
when the effects of human activities on these are uncertain.
(9) Policies, programs, and strategic planning will actively support, and periodically
undergo review and adjustment to reflect the results of, continuing research and
analyses investigating
(a) the operational meaning of sustainable development, and appropriate long-
term goals representing the needs of the future;
(b) scientific understanding of ecological systems and the long-term impacts of
disturbances on their integrity and ability to provide key services;
(c) the nature of linkages between the economy, social institutions, and the
environment; and
(d) economic development and environmental trends that may affect progress
towards sustainable development and achievement of sustainable development
goals as identified under Principle (2).
(10) Policies and programs will
(a) promote understanding of the concepts and principles associated with
sustainable development,
(b) encourage public involvement in the formulation of sustainable development
goals and programs and activities designed to achieve these goals, and
(c) provide for routine public reporting on progress toward sustainable
development.
II - Concept Paper - 15
-------
VL SUMMARY
This paper and the proposals it contains were developed from the premise that "a
partial solution delivered at the right time is better than a perfect solution delivered too
late." This is the right time to begin to determine EPA's role with respect to sustainable
development, and this paper attempts to outline the framework of a partial solution. The
concepts and principles outlined in the preceding sections represent a starting point for
engaging the topic in a coordinated and comprehensive way. Sustainable development is
a complex and often controversial theme. The perspective presented in this paper
represents an interpretation of the concept and its relationship to EPA at this point in time.
As our understanding of what is required to achieve sustainable development evolves over
time, so will our understanding of EPA's role. We need, however to establish a baseline.
Individual programs must begin to discuss, refine, and extend these concepts and principles,
both internally and in terms of our role vis-a-vis other public and private organizations, until
they are meaningful at all levels of the organization. The road to sustainability will be long,
difficult, and require endless diligence. We are already on it but the directions are not
always clear. That is the challenge.
- Concept Paper -16
-------
Table I
What Needs to be Sustained - the Ecological Perspective
Terrestrial
Aquatic
Atmospheric
F Support 1
Systems J
O
Safe Food Supply
Terrestrial Species Diversity
Recreational/Aesthetic
Values
Habitat
Biogeochemical Cycles
Soil Fertility
Safe Drinking
Water Supply
Safe Food Supply
Aquatic Species
Diversity
Water Quality to Support
Aquatic Ecosystems
Habitat
Biogeochemical Cycles
Safe Air Quality
Atmospheric Shielding
Air Quality to Support
Non-Human Biological
Systems
Climatic Stability (or
Manageable Rate of Change)
Recreational/Aesthetic Values
Air Quality to Preserve
Physical Infrastructure
Biogeochemical Structures
c •
to
Supply of Habitable Land
Adequate Supply of Food
Adequate Supply of Shelter
Habitat
Adequate Supply of Energy
Photosynthetlc Production
Supply of Renewable
Resources
Adequate Supply of
Drinking Water
Adequate Supply of Food
Habitat
Water Quantity to Support
Aquatic Ecosystems
Photosynthetic Production
Energy Supply
Solar Energy Supply
-------
Table 2
What Needs to be Sustained - the Economic Development Perspective
Labor*
Capital/Financial*
Natural Resources'
[Support 1
Systems J
Health
Education
Training
Security
Financial
- Civil
Environmental
Reasonable Return on
Investment
Acceptable Rate of
Formation of Investment
Capital
Adequate Credit System
Opportunity for
Competitive Profits
Well-structured and
Reasonable Tax Policies
Reasonable Energy Sources
Renewable Water Supplies
Adequate Food Supply
Supply of Renewable
Raw Materials
Maximum Use Efficiency/Unit
of Output
Infrastructure/Governmental
F Support "I
Ecological/Environmental L systems J
Competitive Market Economy
Adequate Transportation
- System
Rates
Adequate Energy Supply
Distribution System
- Costs
Adequate and Affordable Health
Care Institutions and Systems
International/National Economic
and Political Stability
Effective Education and
Training Programs
Effective Trade Policies
Reasonable Regulatory
Framework
Adequate Social Welfare System
Ability to Own Assets
R&D/Development of New
Technologies
Ecological Life Support Systems
Safe Environment (see Table 1)
* In this context, both stocks and productivity need to be sustained.
-------
Table 3
Threats to Terrestrial Support Systems*
Safe Food Supply
Adequate Supply of Food
Habitat
Microbiological Contamination
Toxic Residues
Climate Modification
Soil Erosion
Urbanization
Lack of Water
Improper Irrigation/Salinization
Air Quality Impacts
Losses to Pests
Terrestrial Species Diversity Adequate Supply of Food
Desertification
Deforestation
Urbanization
Agricultural Land Use
Climate Modification
Adequate Supply of Energy
Loss of Habitat
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Climate Modification
Toxic Chemical Impacts
Acid Deposition
•
Recreational/Aesthetic Values
Non-Sustainable Forest
Harvests
Climate Modification
Sustained Yield of Renewable
Resources
Deforestation
Depletion of Non-Renewable
Energy Sources
Photosynthetic Production
Urbanization
Liner/Illegal Dumping
Deforestation
Supply of Habitable Land
Harvesting/Extraction Rates
Too High
Supply of Non-Renewable
Resources
Deforestation
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Climate Modification
Desertification
Climate Modification
Toxic Chemical Contamination
Excessive Depletion Rates
Lack of Long-Range
Management Policies
* Underlying all of the threats listed here is the dominant impact of continued
population growth and major demographic shifts.
-------
Table 4
Threats to Aquatic Support Systems*
Water Quality to Support
Safe Drinking Water Supply Aquatic Ecosystems
Habitat
Microbiological Contamination
Chemical Contamination
Safe Food Supply
Nutrient Enrichment
Toxic Chemical Impacts
Acid Deposition
Soil Erosion
Climate
Modification
Saltwater Intrusion
Adequate Supply of
Drinking Water
Soil Erosion
Deforestation
Urbanization
Modification of Flow Regimes
Wetland Filling
Climate Modification
Water Quantity to Support
Aquatic Ecosystems
Microbiological Contamination
Chemical Contamination
Aquatic Species Diversity
Groundwater Depletion
Urbanization
Climate Modification
Adequate Supply of Food
Climatic Modification
Excessive Withdrawals
•
Energy Supply
Loss of Habitat
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Climate Modification
Acid Deposition
Toxic Chemical Impacts
Recreational/Aesthetic Values
Non-Sustainable Harvest Rates
Water Quality (see above)
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Photosynthetlc Production
Climate Modification
Soil Erosion
Chemical Contamination
Urbanization
Oil Pollution
Floatables/Garbage
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Chemical Contamination
Soil Erosion
* Underlying all of the threats listed here is the dominant impact of continued
population growth and maior demoaraphic shifts.
-------
Table 5
Threats to Atmospheric Support Systems*
Safe Air Quality
Climatic Stability (or
Manageable Rate of Change)
Particulate Contamination
Chemical Contamination
Radioactive Contamination
Climatic Modification
Atmospheric Shielding
Air Quality to Maintain
Physical Support Systems
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Acidic Contamination
Air Quality to Support Non-Human
Biological Systems
Recreational/Aesthetic
Values
Chemical Contamination
Acidic Contamination
Tropospheric Ozone Damage
Urban Smog
Visibility Impairment
Energy Supply
Climate Modification
* Underlying all of the threats listed here is the dominant impact of continued
population growth and major demographic shifts.
-------
Table 6
Threats to Sustained Economic Development Support Systems
Adequate Labor Force
Availability of Capital
Infrastructure/Governmental
Lack of Education
Lack^f Training
Poverty
Unhealthy Conditions
War
Debt Crisis
Poor Tax Policies/Incentives
Inflation
Trade Wars
Excessive Regulatory Costs
Inadequate Price Structure
Inadequate Investments
Instability in Financial Markets
Loss of Entrepreneurial Spirit
Natural Resource Supply
Adequate Supply of Food
Inefficient Use
Depletion Exceeding Renewal
Rate
Waste and Lack of Recycling
Poverty
Over-Population
Environmental Damage
Restricted Access Due to
Environmental or Political
Reasons
Damages to Ecological Life Support
Systems (see Tables 3-5)
Inadequate Health and Social Welfare
Policies
Inadequate R&D Funding
Excessive Regulatory Demand
Political Instability/Wars
Excessive Restrictions on
Market Economy
Inability of Energy, Transportation and
Water Management Systems to Meet
Demands
Inadequate Trade Policies
Excessive Tax Burdens
Inadequate Support for Education
Loss of Public Credibility
-------
Figure I
Human Life Support*
Atmospheric
Terrestrial
I I
I I
Food Supply
I
I
Aquatic
. [Support "I
~l , I Systems I
Economic •• 4
I I I I
I I
I
(Quantity)
I
(Quality)
1
1
1
Renewable Energy Labor
Resources
i
Soil
Base
I
Climatic
Stability
Water
Supply
Energy
Supply
1
Chemicals
Population
l
Seed
Stocks
Fertilizer
Chemically Biologically Adequately
Non-toxic Safe Preserved
I
Non-
Renewable
Sources Renewable
Sources
Rainfall
I
Irrigation
Temperature
Efflc
Ui
SusU
Su
ilnable
ppiy
lent Sustainable
M /Acceptable
Withdrawal
Rates
1
Sustainable
Application
Rates
Soil Salinity
Content
i ill
Delivery Appropriate Surface GW
Systems Pricing Water
/
Chen
Conl
1
1
Adequate
Quality
I
leal Acidity
ent
Surface
Water
1
Refrigeration
I
1
\
1 1 1
Affordable Environmentally Effective
Sound
I 1
Energy Disposal
Efficient
Recycling
T
Sustainable Efficient Environ.
Supply Use Sound
Production
* This represents only a partial example of how a framework could be developed
to clearly Identify what needs to be sustained and what is needed to do so.
-------
Figure 2
Non-Human Life Support*
I
Species Diversity
I
Ecosystem Functions
[* Support I
Systems J
Terre
!•_ ^i 1 n«t«»
strial Atmospheric Aquatic Economic
1 ' 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .. 1 _ ,1 .1 1 1 1 1
Rangeland
Forests Tundra
Oceans
Lakes I Estuaries
Climatic Air
Stability Quality
Optimum
Size Units
Water
Quantity
Water
Quality
Physical
Habitat
I I
Minimum Minimum
Ozone Acidic
Damage Deposition
Env. Sound
Management
Plans
\
Acceptable
Sedimentation
Rate
I
Minimum
Channel
Modification
Env. Sound
Run-Off
Management
Soil
Conservation
I
Adequate Acceptable
Rainfall Temperatures
Buffers Physical
Controls
Peak Flow
Control
I
Env. Sound
Run-Off
Management
I
Buffers
* This represents only a partial example of how a framework could be developed to clearly identify
what needs to be sustained and what is needed to do so.
-------
Figure 3
Economic Development*
Labor Capital/ Natural
Investment Resources
(see Figure 1)
I I
Healthy Educated Trained
I I
Basic
Health
Care
Sal
Adeq
Food!
(seeF
I
Safe Air
Quality
(see
e/ F*ure1> Wot
uate Cond
iupply
gure 1)
I I I I I I I I I
Safe Safe/ Fina
Homes Adequate S®0
Water
kfng ***
Hi/xnc (See
itions _. » _%
F'9ure 1> Social
Security
Secure
I
I I
ncial Political/ Environmental
urity Civil Health/
Rights Stability
I
(see Healthy*
I Hgurel)
Opportunity to
Earn Adequate
Living
I 1
Informed Regulatory
Work Protection
Force
Minimum Minimum
Exposures to Exposures
Hazardous to Physical
Chemicals Risks
1
1
Standards
1
Work
Practices
I
Job Availability Adequate Pay Training
Sustained
Industry/
Comm. Sector
* This represents only a partial example of how a framework could be
developed to clearly identify what needs to be sustained and what is
needed to do so.
(see Table 2)
Labor Force with Skills
Matching Jobs
I
Mora Jobs
Stable
Population
-------
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Some Key Questions for EPA
DRAFT: July 26, 1990
Science Policy Branch
Science, Economics, and Statistics Division
Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation
-------
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Some Key Questions for EPA
DRAFT: July 26, 1990
Prepared for
Science Policy Branch
Science, Economics, and Statistics Division
Office of Regulatory Management and Evaluation
Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation
Prepared by
Patrick McCabe
The Bruce Company
The material presented in this report reflects the work and opinions of the author, and does not
necessarily represent the official position of the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation or the
Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: SOME KEY QUESTIONS FOR EPA
7/26/90 DRAFT
(1) What is "sustainable development?"
"Sustainable development" represents an ideal-a visionary concept of a society
working to promote a better economic and environmental future. In some contexts, the
term is used broadly to articulate this visionary ideal. In others, it refers to something
more specific, often a general goal or set of goals associated with that ideal. Still other
uses suggest a process designed to achieve the ideal. Though these usages generally
blend somewhat in practice, they are discussed separately here to highlight the variety of
meanings commonly associated with sustainable development.
D Sustainable Development as a Visionary Ideal. As it is defined generally, sustainable
development is an intuitive, self explanatory, and yet visionary concept that links
practical and ethical concerns about the welfare of future generations with the economic
and environmental priorities of today. One such "visionary" definition, that given by the
United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, a.k.a.
the Brundtland Commission), is probably the most frequently used of all sustainable
development definitions:
Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.1
A similar definition is provided by Jim MacNeill, Secretary General of the WCED, who
refers to sustainable development as
growth based on forms and processes of development that do not undermine the
integrity of the environment on which they depend.2
These definitions convey two concepts that are fundamental in most of the visionary uses
of sustainable development. First, they emphasize the links between the environment
and the economy by underlining the importance of environment as an integral
contributor, rather than just a constraint, to economic development. Second, they stress
the need for longer time horizons to ensure that environmental and development
decision-making is consistent with our own long-term interests and our stewardship
responsibilities to future generations.
As a general ideal, sustainable development has broad appeal; criticism of the
'World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1987), 43.
2Jim MacNeill, "Strategies for Sustainable Economic Development,* Scientific American, 2613
(September 1989): 155-165.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 1
-------
messages of these visionary definitions is rare. Unfortunately, however, visionary ideals
are difficult to operationalize, and the incorporation of general sustainable development
concepts into policies and specific management decisions currently driven by more
conventional objectives and criteria is unlikely. If the sustainable development ideal is to
be pursued, a more particular understanding of its meaning will be necessary, even
though efforts to enhance the specificity of intuitively appealing definitions and concepts
tend paradoxically to reduce consensus on their meaning. Yet more action-oriented
characterizations of "sustainable development" are needed; we now turn to these.
Sustainable Development as a Goal. Ultimately, progress towards sustainable
development can only be measured against distinct indicators of "sustainability."
Incremental and local improvements in environmental protection may be easily
identified, but unequivocal verification that a particular sustainable development
program is leading in the "right" (i.e. "sustainable") direction is only possible if we have
long-term sustainable development targets to set that direction.3 These targets will
necessarily reflect somewhat subjective interpretations of the sustainable development
vision, simply because there exists no definitive scientific or economic consensus on what
we must sustain to achieve sustainable development.4 The fundamental sustainable
development concepts discussed above would call for goals that have a long-term focus
and reflect the integration of environmental and resource use considerations with the
need for sound economic development. More specific determinations of what those
goals should be is as much an ethical issue as it is a scientific or economic question.
If sustainable development goals are to be both credible and politically tenable,
they will probably have to reflect a blend of scientific assessments, general social
priorities, and attitudes about uncertainty. Since social priorities, including ethical
concerns for future generations, play an important part in goal setting, an appropriate
arena for the establishment of these goals might be the legislature, with guidance and
input from the environmental sciences and the public at large.
3For example, a market incentive, such as an excise tax or user fee, may discourage behavior that is
environmentally unsound. It will thus provide some degree of improvement of environmental protection.
Whether the improved situation is "sustainable" or not is a different question, and may depend on, for
example, the extent to which the unsound activity is reduced. The extent of this reduction will in turn depend
on the magnitude of the tax or fee. If such a tax or fee is enacted as part of a sustainable development
program, its magnitude would therefore presumably be selected to reduce the undesirable activity to a
sustainable level.
What is a "sustainable" level? The answer will depend on ecological and economic processes that are
difficult or impossible to predict and on ethical judgments we cannot arbitrarily determine. In short, we do
not know what is "sustainable." We can, however, set long-term targets representing our best scientific,
economic, and ethical assessments of where we want to be in the future. These long-term targets could then
be used to specify what constitutes "enough" improvement so that we might establish the appropriate
incentives (or policies) to promote development that is, to the best of our knowledge, sustainable.
4Must we sustain economic growth? A certain rate of capital formation? Or a particular standard of
living (if so, whose)? Why not a specified amount of annual photosynthesis? Or a certain acreage of
"functioning" ecosystems? Or a given level of biological diversity?
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 2
-------
A variety of sustainable development goals have been suggested by several
sources. These range in nature from environmental goals (reduce emissions by X%,
recycle Y% of waste, etc.) and natural resource oriented goals (reduce fossil fuel use by
X%, shift to Y% renewable resource use, etc.) to general economic goals (sustain
current rate of productivity growth, maintain Y% economic growth after deduction of
depreciation of environmental capital and cleanup costs, etc.). While proposed goals of
these types have thus far been somewhat arbitrarily determined/ they may serve to foster
discussion of the characteristics of more appropriate sustainable development goals. To
date, however, the few goals that have been set forth are limited in scope to either
economic, natural resource use, or environmental parameters; no integrated and
comprehensive set of sustainable development goals for the U.S. has been advanced.
An effort to establish such national goals was recently completed by the
government of the Netherlands. The scientific basis for environmental goals was
established in a report entitled Concern for Tomorrow: A National Environmental Survey,
1985-2010, published by the National Institute of Public Health and Environmental
Protection. Goals include a reduction of CO2 emissions by 20-30%, a reduction of SO2
and NOX emissions by 70-90%, and a reduction of discharges into the Rhine and North
Sea of 75-90% by 2010. The economic goal was straightforward: achievement of the
environmental goals in the most cost-effective manner. The Dutch government assessed
its current policies and programs, and finding them inadequate to meet both
environmental and economic goals, proposed a National Environmental Policy Plan
(NEPP) that included a range of new programs and reforms. Not surprisingly, the NEPP
became the focus of intense political battles, including a national election that ultimately
confirmed public support for the goals and gave the government the mandate to
implement the Plan.
