Cover Image

HARDBACK
$74.95



View/Hide Left Panel

National Environmental Goals: Implementing the Laws, Visions of the Future, and Research Priorities1

RICHARD D. MORGENSTERN

Resources for the Future

CONTENTS

1  

Note: A previous version of this paper benefited from comments by Derry Allen, Terry Davis, Devra Davis, Roger Dower, Paul Portney, Peter Truitt, and Elizabeth Farber, who also provided able research assistance.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals National Environmental Goals: Implementing the Laws, Visions of the Future, and Research Priorities1 RICHARD D. MORGENSTERN Resources for the Future CONTENTS     THE THREE MAJOR GOALS PROJECTS: A DESCRIPTION   101     EPA's Environmental Goals for the Year 2005   101     EPA Goal: Clean Air   102     EPA Goal: Climate Change Risk Reduction   103     EPA Goal: Safe Waste Management   103     PCSD's Ten National Goals to Put the U.S. on a Path Toward Sustainable Development   104     PCSD Goal: Economic Prosperity   104     PCSD Goal: A Healthy Environment   105     PCSD Goal: Sustainable Communities   106     CENR's Environmental and Natural Resource Goals for Research for Fiscal Year 1996   107     CENR Goal: Air Quality   108     CENR Goal: Global Change   108     CENR Goal: Toxic Substances/Hazardous and Solid Waste   109     CONSISTENCY AMONG GOALS PROJECTS   110     CRITERIA FOR COMPARISON AND EVALUATION   111     Scope of goals   111 1   Note: A previous version of this paper benefited from comments by Derry Allen, Terry Davis, Devra Davis, Roger Dower, Paul Portney, Peter Truitt, and Elizabeth Farber, who also provided able research assistance.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals     Time frame   111     Measures of success   111     Complete metrics for assessing progress toward goals   111     Clear policy tools for achieving goals   111     Interim milestones of success   111     Explicit assessment of tradeoffs in goal choices   111     Environmental policy analysts as formulators of goals and metrics   111     THE THREE MAJOR GOALS PROJECTS: A COMPARISON   112     Goal scope and time frame   112     Measures of success   112     Completeness of metrics for progress assessment   113     Clear policy tools for achieving goals   113     Interim milestones of success   113     Explicit assessment of tradeoffs in goal choices   113     Environmental policy analysts as formulators of goals and metrics   114     Other observations   114     KEY ISSUES NOT EMPHASIZED BY THE THREE GOALS PROJECTS   115     Systematic measurement and monitoring   115     Program evaluation   115     Interdisciplinary social science research   115     Regulatory reform   115     Devolution to the States   116     Preservation of nature for its own sake   116     Public access to environmental information   116     Acknowledgment of the trade-offs among goals   116     CONCLUSION   116     APPENDIX A: Proposed EPA Goals and Milestones   119     APPENDIX B1: Proposed PCSD National Goals and Indicators   126     APPENDIX B2: Proposed PCSD Sector Goals and Indicators   129     APPENDIX C: CENR Goals and Milestones   130

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Conventional wisdom holds that one of the first steps in developing a government policy or program is to articulate the goals it is supposed to achieve (C.E. Lindblom, The policy-making Process, 1978). Yet, at only slight risk of exaggeration, it can be argued that many of our major environmental statutes contain little more than hortatory phrases that offer scant guidance to the implementing agencies.2 Thus, retrospective program evaluations often mask disputes over what initial program goals should have been. While the goal of virtually all environmental legislation is to protect human health and the environment, such a broad statement is of little use because it begs various questions, including the following: How much protection is enough; who/what should be protected; and what kind of protection is appropriate? Most statutory provisions contain either acceptable risk goals, pollution reduction goals, or technology requirements. A few, such as the Clean Air Act, contain all three. Over the past twenty years, considerable progress has been made in reducing risks, reducing pollution (in all media), and promoting diffusion of environmentally sound technologies. Yet the key issues of how much further to go, what to emphasize, and how to determine success remain largely unresolved. Almost without exception, environmental programs have failed to define targets that are both meaningful and measurable. Within the past few years, a number of agencies have begun to fill that void. Most notably, in 1992, the EPA began a project to develop a set of goals to assist Agency management and the public at large in assessing the nation's future environmental progress. That project has gone through various iterations over the past three years and is now nearing completion. A draft version, referred to as the EPA goals project, is one of the three major projects reviewed in this paper. Coincident with the question(s) of whether and/or to what extent we are making progress in meeting often vague, legislatively mandated goals, three other concerns have arisen in the policy community. The first involves the question of whether our legislative goals are really the right ones for the present and/or the future. Specifically, many have questioned whether our statutes are driving us to commit our nation's resources to certain high-cost problems/strategies, while at the same time ignoring other important environmental concerns, including some with potentially low-cost solutions.3 The second policy issue concerns the absence of a strong linkage between our nation's environmental resource decisions and our economic and social development 2   Exceptions include provisions of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments for specified reductions in sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and stratospheric ozone depleters by various dates. For each of these pollutants, Congress reviewed analyses concerning the feasibility of attaining these goals prior to enactment of the statutes. In contrast, the Clean Water Act calls for the elimination of all discharges into navigable waters by 1985, which is, effectively, a hortatory goal. 3   There is a growing literature on this subject. Early work includes Unfinished Business (EPA, 1987) and Reducing Risk (EPA, Science Advisory Board, 1990).

