ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY
Why is environmental policy so
controversial?
Creates both winners and losers
– Losers may be interest groups or average
citizens
– Losers may not want to pay costs
Example: auto exhaust control
Shrouded in scientific uncertainty
Example: greenhouse effect
Takes the form of entrepreneurial politics
– Encourages emotional appeals: "good guys"
versus "bad guys"
THEME A
POLITICS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
I. MAJORITARIAN POLITICS:
Distributed benefits, distributed costs
A. Gives benefits to large numbers.
B. Distributed costs to large numbers
II. INTEREST GROUP POLITICS:
Concentrated benefits, concentrated costs.
A. Gives benefits to relatively small
group.
B. Cost imposed on another small group
III. CLIENT POLITICS: Concentrated
benefits, distributed costs
A. Relatively small group benefits
B. Costs distributed widely
C. Most people unaware of costs
IV. ENTREPRENEURIAL POLITICS:
distributed benefits, concentrated costs
A. Gives benefits to large number
B. Cost imposed on small group
C. Success depends on people who
work for unorganized majorities - Ralph
Nader, Rachael Carson
The American context
–
Environmental policy is shaped by
unique features of American politics
More adversarial than in Europe
–
–
–
–
–
Rules are often uniform nationally (auto
emissions)
But require many regulators and rules, strict
deadlines, and expensive technologies
Often government (pro-) versus business (anti)
Example: Clean Air Act, which took thirteen
years to revise in Congress
In England, rules are flexible and regional
(1). Compliance is voluntary
(2). Government and business cooperate
The American context
Depends heavily on states
– Standards are left to states,
subject to federal control
– Local politics decides allocations
– Federalism reinforces adversarial
politics; separation of powers
provides multiple points of access
Figure 21.1: Government
Regulation
Source: Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report (January 20, 1990), 185, updated with Wirthlin Worldwide Survey.
MAJORITARIAN POLITICS:
POLLUTION FROM AUTOMOBILES
Many people hope to benefit, but many
people (anyone who owns a car) will have
to pay the cost.
When People Believe the Costs Are Low
Environmental Impact Statements.
When People Believe the Costs Are High
Gasoline Taxes
INTEREST GROUP
POLITICS: ACID RAIN
Regions hurt by acid rain
(mainly in the Northeast) argue
with regions that product a lot of
acid rain (mainly in the
Midwest) about who should pay.
CLIENT POLITICS: AGRICULTURAL
PESTICIDES
Farmers manage to minimize federal
controls over the use of pesticides.
Most people are unaware of what foods
contain what pesticides or which, if any,
are harmful; farmers are keenly aware
of the economic benefits of pesticides
and are well organized to defend them.
ENTREPRENEURIAL POLICIES:
POLLUTION FROM FACTORIES
Many people hope to benefit from
rules that impose costs on a few firms.
Entrepreneurial politics gave
rise to environmental movement
Santa Barbara oil spill, Earth Day
Led to the formation of EPA and passage of the
Water Quality Improvement Act and tougher Clean
Air Act in 1970
Two years later Congress passed laws designed to
clean up water
Three years later Congress adopted the
Endangered Species Act
New laws passed into the 1990s
Existing environmental organizations grew in size
and new ones formed
Public opinion rallied behind environmental
slogans
Global warming
Earth's temperature rises from trapped gases in the
atmosphere
Predicted result: floods on coastal areas as the
polar ice caps melt; wilder weather as more storms
are created; and tropical diseases spread to North
America
Activist scientists versus skeptics scientists
–
–
–
Activists agree with predicted results and say we
should act now, despite scientific doubts
Skeptics say we should learn more before doing
anything
Survey indicates skeptics outnumber activists
Activists have greatest influence
U.S. signed Kyoto Protocol in 1997
THEME B - TRANSPORTATION
AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Much of environmental policy is
connected with the nation's
transportation system especially to
the use of automobiles.
At present, the number of cars
in use is increasing two times
faster than the rate of
population growth. The
amount of land nationwide
devoted to parking lots is
equivalent to the size of the
state of Georgia. The largest
source of toxins in our air is
from Motor Vehicles.
