Environmental Encyclopedia

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

EPA into the cabinet-level position of Department of the

Environment, giving the agency more stature and power.

The EPA, the USFS and other federal environmental agen-

cies have announced a new “ecosystem” approach to resource

management and

pollution control

. In a bold first move,

Congressional Democratic leaders are simultaneously re-

viewing four major environmental statutes (the

Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act

[RCRA],

Clean Water

Act

[CWA],

Endangered Species Act

[ESA] and Su-

perfund) in the hopes of integrating the policies into a com-

prehensive program. See also Pollution Prevention Act

[Cathryn McCue and Kevin Wolf and Jeffrey Muhr]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Lave, Lester B. The Strategy of Social Regulation. Washington, DC: Brook-

ings Institution, 1981.

Logan, Robert, Wendy Gibbons, and Stacy Kingsbury. Environmental Issues

for the ’90s: A Handbook for Journalists. Washington DC: The Media Insti-

tute, 1992.

Portney, Paul R., ed. Public Policies for Environmental Protection. Washing-

ton, DC: Resources for the Future, 1991.

Wolf Jr., Charles. Markets or Government. Cambridge, Massachusetts:

MIT Press, 1988.

World Resources Institute. 1992 Environmental Almanac. Boston:

Houghton Mifflin Co., 1992.

ERIODICALS

Schneider, Keith. “What Price Clean Up?” New York Times, March 21–

26, 1993.

Smith, Fred. “A Fresh Look at Environmental Policy.” SEJ Journal 3

(Winter 1993).

THER

Browner, Carol. Administrator of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

comments during a press conference in Ann Arbor, MI. March 23, 1993.

Environmental and Energy Study Institute. Special Report. October 14,

1992.

Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was estab-

lished in July of 1970, a landmark year for environmental

concerns, having been preceded by the passing of the

Na-

tional Environmental Policy Act

in January and the first

Earth Day

celebrations in April. President Richard Nixon

and Congress, working together in response to the growing

public demand for cleaner air, land, and water, sought to

create a new agency of the federal government structured to

make a coordinated attack on the pollutants that endanger

human health and degrade the

environment

. The EPA

was charged with repairing the damage already done to the

507

environment and with instituting new policies designed to

maintain a clean environment.

The EPA’s mission is “to protect human health and

to safeguard the natural environment.” At the time the EPA

was formed, at least fifteen programs in five different agen-

cies and cabinet-level departments were handling

environ-

mental policy

issues. For the EPA to work effectively, it

was necessary to consolidate the environmental activities

of the federal government into one agency.

Air pollution

control

, solid

waste management

, radiation control, and

the drinking water program were transferred from the U.S.

Department of Health, Education and Welfare (currently

known as the

U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services

). The

water pollution

control and pesticides re-

search programs were acquired from the

U.S. Department

of the Interior

. Registration and regulation of pesticides

was transferred from the

U.S. Department of Agriculture

and the responsibility for setting tolerance levels for pesti-

cides in food was acquired from the

Food and Drug Admin-

istration

. The EPA also took over from the

Atomic Energy

Commission

the responsibility for setting some environ-

mental radiation protection standards and assumed some

of the duties of the Federal Radiation Council. For some

environmental programs, the EPA works with other agen-

cies: for example, the United States Coast Guard and the

EPA work together on flood control, shoreline protection,

and

dredging

and filling activities. And, since most state

governments in the United States have their own environ-

mental protection departments, the EPA delegates the im-

plementation and enforcement of many federal programs to

the states.

The EPA’s headquarters is in Washington DC, and

there are ten EPA regional offices and field laboratories.

The main office develops national environmental policy and

programs, oversees the regional offices and laboratories, re-

quests an annual budget from Congress, and conducts re-

search. The regional offices implement national policies,

oversee the environmental programs that have been dele-

gated to the states, and review Environmental Impact State-

ments for federal actions. The field laboratories conduct

research, the data from which are used to develop policies

and provide analytical support for monitoring and enforce-

ment of EPA regulations, and for the administration of

permit programs.

The administrator of the EPA is appointed by the

President, subject to approval by the Senate. The same proce-

dure is used to appoint a deputy administrator, who assists

the administrator, and nine assistant administrators, who

oversee programs and support functions. Other posts include

the chief financial officer, who manages the EPA’ budget

and funding operations, the inspector general, who is respon-

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

sible for investigating environmental crimes, and a general

counsel, who provides legal support.