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals decisions. This is related, in part, to the issue of inconsistent and/or duplicative government programs or policies. It has long been observed, for example, that one agency's pursuit of an environmental goal (e.g., reducing pesticide risks) may be undermined by another agency's pursuit of an agricultural goal (e.g., increasing agricultural output). Inconsistencies, of course, also occur within a single agency; we sometimes create a solid waste problem when we attempt to solve an air or water pollution problem. The third policy concern is focused on the coordination of research activities across the various agencies and subagencies of government. People question, for example, if federal research dollars are supporting an integrated strategy or, rather, if various parochial interests are the driving forces in individual agencies. The first two concerns form the core of the agenda of the President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). Comprised of leaders from the business, government, and nonprofit sectors, the PCSD was formed in mid-1993 to address a broad range of issues regarding the environment, the economy, and equity within our society. The third concern—pertaining to the integration of federal research efforts—is the province of the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR) of the National Science and Technology Council. Also established in 1993, CENR consists of representatives of the major environmental and natural resource agencies and key White House offices and is chaired by the Office of Science and Technology Policy. This paper reviews and compares the three major efforts put forth by EPA, PCSD, and CENR to establish our country's environmental goals. EPA and PCSD goals are still under development; however, draft versions are available to the public. CENR goals are presented in its 1995 strategic planning document. Key conclusions of this paper are as follows: The three goals reports address three fundamentally different sets of problems. The three goals projects have different technical approaches including different scopes, time frames, completeness of metrics, clarity of policy tools, and use of interim milestones. All three projects fail to address a number of important issues. The state of the art in environmental goal-setting is still in its infancy; however, these three efforts clearly represent a major step forward. An overwhelming strength common to all three projects is the implicit recognition that our environmental management system is in need of significant reform. Follow-through is key to success. Section I of this paper describes the three major projects in some detail. Section II addresses the issue of consistency among the projects. Section III develops a set of eight criteria upon which to compare and evaluate the projects'

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals various goals and metrics. Section IV compares the goals projects on the basis of the comparison criteria. Section V highlights a number of issues not emphasized by the three goals projects. The final section attempts to draw some overall conclusions. THE THREE MAJOR GOALS PROJECTS: A DESCRIPTION The full texts of the projects' goals and metrics are presented in Appendixes A through C. EPA's Environmental Goals for the Year 2005 As of this writing the EPA has not yet issued its final report, titled Environmental Goals for America with Milestones for 2005. EPA proposes 15 long-range environmental goals for the nation: clean air; climate change risk reduction; stratospheric ozone layer restoration; clean waters; healthy terrestrial ecosystems; healthy indoor environments; safe drinking water; safe food; safe workplaces; preventing spills and accidents; toxic-free communities through pollution prevention; safe waste management; restoration of contaminated sites; reducing global environmental risks; and better information and education; and clarifies each goal by providing a one- or two-sentence description of the long-range goal (usually without a specified year for attainment); a series of "ambitious but realistic" quantitative milestones, usually for the year 2005. In total, there are 65 EPA milestones. Some of them are tied to specific outcomes, while others are necessary but not sufficient conditions for the realization of the outcomes. Some of the milestones are results-based performance measures, while others are emission or technology based. Some are national in scope, while others are regional. For expository purposes, it is useful to consider in detail several individual goals and their corresponding milestones:

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals EPA Goal: Clean Air By 2010 and thereafter, the air will be safe to breathe in every city and community and it will be clearer in many areas. Life in damaged forests and polluted waters will rebound as acid rain is reduced. The first milestone for "safe" air in 2005 is the reduction in the number of metropolitan non-attainment areas to six from the current level of 60. That is, "safe" air will have the effect of reducing the number of people living in areas that do not meet the ambient standards to 45 million from today's level of 120 million. Implicit in this first milestone is the notion that safety levels are defined as the national ambient air standards established under the Clean Air Act. "Safe," of course, does not really mean "no risk.'' Also implicit in this milestone and consistent with the Air Act is the notion that success—for the year 2005—does not necessarily mean that all Americans will live in areas meeting the ambient standards. The second milestone for clean air uses an emissions goal from a large source category as a measure of success. It addresses one particular pollutant, volatile organic compounds, from the largest known source category, motor vehicles, and calls for a 65 percent reduction by the year 2005. The milestone description also calls for meeting the relatively prescriptive fuel and vehicle requirements of the Clean Air Act. However, no milestones are established for NO x reduction or for stationary sources in general. Also, no specific emissions goals (other than a general call to meet existing ambient standards) are given for pollutants associated with other ambient air quality standards (e.g., particulates). The third milestone for clean air on vehicle miles traveled is still under development. The fourth milestone addresses toxic emissions, as opposed to "conventional" pollution. It is a combined emissions-technology goal, calling for 174 categories of major industrial facilities, such as large chemical plants, oil refineries, and municipal waste incinerators, to meet toxic air emission standards. Unlike the second milestone which measures success by reductions in emissions of a particular pollutant, this milestone addresses "toxics" in general and does not specify how different toxics will be compared to one another (e.g., by volume or toxicity). In addition, unlike the second milestone, but consistent with the formulation in the Clean Air Act, success is measured in terms of compliance with a technology-based standard rather than on an output basis. Since not all the standards have been promulgated, the amount of toxics reduction has not been specified. The fifth milestone focuses on the issue of acid rain and uses an emissions approach that includes virtually all source categories. Consistent with the CAA, it calls for a reduction in SO2 by 32 percent from the 1994 level of 22 million tons. The sixth milestone concerns the clearness of the air. Like milestone one, it is output based, specifying that annual average visibility in the eastern U.S. will