The Dutch experience is probably the best example of the development and
application of a goal-oriented sustainable development strategy at a national level. The
goal-setting process behind the NEPP clearly mixed subjective assessments with scientific
understanding of what is sustainable, so the Dutch goals themselves may not be
representative of other countries' priorities. Nonetheless, the particular mixture of
science and politics used to set the Dutch goals might serve as a model for other
countries.
One important question that might be used to focus a sustainable development
goals-setting process is: "what needs to be sustained?" General answers will vary, but it
is important to recognize that consideration of either economic growth or ecological
stability in isolation adds little of value to the conventional debates between promoters
of economic growth and advocates of the environment. Clearly, a broader, more
balanced interpretation of the sustainable development vision is needed if it is to be
useful. The value of the general concepts behind sustainable development centers on the
5Since no broad-based sustainable development goal-setting process has been undertaken, goals such as
these simply reflect one particular individual's or group's interpretation of the scientific, economic, and/or
ethical meaning of sustainable development.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 3
-------
integrative and long-term perspectives they prescribe for policy makers, rather than on
their use as a basis for unilateral calls for accelerations or restrictions of economic
growth or resource use.
Nonetheless, the role of economic growth in the sustainable development process
continues to spark one of the more contentious debates in the sustainable development
literature. The Brundtland Report calls for high growth rates, particularly in developing
countries, to help "meet the needs of the present" by reducing the poverty that is also
associated with pressures on natural resources. This emphasis on growth contrasts
somewhat with the premise of many sustainable development theorists that conventional
economic growth is not indefinitely sustainable. Herman Daly's first "operational
principle of sustainability," for instance, states that "total resource flow appropriated by
humans must be limited to a level within global carrying capacity."* The differences are
usually not irreconcilable. The Brundtland Commission calls for neither "conventional"
nor "indefinite" growth; Daly stresses that constraints ultimately limit resource use, not
societal development. Modified national income accounts that subtract depreciation of
"environmental capital" and environmental cleanup costs from national income would
help redefine our concept of economic growth to make it more compatible with
sustainable development.
D Sustainable Development as a Process. Neither a rigorous definition of the sustainable
development ideal nor distinct sustainable development goals are necessarily
prerequisites for efforts to implement programs and policies consistent with that ideal.
Sustainable development can be defined operationally in terms of a framework of actions
(or guidelines governing actions) to redirect development to a course suggested by the
visionary concepts discussed above. Defining sustainable development as a process also
reflects the evolutionary nature of our understanding of what it entails. In general, two
themes emerge in discussions of the sustainable development "process."
• Sustainable Development Transitions. This theme is focussed on the types of changes
needed to make sustainable development possible. These changes may be either broad
social transitions or more narrowly targeted agendas for specific programs or policies.
Gus Speth provides a fine summary of the broader social changes often associated with
sustainable development in what he calls a "series of large-scale social and economic
"Herman Daly, 1990, "Sustainable Development: From Concept and Theory towards Operational
Principles," forthcoming in Population and Development Review, 33. Daly is quite clear about his view that
perpetual economic growth is not compatible with sustainable development:
I will admit that if the ecosystem can grow indefinitely then so can the aggregate economy.
But until the surface of the earth begins to grow at a rate equal to the rate of interest one
should not take this answer too seriously.
Daly and others are generally careful to point out that limits to the expansion of resource use (i.e. "growth" in
the "physical dimensions of the economy") should be distinguished from "qualitative improvement" or
"development," which might continue indefinitely.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 4
-------
transitions" needed to ensure "environmental security":7
(i) a demographic transition toward stable populations;
(ii) a technological transition away from today's resource-intensive, pollution-
prone technologies to a new generation of environmentally benign ones;
(iii) an economic transition to a world economy based on reliance on nature's
"income" and not depletion of its "capital";
(iv) a social transition to a more equitable sharing of environmental and
economic benefits;
(v) a transition in information and consciousness to a far more profound
understanding of global sustainability;
(vi) an institutional transition to new arrangements among governments and
peoples that can achieve environmental security.
Speth's list of transitions is inclusive and far-reaching. Other sustainable development
agendas are more specific and often more prescriptive, and may enumerate specific
recommendations for policy or program reforms. These are commonly organized to
target one particular sector or problem (e.g. energy production and consumption) or to
utilize one type of policy instrument (e.g. economic incentives) rather to address all
sustainable development needs at once.
Sustainable Development Principles. This theme focusses not on the changes needed to
promote sustainable development, but on the administrative principles that will guide
decision makers in fostering those changes. Again, a variety of suggestions have been
made in this area. The following model principles are typical; they are designed to
incorporate the visionary sustainable development concepts into all levels of decision
making, and reflect characterization of sustainable development as a goals-oriented
process.
(1) Agencies and programs will develop, adopt, and promote policies and long-
term strategic plans that, to the extent possible,
(a) foster, encourage, or require efficient use and conservation of natural
resources and energy;
(b) encourage utilization of renewable natural resources at rates that do
not exceed their regeneration rates;
7Gus Speth, "Environmental Security for the 1990s ... b Six Not-So-Easy Steps," WRI Issues and Ideas,
January 1990,1-4. Though Speth's transitions are aimed primarily to achieve "environmental security," he
writes that only by promoting these transitions will we "deliver a gift to the new century of a planet
sustained."
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 5
-------
(c) foster or encourage development of substitutes for nonrenewable
natural resources;
(d) limit emissions of wastes into the environment to rates that do not have
unacceptable effects on key ecosystem functions; and
(e) employ pollution prevention techniques, including source reduction and
reuse or recycling of wastes, to promote the accomplishment of
objectives (a) through (d).
(2) Policies and strategic planning will be directed towards achievement of long-
term, parallel economic and environmental goals that
(a) are developed concurrently in an integrated process;
(b) take into account
(i) scientific and economic assessments of long-term needs,
potential threats to the satisfaction of those needs, and
uncertainty regarding both needs and threats;
(ii) general concerns and priorities of the public; and
(iii) ethical responsibilities to future generations (e.g. as
established in the National Environmental Policy Act §101);
and
(c) are pursued simultaneously.
(3) Decisions concerning actions including, but not necessarily limited to,
establishment of sustainable development goals; development of long-term
strategic plans; and adoption and implementation of policies, programs, and
regulations with the potential for significant long-term impacts will consider
(a) the projected economic and environmental needs of at least two
generations born subsequent to the establishment or commencement of
the action, or when this is not possible, economic and environmental
needs as far into the future as they can reasonably be projected, and
(b) the potential direct and indirect impacts of the action on satisfaction of
the needs identified in paragraph (a).
(4) Whenever possible, policies and strategic planning will support innovation
and development of environmentally benign and resource-conserving
technologies; however, unforeseeable, infeasible, or speculative technological
developments shall not be considered solutions to long-term problems
inhibiting achievement of sustainable development goals as identified under
Principle (2).
(5) The long-term implications of population growth, demographic shifts and
related factors (e.g. per capita consumption and waste generation patterns,
incidence of poverty, etc.) affecting the environment or economic
development will be explicitly taken into account and addressed in
(a) any efforts to establish sustainable development goals, and
(b) decision making affecting policies, strategic planning, programs, and
proposed regulations.
- Some Key Questions for EPA - 6
-------
(6) Wherever possible, policies, strategic planning, and programs will create
market and other incentives designed to encourage public and private
practices and decisions that are consistent with progress towards sustainable
development and achievement of sustainable development goals as identified
under Principle (2).
(7) Economic analyses (including analyses of the costs and benefits of proposed
regulations) used in policy, programmatic, or strategic decision making will
(a) take into account the values of the full range of services provided by
impacted ecosystems;
(b) consider all costs and benefits accruing over the full duration of time
specified under Principle (3); and
(c) explicitly identify any unequal distribution of these costs and benefits
over the duration of time specified under Principle (3).
(8) To the extent possible, programs and policies will adopt a conservative
approach to reduce the risk of unpredicted adverse impacts on ecological
functions and services when the effects of human activities on these are
uncertain.
(9) Policies, programs, and strategic planning will actively support, and
periodically undergo review and adjustment to reflect the results of,
continuing research and analyses investigating
(a) the operational meaning of sustainable development, and appropriate
long-term goals representing the needs of the future;
(b) scientific understanding of ecological systems and the long-term impacts
of disturbances on their integrity and ability to provide key services;
(c) the nature of linkages between the economy, social institutions, and the
environment; and
(d) economic development and environmental trends that may affect
progress towards sustainable development and achievement of
sustainable development goals as identified under Principle (2).
(10) Policies and programs will
(a) promote understanding of the concepts and principles associated with
sustainable development,
(b) encourage public involvement in the formulation of sustainable
development goals and programs and activities designed to achieve
these goals, and
(c) provide for routine public reporting on progress toward sustainable
development.
2) What are the origins of the concepts behind sustainable development?
Though "sustainable development" is itself a relatively new term, the visionary
ideals it represents are the products of a convergence of ideas from ecology and the
II - Some Key Questions for EPA • 1
-------
environmental sciences, economics, religious and ethical value systems, and a collection
of sometimes remarkably visionary thinkers. Several of these ideas have been evolving
for centuries. The far-reaching origins of sustainable development may account,
ironically, for both its general intuitive appeal and the futility of attempts to develop a
precise, universally accepted operational definition of the term. A few of the more
influential thinkers and concepts are discussed below.
Ecology and the Environmental Sciences. The theories, analyses, and data provided by
these disciplines are some of the most important precursors to the sustainable
development ideal.
Carrying Capacity. Defined as the number or biomass of organisms that a given habitat
can support, this ecological concept underlies many of toda/s discussions of sustainable
development. Application of the carrying capacity concept to human populations raises
questions about the ultimate limitations on the demands we can place on our
environment. Since per capita environmental demands will vary with living standards
and technologies, a precise calculation of the global carrying capacity for humans cannot
be made in terms of population. Nonetheless, several illuminating efforts have been
made to quantify the limitations of the planet as they relate to current human resource
consumption. For example, a 1986 study by Peter Vitousek, et ah, concluded that human
activities now either use directly, co-opt, or have eliminated 25% of global annual
primary productivity and 39% of the total annual terrestrial primary production." J.W.
Maurits la Riviere writes that the total quantity of freshwater annually available to
humans is "in principle enough to sustain 20 billion people."9 While the implications of
these figures cannot be drawn too precisely,10 they do serve to illustrate the finiteness of
global systems and the relevance of carrying capacity to humans. The latter ideas
underscore the need for a sustainable pattern of development that proceeds within these
natural limits.
Sustainable Yield. A second concept important in many discussions of sustainable
development is sustainable yield, that is, the yield a renewable resource produces when
harvested at rate equal to its regeneration or replacement rate. This concept was
originally applied to fisheries, but it can be equally relevant to resources ranging from
timber to groundwater. The restriction of renewable resource extraction rates to their
sustainable yield is sometimes posited as a general precondition for sustainable
development.
*Peter M. Vitousek, Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich, and Pamela A. Matson, 1986, "Human
Appropriation of the Products of Photosynthesis,' BioScience (36) 368-373.
'J.W. Maurits la Riviere, 1989, "Sustaining Water Use," Scientific American, 2613 (September 1989), 80.
IOThe results of some very "precise" projections of the future using models based on static assumptions
about human resource needs have produced some particularly alarming conclusions (e.g. those found by
Meadows, Meadows, Randers, and Behrens in 1972 in their The Limits to Growth). While changing patterns
of resource use and technological developments cannot be expected to resolve all our environmental
difficulties, the assumption that current patterns can simply be extrapolated to an ecological-economic
doomsday may be similarly unrealistic
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 8
-------
Global Impacts, Ecological Interdependence, and the Gaia Hypothesis. While the works of
Vitousek et al. and J.W. Maurits la Riviere and the concept of sustainable yield suggest
bounds to our planet's capacity to function as a source of sustenance, the environmental
sciences have also provided evidence of the limits of its capacity to serve as a sink for
our wastes. As we continue to collect information indicating that our activities may have
global and potentially irreversible impacts on the earth's atmosphere, oceans, and
biological diversity, our concerns have grown, but they are not new. In 1864, George
Perkins Marsh wrote, in his Man and Nature:
The scale of change initiated by man is no longer local, but global. The climatic
and hydrological effects of deforestation provide an example.
The growth of ecology as a discipline, and its emphasis on the interdependence of
the planet's organisms and their physical environment, has enhanced recognition of the
complex impacts of large scale anthropogenic disturbances of natural systems. The
formulation of the Gaia Hypothesis in 1972 represented a culmination of this theme.
James Lovelock and Lynn Margulis suggested that the earth could best be understood as
a complex living organism (more precisely, a "superecosystem"), rather than as a planet
that simply happened to support life. They argued that the geophysical environment is
interactive with, instead of deterministic of, the earth's massive assemblage of flora and
fauna. The Gaia Hypothesis served to underscore the importance of a global network of
biogeochemical cycles, ecological life-support systems, and feedback loops between these
that maintain a planetary environment amenable to human life. Our general lack of
knowledge of the workings of these cycles and systems has been the basis of the
argument that sustainable development requires a conservative, risk-averse approach to
the environment to minimize the chance of interference with the functioning of global
life-support systems.
Economics. Several themes in economics have had important roles in shaping the
sustainable development ideal. Among the most important of these are Thomas
Malthus' writings on the limits of the environment to sustain human populations, the
identification and study of externalities, Sir John Hicks' definition of income, and the
practical need to design self-sustaining projects to promote economic development in the
Third World.
Malthusian Economics. In 1798, Thomas Malthus published "An Essay on the Principle
of Population." His assertion in that pamphlet is now famous:
Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometric ratio. Subsistence increases
only in an arithmetic ratio. ...
This implies a strong and constantly operating check on population from the
difficulty of subsistence. This difficulty must fall somewhere and must necessarily
be severely felt by a large portion of mankind.
In explaining the implications of his thesis, Malthus wrote of nature's "great restrictive
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 9
-------
law," the limited availability of sustenance that constrains animal and plant populations.
In essence, Malthus was not only anticipating the concept of carrying capacity, but also
its application to human populations. Tremendous advances in agricultural technology
and declining birth rates (in the industrialized countries) have led many to reject the
Malthusian pessimism. Yet Malthus' general message may have some relevance to the
global situation today, with estimates of between 500 million and 1 billion people
currently undernourished" while U.N. projections now forecast world populations of as
high as 14 billion by the end of the 21st century." Even the projections of 8.4 billion
people by 2025 would imply a decrease in world average cropland per capita from
today's 0.28 hectares to 0.17 hectares in that year." Concerns about our ability to feed
such enormous populations, as well as apprehension over the environmental effects of
the global economy needed to meet their needs, are responsible for much of the current
interest in sustainable development.
Externalities. The development of this concept, which was introduced by Alfred Marshall
at the turn of the century, is important because the existence of externalities often
interferes with the market system's ability to provide for general social welfare, and hi
particular, for protection of the environment. Consequently, externalities may be
partially responsible for patterns of economic growth that are not sustainable.
When the actions of an economic agent (e.g. an individual or firm) affect others
in ways for which no economic mechanism provides compensation, the uncompensated
effect is called an "externality" by economists. For example, pollution released into a
publicly owned resource, such as the atmosphere or a river, may have detrimental effects
on other users of that resource, but these users are generally not compensated for their
losses. Thus, the effects of pollution in such cases are externalities.14 This term is used
because the costs or benefits of the effects are "external" (i.e. "other people's business")
from the perspective of the responsible economic agent.
When other users are not compensated for the detrimental effects of pollution,
the polluter is not bearing the full costs of his or her pollution to society. Thus, the
polluter's incentive not to pollute is insufficient to protect the interests of society at
large. Similarly, a consumer who purchases a product whose production, use, or disposal
is associated with environmental damages usually does not pay for the effects of those
damages to society. Again, without some form of compensation, the incentive to the
individual consumer is inadequate to protect the long-term interests of society.
"World Resources Institute, World Resources 1990-1991 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 88.
12Nafis Sadik, 1990, The State of World Population 1990 (New York: United Nations Population Fund), 2.
"World Resources Institute, 87.
"Externalities may also be positive, that is, beneficial to society. A family's efforts to recycle household
wastes may help to reduce the landfill fees of its community, and if compensation for these efforts is not
provided, the benefits to the community are externalities.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 10
-------
Economic development in a market economy is driven and directed by individuals'
incentives. If these incentives do not lead to individual actions that protect society's
commonly owned environmental resources, its aggregate economic development will
come at the expense of degradation of those resources. In 1968, Garrett Hardin labelled
this dilemma the "tragedy of the commons" and helped bring it to public attention.
The damages caused by externalities can be costly, and thus harmful to both
environmental and economic development. Efforts to clean up and restore degraded
environmental resources are often expensive and sometimes impossible. Prevention of
the injury in the first place is generally a cheaper and more effective alternative to
sweeping up after environmentally unsound growth. To obviate such unsound patterns of
growth and promote pollution prevention, economists suggest that externalities be
"internalized," so that agents causing harm to society's resources pay for that harm. This
might be accomplished through government instituted disincentives (e.g. taxes, user fees,
permit purchase requirements) for activities that injure the environment. The
disincentive should be high enough to reflect the costs to those harmed by environmental
damage (these might include future generations). Making pollution and other harmful
activities more costly, economists argue, would encourage prevention of environmental
degradation and thus direct economic development along more sustainable paths.15
Hicksian Income. In 1948, Sir John Hicks gave the economic analogue to the ecological
concept of sustainable yield:
... we ought to define a man's income as the maximum value which he can
consume during a week, and still expect to be as well off at the end of the week
as he was at the beginning.16
The meaning of Hick's definition of income is most obvious in the case of an
institution funded through a large endowment. While the interest on that endowment
can be considered its income, proceeds from the sales of the endowment are not,
because liquidation of the endowment will reduce future interest payments.