Majoritarian politics: pollution from
automobiles
–
Clean Air Act imposed tough restrictions
1975: 90 percent reduction of hydrocarbons and
carbon monoxide; 1976: 90 percent reduction in
nitrous oxides
Required catalytic converters
States were required to restrict public use of cars
– If auto emissions controls were insufficient- parking
bans required, implementation of car pools, gas
rationing
– Efforts failed: opposition too great
– Congress and the EPA backed down, postponed
deadlines
Consumers, auto industry, and unions objected
– Loss of horsepower
– Loss of competitiveness
– Loss of jobs
The Clean Air Act was weakened in 1977 but revived in
1990 with tougher standards
Public will support tough laws
If costs are hidden (catalytic converters)
But not if they have to change habits (car
pools)
Majoritarian politics when people
believe the costs are low: National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)
Requires environmental impact statement (EIS)
Does not require specific action
Passed Congress with overwhelming support
But encouraged numerous lawsuits that block or
delay projects
Popular support remains strong: costs appear
low, benefits high
Majoritarian politics when people
believe the costs are high
Increased gasoline taxes
– Would discourage driving, save fuel, and reduce
smog
– Most would pay, most would benefit
– But costs come long before benefits
– And benefits may not be obvious
Easier to raise gas tax if benefits are
concrete, for example, highways, bridges,
and so forth
Interest group politics: acid rain
–
Source of acid rain
–
Effects of acid rain
–
Regional battle
Burning of high-sulfur coal in midwestern factories
Winds carry sulfuric acid eastward
Rains bring acid to earth
Acidification of lakes
Destruction of forests
Long-term and some short-term effects are
unclear
East versus Midwest, Canada versus United States
Midwestern businesses deny blame and costs
Interest group politics: acid rain
–
Solutions and compromise
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Burn low-sulfur coal one alternative
Effective but expensive
Low-sulfur coal comes from West, high-sulfur coal is local
Install smokestack scrubbers a second alternative
Costly, not always effective, and leave sludge
But allow use of inexpensive high-sulfur coal
Congress voted for scrubbers for all new plants
Including those that burned low-sulfur coal
Even if plant was next to low-sulfur coal mine
Political advantages
Protected jobs of high-sulfur coal miners; powerful allies in
Congress
Environmentalists preferred scrubbers; "definitive" solution
to problem
Scrubber manufacturers preferred scrubbers
Eastern governors preferred scrubbers; made their plants
more competitive
Interest group politics: acid rain
–
Solutions and compromise
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Practical disadvantages
Failed to allow for plants that burn low-sulfur coal;
why spend money on scrubbers?
Scrubbers didn't work well
Failed to address problem of existing plants
Stalemate for thirteen years
Two-step regulation proposed by Bush
Before 1995: some plants could choose their
approach; fixed reduction but plants decide how to
do
After 1995: sharper reductions for many more
plants, requiring some use of scrubbers
Sulfur dioxide allowances could be bought and sold
Financial compensation for coal miners who lose jobs
Became part of Clean Air Act of 1990
Client politics: agricultural
pesticides
–
–
Issue: control of use and runoff of pesticides; farmers have
mostly resisted policy entrepreneurs, with DDT an
exception
EPA efforts to evaluate safety of all pesticides
Given mandate by Congress in 1972
Program has not succeeded
–
Too many pesticides to evaluate
(1). Many have only long-term effects needing extended
study
(2). Expensive and time-consuming to evaluate
–
Benefits of pesticide may outweigh harm
Political complications
–
Farmers are well-represented in Congress
–
Subsidies encourage overproduction, which encourages
overuse of pesticides
–
Damage is hard to see and dramatize
The EPA budget is small
Few pesticides have been removed from the market; only those
receiving heavy media coverage such as DDT in 1972
Client politics has won out
THEME C - ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY WITHOUT PUBLIC
INTEREST
THE ENVIRONMENTAL
UNCERTAINTIES
1. What is the Problem?
2. What Are Our Goals?
3. How Do We Achieve Our Goals.?
Offsets
An environmental rule that a company in
an area with polluted air can offset its own
pollution by reducing pollution from
another source in the area. For instance,
an older company that can't afford to pay
for new anti-pollution technologies may
buy pollution credits from a newer
company that has reduced its source of
pollution below the levels required by law.
Bubble standard
The total amount of air pollution that
can come from a given factory. A
company is free to decide which
specific sources within that factory
must be reduced and how to meet
the bubble standard.
Pollution Allowances (or banks)
If a company reduces its polluting
emissions by more than the law
requires, it can either use this excess
to cover a future plant expansion or
sell it to another company.
Command-and-control strategy
A strategy to improve air and water
quality, involving the setting of
detailed pollution standards and
rules.
Why is it so controversial?
1. Every policy creates winners and losers.
2. Many environmental issues are
enmeshed in scientific uncertainty.
3. Much environmental policy takes the
form of entrepreneur politics - mobilizing
decisions with strong, often emotional
appeals in order to overcome the political
advantages of client groups that oppose a
change.
THEME D - THE FUTURE ENVIRONMENT THE RESULTS
Evidence indicates that many current
environmental problems are intensifying while
new problems are continually emerging. Science
has been unable to develop workable solutions to
most forms of pollution. Such uncertainty
precludes the formulation of a coherent public
policy. As a result, this is an area where politics
will necessarily lag behind technology. Science
must define a direction.
The results: the environment has
improved since 1970 in some
aspects
–
–
–
Less air pollution
Maybe less water pollution but harder
to judge
Hazardous wastes remain a problem
IMPORTANT WEB SITES
www.worldwatch.org
www.epa.gov
SELF TEST