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals improve by 10 to 30 percent. Further, it states that the greatest improvement will be found in a particular area, the central Appalachian region. EPA Goal: Climate Change Risk Reduction The United States and other nations will stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that prevents dangerous interference with the climate system. The level should be achieved within a time frame that allows ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, that ensures food production is not threatened, and that enables economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner. The single milestone for this goal states that U.S. emission of greenhouse gases—carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and halogenated fluorocarbons—will be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2000. This is an emissions goal that President Clinton has endorsed, although it was originally established as a non-binding target in the Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992). However, it is not clear how this goal relates to the larger goal of "… prevent(ing) dangerous interference with the Earth's climate system." Nor is there any linkage in the milestone between U.S. actions and those of other nations, as suggested in the goal statement. EPA Goal: Safe Waste Management The wastes produced by every person and business will be stored, treated, and disposed of in ways that prevent harm to people and other living things. The first milestone for safe waste management involves an emissions goal for dioxin emissions from hazardous, medical, and municipal solid waste incinerators. The second waste milestone concerns emissions of mercury and other harmful pollutants from the same source categories. Unlike the other milestones for safe waste management, which are primarily concerned with contamination of land, these milestones focus on releases into the air. These sources, which are subject to federal permit requirements managed by EPA's waste programs, represent an estimated 80 to 90 percent of known dioxin and mercury emissions. Milestone three concerns confirmed releases from underground storage tanks. Milestone four involves toxic wastewater injected into deep Class I wells, while milestone five focuses on so-called high-risk wastewater injection in shallow Class V wells. All three utilize emissions goals and/or federally mandated practices/standards as a means to define "safe." In all cases, the emissions goals are quantitative. In one case, injection of toxic wastewater in high-risk shallow wells, the practice is to be eliminated. The notion of high risk, of course, is subject to further clarification.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals PCSD's Eight National Goals to Put the U.S. on a Path Toward Sustainable Development The following discussion is based on the PCSD interim report dated June 28, 1995. The PCSD proposes eight "priority national goals" designed to "put the U.S. on a path toward sustainable development": prosperity, a healthy environment, conservation of nature, responsible stewardship, sustainable communities, cooperative democracy, stable populations, and international leadership. For each goal, the PCSD provides a one-sentence clarification of the goal; and a number of possible indicators of progress, which are quantitative in nature and designed to measure the movement toward achievement of the goals. In addition, the PCSD intends to propose policy recommendations for achieving each goal. (As of this writing, recommendations have not yet been released.) In general, PCSD's priority national goals are broadly defined and long-term in nature. Moreover, the goals are oriented toward the basic objectives of promoting efficiency, protecting the environment, and ensuring equity. This subsection explores three of these goals and their corresponding "indicators of progress" in an attempt to highlight some basic themes and characteristics of the PCSD's vision: PCSD Goal: Economic Prosperity Achieve long-term economic growth and prosperity that provides opportunity, meaningful jobs, and better living conditions for all Americans. Four of the six indicators of progress toward this goal (economic performance, savings rate, productivity, and environmental wealth) are designed to reflect the country's production and maintenance of wealth, and two indicators (income equity and poverty) are designed to reflect the country's distribution of income. The first indicator is the growth in GDP per capita and is designed to reflect economic performance.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals The second and third indicators, income equity and poverty, are measures of current income distribution. The fourth indicator, savings rate, is a key factor in assessing long-term economic growth. The fifth indicator, environmental wealth, is based on a new measure of wealth that reflects resource depletion and environmental costs. Finally, the sixth indicator, based on per capita production per hour worked, is designed to measure productivity. As a group, these represent a balanced and measurable set of indicators. Baseline data for five of the six indicators are readily available. Because of both conceptual and practical problems, developing an indicator on environmental wealth, however, is more problematic. The Commerce Department has been attempting to construct a very similar indicator, often referred to as Green GDP. Currently, work has been halted by Appropriations Committee language, adopted in 1994, barring further development of this indicator. PCSD Goal: A Healthy Environment Ensure that every person can enjoy the benefits of clean air, clean water, safe food, and secure and pleasant surroundings. Indicators of progress toward this goal are not all currently measurable: The first indicator, toxic materials per capita, is based on measures of long-lived and other toxic materials released into the environment as pollutants or waste; it does not consider distribution of toxic pollution across the U.S. population. The second indicator, life expectancy, is based on measures of expected life span covering various economic and demographic groups. The third indicator, infant mortality, is based on measures of infant mortality rates developed for various economic and demographic groups. The fourth indicator, safe drinking water, is based on measures of the percentage of the population whose safe drinking water does not meet safe drinking water standards. This indicator assumes the accuracy of the SDWA's definition of "safe." The fifth indicator, clean air, is based on a measure of the percent of U.S. population that lives in cities where air quality standards for one or more pollutants are not met. This indicator is consistent with the ambient standards of the Clean Air Act. These five indicators cover a broad range of issues, yet they do so in a fairly general matter. In many respects, they correspond to the EPA milestones. However, EPA has a total of 65 milestones (the great majority of which are health related). The PCSD has clearly opted for breadth over specificity.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals PCSD Goal: Sustainable Communities Strengthen communities' capacity to engage their citizens in actions to enhance fairness, provide economic opportunity, and maintain a safe and healthy environment. Indicators of progress attempt to "allow for the cultural diversity among communities while recognizing key national trends": The first indicator, violent crime, is based on measures of the number of people who feel safe walking through their neighborhood in the evening. Establishing a baseline may be difficult for this indicator. The second indicator, community design, is based on measures of access to jobs, shopping, services, and recreation, nearby transportation choices, and housing through "alternative land designs." This indicator attempts to reflect a community's economic opportunity, one of the multiple components of the goal. In a world of advanced telecommunications, however, it is not clear that traditional measures of economic opportunity are accurate. Moreover, it is questionable whether additional access routes, shopping centers, recreation centers, etc., enhance or threaten the health of the environment (another component of the goal). Finally, it is not clear how this indicator is calculated. The third indicator, public parks, is based on the amount of urban green space or park space. The fourth indicator, public participation, is based on the percentage of registered voters who cast ballots in the past two national elections and the percentage of individuals within a community who participate in social, recreational, charitable, and other civic activities. This indicator attempts to measure the extent to which citizens are "engaged" in the maintenance/betterment of their communities; it does not address the effectiveness of such efforts. The fifth indicator, investment in future generations, is based on the amount of community resources dedicated to its children, including maternal care, childhood development, and K-12 education. How the amount of resources dedicated to children is determined is not clear (e.g., is time spent by parents at home somehow included in this calculation?). Finally, the sixth indicator, transportation patterns, is based on the average mass transit miles, vehicle miles traveled per person, and the number of trips made possible by alternatives to personal motor vehicles. Weighting of the four subindicators and interpretation problems may be issues for this indicator. Unlike the literature on either economic or health-related issues, the literature on sustainable communities is not well developed. Thus, in many ways, the authors are breaking ground with these measures. While such measures represent a solid effort, issues related to baseline data availability and metric comprehensiveness and specificity are apparent.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals The PCSD also proposes goals and indicators specific to the energy, transportation, and agriculture sectors. CENR's Environmental and Natural Resource Goals for Research for Fiscal Year 1996 CENR's goals for environmental and natural resource research are presented in the context of five overall goals for Science and Technology: improved environmental quality; a healthier, safer America; a stronger economy; enhanced national security; and improved education and training. CENR's goals for improved environmental quality cover seven areas: air quality; biodiversity and ecosystem dynamics; global change; natural disaster reduction; resource use and management; toxic substances/hazardous and solid waste; and water resources and coastal and marine environments. For each of the seven goal areas, CENR provides a description of the current state of understanding; a characterization of the themes of the current research; proposed areas of enhanced emphasis; selected milestones for 1995–1998; and a proposed budget for fiscal year 1996, reflecting the Administration's priorities. Five of the seven research areas show at least slight budget increases. Two of the areas (resource use and management and natural disaster reduction) show slight declines from the previous year. In addition to the seven research areas, CENR presents five crosscutting topics for Integrated Environmental Research and Development: ecosystem research; observations and data management; social and economic dimensions of environmental change; environmental technology; and science policy tools: integrated assessments and characterizations of risks. These crosscutting topics span the seven environmental research areas. Each topic, in turn, has an environmental goal, key policy objectives, areas of enhanced emphasis, and selected milestones, 1995–1998. No separate budgets are presented for the crosscutting topics. The expository material emphasizes the process by which strategic planning