"Again, the question arises: what is a "sustainable" incentive policy? Theoretically, elimination of an
externality would require incentives strong enough to equalize the private costs of an activity (those faced by
the responsible economic agent) with its social costs. If the latter can be accurately determined, this criterion
could be used to set an incentive promoting "sustainable" levels of the activity. Such an approach would be
difficult to implement, however, for several reasons. Scientific uncertainty associated with potentially
irreversible, non-linear effects of some activities, the limited capabilities of economic techniques for valuing
the full range of services provided by ecosystems, as well as the ethical ambiguities inherent in techniques to
aggregate costs to future generations (e.g. discounting) make determinations of "true" social costs a highly
subjective exercise. Administration of a comprehensive system of incentives would not only be costly and
difficult, but it would also reduce market efficiency substantially. While choosing a "desired future" by setting
long-term economic and environmental targets is not as economically elegant an approach as internalizing
externalities, such a strategy may be a more practicable means of directing activities, including the use of
selected incentives, toward sustainable development (see discussion of "Sustainable Development as a Goal"
under Question #1 above).
16J.R. Hicks, 1948, Value and Capital, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon), 172.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 11
-------
Like a financial endowment, environmental resources can provide streams of
income indefinitely into the future. National income that is generated through activities
that damage or destroy this "environmental capital" would therefore not be considered
Hicksian income. This understanding has led to attempts to net out the value of such
damage from national income accounts (e.g. Gross National Product); the result is
"natural resource accounts" or "environmental accounts." The Brundtland definition of
sustainable development ("... meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs"), as well as the definition given by
Jim MacNeill,17 can be understood as the application of the Hicksian income concept
across generations.
• Sustainable Development Projects in the Third World. The urgent need for development to
meet the needs of the world's poor has been a target of projects sponsored by
multilateral development banks, other international organizations, and national agencies
responsible for aid to developing countries. It was in this Third World aid context, in the
late 1970s, that "sustainable development" first gained common usage. It is still used in
this way to describe a project, or development it promotes, that is self-sustaining over the
long term. Determinants of sustainability include the project's ability to pay for itself, its
acceptance within the cultural value system of its host country, and its environmental
soundness. Such use of "sustainable development" marked the beginning of an increased
consideration of the environmental impacts of development projects.
In general, "sustainable development" used in this fashion refers to a smaller-scale
and more localized phenomenon than the global ideal now usually associated with the
term. Nonetheless, the project-specific usage can be entirely consistent with the broader
vision of sustainable development."
D Religion and Ethics. Sustainable development cannot be defined or described solely in
environmental or economic terms. It is also an ideal that encompasses ethical concerns
for future generations, the poor of the present day, and other species and nature in
general.
• Stewardship Responsibilities to Future Generations. This ethical concept, which is clearly
an element of the Brundtland definition of sustainable development,19 was popularized,
legitimized, and related to preservation of natural resources by the Progressive
Conservation movement in the United States in the early 1900s. Championed by
Theodore Roosevelt and his outspoken advisor and chief of the Bureau of Forestry (later
the Forest Service), Gifford Pinchot, this movement was avowedly pro-development,
utilitarian, and democratic in spirit. Its unofficial motto reflected these values: The
greatest good for the greatest number for the longest time." Roosevelt elaborated on his
belief in the Nation's responsibilities to the future:
17See Question #1 above.
I8See "Strategic Decision Making with Economic and Environmental Benefits" under Question #4 below.
"See Question #1 above.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA -12
-------
The "greatest good for the greatest number" applies to the number within the
womb of time, compared to which those now alive form but an insignificant
fraction. Our duty to the whole, including the unborn generations, bids us to
restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of those
unborn generations.20
Environmental stewardship responsibilities are now recognized as United States
National policy in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1970.
... it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal government to use all
practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of national
policy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and
resources to the end that the Nation may-
(1) fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment
for succeeding generations; . .. [§101].
Religious Values, Preservation, and the Rights of Nature. The sacredness of the natural
world is a theme in many religions. Though such sanctity does not usually preclude
exploitation of natural resources, it generally engenders a degree of respect that extends
beyond utilitarian values. Aboriginal religions, such as those of some American Indians,
are particularly renowned for their conception of land and nature as sacred, though
popular notions of the spiritual relationships of these peoples to their environment are
often distorted.
While those who emphasize responsibilities to future generations generally
advocate conservation of natural resources to allow their use in the future, others focus
on the preservation of wilderness, not for future exploitation, but for religious reasons or
for "its own sake." Historically, the preservation ethic has largely been rooted in
religious conceptions of nature. Particularly influential in the history of American
environmentalism were the Transcendentalism, such as Henry David Thoreau and John
Muir, who believed that nature reflected its Creator's spiritual laws and saw the
wilderness as a source of faith. It is noteworthy that neither of these men were
opponents of development; Thoreau sought not a reversion to a "natural state" but a
balance between culture and wilderness. More recently, the preservation ethic has been
advanced to protect the "rights" of nature and other species. Advocates of preservation
generally tend to emphasize the importance of sustainable development as a means of
protecting environmental resources, rather than as an economic and environmental goal.
The Convergence. The convergence of the concepts listed above into a reasonably
coherent vision and the labelling of that vision "sustainable development" are relatively
recent phenomena. Three developments have been particular influential in accelerating
the process.
'"Theodore Roosevelt, 1916, "Bird Reserves at the Mouth of the Mississippi," in A Book-Lover's Holidays
in the Open (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons).
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 13
-------
Application of Ecological and Physical Concepts to Economics. In 1966, Kenneth Boulding
contrasted the "cowboy economy" of today with the "spaceman economy" of the future.
The former is based on the notion of unlimited resources; the latter on a closed system,
like a spaceship, without unlimited reserves of anything. In the spaceman economy,
Boulding writes,
... man must find his place in a cyclical ecological system which is capable of
continuous reproduction of material form even though it cannot escape having
inputs of energy.21
Boulding's application of ecological concepts to economics included reference to
the role of the Second Law of Thermodynamics (the entropy law) in the economic
process. The implications of the Second Law for the economy and the human species in
general were more fully explored by Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen in 1971. He writes:
. . . there is the general practice of representing the material side of the economic
process by a closed system, that is, by a mathematical model in which the
continuous inflow of low entropy from the environment is completely ignored. .. .
no other conception could be farther from a correct interpretation of the facts. . .
this process is not circular, but unidirectional21 *
With a macroeconomic system represented as circular and closed, concerns about
carrying capacity or the finiteness of the planet and its resources are exogenous to
economics. Exchange value flows around and around: analytically, nothing essential is
used up. With a economic system represented as the unidirectional (and irreversible)
transformation of low entropy to high, these concerns become paramount because
something is used up. Herman Daly expands on Georgescu-Roegen's arguments to
propose an "optimal scale," a concept similar to carrying capacity:
When growth pushes scale beyond the optimum we begin to experience
generalized pervasive externalities, such as the greenhouse effect, ozone layer
"Kenneth E. Boulding, 1968, Beyond Economics (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan), 281.
Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, 1971, The Entropy Law and the Economic Process (Cambridge: Harvard
University), 281.
"dosed system" Georgescu-Roegen criticizes here is not the "closed system" of Boulding's
"spaceman economy." Georgescu-Roegen refers to the macroeconomic model often characterized as a
"circular flow" of exchange value between production and consumption. This closed economic loop implies,
according to Georgescu-Roegen and others, no analytical linkages between the economy and a finite
environment. Boulding, on the other hand, refers not to a model of the economic system independent of the
environment but to a model of the environment of which the economy is a part. He argues that the system
constituted by the earth's biosphere and human economies-however the latter may be modelled-is dosed
except for solar energy inputs (and presumably, some radiative energy outputs).
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 14
-------
depletion, and acid rain . . .*
Concepts like optimal scale do not enjoy widespread use among economists.
Nonetheless, their existence in the economics literature represents progress towards a
key precondition for sustainable development: popular recognition of the fundamental
linkages between the economy and the environment.
The 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (held in Stockholm).
The Stockholm Conference represented a watershed in international efforts to protect
the global environment. By publicizing a broad perspective on "environment" that
included issues important to developing countries, it prompted the initial participation of
many of these countries in international environmental protection efforts. The
Conference "Declaration on the Human Environment" stated, for example: "In the
developing countries most of the environmental problems are caused by under-
development. . ." This identification of the linkages between economic depravation and
environmental degradation was an important conceptual contribution to later efforts of
U.N. and other international organizations to link environment and development issues.
In this way, the Stockholm Conference was a key precursor for the Brundtland
Commission's work to establish consensus between the industrialized and developing
countries on the necessity of achieving sustainable development.
The Conference also established the United Nations Environment Programme
and thus helped to institutionalize consideration of environmental issues in the
international arena.
The Report of the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development:
Our Common Future (a.k.a. the Brundtland Report). This report, released in 1987 after
three years of efforts that included public hearings on five continents, has probably done
more to publicize sustainable development than any other document. With an expansive
scope that covers topics from population and global food needs to biodiversity and
international trade, the Report provides a vast array of recommended national and
international actions designed to meet the economic and environmental needs of both
the present and future generations. The Commission's "Overview" of the Report states:
Our report, Our Common Future, is not a prediction of ever increasing
environmental decay, poverty, and hardship in an ever more polluted world
among ever decreasing resources. We see instead the possibility for a new era of
economic growth, one that must be based on policies that sustain and expand the
environmental resource base. And we believe such growth to be absolutely
essential to relieve the poverty that is deepening in much of the developing world.
But the Commission's hope for the future is conditional on decisive political
action now to begin managing environmental resources to ensure both sustainable
human progress and human survival. We are not forecasting a future; we are
''Daly, 9-10.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 15
-------
serving a notice—an urgent notice based on the latest and best scientific evidence--
that the time has come to make the decisions needed to secure the resources to
sustain this and coming generations. We do not offer a detailed blueprint for
action, but instead a pathway by which the peoples of the world may enlarge their
spheres of co-operation.25
The major themes of the Brundtland Report include many of those discussed
above: the linkages between economics and environment, the complex interrelationships
within ecological systems, the international scale of modern environmental problems, and
our ethical responsibilities to the future. In addition, the Report places much emphasis
on the imperative of meeting the needs of the today's poor, for both ethical and
environmental reasons:
. . . poverty itself pollutes the environment, creating environmental stress in a
different way. Those who are poor and hungry will often destroy their immediate
environment in order to survive: they will cut down forests; their livestock will
overgraze grasslands; they will overuse marginal land; and in growing numbers
they will crowd into congested cities. The cumulative effect of these changes is so
far-reaching as to make poverty itself a major global scourge.26
The WCED calls for very high economic growth rates27 to alleviate this "scourge" in
developing countries. Our Common Future also underlines the key roles that social,
cultural, and political factors will play in any progress towards sustainable development.
The Brundtland Report has prompted international conferences, official national
responses, a variety of non-government organization activities, publications, and even the
creation of a "Centre for Our Common Future" in Geneva to monitor and publicize
worldwide progress towards sustainable development.
D Conclusions. The rich and diverse collection of concepts, disciplines, and thinkers from
which the sustainable development ideal has evolved serves, paradoxically, both to endow
the term with far-reaching meaning and to confound efforts to define it precisely.
"Sustainable development" is itself highly self-explanatory, yet different individuals will draw
on their knowledge of different aspects of the conceptual origins of the term to arrive at
different interpretations of its meaning. Ecologists may see it as a simple extension of the
carrying capacity concept to global human populations, economists may envision it as the
fruits of an economy in which deleterious environmental externalities have been largely
2SWorld Commission on Environment and Development, 1-2.
36World Commission on Environment and Development, 28.
^Growth goals of 5% per annum for developing countries in Asia, 5.5% for Latin America, and 6% for
Africa and West Asia are suggested (World Commission on Environment and Development, 50). The
WCED's growth-oriented brand of sustainable development is in marked contrast with some other views,
such as those of many who advocate a form of sustainable development that would put maximum emphasis
on the preservation of nature for ethical reasons.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 16
-------
eliminated, while others may view sustainable development as a simple moral
responsibility to the future. Its meaning is probably best described, however, as a
synthesis of all these and the other concepts that have contributed to the evolution of the
sustainable development ideal.
3) How does sustainable development relate to current EPA priorities for
pollution prevention and risk reduction?
D Pollution Prevention and Sustainable Development. Pollution prevention, as it is
currently viewed within EPA, is a management strategy that aims to reduce or eliminate
the generation of pollution as an alternative to controlling transport and disposal of
pollution once it has been created. Since pollution is often the consequence of waste of
natural resources, pollution prevention can increase economic efficiency (by reducing
waste) as it simultaneously reduces disturbances on natural systems. Moreover, pollution
prevention represents a long-term solution to environmental problems, since pollution
that is not created will not be spilled or transported across media in the future. Thus,
once a particular goal is identified as an Agency priority, its achievement can be pursued
with a pollution prevention strategy that is both cost effective and protective of the
environment of future generations.
Not surprisingly, much overlap exists between pollution prevention and sustainable
development. Many of the programs that are called for under the sustainable
development rubric are similar to projects ongoing or under development as part of
EPA's pollution prevention activities. These include:
• research on the use of incentives policies,
• study of the application of sustainable agricultural practices,
• development of an environmental labelling program for consumer products,
• establishment of a Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse to facilitate
transfer of information about cost effective prevention technologies, and
• implementation of guidelines on recycling and recycled materials procurement by
the Federal government.
Similar work in countries such as Canada, Norway, and the Netherlands is done as part
of these countries' sustainable development programs. Thus, EPA has already begun to
incorporate sustainable development concepts in its programs; much of the progress so
far has simply been labelled "Pollution Prevention."
Sustainable development and pollution prevention are not synonymous, however.
Sustainable development can be understood as a visionary, long-term social goal or a set
of objectives that represent such a goal. Pollution prevention, on the other hand, is less
an independent goal or vision than a cost-effective implementation strategy. Thus~in the
terminology used under Question #l~pollution prevention is a process rather than a goal
(sustainable development can be both). Pollution prevention may be used to build on or
reinforce conventional environmental protection efforts, or it may be used to attain
II - Some Key Questions for EPA • 17
-------
ambitious new sustainable development objectives, but in either case, the ultimate
objective is not pollution prevention itself. As it is applied by the Pollution Prevention
Office, which is currently sponsoring and proposing several projects that will promote
sustainable development, pollution prevention can be characterized as a strategy well-
suited to the achievement of sustainable development goals.
Risk Reduction and Sustainable Development. Risk reduction is a versatile paradigm
with a range of applications, and like sustainable development, it can be both a process
and a goal. Risk reduction may refer to a process in which risk is used as a metric to set
standards in specific regulatory contexts. Risk reduction may also be the goal (e.g.
reduction of risks to human health) that serves as the basis for broad comparisons of
alternative strategies and programs as they support that goal. In general, the use of the
risk reduction paradigm presupposes the existence of a goal. For the purposes of most
EPA decision-making, this goal is the reduction of the risk of toxic or carcinogenic
effects on humans, though other goals, such as reduction of risk to ecological systems,
are receiving increasing emphasis within the Agency.
' Goals. Sustainable development, like risk reduction, derives much of its meaning from
the goals on which it is predicated. Risk reduction is inoperative as a process unless the
questions "reduce risk of what, and to whom?" can be answered; verification that a
particular form of development is sustainable ultimately depends on our ability to answer
the questions "what is to be sustained, and at what level?" An answer to the former
questions came from outside the Agency, in the form of legislation and the mandate to
protect human health and the environment; thus, the Agency works to reduce the risks of
adverse impacts on human health and organisms in the environment. The answer to the
latter questions must also be found in public fora: sustainable development goals
(including the answers to "what is to be sustained, and at what level?") represent
political, economic, and ethical issues, not just technical or definitional ones.
While sustainable development and risk reduction both imply goals, two key
elements distinguish the two paradigms.
• Existence of a Metric. First, risk reduction has a metric: risk. Though Agency programs
seek to reduce various types of (not necessarily comparable) risk, priorities and progress
within programs can be assessed and trends can be monitored using the risk metric. No
such standard of measurement exists for sustainable development. What is "fifty percent
sustainable?" Are we becoming "less sustainable?" At this point the answers can be no
more analytical than our common sense; sustainable development is too broad a concept
to reduce to a single measure.
» Goal Dynamics. A second difference between risk reduction and sustainable
development is the dynamics of the goals on which each is based. Though risk
assessments may be responsive to dynamic variables, the risk reduction goal itself can be
static (e.g. reduce lifetime cancer risk due to exposure to a particular chemical to 10"6).
Moreover, risk reduction responds to risks as they are currently perceived: unanticipated
risks cannot be assessed, and though reduction of unanticipated risks may be possible (by
reducing pollution loadings on natural systems that are not fully understood, for
II - Some Key Questions for EPA • 18
-------
example), this type of goal is generally not identified. Sustainable development,
however, is inherently a dynamic goal-a moving target. "Achievement of sustainable
development" has little intrinsic meaning since "development" is itself dynamic; instead
we might speak of "progress" toward sustainable development as measured against
politically determined, long-term goals that serve as the interim metric for (and interim
operational definition of) sustainability. These goals would have to reflect society's long-
term ethical priorities as well as a collective social response to uncertainty and the
possibility of unanticipated risks.28 They will also necessarily be interim in nature due to
the dynamic nature of sustainable development, since development that now appears
sustainable may be found to be otherwise-and vice versa-a generation from now (i.e.
our target may move). Once interim goals are established, however, they serve to fix the
moving sustainable development target temporarily. At that point, the risk paradigm
could be applied to reduce the risk of failure to attain those goals through the
implementation, for example, of pollution prevention tools.
4) What is the value-added of sustainable development concepts and principles
(e.g. those listed under Question #1 above)? What would they add to
environmental protection efforts currently in place?
