Environmental Policy

Spring, 1998



Course Objectives

Environmental policy is a complex, constantly evolving field of public policy. Combining elements of law, the natural sciences, politics, economics, and other fields, environmental policy literally encompasses the world. This course provides an overview of the major elements of contemporary environmental policy with specific attention to recent developments at the state, national, and international levels that are likely to be the defining forces of environmental policy over the next decade.

The course will provide students with an understanding of:

  • the nature of environmental changes requiring policy responses
  • regulation as a management tool
  • alternatives to regulation, including market incentives
  • the role of public involvement in the formulation of environmental policy


Five elements are used to define environmental policy in the course:

  • Defining risks
  • Choosing appropriate policy tools
  • Establishing appropriate institutions
  • Involving the public in decisions

  • Developing and using appropriate accountability measures

These elements form the framework of tasks that must be accomplished in any environmental policy formulation and through which the political, scientific economic, legal, and other dimensions of environmental policy can be comprehended. By understanding each of the elements and how it applies to specific environmental issues, students will develop capabilities to deal with a wide variety of policy situations concerning the environment.

Required Readings

Maine Environmental Priorities Project, Summary Reports of the Technical Working Groups

John, DeWitt Civic Environmentalism

Bryner, Gary Blue Skies, Green Politics: The Clean Air Act of 1990

Chertow and Esty Thinking Ecologically

Readings Package available at the bookstore. (denoted in syllabus as RP)

Kennedy School case package available at the bookstore. (denoted in syllabus as KSG)



Assignments

Students are expected to read all material and participate actively in class discussions. Class participation will be counted in final grading with a weight of 10% .

There will be three written assignments. The first two will have the same basic form, and will count for 35% each of the final grade. The final paper, on a topic to be handed out in week 13, will count 30%.

The first two papers will be brief policy assessments, each 5-7pp. in length. In each paper students may choose any issues in environmental policy and assess that issue in terms of one of the five framework elements noted above. The issues must differ in the two papers, and may not be issues covered directly in class. The issue may be in Maine, at the national level, or elsewhere. Examples of issues that may be examined:

A particular environmental policy controversy

The environmental impacts of a proposed project and efforts to deal with them

The development of environmental policy legislation or regulations, such as new approaches to regulation or alternatives to regulation.

A legal, political, scientific, or economic issue in environmental policies.

The assessment will address the following questions:

What is the issue? A brief introduction to the question being examined.

How does the particular framework element (risk definition, choosing a management tool, building institutions, involving the public, developing accountability) help understand the nature of the issues, and how can that element of the framework lead to more effective environmental policy?

Students should be present a proposal of the topics on which they will write the assessment papers and the policy framework element they will use no later than three weeks before they are due. Papers are due in weeks 6 and 11.

Schedule and Readings

1. January 26 Course Introduction

Chertow and Esty: Introduction

Defining Risks

2. February 2 Maine Environmental Priorites Project: Reports from the Technical Working Groups

Vig and Kraft, pp. 3-20, 209-231

Chertow and Esty, Chapter 10

February 16 NO CLASS

Choosing Appropriate Tools

3. February 9 KSG: Cultures in Collison: Battling Over the Environmental Review of Quebec's Great Whale Project

4. February 23 Bryner, pp. 1-120

Muskie and the Clean Air Act (KSG)

5. March 2 Bryner, pp. 121-185

KSG: Ruckelshaus and Acid Rain

KSG: Unocal Corp.'s SCRAP: Crushing Old Cars for Credit

6. March 9 Maine Clean Air Stakeholder's Conference: Recommended Strategies

15% Rate of Progress Plan

7. March 16 KSG: Wetlands Protection v. Commercial Development: The Battle of Sweden's Swamp

Chertow and Esty, Chapters 2,3,4,5,12

EPA: The National Estuary Program after Four Years (RP)

8. March 23 Alternatives to Regulation

Chertow and Esty, Chapters 1, 7, 8, 14

KSG Note on Environmental Enforcement Programs

March 30 NO CLASS

Involving the Public

9. April 6 John, DeWitt, Civic Environmentalism (All)

10. April 13 Please be Patient: The Seattle Solid Waste Utility (KSG)

Toxics Release Inventory (KSG)

Developing Institutions

11. April 20 EPA-State of Maine Performance Partnership

Design for Environmental Protection (KSG)

Measuring Progress

12. April 27 Vig and Kraft, pp. 167-188.

EPA: Proposed Environmental Goals for America with Benchmarks to the Year 2005 (RP)

Future of Environmental Policy

14. May 4 Vig and Kraft, pp. 251-322

Chertow and Esty, Chapters 8,9,11,15

May 15 FINAL PAPER DUE