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Restoration of Contaminated Sites: Places currently contaminated by hazardous or radioactive materials will no longer endanger public health or the natural environment, and they will be restored to uses desired by surrounding communities. • By 2005, 70 percent of the 1,300 contaminated sites on the EPA's National Priorities List will be cleaned up, have the contamination contained, or have cleanup or containment work under way. • By 2005, 80 percent of the estimated 5,000 sites that warrant further EPA action will have contamination removed or cleanup completed. • By 2005, at least 10 percent of contaminated federal lands will be cleaned up and restored to uses desired by surrounding communities. • By 2005, actions to stabilize the further spread of contamination and/or protect people from further exposure to contamination will be under way at 1,275 industrial waste facilities (32 percent). These actions will be under way at 100 percent of facilities where actual human exposure have been identified. • By 2005, cleanups will be completed at 200,000 leaking underground storage tank sites. • By 2005, radioactivity will be cleaned up or contained at 6 percent of radioactively contaminated sites. • By 2005, the 10 percent most severely contaminated sediment sites in 1995 are to have point sources of contamination controlled. • By 2005, Responsible Parties will continue conducting 70 percent or more of the remedial work and percent of the removal work at Superfund sites. • By 2005, 99 percent of the currently known universe of potential Superfund sites (38,000) will have had an assessment decision made to determine whether the site will require federal action. Reducing Global Environmental Risks: Global and transboundary environmental threats to U.S. interests will be eliminated.  