D Linking Environmental Protection and Natural Resource Management. Conventional
environmental protection efforts focus on regulating, limiting, or controlling use of the
environment as a sink for society's wastes, whether they are emitted, dumped, leaked,
spilled, or otherwise released into natural systems. Yet the environment's function as a
sink is only half of its usefulness to us; it also serves as the ultimate source of our
sustenance by providing food, minerals, energy, and life-support systems. Of course, the
source and sink functions of the environment are interdependent: releases and emissions
may have profound effects on the environment's capacity to provide food and life-support
functions, and patterns of natural resource and agricultural harvesting (e.g. mining
techniques, pesticide use) have significant impacts on the use of the environment as a
sink
Maintaining both the source and sink functions of the environment will clearly be
key to achieving sustainable development. Hence, sustainable development concepts,
principles, and goals tend to underscore the importance of both the source and sink
functions of the environment, as well as their interdependence. These concepts,
principles, and goals can then serve as a useful framework for expanding our
conventional environmental protection efforts to include more emphasis on uses of the
environment as a source. Work is already underway to develop more productive
relationships between EPA and several agencies with resource management
responsibilities (e.g. Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture, Department of
Energy). A focus on sustainable development could add to these efforts by prescribing
more systematic integration of natural resource and environmental (source and sink)
MFor some possible guidance on role of uncertainty in sustainable development policy design, see
Principles (2), (4) and (8) under Question #1.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 19
-------
issues at all levels of government. This would help to ensure that the relationships
between these issues are not neglected merely because they fall between the traditional
mandates of resource management and environment protection agencies. It will also
reiterate the message that resource management agencies must operate to protect the
environment and guarantee the sustainability of the resources they manage.
D Strategic Decision Making with Economic AND Environmental Benefits. Application of
the principles listed above (under Question #1) in strategic decision-making could, in the
long run, benefit both the economy and the environment. Since most strategic
government decisions are made primarily to achieve the goal of furthering economic
growth, environmental considerations enter the decision-making process as constraints,
rather than as explicitly identified goals. Environmental policy thus becomes negative or
reactive, responding to pressures created by poorly directed growth. The result is often
either an expensive environmental cleanup bill or a highly politicized battle between
"economy" and "environment" that is settled with a compromise that is costly and
unsatisfactory to both sides.
By setting long-term positive environmental goals to be achieved alongside
economic goals, policy makers are better able to develop strategies that can achieve both
objectives. Such a process can give practical value to the application of sustainable
development concepts to decision making at the program or project level. Consider, for
example, a regional Water Authority that identifies both the need to meet the water
demands of an expanding economy and the need to preserve regional riparian and
lacustrine ecosystems. A long-term water conservation strategy might be formulated to
achieve both goals. In contrast, consideration of only the economic goal (meeting water
demand) may ignore opportunities for conservation, but when demand increases prompt
the Water Authority to propose a new dam or drainage of a lake, environmental
agencies, NGOs, and the public are likely to react. The consequences may be costly
court battles, delays that impede development, and either the destruction of important
environmental resources or the scrapping of expensive construction planning efforts.
Neither outcome promotes sustainable development.
Multiple objective planning for both environment and development can help
prevent the divisive and costly battles that unnecessarily pit "environmental" and
"development" interests against one another. Again, the key step in making such
planning operational will be the establishment of parallel economic and environmental
goals. Once this is done, appropriate strategies may be developed, indicators of progress
can be identified, and monitoring programs can be established to track progress and
determine needed mid-course corrections.
By advocating strategic planning for economic and environmental goals, EPA can
also demonstrate its own commitment to furthering the long-term economic prosperity of
the country, even as it continues to safeguard national environmental resources.
D Applications in Day-to-Day Decision Making. In addition to their usefulness in strategic
decision-making, the concepts and principles discussed under Question #1 above could
also be applied to more day-to-day management issues within specific programs, at both
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 20
-------
EPA and other agencies. At this level, the critical question is: "does the proposed
policy, regulation, or decision promote or hinder progress towards a set of socio-
economic transitions necessary to achieve sustainable development (such as those
outlined by Speth)?" For example, does the proposed action promote
- a technological transition away from today's resource-intensive, pollution-prone
technologies to a new generation of environmentally benign ones?
- an economic transition to a world economy based on reliance on nature's
"income" and not depletion of its "capital" (i.e. reliance on renewable usages of
environmental resources rather than on drawdown of environmental assets at
nonsustainable rates)?
Programs and actions can also be evaluated against more administrative, program-
specific criteria based on the ten principles listed under Question #1. For example,
- is the proposed action directed toward the achievement of long-term, parallel
economic and environmental goals? [Principle 2]
- does the proposed action adequately take into account population growth and
demographic shifts in estimating long-term benefits and costs? [Principle 5]
O A Fundamental Ethic and a New Perspective on Environment and Economy. The
principles and concepts associated with sustainable development have value not only in
policy, planning, and programmatic applications, but also as the underpinnings of more
theoretical and ethical understandings of the long-term interests of our society. As an
intuitively cogent ideal, sustainable development can serve as the basis of a new, more
integrated understanding of the importance of the environment in the long-term well-
being of the Nation and the international community. Sustainable development may thus
become an organizing principle, not only for our environmental protection efforts, but
for guidance on all types of decision-making with potentially long-term effects. In short,
sustainable development can serve as the focus of society's vision of what it ultimately
must achieve, while "sustainability" might become the heart of a new ethic based on that
vision.
5) Is sustainable development primarily an international issue, and if so, might
efforts to develop a nationally focussed sustainable development program be
misplaced?
Clearly there is a strong international component to the concept of sustainable
development. Many of the efforts to promote sustainable development continue to focus
on its meaning in the Third World context. The causes and effects of rapid population
growth, rampant poverty, and environmental degradation are closely linked in many
developing countries. Rapid economic development is called for to combat these
problems simultaneously, yet that development must be environmentally sound if it is to
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 21
-------
be maintained over the long term. Achievement of sustainable development in the
developing countries will require major adjustments in policies and institutions that affect
international trade, foreign assistance, and the transfer of economically and
environmentally appropriate technologies. It will also require substantial strengthening
of the environmental management and protection capabilities of these countries.
Ultimately, however, many sustainable development priorities are shared by all
countries, developing and developed, and are global in nature. We have already
identified several impacts of human activities on the environment that are threatening
global life-support systems and cannot be isolated nationally or even regionally; these
include stratospheric ozone depletion, global warming, pollution of the oceans, and
reductions in biodiversity. Effective mitigation of these problems requires internationally
coordinated responses and cooperative research and technical work.
While global problems require global solutions, national and local action will still
be required to combat their causes, even when international agreements are in place.
The adoption of implementation plans at the national, state, and local levels of
government as well as within private industry will be necessary to ensure domestic
compliance with international agreements. Indeed, EPA and other Federal agencies
already manage a number of programs to implement US compliance with international
conventions and protocols.
Yet efforts to comply with international agreements do not represent the only
opportunity for improvement in US impacts on global sustainability. Several current
patterns of economic development and resource use in the United States suggest the
need for domestic efforts to adopt a longer-term emphasis consistent with sustainable
development:
• The United States, with 4.8% of world population, is responsible for
approximately 24% of the global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels® and
approximately 25% of global atmospheric loadings of chlorofluorocarbons.30
• U.S. energy efficiency (output per unit energy consumed) is less than half that of
Japan, West Germany, and many other Western European countries, a situation
that has detrimental effects on both the domestic and global environment and on
U.S. competitiveness abroad.31
• In the United States, pesticide use has increased approximately 33-fold since 1945.
Yet the percentage of crops lost to pests has actually risen from 31% in the 1940s
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Energy and Industry Sub Group Report (31 May 1990), 2-31.
'"World Resources Institute, 348-349.
3lIbitL, 316-317.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 22
-------
to 37% in 1986;32 meanwhile pesticide poisonings now result in about 3000
hospitalizations annually,53 and, according to Unfinished Business: A Comparative
Assessment of Environmental Problems, pesticide residues in food cause an
estimated 6,000 cancer cases each year and are also ranked "high" as a non-cancer
risk.34
• While each U.S. citizen produces approximately 2-3 times as much solid waste as
his or her counterparts in other industrialized countries, the U.S. lags far behind
such countries as Japan and West Germany in solid waste management: in Japan,
73% of the solid waste is reused, recycled, or converted to useful energy; in West
Germany, 45%; in the U.S., only 17%.*
In view of these and other areas of opportunity for improvements in domestic
U.S. impacts on both global and local environmental resources, a proactive stance at the
national level could provide a significant contribution to national and international
progress towards sustainable development. In fact, the national level may be the most
appropriate place to initiate a goal-setting process to support such a proactive stance.
Such goals could be set through political mechanisms to establish a national
understanding of what is needed to ensure progress towards sustainable development.
Once some consensus is achieved on this issue,36 managers could begin to redirect
domestic programs to meet both economic and environmental priorities, while diplomats
could negotiate international agreements consistent with these priorities.
6) What are the roles that EPA could play in a National effort to promote
sustainable development, given the fact that sustainable development is
largely a resource management and population issue that falls outside the
Agency's purview?
EPA could have several significant roles in any undertaking to promote
sustainable development as a long-term national priority.
D Administration of its Primary Legislative Mandates. The Agency could work to ensure
"David Pimentel, Lori McLaughlin, Andrew Zepp, et al., "Environmental and Economic Impacts of
Reducing U.S. Agricultural Pesticide Use," unpublished paper (October, 1989), 3-4 and Table #2.
^Global Tomorrow Coalition, 1990, Global Ecology Handbook, ed. Walter H. Corson (Boston: Beacon
Press), 80.
''U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1987. Unfinished Business: A Comparative Assessment of
Environmental Problems; Volume I: Overview. (Washington, D.C.: EPA), 84.
^Global Tomorrow Coalition, p. 270.
through, for example, regional communication and dialogue processes (see Project (b) under Question
#8 below) or legislative action.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 23
-------
that its own primary legislative mandates are administered, to the extent legally possible,
in a manner that is consistent with and enhances progress towards sustainable
development. These efforts could also serve as a model for similar work by other
Federal and state agencies.
D Serving as a Catalyst for Change. A second Agency role could be that of a catalyst
promoting activities consistent with sustainable development in both the public and
private sectors. EPA could work to encourage other government agencies at the local,
state, Federal, and even international levels to adopt management practices, strategic
planning targets, and program development procedures that further progress towards
sustainable development. In general, sustainable development goals are too broad-based
to be handled exclusively by the agencies traditionally responsible for land and resource
management. Other agencies must take part; some potential contributions that EPA
could encourage include:
• Department of Transportation-development of a national transportation strategy
designed to meet both the long-term transport needs of the country and
environmental goals;
• Department of Commerce-revision of national income accounts to incorporate
the economic function of environmental capital assets (e.g. resource stocks,
ecosystems providing streams of services over time, etc.);
• Department of Defense (or NSA)--analysis of the implications for U.S. national
security of various global environmental contingencies;
• Departments of the Treasury, Commerce, and Labor-analysis of the beneficial
and adverse consequences, for both the economy and the environment, of a shift
in the tax base from labor and capital to natural resource use hi order to provide
incentives for employment, investment, and conservation.
Similarly, the Agency could foster private activities consistent with sustainable
development through educational efforts and the introduction of incentives (see
Principles (6) and (10) under Question #1). Efforts in support of this catalytic role
might include communication and elucidation of sustainable development concepts and
principles, as well as collection and dissemination of information about progress toward
sustainable development.
o Establishing Environmental Goals. EPA would have an important role to play in the
establishment of (at least) the environmental component of national sustainable
development goals. The Agency is endowed with a unique collection of environment-
related resources, including data bases, human technical and legal expertise, and
institutional structures. These put it in a unique position to contribute to the
development of appropriate long-term environmental goals that represent not only the
long-term environmental priorities of the US, but also its economic needs. Thus, an
EPA role in a national sustainable development goal-setting process may be warranted
even if the Agency is not charged with the responsibility for implementing sustainable
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 24
-------
development programs.
a Oversight of Federal Sustainable Development Activities. A fourth role for EPA could
be the task of overseeing Federal sustainable development activities to ensure, for
example, that environmental goals are pursued concurrently with economic objectives.
Such a responsibility would be consistent with EPA's current oversight authorities (e.g.
under NEPA), with possible enhanced authority if the Agency is elevated to Cabinet
status, and with its general mission as the environmental "conscience" of the Federal
government. In fulfillment of this role, EPA might also be required to provide technical
assistance to agencies administering programs that will significantly affect progress
towards sustainable development goals.
7) Would EPA compromise its effectiveness as an advocate of the environment
by adopting sustainable development policies that include economic
development as an objective?
Historically, most environmental protection efforts have used command-and-
control approaches to contain, treat, or clean up existing pollution; the focus has been on
correcting past mistakes. Progress has been substantial, particularly over the last twenty
years, but it has often come at high cost, leading some to identify an apparent conflict
between economic growth and environmental quality. Hence, some environmentalists
may not be comfortable with efforts to adopt sustainable development goals that
integrate economic and environmental priorities, fearing that consideration of economic
needs will compromise advocacy of environmental quality. Apprehensions of this sort
are understandable, but largely unfounded, for several reasons.
First, a sustainable development program would build on rather than compromise
the progress EPA has made as an advocate of environmental quality. Environmental
protection provided by the existing framework of regulatory and compliance programs
would become the baseline against which future gains from any sustainable development
activities will be measured.
Second, in the long run, preservation of ecological resources is probably not best
served by the reactive stance that environmental protection programs now take in
managing problems once they become deleterious enough to warrant political attention.
This is particularly true when impacts of environmental stresses may not be discernible
for many years or decades, during which time stressors may be allowed to continue until
cumulative impacts become irreversible. In such cases, "correcting past mistakes" will not
be enough. Positive, proactive positioning, which might include statements of carefully
conceived goals, will be increasingly needed to achieve long-term protection of life-
support systems in the presence of growing anthropogenic stresses. The establishment of
environmental goals would not, however, be meaningful unless these goals are
considered in the context of more general national objectives, including desired patterns
of development. One of the key principles of sustainable development is the need for
parity and linkages between environmental and economic goals. Identification of only
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 25
-------
environmental targets may achieve near-term Agency objectives, but it will not promote
the understanding that environmental goals must be considered alongside economic
goals, rather than as a mere constraint on economic growth.
Third, there is growing recognition that the causes of the future environmental
problems of greatest concern will fall increasingly outside both the realm of command
and control protection strategies and the traditional EPA mandate itself. Examples
include problems (both economic and environmental) associated with agricultural
practices, transportation and energy infrastructures, and accelerating urban growth.
Addressing the new breed of environmental priorities will require much additional
cooperation from private interests (businesses and households) and from other
government agencies. These will clearly include players whose missions and objectives
emphasize economic returns and growth. An adversarial approach, by which the EPA
might attempt to force these players to consider environmental issues without recognizing
economic priorities, would be very difficult to advance and would probably not be
conducive to the establishment of links between economic and environment decision-
making. A focus on sustainable development goals may establish the context in which all
parties can address these problems in a constructive, "win-win" manner.
(8) What are some possible projects that would promote sustainable
development or the concepts behind it?37
(a) Awareness Raising: issue an EPA Order or policy directive on sustainable
development. The Order would set forth some general principles, objectives, and
guidelines for increasing Agency emphasis on sustainable development, and
propose a timetable for subsequent actions.
(b) Awareness Raising: establish communication and dialogue processes focused on
sustainable development and involving participation from a broad cross-section of
interests including government, public interest groups, industry, and academia.
These groups would explore the implications of sustainable development concepts
and make recommendations to the Administrator on appropriate national goals
and initiatives.38
(c) Awareness Raising: sponsor an internal distribution of background materials on
sustainable development, as well as training sessions and/or workshops on the
topic, to broaden understanding of sustainable development principles and
concepts and to stimulate discussion and creative thinking on its implications for
the Agency and the nation.
a complete list, see "Sustainable Development and EPA: A Proposed Action Agenda." The
descriptions of possible projects given here are abridged from that document.
3*This process could resemble the approach the Canadians have undertaken in establishing National and
Provincial Round Tables.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 26
-------
(d) Internal Goal Setting and Planning: incorporate, in guidance to EPA programs for
the second round of strategic planning, requirements for selected analyses and
targets that focus on sustainable development.
(e) Interagency Goal Setting and Planning: promulgate an Executive Order on
sustainable development, to be complementary to the proposed Pollution
Prevention Executive Order. The Executive Order on sustainable development
would require Federal agencies to evaluate the contributions of their programs to
progress towards sustainable development.
(f) Interagency Goal Setting and Planning: work with the Department of Energy to
incorporate, in the final National Energy Strategy, a commitment to develop a set
of sustainable development goals for the energy sector within 3-5 years.
(g) Interagency Goal Setting and Planning: enhance cooperation with USDA in the
promotion of sustainable agriculture. A forum for senior USDA and EPA
officials could be organized to reach agreement on the development of integrated
economic and environmental goals for the agricultural sector. Analyses of
projections for that sector, and the environmental implications of projected trends,
would be conducted in preparation for the forum and follow-up processes.
(h) National Goal Setting and Planning: analyze the potential for a national
sustainable development goals-setting process. This would include reviews of past
goal-setting efforts; discussions between the Administrator and government,
industry, and public interest group leaders to explore the feasibility of a goals-
setting effort; and development of options for a goals-setting process.
(i) Forecasting and Reporting: develop a series of projects to demonstrate the
applicability of forecasting to EPA program management and decision-making.
One component of these projects could assess the relevance of forecasting
information to integrated planning and goal setting for sustainable development.
(j) Geographic Area Sustainable Development Analyses: Conduct an assessment of
current and proposed programs for environmental management in one or more
discrete geographic areas (e.g. the Chesapeake Bay or Puget Sound regions) for
consistency with sustainable development concepts and principles. The
assessment would use forecasts of economic development, population growth, and
environmental quality to identify key regional sustainable development issues.
Current and planned management programs would be evaluated for their ability
to address these issues.
(k) Environment - Economy Linkages: conduct a pilot study to develop a set of
environmental and natural resource accounts for the Chesapeake Bay basin. This
pilot will identify procedural and data availability issues. Results will serve as a
guide for other potential regional assessments and provide input to the
development of national environmental accounts [currently underway].
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 27
-------
(1) Environment - Economy Linkages: develop, in cooperation with the Bureau of
Economic Analysis at the Department of Commerce, a model framework for the
incorporation of satellite natural resource accounts in national income accounts.
(m) International Activities: promote a stronger environmental and sustainable
development emphasis in the programs of the multilateral development banks.
Work focuses on strengthening programs to reduce CFC releases, preserve
wetlands, improve environmental impact assessment capabilities, enhance input
from NGOs, and establish a Green Fund [currently underway].
(n) International Activities: strengthen environmental management and program
development capabilities in developing countries through technical assistance and
training [currently underway].
(o) International Activities: promote U.S. policy positions that support sustainable
development in multilateral fora, including the 1992 World Conference on
Environment and Development in Brazil [currently underway].