In addition to the administrative offices, the EPA is

organized into the following program offices: The Office of

Air and Radiation, the

American Indian Environmental

Office

, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assur-

ance, the Office of Environmental Justice, the Office of

Environmental Information, the History Office, the Office

of International Affairs, the Office of Prevention, Pesticides

and Toxic Substances, the Office of Research and Develop-

ment, the Science Policy Council, the office of

Solid Waste

and Emergency Response, and the Office of Water.

The current EPA Administrator, elected by President

George W. Bush, is Christie Whitman, formerly Governor

of New Jersey, who was sworn in on January 31, 2001.

Whitman’s official administrative philosophy is that envi-

ronmental goals are compatible with and are connected to

economic goals, and that relationships between citizens, pol-

icy makers, and private sector must be strengthened. The

nomination of Linda J. Fisher to the post of EPA Deputy

Administrator was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on May

24, 2001. Fisher, who formerly practiced law in Washington

DC and has served as Vice President and Corporate Officer

at the Monsanto Co. in St. Louis MO, is Whitman’ top

managerial and policy assistant.

One of the major activities of the EPA is the manage-

ment of Superfund sites. For many years, uncontrolled

dumping of hazardous chemical and industrial wastes in

abandoned warehouses and landfills continued without con-

cern for the potential impact on public health and the envi-

ronment. Concern over the extent of the hazardous-waste-

site problem led Congress to establish the Superfund Pro-

gram in 1980 to locate, investigate, and clean up the worst

such sites. The EPA’ Office of Emergency and Remedial

Response (OERR) oversees management of the program in

cooperation with individual states. When a hazardous-waste

site is discovered, the EPA is notified. The EPA makes a

preliminary assessment of the site and gives a numerical

score according to

Hazard Ranking System

(HRS), which

determines whether the site is placed on the

National Priori-

ties List

(NPL). As of May 29, 2002, 1221 sites were listed

on the final NPL, with 74 new sites proposed, 812 sites

were reported to have completed construction, and 258 sites

had been deleted from the list. The final NPL lists Superfund

sites in which the clean-up plan is under construction or

ongoing. NPL proposed sites include sites for which the

HRS indicates that placement on the final NPL is appro-

priate. Among currently proposed NPL sites are Air Force

Plant 85 near Columbus OH (

coal

deposits

leaching

sulfu-

ric

acid

, ammonia, and

heavy metals

), Blackbird Mine in

Lemhi ID (high levels of

arsenic

copper

, cobalt, and

nickel

in surface water and sediments of Meadow and Blackbird

508

Creeks downstream from mining tunnels and waste-rock

piles), the Omaha

Lead

site in Omaha, NE (lead

contami-

nated soil

near populated areas and

wetlands

) and the

Libby

Asbestos

site in Libby, MT (heavy asbestos exposures

and chromium, copper, and nickel deposits near wetlands

and fisheries). A final NPL site is deleted from the list when

it is determined that no further clean up is needed to protect

human health or the environment Finally, under Superfund’s

redevelopment program, former hazardous-waste sites have

been remade into office buildings, parking lots, or even

golf courses

to be re-integrated as productive parts of the

community.

The offices and programs of the EPA recognize a set

of main objectives, or “core functions.” These core functions

help define the agency’s mission and provide a common

focus for all agency activities. The core functions are:

Pollution

Prevention—taking measures to prevent pollu-

tion from being created rather than only cleaning up what

has already been released, also known as source reduction

Risk Assessment and Risk Reduction—identifying prob-

lems that pose the greatest risk to human health and the

environment and taking measures to reduce those risks

Science, Research and Technology—conducting research

that will help in developing environmental policies and

promoting innovative technologies to solve environmental

problems

Regulatory Development—developing requirements such

as operating procedures for facilities and standards for

emissions of pollutants

Enforcement—assuring compliance with established regu-

lations

Environmental Education—developing educational mate-

rials, serving as an information clearinghouse, and provid-

ing grant assistance to local educational institutions

Many EPA programs are established by legislation

enacted by Congress. For example, many of the activities

carried out by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency

Response originated in the

Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act

(RCRA). Among other laws that form the

legal basis for the programs of the EPA are the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, which repre-

sents the basic national charter of the EPA, the

Clean Air

Act

(CAA) of 1970, the

Occupational Safety and Health

Act

(OSHA) of 1970, the

Endangered Species Act

(ESA)

of 1973, the

Safe Drinking Water Act

(SDWA) of 1974,

the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976, the

Clean Water Act

(CWA) of 1977, the Superfund Amend-

ments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, and the

Pollution Prevention Act

(PPA) of 1990. It is through such

legislation that the EPA obtains authority to develop and

enforce regulations. Environmental regulations drafted by

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

EPA organization chart. (Photograph by Tom Pantages. Reproduced by permission.)

the agency are subjected to intense review before being final-

ized. This process includes approval by the President’s

Office

of Management and Budget

and input from the private

sector and from other government agencies.