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Better Information and Education: All people will be informed and educated stakeholders in environmental quality and active participants in environmental decisions at the personal, local, national, and global levels. • By 2005, information will be available on toxic chemical releases into the environment from all major industrial pollution sources. • By 2005, the public will have access to comprehensive, integrated environmental information on individual facilities. • By 2005, information on environmental programs will be available through electronic means that citizens and local organizations can access in homes, schools, and libraries. • By 2005, EPA will make available comprehensive and integrated information and statistics on national, regional, and local environmental conditions and trends. • By 2005, there will be substantial growth in the number of environmental education programs in schools, colleges, and communities. The communities will teach educators, students, and the general public how to make informed and responsible decisions about their actions that impact the environment.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals APPENDIX B1 PROPOSED PCSD NATIONAL GOALS AND INDICATORS National Goal Possible Indicators of Progress Prosperity: Achieve long-term economic growth and prosperity that provides opportunity, meaningful jobs, and better living conditions for all Americans. • Economic Performance: Growth in GDP per capita. • Income Equity: Ratio of the income of the top 20 percent compared with the bottom 20 percent of the United States population. • Poverty: Number of children living below the poverty line. • Savings Rate: Per capita savings rate. • Environmental Wealth: New measures that reflect resource depletion and environmental costs. • Productivity: Th : level of per capita production per hour worked. A Healthy Environment: Ensure that every person can enjoy the benefits of clean air, clean water, safe food, and secure and pleasant surroundings. • Toxic Materials: Measures of long-lived and other toxic materials released into the environment as pollutants or waste. • Life Expectancy: Measures of expected life span covering various economic and demographic groups. • Infant Mortality: Measures of infant mortality rates, developed for various economic and demographic groups. • Safe Drinking Water: Measures of the percentage of the U.S. population whose drinking water does not meet safe drinking water standards. • Clean Air: Percentage of population that lives in cities where air quality standards for one or more pollutants are not met. Conservation of Nature: Protect and seek to restore the health and biological diversity of ecosystems. • Vulnerable Ecosystems: Measures of the vulnerability of natural ecosystems to degradation from present land use patterns, involving such resources as forests, grasslands, wetlands, and coastal lands. • Conservation Status: Measures of lost natural systems or species (incorporating measures for soil loss, wetland loss, threatened and endangered species, remaining old growth forests, threatened and endangered rivers). • Nutrients and Toxics: Measures of nutrients and toxic pollutants that endanger or harm waters. • Exotic Species: Measures of ecological risk due to the introduction and spread of exotic species.   Source: PCSD report dated June 28, 1995.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Responsible Stewardship: Create an ethic of stewardship and community that encourages Americans to reduce resource use and take responsibility for the environmental and social consequences of their actions. • Material Consumption: Consumption per capita by type of material. • Toxics Accumulation: Amount of long-lived and other toxic materials released into the environment. • Virgin Material Use: Raw or virgin material input, per dollar of GDP output, by sector. • Renewable Material Use: Market share of renewable, recoverable, and recycled material inputs. • Water Use: Net amount of water used, compared with its recharge capacity. Sustainable Communities: Strengthen communities' capacity to engage their citizens in actions to enhance fairness, provide economic opportunity, and maintain a safe and healthy environment. • Violent Crime: Number of people who feel safe walking through their neighborhood in the evening. • Community Design: Measures of the access in rural and urban areas to jobs, shopping, services, and recreation, nearby choices for transportation, and housing through alternative land designs. • Public Parks: Amount of urban green space or park space. • Public Participation: Percentage of registered voters who cast ballots in the past two national elections and the percentage of individuals within a community who participate in social, recreational, charitable, and other civic activities. • Investment in Future Generations: Amount of community resources dedicated to its children, including maternal care, childhood development, and K-12 education. • Transportation Patterns: Average mass transit miles, vehicle miles traveled per person, and the number of trips made possible by alternatives to personal motor vehicles. Cooperative Democracy: Change the process of government to involve more fully citizens, businesses, and communities in collaborative resolution of natural resource, environmental, and economic decisions that affect them. • Social Capital: Measures of social capital, such as investment in education, and civic awareness. • Citizen Participation: Voter turnout and community participation in such civic activities as professional organizations, PTA, sporting leaques, and charity work. • Collaborations: Measures of characteristics that contribute to successful collaboration.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Stable Populations: Move toward stabilization of U.S. population. • Population Growth: Rate of population growth in the United States and the world. • Status of Women: Measures of the national and global social/economic status of women. • Unintended Pregnancies: Number of unintended pregnancies in the United States. • Teen Pregnancies: Number of teenage pregnancies in the United States. International Leadership: Practice globally the values of sustainability we espouse as a nation. • Treaty Commitments: Adherence to U.S. commitments under international environmental treaties, such as those signed in Agenda 21. • International Assistance: Level of U.S. international assistance, including Official Direct Assistance as a percentage of GDP. • Environmental Assistance: U.S. contribution to the Global Environmental Facility and other environmentally targeted development aid.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals APPENDIX B2 PROPOSED PCSD SECTOR GOALS AND INDICATORS Sector Goal Possible Indicators Of Progress Energy: Improve the economic and environmental performance of energy use to enhance national competitiveness and social well-being. • Energy Use: Amount of energy input per dollar of GDP output by sector. • Renewable Energy: Share of renewable and non-renewable energy use in U.S. energy supply. • Electric Efficiency: Average efficiency of electricity generation. • Greenhouse Gas Emissions: U.S. annual emissions of greenhouse gases. Transportation: Provide a U.S. transportation system that optimizes the performance and use of each type of transportation and enables access to regional and public transit that is reliable, affordable, and convenient. • Congestion: Congestion levels in urban areas. • Oil Imports: Oil dependency. • Transportation Emissions: Rates of annual greenhouse and other pollutant emissions (including carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen oxides, small particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, and volatile organic compounds) from transportation. • Transportation Patterns: Average mass transit and personal vehicle miles traveled per capita per year. Agriculture: Achieve long-term social and economic viability of farm communities and ensure a healthy and affordable supply of food and fiber. • Average percentage of household income spent on food and fiber. • Percentage of GDP spent on food production and distribution. • Level of concentrations of nutrients and pesticides in ground and surface water. • Trade balance in agricultural products. • Comparison of the per capita income and wealth of rural populations with national and non-rural averages, adjusted for differences in cost of living. • Comparison of unemployment rates among rural population groups, with national and non-rural averages.   Source: PCSD report dated June 28, 1995.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals APPENDIX C CENR GOALS AND MILESTONES Research Goal Selected Milestones, 1995–1998 Air Quality: The goal of the federal air quality research program is to help protect human health and the environment from air pollution by providing the scientific and technical information needed to evaluate options for improving air quality in timely and cost-effective ways. • Provide scientific input to air quality management planning for the highly stressed Great Smoky Mountains National Park by completing an extensive field study with diagnostic modeling to understand the extent, causes, and processes involved in local visibility problems. • Characterize the roles of production and movement of ground-level ozone formation in a region of high natural hydrocarbon emissions and a region of high complexity (Nashville Field Campaign-Southern Oxidants Study) to help formulate more effective emission abatement applications for specific regions of the country. • Quantitatively compare the effects of anthropogenic fine particles to those of coarse, windblown dust particles on human health. • Conduct a National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) assessment of (1) the reduction in deposition rates necessary to prevent adverse ecological effects and (2) the costs, benefits, and effectiveness of the current acid deposition control strategies mandated under Title IV of the CAAA of 1990. • Create Great Waters and Urban Toxics Inventories to characterize the major risks faced by Native Americans from their basic fish stocks and by inner-city individuals from airborne toxics in the urban environment. • Conduct a comprehensive state-of-science assessment of surface ozone that is summarized in policy-useful terms and that is prepared by the broad scientific community as well as other communities, sponsored by the relevant agencies, reviewed by peers and stakeholder communities, and timed to aid decisions associated with midcourse corrections in the state implementation plans required by the CAAA. • Standardize indoor air tests, develop instrumentation, and evaluate standard procedures that will lead to commercialization of monitoring equipment to improve the ''health" of the nation's residential and commercial buildings.   Source: CENR Strategic Planning Document dated March 10, 1995.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Biodiversity: The goal of federal research on biodiversity and ecosystem dynamics is to ensure the sustainability of the ecological systems and processes that support our social needs in areas such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, recreation, medicine, and the preservation of natural areas. • Publish common standards and protocols needed to classify and map ecological units and their biological and physical attributes. • Publish an ecosystem map for the United States at a scale that allows land-use planners, resource managers, industry, the public, and policy-makers to incorporate spatially explicit social, economic, and environmental factors into urban planning and resource management decisions. • Complete establishment of a network of representative long-term sites to determine how various ecosystem management approaches can be achieved. • Calculate the social and economic impacts (local, regional, and national) of alternative management scenarios; track cumulative social and economic effects of various ecosystem management regimes, such as impacts on fishery management and agricultural programs. • Determine the functional characteristics to be used to group species so that data essential to successfully maintaining or restoring the population of a species can be extrapolated from studies of a few representative species to entire groups of species.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Global Change: The goal of global change research is to observe and document global environmental changes and identify their causes, predict the responses of the earth system, determine the ecological and socioeconomic consequences of these changes, and identify strategies for adaptation and mitigation that will most benefit society and the environment. • Contribute to the international effort to develop a long-term comprehensive global earth observation system by launching the first in a series of earth observing system satellites, and establish a global change data and information system to make high-quality global change data accessible to researchers worldwide. • Incorporate new understanding of atmospheric radiation processes (including the role of clouds and aerosols), ecosystem processes, and social and economic driving forces into improved coupled ocean-atmosphere-land surface models to predict future long-term changes in climate. • Observe and document changes in the earthls stratospheric ozone layer through both space- and surface-based observation systems, and observe and document corresponding changes in UV radiation at the earth's surface through development of an intercalibrated network for monitoring radiation. Observe changes in human and ecosystem health related to changes in surface UV radiation and evaluate processes leading to health and environmental changes from UV radiation. Evaluate the effects on the ozone layer and the health and environmental risks of alternatives to CFCs and other halons. • Provide regular forecasts of the timing and distribution of extreme climatic events (flooding, droughts, etc.) related to seasonal to interannual climate variability (from such phenomena as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation) to communities to assist them in developing plans for preventing damage from climate-related disasters. • Develop regional assessments of vulnerability to climate change and evaluate the potential social, economic, and human health effects on communities, and the effects on local natural ecosystems, agricultural, forest, fishery, and water supply resources, that would occur if climate changes consistent within the range predicted by the IPCC were to occur. • Fulfill the U.S. commitment to establish strong international cooperation on global change research by supporting credible, internationally developed research programs (e.g., the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program, World Climate Research Program, and Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Program), the development of regional research institutes (such as the Inter-American Institute and the System for Analysis, Research, and Training), and international assessments (such as that of the IPCC).