(9) What does a sustainable development focus imply for EPA programs?
Does an increased emphasis on sustainable development mean reduced
emphasis on regulatory and compliance programs?
Though it has no coordinated sustainable development strategy or program in
place, EPA is already administering a wide range of programs and projects that directly
address sustainable development concepts and principles, and others are now in planning
stages. Examples include projects planned or underway as part of the Agency's Pollution
Prevention program, initiatives promoting sustainable agriculture in cooperation with
USDA, ongoing examination of the usefulness of economic incentives in promoting cost
effective environmental protection, and work to implement a "No Net Loss" policy for
wetlands. Although such activities generally have not been initiated primarily to promote
"sustainable development," they do serve as evidence of a growing EPA commitment to
move in new directions often associated with that term.
The development of a coordinated EPA program or strategy to promote
sustainable development would nonetheless add much value to these efforts already
underway. A coherent strategy would reinforce the proactive approach that is essential
to addressing sustainable development issues. A goals-oriented strategy would provide a
means of evaluating current programs, including projects such as those listed above, for
their qualitative consistency with sustainable development concepts and principles and
their quantitative adequacy for achievement of strategic objectives. The framework
provided by such a strategy could be used to identify gaps in current programs and reveal
opportunities for new projects. Coordination would also enhance compatibility amongst
programs and eliminate unnecessary duplicate efforts. Finally, a sustainable
development strategy with clearly stated objectives would give policy makers and the
public distinct indicators of progress to guide future adjustments in programs or policies.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 28
-------
Meanwhile, though an EPA sustainable development strategy or program could
include a range of new projects and programs (see Question #8 above for a listing of
some possible initial projects), the success of such a program will depend on the
continued strength of current regulatory and compliance programs. Any progress toward
sustainable development will begin at the environmental protection baseline established
by these programs. Regulatory and compliance programs can also contribute important
institutional expertise to an environmental goal-setting process that could be an integral
part of a sustainable development focus. If economic and environmental goals are
established and sustainable development strategies emerge, these programs will be
needed to ensure that intermediate objectives are met. Over time, as institutions gain
experience in setting and working towards sustainable development goals, regulatory and
compliance programs could be evaluated against strategic sustainable development
objectives (or against general principles such as those identified in Question #1 above)
to identify opportunities for strengthening their focus, direction, and effectiveness.
10) Summary: what are the most important lessons found in the sustainable
development literature?
Though many definitions of sustainable development have been proposed, the
definitions generally emphasize two key concepts:
(a) environmental and economic needs are ultimately linked, so that environment must
be considered a fundamental component of, rather than a constraint to, economic
activity, and
(b) activities and decisions affecting the economy and the environment should reflect the
long-term and intergenerational needs of society.
Beyond these basic concepts, the definitions often differ. Each will necessarily
imply that something must be "sustained" and thus will call implicitly for achievement of
certain goals ("sustain X quantity of Y"). Determination of these goals-whether the
focus should be on economic expansion, preservation of healthy ecological systems,
maintenance of natural resource stocks, or combinations of these and other long-term
needs-is not a task that can be left to writers of definitions of "sustainable development"
at EPA or other Federal agencies. Such goals will reflect ethical concerns about the
future, as well as judgments about appropriate means of handling uncertainty, and thus
should probably be set through political channels with broad-based public input.
The political process needed to establish a national sustainable development
agenda would certainly be complex. Nonetheless, our ability to meet the long term
challenges facing our country, and especially those associated with ecological processes
characterized by long time lags, will be greatly enhanced by the adoption of proactive
strategies directed by such goals.
II - Some Key Questions for EPA - 29
-------
Ultimately, "sustainable development" may derive its meaning from the economic,
social, and environmental goals on which it is based. We may only know, for example,
that a particular pattern of development is "sustainable" if we know precisely what we
must sustain-the latter determines a goal. Yet even without clearly defined goals of this
nature, the general concepts behind sustainable development can serve to indicate some
important opportunities for improvements in both the strategic and day-to-day decision
making at the EPA.
- Some Key Questions for EPA - 30
-------
SECTION m
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FROM SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
INTERVIEWS AND DISCUSSIONS
Sustainable development is, in a formal sense, a new concept and one that is not
yet explicitly integrated into EPA's programs and policies. There are wide variations in
the level of awareness and understanding of the concept, both within EPA and in U.S.
society as a whole. A basic objective of this project was to develop, through discussions
with a broad cross-section of EPA managers and staff, a better sense of the thinking
within the Agency on this topic. Focus of the discussions ranged from definitions and
philosophy to the implications of the concept for EPA and specific suggestions for
projects, policies, and actions. The results of these discussions, which are summarized in
following sections, provided essential input to the development and refinement of the
concepts, principles, and options for action presented elsewhere in this report.
Before proceeding, it is worthwhile to mention briefly the limitations of this
interview and discussion process. Attached is a comprehensive list of contacts.
Examination of this listing indicates a number of areas where hi the future, additional
input could be obtained to develop a truly comprehensive perspective. Internally, input
from a broader range of contacts within the program offices and from the regions is
needed. Externally, there are four key areas where extensive discussions on sustainable
development will ultimately be needed. These are 1) other Federal agencies, 2) states,
3) environmental groups, and 4) business and industry. As an initial stage in developing
a perspective on sustainable development in EPA, the discussions and interviews held
provide a good cross-section of perspectives and ideas. As part of an ongoing effort to
formulate an approach to sustainable development, broader input as indicated above
should be obtained.
The material in this section is organized into three parts. The first is an overview
of some of the major themes which emerged from the interviews. The second is a
compilation of suggestions for actions and projects drawn from these discussions. The
last part is a list of contacts.
m-i
-------
GENERAL THEMES AND IDEAS
A number of common themes and ideas emerged during the discussions of
sustainable development. Following is a brief summary of the general findings and
conclusions drawn from these discussions:
- Agency Perspective. At present our thinking and planning is driven
predominantly by legislative goals and requirements. These will not change but if
we think about sustainability (both ecological and economic) a different
perception of mission, priorities, approaches, and opportunities might be
suggested. A broader perspective of the context in which we operate could be
developed. Many feel that the results of challenging our thinking in this way
might be the most important benefit of an emphasis on sustainable development.
- Need for Long-Range Goals. The need for some goals to focus efforts to achieve
progress toward sustainability was a common theme. While comprehensive
national goals in this area are needed, it was recognized that establishing these
goals in the near term would be very difficult It may be more effective for EPA
to initially set some sustainable development goals (by sector or region or sub-
region) in key program areas. All recognized that such goals would be interim
and part of a long-range, iterative process. Sustainable development concepts
could provide a good organizing framework.
- Sustainable Development as a Priority. If EPA is to address sustainable
development in a comprehensive way, senior management needs to agree on
directions and priorities. It is important to send clear signals on intent, both
internally to managers and staff and externally to other agencies and public.
There is a strong feeling that phasing it in as a priority should be gradual and
fully integrated into on-going programs. This is not a quick-fix type of effort.
- Geographic Focus. Many interviewed felt that focussing on a specific geographic
area would be best way to explore the implications of the concept Analyzing
economic and environmental trends in a discrete area and their implications for
sustainability and EPA process would put sustainable development in a context
that local officials and the public can understand. Chesapeake Bay basin was
suggested most frequently but other areas (Puget Sound, Great Lakes, etc.) were
also mentioned.
ra-2
-------
Sectoral Focus. Picking one economic sector as a focus for analyses and program
development was also frequently suggested. Energy and agriculture sectors were
the two most frequently mentioned. As with the geographic focus, this would help
foster a cross-media, integrated approach.
Natural Resources. Many feel that sustainable development can provide the focus
and framework for increasing EPA participation in natural resource issues.
Development of natural resources is a fundamental component of much economic
activity. At the same time, it is also frequently the source of significant and
sometimes irreversible impacts on the environment. Many of these impacts are
not immediately obvious but show up later or result from secondary development
actions. The primary responsibility for natural resource development rests with
other agencies with missions more focussed on economic development. As a
result EPA and the natural resource agencies are frequently in adversarial
positions regarding proposed programs and projects. Consideration of sustainable
development concepts can, over time, provide a constructive approach to resolving
some of the existing issues and preventing some of the future ones.
Approach to Growth Issues. Growth management issues are at the heart of many
of the current sustainability issues. Land use and economic development
decisions most often made by the private sector or local, regional, or state
governments can have significant environmental impacts over longer time periods
and larger areas than originally anticipated. EPA is often precluded by law from
direct involvement in these issues and decisions yet our policies and programs
frequently influence them in fundamental ways. Strengthening the focus on
sustainable development can help create a context in which both environmental
concerns and those related to land use planning and growth management can be
dealt with more constructively than in the past.
Integration of Sustainable Development into Programs. The need for training,
workshops, and management discussions of sustainable development and its
implication was a common theme. The awareness of Agency staff and managers
needs to be raised. Distribution of background materials, discussions with the
Canadians about their efforts to implement a sustainable development program,
development of case studies and curricula for EPA Institute courses are examples
of suggestions in this area. Several managers also indicated it would be essential
to incorporate sustainable development into our strategic planning effort if we
really want to integrate it into our programs.
m-s
-------
Research and Data Analysis. The need to understand better what it takes to
make our ecosystems sustainable and the impacts of human actions was frequently
expressed. Better use of our existing data bases (both within media and in an
integrated sense) is a key element. Improved monitoring, forecasting and
research programs should specifically address sustainability issues and related data
needs.
HI4
-------
SUGGESTIONS FOR POLICIES. PROGRAMS. AND ACTIONS
One product of the interviews was a large number of specific suggestion for things
EPA might do to foster an increased emphasis on sustainability. The following is an
expanded summary of those suggestions. It is indicative of the creative thinking
stimulated by consideration of sustainable development, even for a short-time period.
These ideas begin to highlight the diversity and scope of activities and the program
linkages which could evolve from a more systematic and on-going emphasis on
sustainable development.
Need to find a model on a small or medium scale to study in terms of how
agreement on long-term goals was achieved. Examples might be Great Lakes
Agreement or CFC protocol. Need to define key components to success.
(Delores Gregory, BFI)
Establish a national vision and some goals in this area. Some organization in the
Executive Branch (EPA or CEQ) needs to exercise leadership in focussing the
national effort. (Don Lesh, GTC)
Need to establish an on-going dialogue on the goals (evolutionary process vs one
time). (Don Lesh, GTC)
EPA could have a major impact if it would step out and take responsibility for
monitoring the impact of American lifestyle on sustainability. Need to develop
long-term indicators and programs which would track both environmental quality
and environmental productivity.
(Charles Benbrook, NAS)
EPA should work with NAS in a joint project to define and develop good indicators
of soil sustainabih'ty/productivity. Work could impact 1995 Farm Bill.
(Charles Benbrook, NAS)
Best way to get into topic would be to pick a sector (agriculture, energy, or maybe
both) and really dig into it to define what would be implied by a comprehensive
sustainable development approach.
(Susan Wayland, OPP, OPTS)
ra-5
-------
Might be worthwhile to revisit concept of national planning or goal setting for
industrial/economic development. Currently in disfavor but might be revived in
context of sustainable development. It could help set priorities for the kind of
technologies we should support, areas for long-term research, etc. It would provide
for the planning needed to promote environmentally benign economic
development.
(Mike Shapiro, OAR)
We should pull together a cross-section of people who have creative ideas on the
subject (staff, senior managers, etc). Each office could be requested to nominate
people. With appropriate preparation, hold a two-day meeting to discuss and
hammer-out a set of principles and objectives to guide Agency
programs. (Mike Shapiro, OAR)
In exploring implications of sustainable development we should follow closely the
reauthorization of the Coastal Zone Management Act Current House and Senate
bills are trying to deal with the environment/economic development issue more
comprehensively than other EPA legislation. It can provide insights on how to
proceed in other areas.
(Tudor Davies, OMEP, OW)
We need to look across other agencies, perhaps on a sector basis, and develop a
comprehensive approach to deal with issues. It is not enough for EPA to just get
its own act together on sustainable development.
(Tudor Davies, OMEP, OW)
A geographic approach to sustainable development would work best Need to have
boundaries that are reasonably consistent with publics area of interest Hydrologic
units work best Estuarine areas like Chesapeake Bay have full cross-section of
issues and would be a good place to test implications.
(Tudor Davies, OMEP, OW)
Conduct a set of workshops involving EPA people plus some from outside
(international, state, city, foundation) who are involved exploring this concept
Need some sophisticated thinking on the subject and a broader set of Agency
people need to be involved. (John Skinner, ORD)
Best approach from a sector or geographic area perspective. Analyses would define
what needs to be sustained (both environmental and economic), key factors
ffl-6
-------
governing sustainability, and which types of clean technologies need to be
promoted. (John Skinner, ORD)
EPA and USDA (and possibly USDI) need to team up on some common goals.
Water issues are best place to start. Best way to start is to get Reilly and Yeutter
talking, possibly through a retreat process. Willing to help.
(Ned Raun, Winrock International)
Would be useful to put together a sustainable development source book that
provides background info on definitions, what it might imply, examples of how it
might relate to programs, what others are doing, etc. This would help create a
context for discussions about an EPA Directive or Order.
(Bob Wayland, OW)
After people get further into topic schedule trip for 6-8 key people to go to Canada
and discuss their experiences and problems in trying to put a sustainable
development program in place.
(Bob Wayland, OW)
EPA needs to be actively involved with energy, agriculture, and transportation
agencies to insure environmental perspective incorporated in their programs. Real
need for long range goals with environmental concerns fully included.
(Mike Shapiro, OAR)
As an Agency the focus of discussion and action needs to shift to environmental
quality in a broad context This might lead us to conclusion that sustainable
development might be closer to the real environmental ethic we should be adhering
to. To get into this schedule a half-day meeting involving the Administrator,
Deputy, and a cross-section of EPA managers. The meeting would be a discussion
and brainstorming session regarding our fundamental guiding ethic and where
sustainable development fits in.
(Tudor Davies, OMEP, OW)
Organize a training program for SES which gets at basics of what sustainable
development means for our agency culture, procedures, etc.
(Tudor Davies, OMEP, OW)
The key is to get the programs involved in examining their own rules and actions
with respect to sustainable development. OPPE can do some of this but programs
ffl-7
-------
are the key.
(Hank Schilling, OPP, OPPE)
One way to increase attention on subject would be to organize a couple of
symposiums where key government, industry, and environmental leaders were
invited to debate the topic. The audience would be key opinion makers from
media.
(Chris Rice, OCPA)
A 10 page ± primer on sustainable development would be a useful communication
tool. It could briefly explain the concept and implications and then focus on
questions that staff, managers, and organizations at various levels (federal, state,
local, industry, etc) should ask about their operation and sustainable
development. (Chris Rice, OCPA)
Need to define sustainable development in terms more familiar to the Agency at
this point. Should show how it relates to, supports, etc. current goals like risk
reduction and resource conservation. (Art Koines, OPP, OPPE)
Development of a case study would be a very good way to show managers and staff
how sustainable development themes and concepts impact the way we do business.
Examples of two "case study" types of efforts which were successful hi introducing
new concepts were comparative risk studies and the "di-nitro chickenwire" case
study for risk assessment
(Art Koines, OPP, OPPE)
Somebody needs to take a comprehensive look at how tax policy impacts
sustainability. Best approach might be to find a way to get GAO to do it. OMB
and Congressional Budget Office also have the capability.
(Nancy Mathews, Energy/Environmental Study Institute)
Should review efforts of White House Commission on National Goals from the
early 1970*5. This might provide ideas on problems, process, etc. associated with
national goal-setting efforts. Best contact would be Walter Hahn, ex-Secretary of
Commerce. (Delores Gregory, BFT)
Need to find out what happened to the interagency Global Issues Group which was
chaired by CEQ. It was active a few years ago and served as a forum for
discussion of approaches to topics like sustainable development
ra-s
-------
(Delores Gregory, BFI)
Need to establish some long-term goals even if they are initially only general
targets. An example is the set of interim goals Japan has set for addressing global
warming. If we picked a few key areas like the energy sector, agriculture sector, or
pollution prevention we might be able to reach consensus on
goals.
(Delores Gregory, BFI)
The Brazil 1992 Conference could be used as a framework or hook around which a
public debate on sustainability development or an advisory group to EPA could be
orgaruzed. If we could identify 3-4 major issues that EPA and U.S. will have to
address as part of that meeting these could be basis for starting the process.
(Delores Gregory, BFI)
It would be useful to find a way to score or rank EPA programs at this point in
terms of their focus and effectiveness in addressing the sustainable development
goal. This would suggest an agenda of actions to improve programs.
(Tom Kelly, ORME, OPPE)
Some longer-term goals which focus on sustainability would be helpful to the water
program. Examples in the agriculture area might be goals for X% reduction in soil
erosion, pesticide use, and nutrient loss with no loss in productivity. Another might
be a water conservation goal (reduce use X% per year).
(Betsy LaRoe, OWRS, OW)
EPA should consider doing a sustainability analyses of Chesapeake Bay with
emphasis on the ultimate carrying capacity of system. Basic questions are there re
what numbers of people and what nature and level of economic activity are
sustainable if functioning water ecosystem in Bay is also to be sustained. The
recent 2020 Study is a good starting point.
(Bill Painter, OPA, OPPE)
Agriculture is having major effects on water quality around the country. Would it
be feasible to divide the country into geographic sectors and then for each do an
analyses that would integrate environmental standards and protection priorities with
needs for food and fiber production and maintenance of farm income?
(Bill Painter, OPA, OPPE)
ra-9
-------
Projects and research which strengthen our basic understanding of ecosystems and
our ability to detect changes are essential to a strong sustainable development
focus. Use of the E-Map program, which is rapidly gaining support from other
agencies, will be a key activity for EPA.
(Erich Bretthauer, ORD)
We should try to develop a geographic focus for conducting some sustainability
analyses. Many key decisions affecting sustainable development are made at the
regional scale. Two possibilities for conducting these types of analyses are the
Chesapeake Bay basin and the Puget Sound basin. The latter might be best as a
first choice due to fact that only one state is involved.
(Erich Bretthauer, ORD)
For a topic like sustainable development you need to find a way to bring people
along. We should get some of the good thinkers on the subject from inside and
outside EPA and hold some workshops with Agency managers and staff. This is a
good vehicle for building consensus.
(Erich Bretthauer, ORD)
A key element in moving on sustainable development will be establishment of a
broad constituency. EPA needs to actively work on this both inside and with key
groups like academia, members of Congress and key staff, etc. To make this
happen there needs to be a champion at a senior level within the Agency to push
it. (Erich Bretthauer, ORD)
EPA should play an active role in promoting incorporation of environmental
benefits and damages into the analytic basis used to manage resources like coal,
timber, water, etc. Fundamental changes are needed in U.S. forest management
policy, water management policy, etc. and EPA should be one of the catalysts for
change. (Dr. Robert Stavins, Kennedy School of Government)
EPA should examine, possibly through a study or a workshop with industry, the
problem of major differences in views on economy/environment issues between
CEO's and lobbyists, and VPs in industry. There is a major disconnect here which
is a barrier to progress in this area. Its a much bigger problem than between
CEO's and government (Dr. Robert Stavins, Kennedy School of Government)
Issuance of reports by EPA like the proposed report of the Incentives Task Force
will contribute significantly to movement toward a stronger market-based approach
m-io
-------
to environmental management. With respect to the Task Force Report, EPA
should move quickly to get this information out to state officials. He senses a
strong willingness to try new approaches at that level but a lack of expertise.
(Dr. Robert Stavins, Kennedy School of Government)
One approach for increasing the emphasis on sustainable development would be to
provide some incentive funds for projects and let programs compete for them.
Keep the process simpler than that used for pollution prevention incentive funds
and use a smaller set-aside. The major benefit of something like this would be
sowing the seeds of sustainable development thinking in broader group within the
Agency. (Dave Davis, OWP, OW)
Increased training on sustainable development will be necessary. It could be done
by incorporating into existing training program curricula, obtaining related videos
that management can use with staff, holding a series of forums on the topic, etc.
(Dave Davis OWP, OW)
An Executive Order on sustainable development would be useful if you can get it.
Likely to be very difficult.
(Dave Davis, OWP, OW)
Establishment of goals for EPA in the sustainable development area could help
make staff more aware of concepts and willing to discuss a broader approach with
other agencies. It might be best to establish these goals at a regional or sub-
regional level due to difficulty of doing it nationally.
(Dave Davis, OWP, OW)
It would be useful to pick one or more geographic areas and evaluate current
programs, is a vis sustainable development concepts. Chesapeake Bay may be too
complex due to three states being involved. Any such effort should have a high
level endorsement from both EPA and other jurisdictions involved. Its very
important that any analyses be done in context of on-going programs and not as a
separate, isolated project.
(Dave Davis, OWP, OW)
It might be appropriate to set up within OPPE a small group to handle
coordinating functions re sustainable development, facilitate the flow of
information, track outside activities, etc. It would be a mistake to have a separate
sustainable development program office which ran projects and initiatives totally
ra-n
-------
independent of line programs.
(Dave Davis, OWP, OW)
At the present time we have not taken a comprehensive look at all the components
involved in the long-term sustainability of our food and fiber system. However,
within the USDA the issue has surfaced and discussions and activities are taking
place that begin to address this critical issue. As we examine sustainability one
quickly recognizes that we are dealing with not only an agricultural issue but also
the long-term sustainability of all ecosystems. The EPA can play a vital role in this
examination and discovery process by assisting the USDA in breaking down the
barriers and bringing to the discussions their experience in dealing with highly
complex issues. This is an excellent opportunity for the USDA and the EPA to
begin to "crossbreed" their respective areas of expertise in an effort that will
ultimately result in the development of sound long-term goals on sustainability. As
a starting point, a joint meeting or retreat of key senior officials from both
agencies, as suggested by Winrock International, would be useful.
(Jim Mosely, Agriculture Advisor to the Administrator)
One thing that EPA could do within our legislative authorities is include energy
conservation as part of the basic definition of BACT for purposes of PSD
permitting. This would establish as a basic requirement that anyone wanting a
permit for an energy generation facility must demonstrate use of conservation up to
the point where conservation costs exceed avoided costs.
(Alex Cristofaro, OPA, OPPE)
A goal setting process with USDA as part of an overall increase in emphasis on
sustainable development could prove useful. It would need to wait for some
appropriate time following passage of the 1990 Farm Bill
(Rob Wolcott, OPA, OPPE)
It would be useful to take a comprehensive look at what we mean by sustainable
agriculture. A background paper could be prepared which summarizes what EPA
and others think sustainable development means in the agriculture sector. This
paper could then serve as a basis for senior level discussions between EPA and
USDA. Hopefully these meetings would result in consensus on what sustainable
agriculture means and a longer-range agenda for cooperative action.
(Rob Wolcott, OPA, OPPE)
01-12
-------
It might be useful to synthesize information, by agricultural subsector, and identify
characteristics of prototype Sustainable agriculture operations. This effort could
start with the highest environmental impact sector.
(Rob Wolcott, OPA, OPPE)
There is a need to integrate nonpoint source control programs, BMPs, alternative
agriculture, and sustainability. We need to develop a comprehensive conceptual
framework which identifies linkages, barriers, and synergistic effects.
(Rob Wolcott, OPA, OPPE)
A key component of making progress on sustainable development is knowing what
we are trying to sustain and to develop. EPA should make a strong effort to
integrate our data and related analysis systems (E-MAP, GIS, OW systems, etc.) so
that we can really understand what is happening to our resource base.
(Chris Holmes, OSWER)
A geographic analyses relative to sustainability would be useful. Washington State
(or a part of it) would be good place to start due to the cross-section of issues, data
availability, etc.
(Chris Holmes, OSWER)
Training will be the key to making progress on promoting sustainable development
thinking within the Agency. We need to have workshops and training sessions for
both managers and staff on the concepts and issues. Part of this training should
involve people with actual experience in trying to put sustainable development
programs in place. These could include people from World Bank, WRI, etc. We
could also think abut developing a series of courses on the topic through the EPA
Institute.
(Chris Holmes, OSWER)
The best way to capture attention of AAs and others would be some specific
examples based on analyses of our data. Need to identify some specific examples
or case studies of key resources where long-term sustainability is threatened.
(Chris Holmes, OSWER)
The upcoming activity by EPA on the regulation of mining waste would be an
excellent place to look at sustainability issues.
(Chris Holmes, OSWER)
m-13
-------
A good vehicle for emphasizing sustainable development would be through
programmatic EISs. We could focus increased attention on development and
review of EISs for programs and policies (as contrasted with project EISs) and
make sustainable development a priority element of the review. Currently do some
of these but no comprehensive, systematic emphasis. If this was done, it could
involve us in review of things like tax policies, SEC action, trade policies, etc. that
can have major impacts on environment protection programs.
(Bill Dickerson, OFA, OE)
Issues of long term sustainability of water supplies and water conservation
represent an area where NEPA/EIS program becoming more actively involved.
The issues deal not only with sustaining water supplies but also sustaining
ecosystems that might be destroyed by water supply projects. The policy group
chaired by OW seems to be an effective way to work these issues.
(Bill Dickerson, OFA, OE)
The best way to make progress on sustainable development would be for the
Administrator to designate some key areas (6-12) where we want to promote and
push sustainable development thinking and concepts. This would provide support
for some creative work in these areas. Examples might be nonpoint source
pollution, water conservation, energy conservation, etc.
(Cindy Dybella, OPA, OPPE)
EPA currently tends to view resolution of many NPS problems as a local issue and
stay out of it due to land use implications. There is a policy gap. Sustainable
development could provide focus for a stronger EPA effort if NPS were identified
as one of the key sustainability priorities on the overall Agency list (see item
above). EPA could then increase emphasis in this area through a combination of
regulatory approaches, incentive programs, and support/tech assistance to states.
(Cindy Dybella, OPA, OPPE)
Efficient water use and conservation are essential elements of any emphasis on
sustainability. This applies to both municipal water supply and agricultural water
use. Lots of activity in this area now. Efforts could be strengthened by (1)
identification of water conservation as one of the priority areas in a comprehensive
Agency approach to sustainable development, and (2) issuance of a policy
statement which would support making water conservation one of the priority
criteria for OFA reviews under NEPA Emphasizing water conservation can be a
ffl-14
-------
winner for the Agency. It promotes solutions to both environmental and
development problems alone.
(Cindy Dybella, OPA, OPPE)
Other things which might be utilized to enhance water conservation could include
requiring a water conservation plan as apart of the conditions which must be met to
get an NPDES permit. Same could apply for receiving variances or exceptions
under SDWA. These options have not been explored in detail to date.
(Cindy Dybella, OPA, OPPE)
The best way to push sustainable development as a priority would be to ask each
program to identify major development projects or trends they see as most
threatening to long-term sustainability. From these we could select some pilot
cases and bring together development and environmental interests to see if an
approach to sustainable development can be achieved.
(Bill Dickerson, OFA, OE)
NEPA is basically adequate and can be used as a basis for promoting sustainable
development. CEQ should promote an increased emphasis or programmatic EISs
which could incorporate sustainable development analyses. They are going to be
increasing staff to 40 next year and be looking for some big issues or emphasis
areas. Energy efficiency and sustainable development might be of interest.
(Bill Dickerson, OFA, OPPE)
The sustainable development concept has great potential in the EIS area. Issues of
how much mitigation needed and thresholds for no action (how much impact is too
much) are difficult yet fundamental to the process. Establishing sustainable
development as the basic operating premise would provide a systematic way to
address these issues. To implement this, support of the political leadership within
the Agency and a formalized policy would be needed. A task Force within the
Agency would be needed to develop criteria.
(Bill Dickerson, OFA, OPPE)
ffl-15
-------
LIST OF EPA CONTACTS
The following is a comprehensive list of those contacted during the course of this
project. Some were participants and contributors in the many meetings and discussions
held during the project period. A large number of those listed were specifically
interviewed to obtain their views on sustainable development
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
Jim Mosely, Agriculture Advisor
Dan Esty, Special Assistant
Chris Rice, Office of Communication and Public Affairs
OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL ACnvmES
Victor Gray, Director, International Cooperation Division
Susan Drake, International Cooperation Division
Pat Koshell, International Cooperation Division
Ed Johnson, Director, International Issues Division
Chris Herman, Director, International Cooperation Division
OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION
Michael Shapiro, Deputy Assistant Administrator
Eileen Claussen, Director, Office of Atmospheric and Indoor Air Programs
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE
Christian Holmes, Deputy Assistant Administrator
OFFICE OF POLICY. PLANNING ANP EVALUATION
Terry Davies, Assistant Administrator
Dan Beardsley, Deputy Assistant Administrator
m-16
-------
OFFICE OF POLICY. PLANNING AND EVALUATION (continued')
OFFICE OF POLICY ANALYSIS
Dick Morgenstern, Director
Alex Cristofaro, Director, Air and Energy Policy Division
Joel Sheraga, Energy Policy Branch
Rob Wolcott, Director, Water and Agriculture Policy Division
Peter Caulkins, Chief, Agriculture Policy Branch
Jim Jones, Agriculture Policy Branch
Bill Painter, Chief, Water Policy Branch
Cindy Dybella, Water Policy Branch
Barry Korb, Chief, Regulatory Innovations
OFFICE OF REGULATORY MANAGEMENT AND EVALUATION
Thomas Kelly, Director
Timothy Titus, Director, Science, Economics and Statistics Division
Deny Allen, Deputy Director, Science, Economics and Statistics Division
Timothy Barry, Chief, Science Policy Branch
Dexter Hinckley, Science Policy Branch
Ruth Miller, Science Policy Branch
Bill O'Neil, Chief, Economic Analyses and Research Branch
Greg Michaels, Economic Analyses and Research Branch
Phil Ross, Chief, Statistical Policy Branch
OFFICE OF POLLUTION PREVENTION
Hank Schilling, Director
Art Koines, Deputy Director
Bob Currie, Director, Strategic Planning and Management Division
Kim Devonald, Chief, Environmental Measures and Forecasting Branch
Eric Wright, Environmental Measures and Forecasting Branch
John Cross, Deputy Director, Pollution Prevention Division
John Atcheson, Chief, Prevention Integration Branch
IH-17
-------
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Erich Bretthauer, Assistant Administrator
John Skinner, Deputy Assistant Administrator
OFFICE OF PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Vic Kimm, Deputy Assistant Administrator
Susan Wayland, Deputy Director, Office of Pesticide Programs
OF WATER
Bob Wayland, Deputy Assistant Administrator
Tudor Davis, Director, Office of Marine and Estuarine Programs
Dave Davies, Director, Office of Wetlands Protection
Elisabeth LaRoe, Chief, Policy Analysis Branch, OWRS
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING
Bill Dickerson, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Activities
Joe Montgomery, Special Programs and Analysis Division
m-18
-------
LIST OF NON-EPA CONTACTS
Alan Kneese, Senior Fellow, Resources for the Future
Michael Toman, Fellow, Resources for the Future
Bruce Smart, Senior Counselor, World Resources Institute
Ned Raun, Regional Director, Winnrock International
Delores Gregory, Special Assistant, Browning Ferris Industries
Gordon Strickland, Assistant V.P., Technical Department, CMA
Robert Stavins, Assistant Professor of Public Policy, Harvard University
Charles Benbrook, Executive Director, Board on Agriculture, NRC-NAS
Don Lesh, Director, Global Tomorrow Coalition
Nancy Mathews, Consultant on Sustainability Project, Environment & Energy Study
Institute
John Carson, Assistant to the Chairman, Council on Environmental Quality
m-19
-------
SECTION IV
OPTIONS FOR ACTION
Consideration of sustainable development and its implications for EPA leads
to two questions:
1. Should EPA do anything beyond current and planned work to increase the
emphasis on sustainable development?
2. If the answer to the first question is yes, then what is an appropriate set of
new actions?
With respect to question 1, there is clearly uncertainty on the part of some as to whether
an increased emphasis on sustainable development will significantly change current
approaches and priorities. Intuitively, most staff and managers with whom this was
discussed feel that it might imply significant and constructive changes. Most are not able
at this point, however, to identify specific operational changes in any detail. Discussion
in this area generates many ideas and approaches which would need to be evaluated and
further refined.
For purposes of this project, it is assumed that the answer to question 1 is yes.
The options for action that follow are proposed as a way to:
1. Establish some operating principles to serve as general guides for increasing
the focus on sustainable development within EPA programs.
2. Promote thinking and analysis regarding the implications of sustainable
development from a variety of perspectives to increase understanding of the
concept by EPA managers and staff.
3. Strengthen the focus on sustainability in Agency work on problems in some
key economic sectors.
4. Carry out a core set of programs and activities which demonstrate both
attention to the topic and a balanced approach toward it.
5. Provide a basis for decisions on the long-term implications of the concepts for
EPA programs.
The options build on and complement a variety of current work already underway
or planned. They present a range of possibilities for both the scope and extent of
increased agency activity in this area. A detailed schedule is not included but most of
the specific actions, projects or analyses could be completed within a two year period.
The next page provides a one page overview of the options. This is followed by
an expanded discussion of each proposed action. Recommendations are included in the
following section.
IV-1
-------
SUMMARY LISTING OF OPTIONS
OPTION 1; Develop and propose three specific sustainable development policies.
- Increased emphasis on sustainability in NEPA/EIS program.
Modification of cost-benefit analysis procedures to increase emphasis on long-
term sustainable development.
- Energy conservation requirements in permits.
OPTION 2; Initiate a set of six projects and actions to strengthen emphasis on
sustainable development.
- EPA Order or policy directive on sustainable development.
- Include progress toward sustainable development as a priority in overall EPA
strategic plan.
- Establish public dialogues in each Region on sustainable development.
- Support development of long-range sustainable development goals in the
agricultural sector.
- Prepare report on sustainable development work and initiatives underway in
other federal and state agencies.
- Conduct an assessment of current programs in a priority geographic area or
areas for consistency with sustainable development.
OPTION 3; Initiate an additional six projects and actions to build on those in
Option 2.
- Develop a comprehensive training program on sustainable development.
- Develop integrated agency-wide plan for reporting both environmental quality
and progress toward sustainability.
- Stronger emphasis on sustainable development in the energy sector.
- Propose an Executive Order on sustainable development.
- Conduct a feasibility analysis of the potential for a national sustainable
development goal-setting process.
- Develop model national satellite accounts for natural resource and ecological
values.
OPTION 4t Combination of Option 1 & 2.
OPTION 5; Combination of Option 2 & 3.
OPTION 6: Other combinations.
IV-2
-------
OPTION l! Develop and propose for adoption sustainable development policies in
three specific areas.
DISCUSSION; Selection of this option would emphasize a very specific set of actions
focussed directly on policy development. The mix of policies proposed for development
would push the thinking and increase the awareness of sustainable development
implications from both economic and environmental perspectives. Both internal
procedures and those primarily focussed on interagency action would be represented.
The proposed policies are action oriented rather than emphasizing study, analysis,
training, etc. All major program components would be involved to some degree. The
proposed policies would:
1. Establish consistency with sustainable development concepts and principles as
a basic criterion to be emphasized in implementation of the NEPA/EIS
program.
In implementing the requirements of the NEPA program, EPA and other
federal agencies are continually faced with both basic threshold issues
regarding project feasibility and questions of the adequacy of proposed
mitigation. Many of these issues involve complex growth management
problems and questions of short-term versus cumulative effects. While NEPA
provides fundamental guidelines for EPA activity in this area, a clearer
statement of agency policy and support for addressing cumulative effects and
sustainability is needed.
The concept of sustainable development has great potential to provide a
systematic and logical way to address these issues. Adoption of sustainable
development as a basic operating criterion would dictate that proposed
mitigation steps must pass the test of sustaining ecosystem function (or
improving it in an already degraded situation). It would also require that
consideration of energy, water, and other resource conservation be given
significantly increased attention in EIS development and review. Given that
many government policies and programs, in addition to specific projects, can
foster or inhibit sustainability this approach would require programmatic EISs
(development and review) to be given higher priority. All of the above fall
within the authorities and basic principles of NEPA.
2. Modify, after appropriate evaluation, current procedures used to conduct cost-
benefit analyses to strengthen emphasis on long-term sustainability and
intergenerational equity.