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Natural Disaster Reduction: The goal of federal research in natural disaster reduction is to provide the scientific information necessary to make our society resilient to natural disasters by reducing the loss of life, property damage, and economic disruption caused by earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, fires, and volcanoes. • Make publicly available through Internet an information system to support the National Mitigation Strategy. • Identify weather-sensitive industries, and work collaboratively with them to assess the economic impacts of severe weather; implement a framework under the U.S. Weather Research Program for increasing the benefit of severe weather forecasts to these industries. • Complete a plan for national risk assessment that will guide U.S. planning for natural disaster avoidance and response. • Develop and distribute improved hazard warnings, and increase the effectiveness of hazard warnings in ensuring human safety through mechanisms for stakeholder feedback (including policy-makers, community planners, emergency response personnel, the general populace, and special populations). • Develop new technologies and engineering techniques for the seismic safety of new and existing buildings and lifelines, and implement new guidelines to enhance public safety and building resilience. • Develop an interagency system to provide real-time, accurate, and reliable observations of geomagnetic storms and solar wind, which can seriously compromise satellite operations and electric power delivery, and develop the capability to make 10-year geomagnetic storm forecasts. Resource Use and Management: The goal of federal R&D on resource use and management is to promote the management, conservation, and use of natural resources in ways that sustain and enhance terrestrial and marine ecosystems and the quality of life. This broad goal has three subcomponents: (1) link research to resource management at various temporal and spatial scales; (2) develop the science base and the technologies for determining the mix of resources that will promote sustainability; and (3) determine how best to sustain and use a given resource across landscapes and the seascape. • Define the protocols and techniques needed for integrated resource assessments. • Establish an integrated data base that links socioeconomic factors to measures of natural resource conditions and trends. • Define and implement site-specific and regional natural resource condition indicators that reflect the local and regional impacts of management activities. • Provide new or modified methods and management systems, for both renewable and nonrenewable resources, that are cost-effective and that minimize environmental damage associated with consumptive and non-consumptive uses. • Determine ways to extend the service life of materials, or improve recycling technologies to reduce consumptive use of renewable and nonrenewable resources.