Discount rates are used to express future costs and benefits in terms of today's
dollars. Because they devalue future effects, high discount rates can be a
significant source of bias favoring short-term over long-term uses, and their
use may therefore impede progress towards sustainable development. Even if
a lower discount rate were applied, summation of the present value of all
impacts that may accrue to different generations obscures effects on
IV-3
-------
intergenerational equity. Several fundamental questions need to be carefully
addressed. Is discounting appropriate for analysis of environmental projects
with significant long-term impacts? Is discounting appropriate when costs and
benefits may be unevenly distributed over different generations? If so, what
should that rate be? If not, how should present and future benefits be
compared? Current guidelines provide some flexibility to use lower discount
rates to give greater consideration to long-term impacts and benefits.
Discounting still remains, however, a somewhat crude tool that blurs
intergenerational equity issues.
A reexamination of the use of discounting, with consideration of its
implications for progress towards sustainable development, may be a useful
means of exploring alternative methods to advance the time horizons of
decision makers, and ensure more explicit consideration of intergenerational
distribution effects. It will also have important consequences for other
sustainable development projects. For example, efforts to introduce prices
that reflect the environmental costs and benefits of goods and services must
consider those costs and benefits as they accrue over time and will therefore
be sensitive to the use of discounting. Environmental accounting must take
into account the values of future ecosystem services in order to value
ecological assets, and will also be affected by discounting procedures. The use
of an appropriate method to compare present and future values is essential for
most other sustainable development activities, including the establishment of
long-term goals, appropriate incentives, and both strategic and day-to-day
decision making procedures.
EPA efforts to modify its basic cost-benefit procedures can serve as a valuable
model for similar endeavors by other federal agencies, state and local
governments, and even governments abroad. This work represents an
opportunity for EPA to show some leadership on an issue with major
implications for progress towards sustainable development.
3. Establish wherever possible the requirement that applicants for EPA permits
(PSD, NPDES, RCRA, etc.) must establish aggressive and comprehensive
energy conservation programs.
Achievement of long-term sustainability requires fundamental changes in the
energy supply system. Ultimately, it means a shift to renewable sources of
energy. In the short-to-mid-term, it requires significantly increasing energy
efficiency. This will not only reduce environmental impacts of energy
production but extend life of non-renewable energy sources and enhance
economic competitiveness. To promote these changes EPA should require
energy conservation programs wherever possible as a condition of receiving a
permit. For example, definitions of BACT or BAT applicable to any energy
generation unit or project could explicitly include a requirement for an
aggressive energy conservation plan. To the extent not already being done, the
life-cycle energy requirements of any technology-based treatment requirement
IV-4
-------
should be explicitly addressed. In the actual permitting process, demonstration
of an energy conservation program, or a plan to develop one and a
commitment to implement it, would be a threshold condition for considering a
permit application complete. For permits involving operations with no energy
generation but major energy demand, our legal authorities and regulations
could be reviewed to determine specifically if energy requirements and related
emissions can be considered.
IV-5
-------
OPTION 2; Initiate a priority set of six new projects and actions in the planning,
policy analyses, and information gathering areas to strengthen the
emphasis on sustainable development.
DISCUSSION; Under this option, six specific actions and projects would be selected
and carried out. These actions would provide clear interim direction for an increased
emphasis on sustainable development. They would also result in an examination, from a
number of different perspectives, of the implications of sustainable development for
EPA. The directions set and information obtained by these actions will provide a solid
base to build on for a continuing emphases on sustainable development. The six
actions/projects represent a priority subset of a broader action agenda outlined in
Option 3. The propose projects/actions are:
1. Issue an EPA Order or policy directive on sustainable development.
This order or directive would clearly establish that progress toward
sustainability is an agency priority. It would establish a set of interim
operating principles to provide general guidelines for an increased emphasis in
this area. The principles presented on pages _ in Section II of this report are
proposed for inclusion. The order or directive would require all organizations
to evaluate their programs, policies and procedures to find ways to enhance
the emphasis on progress toward sustainable development.
2. Include in development of an overall Agency strategic plan specific language
emphasizing progress toward sustainable development as one of the priorities.
This action will send strong signals within the Agency regarding our intentions
on sustainable development. It will also lay the groundwork for an increased
emphasis on sustainable development in program specific strategic plans and
guidance.
3. Establish within each region a public dialogue on sustainable development.
Each Regional Administrator would be requested to establish, within general
guidelines from the Administrator, an on-going communication and dialogue
process focused on sustainability. This will involve participation from a broad
cross-section of interests including government, public interest groups, industry,
and academia. These groups will explore implications of sustainable
development in a regional or sub-regional context, develop and implement
ways to extend outreach and communication programs on sustainable
development, and make recommendations to the Administrator on appropriate
national goals and initiatives in this area.
4. Support development of long-range sustainable development goals in the
agricultural sector.
IV-6
-------
Numerous people within EPA and outside have suggested focussing on a
specific economic sector to push sustainable development. Currently working
relationships with USDA are improving in most program areas. This may
provide an opportunity for some longer range integrated planning and goal
setting regarding sustainable development in the agricultural area. This effort
would involve OPPE, OW, OPTS, and ORD.
To pursue this opportunity and strengthen the focus on sustainability the
following specific actions are proposed:
a. In preparation for senior level discussions with USDA and others on
sustainability in the agriculture sector, develop a comprehensive
background paper which would
- Summarize what we at EPA and others think sustainable agriculture
really means.
- Highlight the potential implications environmental, economic, and
social shift toward sustainable agriculture.
b. Arrange a meeting involving senior USDA and EPA (OPPE, OW, OPTS)
officials to discuss key components of sustainability from both economic
and environmental perspectives. The goal of the meeting would be to:
- Review and discuss the background paper and attempt to reach
consensus on the definitions and discussions of implications that it
contains.
- Identify a few sustainability issues for which a joint goal setting and
assessment process would be valuable.
c. Arrange a meeting involving the Administrator and the Secretary to review
results of (a) and (b) above and
- Reach agreement on some key issues or areas for which integrated
environmental and economic development goals will be established.
- Reach agreement on a general process and timetable for pursuing
development of those goals. This might include establishment of groups
or forums with a broader government and public representation.
5. Prepare a report on sustainable development work and initiatives in other
governmental agencies.
This analysis will provide information on the scope and level of activity and
highlight opportunities for stronger linkage and coordination between EPA
and the relevant agencies. It will also serve as a valuable baseline for
IV-7
-------
measuring future shifts toward sustainable development. This work would be
done in two phases:
a. A report on sustainable development work in other Federal agencies. This
report would include not just the traditional resource agencies EPA usually
deals with but also development, trade and financial agencies.
b. A report on sustainable development work at the state/local level.
6. Conduct an assessment of current and proposed programs for environmental
management in one or more discrete geographic areas for consistency with
sustainable development concepts and principles.
The geographic area approach has been suggested by many as the best way to
further define the implications of sustainable development for specific
programs and policies. The Chesapeake Bay basin, the Puget Sound basin, the
Great Lakes, and southern Florida were suggested as possibilities. All have
significant amounts of work underway and relatively large amounts of data
available. It is proposed that one or more comprehensive assessments be
initiated with the general framework as outlined below. The focus could be
comprehensive or be limited to a media specific environmental problem. The
general objectives for these assessments would be to:
a. Summarize goals and forecasts related to economic development to the
basin or area for a period at least 20 years into the future.
b. Summarize population forecasts (including demographics for sub-regions)
for the basin or area for the same period.
c. Summarize available projections, analyses, and assumptions regarding
environmental/ecosystem quality and related protection/prevention
programs for the same period.
d. Based on the information gathered under a-c above,
- identify key issues affecting long-term sustainable development in the
basin or area.
- determine if current and planned management programs are addressing
key sustainability issues and, if not, what changes would be needed to
do so.
- Determine the implications, if any, for EPA's general policies and
programs.
IV-8
-------
OPTION 3i Initiate a more comprehensive set of actions/projects (Option 2 & six
additional actions) to further increase the emphasis on sustainable
development.
DISCUSSION: Building on the actions in Option 2, the additional six actions proposed
here will further strengthen the development of a comprehensive sustainable
development emphasis within EPA. Several would increase efforts to develop a broader
federal government focus on sustainability. The proposed additional projects/actions
are:
1. Develop and implement a plan to provide comprehensive training on
sustainable development concepts, principles, and implications for EPA staff
and managers.
To permanently increase the focus on sustainability issues within EPA, a
comprehensive training program is needed. This program needs to range from
introductions to the concepts to more in-depth courses on topics such as
sustainability analyses, current economic thinking and trends, international
environmental and economic problems and linkages, case study analyses, etc.
This project would develop a core curriculum and supporting materials to
allow initiation of the needed training. The results would meet EPA needs
and serve as a model for other agencies.
2.
Develop an integrated agency-wide plan for reporting both environmental
quality and progress toward sustainability.
Currently there is not in place a comprehensive program within EPA for
reporting an environmental quality. An increased focus on sustainability will
require that more systematic and integrated analyses and reporting be carried
out. Based on the forecasting work already underway or planned, plans for
the Bureau of Environmental Statistics, results of environmental indicators
work, current environmental quality reporting, etc., EPA should develop an
integrated agency-wide plan for reporting both environmental quality and
trends and progress toward sustainability. To be useful in enhancing public
awareness and supporting program development, implementation of this plan
must be sustainable over the long-term.
3. Push for a stronger emphasis on sustainable development in the energy sector.
The effects of decisions regarding sources and levels of energy supply have
profound implications both economically and environmentally. For long-term
sustainability, an integrated set of goals which optimize both components
needs to be established. The intensive analyses underway as part of the global
climate change program and other efforts will provide a strong base of
information on possible energy supply and demand scenarios. In parallel with
the analytical work, a framework and process needs to be developed which
IV-9
-------
leads to establishment of sustainability goals. To do this, the following actions
are proposed:
a. Work with Department of Energy to insure that sustainable development in
the energy sector is explicitly addressed in the final National Energy
Strategy. As a minimum, EPA should attempt to get incorporated into the
strategy a commitment to develop, within 3-5 years, a set of sustainable
energy goals. These goals would establish milestones and the ultimate
target for transition to an environmentally and economically sustainable
energy supply system.
b.
To the extent feasible, modify implementation of existing EPA programs to
promote and require increased energy conservation (see Option 1).
4. Develop and propose issuance of an Executive Order on sustainable
development.
Like EPA, other agencies need to begin evaluating their programs with respect
to how they support or hinder achievement of sustainable development. Some
of this is underway but not in any consistent or comprehensive way. An
Executive Order will provide the basic framework and guidance for doing so.
The proposed Order would build on the principles incorporated in the EPA
Order or policy directive on sustainable development (see Option 2). It would
be consistent with and complementary to requirements for pollution
prevention programs established either through Executive Order or new
legislation.
5. Conduct a feasibility analysis of the potential for a national sustainable
development goals setting process.
The need for some longer range national sustainable development goals is a
common theme. We need a vision of where we are headed. Other work
described in this proposal will provide insights to the feasibility of setting some
of these goals. To further define these possibilities, the following work should
be completed:
a. An analysis should be conducted of past efforts at national goal setting
(economic, scientinc, development, educational, environmental, etc.) to
evaluate process, what worked and what did not, whether or not there are
successful models, etc.
b. The Administrator and/or senior managers should carry out an extensive
set of discussions with a broad cross-section of government, industry, and
public sector leaders to explore in general terms the desirability and
feasibility of starting a national goal-setting effort.
IV-10
-------
c. Based on the work described in a and b above, plus work on specific sector
analyses, develop options for a process leading to national sustainable
development goals, and supporting information on the benefits.
6. Develop model national satellite accounts for natural resource and ecological
values.
The need for including environmental values (benefits, costs of degradation) in
national accounts such as the GNP is a common theme in sustainable
development proposals. There is currently interest within the Bureau of
Economic Analysis (BEA) of the Department of Commerce in some work in
this area. EPA should capitalize on this and negotiate with BEA and other
appropriate agencies to develop a model framework with initial focus on
natural resource accounts.
OPTION 4; A combination of Options 1 and 2.
DISCUSSION: See previous discussion. This section would provide a mix of specific
policy actions and those aimed at more general analyses and program development.
OPTION 5: A combination of Options 1 and 3.
DISCUSSION; Same general approach as Option 4 except more comprehensive.
OPTION 6: Other combinations/subsets.
IV-11
-------
SECTION V
RECOMMENDATIONS
Two sets of recommendations are presented in this Section. The first covers those
actions/projects outlined in Section IV recommended for adoption. The second presents
several management and communication actions which should be implemented to
maintain and help guide a continuing emphasis on sustainable development in the near
term.
Recommended Action and Projects
Option 4 from Section IV is recommended for adoption. This recommendation
contains a mix of both specific policy development actions (Option 1) and a variety of
evaluation and program development activities (Option 2).
- Policy Development - It is recommended that two of the policies identified
(sustainable development as a NEPA/EIS criterion and modification of our
cost-benefit analyses procedures) be put on priority tracks for development,
proposal, and adoption. Both build on existing policies and can be acted on
fairly quickly. The third policy (establishing energy conservation as a
requirement in permitting programs) represents potentially a more difficult
policy to formulate and adopt. A priority effort to evaluate potential scope
and feasibility is recommended.
- Program Development - To review, the specific actions/projects recommended
in addition to the specific policies outlined above are:
1. EPA Order or policy directive on sustainable development.
2. Include progress toward sustainable development as a priority in overall
EPA strategic plan.
3. Establish public dialogues in each region on sustainable development.
4. Support development of long-range sustainable development goals in the
agricultural sector.
5. Prepare report on sustainable development work and initiatives underway
in other federal and state agencies.
6. Conduct an assessment of current programs in a priority geographic area or
areas for consistency with sustainable development.
V-l
-------
Recommended Program Management Actions
1. Formally charter the sustainable development interest group.
Currently an ad hoc group of staff and managers meets periodically to discuss
sustainable development topics. Attendance from programs has been varied
and the meeting frequency is irregular. To strengthen the effectiveness of this
group, meetings should be held on a more systematic basis and each relevant
program and office should be asked to designate one or two key members.
These designees from each program will constitute the core group
membership.
The purpose of the interest group will be to facilitate communication and
sharing of information on sustainable development topics, serve as a forum for
discussing specific sustainable development issues, and to identify opportunities
and possible initiatives to increase awareness of and emphasis on sustainable
development within the Agency. If the Sustainable Development Coordinating
Committee (See recommendation for EPA Order) is established the interest
group could continue to function as one of the key sub groups.
2. Designate responsibilities at management level for overseeing and guiding on-
going efforts to increase emphasis on sustainable development.
Until such time as a more formal management structure (such as SDCC) is
established it is recommended that the Director of the Science, Economics,
and Statistics Division within ORME/OPPE and the Director of the Strategic
Planning and Management Division within OPP/OPPE serve as co-chairs of
the interest group and provide direction for other interim management
activities as needed and appropriate. The responsibilities within these two
Divisions represent a strong core of activities related to any sustainable
development emphasis.
3. Establish process for routine communication on sustainable development.
To give the theme continuing visibility and facilitate routine sharing of
information the following actions are recommended:
- Produce and distribute a quarterly status report or newsletter on
selected current and planned sustainable development activities, both
within EPA and outside. All programs could provide input.
- Periodically (at least every six months) compile and distribute selections
of a few current articles and papers on sustainable development.
- The distribution list for the above should be members of the interest
group plus Deputy Assistant Administrators, Deputy Regional
Administrators, and Division Directors.
V-2
-------
4. Establish contacts on sustainable development with three key
groups/organizations. These are CEQ, selected Congressional staff, and
Environment Canada.
CEQ is currently rebuilding its staff and expanding its scope of interests and
activities. Given the fundamental thrust of NEPA, it is likely that they will
become increasingly involved in sustainable development issues. EPA should,
at the earliest opportunity, begin to share with them our activities and ideas on
the topic and find out more about theirs.
A growing number of the members of Congress and their staff are becoming
interested in and proposing legislation related to issues of sustainable
development. A focussed effort should be initiated to find out who the players
are and their interests and to develop an ongoing communication strategy to
keep them informed of EPA ideas and actions in this area.
The Canadian Government has had underway for sometime a concentrated
effort to increase the national focus on sustainable development. Given the
similarity of many of our problems (environmental, program implementation,
etc.), the major economic linkages between the countries, and the growing
emphasis on joint environmental protection programs, we should initiate
periodic communications meetings and other exchanges with Environment
Canada on sustainable development. The result will be beneficial to both.
5. Establish sustainable development as a visible element in the budget
development process for FY93.
Between now and the start of the next Agency budget development cycle,
efforts should be made to work with the Comptrollers Office and other
relevant organizational components to identify ways to insert an increased
emphasis on sustainable development into guidance, calls for investment
papers, etc.
6. Organize a forum with the Deputy Administrator to discuss sustainable
development.
As indicated by the results of the interviews, the topic of sustainable
development elicits a wide spectrum of ideas. It would be very useful to
continue this dialogue in more detail to explore areas of common
understanding, thoughts on next steps, etc. A meeting of 10-15 people drawn
from those interviewed with the Deputy Administrator and other senior
managers as appropriate would be a good way to do this.
7. Review current strategic plans to identify where sustainable development is
being addressed and where there are opportunities for increased emphasis on
it.
The evolving strategic planning framework will guide Agency actions for
V-3
-------
several years to come. As a basis for further emphasis on sustainable
development, an understanding of how current plans relate or don't relate to
the theme is needed. The interest group could be actively involved in this
review process.
8. Establish staff position to facilitate and assist in carrying out the actions
identified above.
It is recommended that it least one full-time staff person be assigned to work
on sustainable development as a facilitator/coordinator. This position would
be responsible for supporting the interest group and co-chairs, pulling together
the quarterly status report and key articles, facilitating the exchange of
information, etc. The position would not be responsible for initiating or
managing specific sustainable development programs or projects. That would
be the responsibility of appropriate program offices. Because of the current
history of work on this topic and the relevant mix of interests and disciplines it
represents, it is recommended that this position be located in the Science,
Economics and Statistics Division within OPPE.
The proposed set of policy development priorities, projects, and management
actions outlined above, plus the large body of work already underway which is closely
related, provides a substantial and comprehensive commitment by EPA to operationalize
sustainable development concepts. The proposed program will
- Push the thinking and refine the meaning of sustainable development for EPA
- Help start a similar process within other agencies
- Demonstrate a balanced and constructive approach to economic development
interests
- Provide both an interim structure and momentum for an on-going emphasis on
sustainable development
- Demonstrate progressive thinking and leadership on the part of EPA It fits
nicely as part of an action agenda for EPA as a Department.
EPA needs to proceed with evaluating the implications of moving toward long-
term sustainability in our current policies and programs. The proposals presented above
represent one way to do so. Its time to decide on next steps.
V-4
-------
APPENDIX A
DRAFT EPA ORDER
ESTABLISHING ACHIEVEMENT OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
AS AN EPA GOAL
1. PURPOSE; This order prescribes a policy, principles, and objectives for establishing
the achievement of environmental protection in the context of sustainable
development (SD) as one of EPA's major operational goals.
2. SCOPE: The provisions of this order apply to all EPA organizations.
3. DEFINITIONS; For purposes of this Order, sustainable development will be defined
at a general level using the terminology proposed by the World Commission on
Environment and Development. Sustainable development is "meeting the needs of
the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs." At an operational level, the term is defined for individual organizations by
the nature of the actions taken to move toward sustainability.
4. BACKGROUND; There is growing evidence that many current systems and
approaches for achieving both environmental protection and economic development
do not provide for long-term sustainability. The scope and magnitude of this problem
were highlighted in a 1987 report entitled "Our Common Future," which was issued
by the World Commission on Environment and Development. The Commission was
established by the United Nations for the specific purpose of formulating a "global
agenda for change in the way we approach environmental and economic development
issues." Following three years of world-wide data gathering and hearings, the
Commission recommended a comprehensive agenda of actions to address the urgent
concerns which had been identified. In the fall of 1987 the United Nations General
Assembly adopted a resolution which called upon UN organizations to review their
work to see how it contributed to the goal of sustainable development. It also called
on all governments to address the recommendations in the Commission report.
In response to this challenge, governments and organizations world-wide have begun
the difficult process of examining policies and programs with respect to the changes
needed to achieve sustainable development. For a given country or organization
consensus on changes needed must be established taking into account such things as
status of environmental and economic programs, cultural differences, etc. This
process is just beginning within the United States.
A-l
-------
5. RESPONSIBILITIES; Systematic progress toward a condition of sustainable
development, both within the U.S. and internationally, is a fundamental element in
U.S. efforts to insure long-term economic development, ecosystem protection, and
national security. The Environmental Protection Agency, due to the nature and
scope of its legislative mandates and the expectations of the public, will have a key
role in the formulation and implementation of the United States response to the
sustainable development challenge. As the primary environmental protection agency
at the Federal level, EPA will have responsibilities for leadership in this effort in
areas of direct legislative responsibility and for supporting efforts of other agencies
and the public. EPA will also have responsibilities for conducting or assisting in
efforts to educate the public on this theme and to report progress toward
achievement of sustainable development. Within EPA, each major program or office
will have responsibilities for evaluating current and proposed programs and modifying
them over time as feasible and appropriate to insure EPA meets its obligations in
this area.
6. POLICY. PRINCIPLES. AND OBJECTIVES;
(A) Policy. All EPA organizations shall evaluate their current and developing
programs, policies, and procedures to insure that sustainable development principles
and objectives as outlined below are addressed and incorporated as appropriate.
(B) Principles. The following principles shall guide Agency efforts to increase the
emphasis on sustainable development:
(1) Agencies and programs will develop, adopt, and promote policies and long-
term strategic plans that, to the extent possible,
(a) foster, encourage, or require efficient use and conservation of natural
resources and energy;
(b) encourage utilization of renewable natural resources at rates that do
not exceed their regeneration rates;
(c) foster or encourage development of substitutes for nonrenewable
natural resources;
(d) limit emissions of wastes into the environment to rates that do not have
unacceptable effects on key ecosystem functions; and
(e) employ pollution prevention techniques, including source reduction and
reuse or recycling of wastes, to promote the accomplishment of
objectives (a) through (d).
(2) Policies and strategic planning will be directed towards achievement of long-
term, parallel economic and environmental goals that
(a) are developed concurrently in an integrated process;
(b) take into account
(i) scientific and economic assessments of long-term needs,
potential threats to the satisfaction of those needs, and
uncertainty regarding both needs and threats;
(ii) general concerns and priorities of the public; and
A-2
-------
(iii) ethical responsibilities to future generations (e.g. as
established in the National Environmental Policy Act §101);
and
(c) are pursued simultaneously.
(3) Decisions concerning actions including, but not necessarily limited to,
establishment of sustainable development goals; development of long-term
strategic plans; and adoption and implementation of policies, programs, and
regulations with the potential for significant long-term impacts will consider
(a) the projected economic and environmental needs of at least two
generations born subsequent to the establishment or commencement of
the action, or when this is not possible, economic and environmental
needs as far into the future as they can reasonably be projected, and
(b) the potential direct and indirect impacts of the action on satisfaction of
the needs identified in paragraph (a).
(4) Whenever possible, policies and strategic planning will support innovation
and development of environmentally benign and resource-conserving
technologies; however, unforeseeable, infeasible, or speculative technological
developments shall not be considered solutions to long-term problems
inhibiting achievement of sustainable development goals as identified under
Principle (2).
(5) The long-term implications of population growth, demographic shifts and
related factors (e.g. per capita consumption and waste generation patterns,
incidence of poverty, etc.) affecting the environment or economic
development will be explicitly taken into account and addressed in
(a) any efforts to establish sustainable development goals, and
(b) decision making affecting policies, strategic planning, programs, and
proposed regulations.
(6) Wherever possible, policies, strategic planning, and programs will create
market and other incentives designed to encourage public and private
practices and decisions that are consistent with progress towards sustainable
development and achievement of sustainable development goals as identified
under Principle (2).
(7) Economic analyses (including analyses of the costs and benefits of proposed
regulations) used in policy, programmatic, or strategic decision making will
(a) take into account the values of the full range of services provided by
impacted ecosystems;
(b) consider all costs ano! benefits accruing over the full duration of time
specified under Principle (3); and
(c) explicitly identify any unequal distribution of these costs and benefits
over the duration of time specified under Principle (3).
(8) To the extent possible, programs and policies will adopt a conservative
A-3
-------
approach to reduce the risk of unpredicted adverse impacts on ecological
functions and services when the effects of human activities on these are
uncertain.
(9) Policies, programs, and strategic planning will actively support, and
periodically undergo review and adjustment to reflect the results of,
continuing research and analyses investigating
(a) the operational meaning of sustainable development, and appropriate
long-term goals representing the needs of the future;
(b) scientific understanding of ecological systems and the long-term impacts
of disturbances on their integrity and ability to provide key services;
(c) the nature of linkages between the economy, social institutions, and the
environment; and
(d) economic development and environmental trends that may affect
progress towards sustainable development and achievement of
sustainable development goals as identified under Principle (2).
(10) Policies and programs will
(a) promote understanding of the concepts and principles associated with
sustainable development,
(b) encourage public involvement in the formulation of sustainable
development goals and programs and activities designed to achieve
these goals, and
(c) provide for routine public reporting on progress toward sustainable
development.
(C) Objectives. The objectives of this policy are to insure that
(1) EPA programs and mandates are designed and implemented to enhance
progress toward sustainable development to the maximum extent possible;
and
(2) EPA's responsibilities as leader and catalyst in promoting emphasis on
sustainable development by other public and private organizations are well
defined and actively pursued.
6. IMPLEMENTATION
(A) Implementation Milestones. The following key milestones are established to
insure continuing progress toward achievement of the stated objectives.
(1) Within 180 days of the date of this Order, each Assistant Administrator and
Regional Administrator will submit to the Assistant Administrator for Policy,
Planning, and Evaluation a preliminary evaluation of program goals,
procedures, guidelines, etc. relative to the requirements of this Order. This
analysis will
A-4
-------
identify areas where changes would be needed to bring operations and
related policies and procedures into conformance with the Order, and
- identify program and office priorities for making needed changes and
the barriers that would inhibit or prohibit them.
(2) Within 270 days of the date of this Order, each Assistant Administrator and
Regional Administrator will submit to the Administrator a proposed schedule
for making needed changes. This schedule may extend over three FY's.
(3) Within 2 years of the date of this Order, the strategic plans and related
. program guidance developed by program and regional offices will reflect
incorporation of sustainable development principles, goals and appropriate
program changes as identified under (1) and (2) above.
(B) Coordination. To facilitate the necessary coordination, implementation,
oversight, and exchange of information, the following steps will be implemented:
(1) A standing Sustainable Development Coordinating Committee (SDCC) will be
established. Members of the committee will be at the Deputy Assistant
Administrator or equivalent level and all programs and offices will be
represented. The Regions will be represented by two Deputy Regional
Administrators. The Committee will be chaired by the Deputy Administrator
and will meet at least every six months. Staff level work groups special task
forces may be established as needed.
(2) To provide staff support to the SDCC, and to facilitate the flow of information
and day to day coordination on sustainable development actions and issues, a
small support function will be organized within OPPE. This group will not
have responsibilities for initiating or implementing substantive changes in
programs or policies. That responsibility rests with the appropriate program
office.
A-5
-------
APPENDIX B
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The sources listed below are representative of the growing body of literature on
sustainable development. They have been selected to provide a cross-section of the
major themes relating to this issue. This bibliography is by no means intended to be a
comprehensive listing of sustainable development literature.
This sustainable development bibliography will be periodically updated and
distributed.
Bond, Wayne. 1990. Sustainable Development Initiatives in Canada: A Federal Perspective.
Ottawa, Canada: Sustainable Development/State of Environment Reporting
Branch, Environment Canada.
This report is simply a brief overview of Canadian Federal efforts to promote
sustainable development. These include, among others, initiatives designed to:
build consensus on the meaning of sustainable development for Canada (the
National and Provincial Round Tables on Environment and Economy), establish
an environmental labelling program for consumer products, provide an
information clearinghouse for business-related ideas that promote sustainable
development, and incorporate sustainable development as an objective for
Canadian International Development Agency projects.
Brown, Lester, et al. 1990. State of the World 1990: A Woridwatch Institute Report on
Progress Toward a Sustainable Society. New York: W.W. Norton.
This book is one in a series of reports published annually by the Woridwatch
Institute since 1984. Like its predecessors, the 1990 edition provides an excellent
overview of some of the threats to global sustainable development, as well as
suggested remedies. Topics covered include the potential effects of global climate
change, threats to global food production, the health and ecological impacts of air
pollution, and the growing disparity between the world's rich and poor. One
chapter is entitled "Picturing a Sustainable Society" and describes how such a
society would meet its energy needs, use and reuse its resources efficiently,
preserve its ecological support systems, and inculcate in its citizens a new set of
values consistent with sustainable development.
B-l
-------
Centre for Our Common Future. 1988-1989. Brundtland Bulletin. Nos. 1-6. Geneva:
Centre for Our Common Future.
The Centre was established in Geneva in 1988, with funding from several national
governments, to serve as an information exchange and catalyzing agent promoting
the sustainable development envisioned in Our Common Future. Its Brundtland
Bulletin reports on the sustainable development activities of international
organizations, national and local governments, non-governmental organizations,
the media, research centers, and industries. The Bulletin also provides extensive
lists of international contacts.
Colby, Michael E. 1990. "Environmental Management in Development: The Evolution of
Paradigms." World Bank Discussion Paper No. 80. Washington, D.C.: World
Bank.
Colby explores the evolution of paradigms of the relationship between society and
nature. These range from "Frontier [i.e. Neoclassical] Economics," in which
analysis of the role of the environment in development is minimal, to "Deep
Ecology," in which "biospecies equality" and the reduction of the size of human
economies are advocated. Colby shows that new paradigms, including
"Environmental Protection," "Resource Management," and "Eco-development" are
emerging between these two extremes. This paper gives a creative and concise
summary of the perspectives on environment that have contributed to the
evolution of the sustainable development ideal.
Daly, Herman E., and John B. Cobb, Jr. 1989. For the Common Good: Redirecting the
Economy toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future. Boston:
Beacon.
Written by an 'economist (Daly) and a theologian (Cobb), this book explores some
of the fundamental assumptions behind our economic theories and the indicators
we use to measure "success" (e.g. gross national product). Finding these
inadequate to guide humanity towards its own long-term best interests, the
authors suggest a new paradigm based on community and moral values as well as
a revised understanding of the role of the economy.
Daly, Herman E. 1989. "Sustainable Development: From Concept and Theory Towards
Operational Principles." Population and Development Review (in press).
This very lucid paper discusses the lack of analytical linkages between the
economy and the environment in macroeconomic models. Daly suggests some
possible opportunities for portraying these linkages. He introduces, in language
accessible to the non-economist, concepts such as "throughput" and "optimal scale"
(a somewhat modified version of the ecological concept of carrying capacity
applied to the economy). An interesting set of "operational principles of
sustainability" are also included.
B-2
-------
FRN (Swedish Council for Planning and Coordination of Research). 1990. Towards an
Ecologically Sustainable Economy. Britt Aniansson and Uno Svedin, eds. Report
from a Policy Seminar (3-4 January 1990). Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish
Environmental Advisory Council.
This is a collection of the papers presented at the Swedish government sponsored
international policy seminar entitled 'Towards an Ecologically Sustainable
Economy." Topics of the papers include the use of economic incentives policies,
the "ecological context" of national sustainable development policies, and ethical
responsibilities to future generations.
Lander, C.W.M. and R.J.M. Maas. 1990. Economics of Sustainability in a Policy Process.
Paper presented at the United States Environmental Protection Agency/United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE/USEPA) Workshop on the
Economics of Sustainable Development (23-26 January 1990). Washington, D.C.:
UNECE/USEPA.
This short paper traces the political process in the Netherlands that led to the
establishment of national sustainable development goals and the .adoption of a
"National Environmental Policy Plan" (NEPP). In particular, the paper focusses
on a report published by the National Institute for Public Health and
Environmental Protection entitled "Concern for Tomorrow," which served as a
catalyst for the Dutch goal-setting process. It also discusses some of the goals
adopted by the Dutch.
Lebel, Gregory G. and Hal Kane. 1989. Sustainable Development: A Guide to Our
Common Future. Washington, D.C.: Global Tomorrow Coalition.
This is a useful 77-page summary of the 400-page Report of the World
Commission on Environment and Development.
Repetto, Robert and John Pezzey. 1990. The Economics of Sustainable Development.
Paper presented at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe/United
States Environmental Protection Agency (UNECE/USEPA) Workshop on the
Economics of Sustainable Development (23-26 January 1990). Washington, D.C.:
UNECE/USEPA.
This paper is a useful overview of the range of economic issues often associated
with sustainable development. It explores subjects such as appropriate pricing of
natural resources to promote their conservation, economic incentives for pollution
prevention, the use of discount rates consistent with the long-term time horizons
associated with sustainable development, the role of international trade issues in
sustainable development, and the need to leverage international lending
institutions (e.g. multilateral development banks) to ensure that funded projects
are consistent with sustainable development in the developing countries.
B-3
-------
Scientific American. 261.3 (September, 1989).
This special issue, entitled "Managing Planet Earth," is entirely devoted to
sustainable development. Eleven articles discuss the global implications of
sustainable development for various economic sectors (agriculture, energy, and
manufacturing), key environmental resources (climate, freshwater, and
biodiversity), population growth, and development in the Third World. Articles
are written by world renowned scholars, researchers, and environmental
advocates, including William Ruckelshaus and Jim MacNeill, Secretary General of
the World Commission on Environment and Development. Most of the articles
provide useful recommendations. This is an excellent source of compelling
arguments and statistics underscoring the importance of actions to promote
sustainable development.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe and United States Environmental
Protection Agency (UNECE and USEPA). 1990. UNECE/USEPA Workshop on
the Economics of Sustainable Development: Final Report. Washington, D.C.:
UNECE/USEPA.
The "Workshop Findings and Recommendations" contained in this report provide
an excellent summary of some of the economic policies and instruments that can
promote sustainable development. The report also gives a listing of the speakers
and participants attending the conference; this can serve as a starting point of a
list of international contacts on sustainable development.
World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
This report, released in 1987 after three years of efforts that included public
hearings on five continents, has probably done more to publicize sustainable
development than any other document. With an expansive scope that covers
topics from population and global food needs to biodiversity and international
trade, the Report provides a vast array of recommended national and
international actions designed to meet the economic and environmental needs of
both the present and future generations. The Commission's "Overview" of the
Report states:
Our report, Our Common Future, is not a prediction of ever increasing
environmental decay, poverty, and hardship in an ever more polluted world
among ever decreasing resources. We see instead the possibility for a new
era of economic growth, one that must be based on policies that sustain
and expand the environmental resource base. And we believe such growth
to be absolutely essential to relieve the poverty that is deepening in much
of the developing world.
But the Commission's hope for the future is conditional on decisive
B-4
-------
political action now to begin managing environmental resources to ensure
both sustainable human progress and human survival. We are not
forecasting a future; we are serving a notice--an urgent notice based on the
latest and best scientific evidence-that the time has come to make the
decisions needed to secure the resources to sustain this and coming
generations. We do not offer a detailed blueprint for action, but instead a
pathway by which the peoples of the world may enlarge their spheres of co-
operation.
The Brundtland Report has prompted international conferences, official national
responses, a variety of non-government organization activities, publications, and
even the creation of a "Centre for Our Common Future" in Geneva to monitor
and publicize worldwide progress towards sustainable development.
World Resources Institute, United Nations Environment Programme, and United
Nations Development Programme. 1990. World Resources 1990-91. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
An excellent reference resource, this volume gives brief but well-documented
overviews of important trends and issues affecting human welfare and global
environmental resources. "Special Focus Chapters" on global climate change and
Latin America are also provided. The analysis is supported by a collection of
several dozen tables of data on the countries of the world. Categories of data
include basic economic and demographic indicators; agricultural, industrial, and
energy production; natural resource endowments and use patterns, environmental
indicators; and contributions to global phenomena (e.g. "Net Additions to the
Greenhouse Heating Effect" listed by country).
B-5
------- |