OCR for page 97
Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Solid Wastes: The goal of federal toxic substances and hazardous and solid waste research is to prevent or reduce human and ecological exposure to toxic materials, such as pesticide residues, PCBs, and lead, and their adverse consequences by providing the scientific and technical information needed for informed decision- and policy-making and effective problem solving. • Produce a national research strategy on endocrine-disrupter chemicals. • Finalize the reassessment of the health and ecological effects from exposure to dioxin and related compounds. • Conduct cooperative research with industry partners to develop technological improvements to reduce inefficiency, substitute cleaner and less toxic chemicals, reduce costs, and improve environmental performance. • Provide improved exposure models for hazardous air pollutants. • Improve ecological risk characterization by better defining the responses of communities and ecosystems to toxic chemical stresses. • Implement a national program to verify performance of innovative environmental technologies. Water Resources and Coastal and Marine Environments: The goal of research on water resources and coastal and marine environments is to provide the scientific basis for managing water resources and aquatic environments to ensure adequate, quality water resources for domestic, industrial, agricultural, fishery, transportation, recreation, and other uses to meet equitably and efficiently the needs of present and future generations and to ensure the integrity, productivity, diversity, and vitality of lake, stream, estuary, and ocean coastal ecosystems. • Complete mapping and change detection of coastal land cover for all major coastal areas of the United States, including the coordinated management and dissemination of the change-detection data sets and management applications derived from them • Complete data collection, interpretation, and report preparation for the first 20 National Water-Quality Assessment Program sites, and initiate detailed planning for the final 20 sites. • Provide new, regional algorithms for remotely monitoring water mass movement, algal pigments, and productivity in coastal and estuarine water from satellites and aircraft. • Complete a peer-reviewed, comprehensive national assessment of the U.S. coastal environment that integrates evaluations of the state of the natural environment with assessments of the effectiveness of current governance mechanisms and structures and the social and economic effects of environmental change. • Provide improved assessment and field tools for predicting the cumulative effects of multiple stressors and carrying capacities in U.S. coastal and estuarine systems.