Public concern over the environmental changes with

time, and the EPA alters its policy priorities in response.

For example, in answer to growing concern regarding envi-

ronmental impact to children’s health, the Office of Chil-

dren’s Health Protection (OCHP) was created in May 1997.

On February 14, 2002, President George W. Bush an-

nounced the Clear Skies Initiative, which contain the farthest

reaching legislative changes to the Clean Air Act since 1990.

Growing public concern about water pollution led to

a landmark piece of legislation, the Federal Water

Pollution

Control

Act of 1972, amended in 1977 and commonly

known as the Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act

gives the EPA the authority to administer pollution control

programs and to set

water quality standards

for contami-

nants of surface waters. October 18, 2002, marks the thirtieth

Anniversary of the enactment of the Clean Water Act. In

continuing support of the goals of this Act, Congress has

proclaimed 2002 as the “Year of Clean Water.”

509

As part of its mission as an information clearing house,

the EPA maintains an excellent web site at <http://www.ep-

a.gov> with countless links to supporting information of all

kinds. The web site also includes Spanish translations of

many documents, and links to children’s activities.

[Teresa C. Donkin]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Environmental Management. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Pro-

tection Agency, October 1991.

Keating, B., and D. Russell. “Inside the EPA: Yesterday and Today...Still

Hazy After All These Years.” E Magazine 3 (August 1992): 30–37.

THER

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Laws and Regulations. Clean Water

Act. March 26, 2002 [cited July 10, 2002]. <http://www.epa.gov/region5/

water/cwa.htm>.

U.S. Environmental Protection Web Site. [cited July 10, 2002]. <http://

www.epa.gov>.

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental racism

The term environmental racism was coined in a 1987 study

conducted by the United Church of Christ that examined

the location of

hazardous waste

dumps and found an

“insidious form of racism.” Concern had surfaced five years

before, when opposition to a polychlorinated biphenyl

(PCB)

landfill

prompted Congress to examine the location

of hazardous waste sites in the Southeast, the

Environmen-

tal Protection Agency

(EPA)’s Region IV. They found that

three of the four facilities in the area were in communities

primarily inhabited by people of color. Subsequent studies,

such as Ben Goldman’s The Truth about Where You Live,

have contended that exposure to environmental risks is sig-

nificantly greater for racial and ethnic minorities than for

nonminority populations. However, an EPA study contends

that there is not enough data to draw such broad conclusions.

The National Law Journal found that official response

to environmental problems may be racially biased. According

to their study, penalties for environmental crimes were

higher in white communities. They also found that the EPA

takes 20% longer to place a hazardous waste site in a minority

community on the Superfund’s

National Priorities List

(NPL). And, once assigned to the NPL, these clean ups are

more likely to be delayed.

Advocates also contend that environmentalists and

regulators have tried to solve environmental problems with-

out regard for the social impact of the solutions. For example,

the Los Angeles Air Quality Management District wanted

to require businesses to set up programs that would discour-

age their employees from driving to work. As initially con-

ceived, employers could have simply charged fees for parking

spaces without helping workers set up car pools. The Labor-

Community Strategy Center, a local activist group, pointed

out that this would have disproportionately affected people

who could not afford to pay for parking spaces. As a compro-

mise, regulators will now review employers’ plans and only

approve those that mitigate the any unequal effects on poor

and minority populations.

In response to the concern that traditional

environ-

mentalism

does not recognize the social and economic com-

ponents of environmental problems and solutions, a national

movement for “environmental and economic justice” has

spread across the country. Groups like the Southwest Net-

work for Environmental and Economic Justice attempt to

frame the

environment

as part of the fight against racism

and other inequalities.

In addition, the federal government has begun to ad-

dress the debate over environmental racism. In 1992, the

EPA established an Environmental Equity office. In addi-

tion, several bills that advocate environmental justice have

been introduced. See also Comprehensive Environmental

510

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA);

Environmental economics; Environmental law; Hazardous

waste siting; South

[Alair MacLean]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Alston, D., ed. We Speak for Ourselves: Social Justice, Race and Environment.

Washington, DC: The Panos Institute, 1990.

Goldman, B. A. The Truth About Where You Live: An Atlas for Action on

Toxins and Mortality. New York: Times Books, 1991.

Lee, C. Toxic Wastes ad Race in the United States: A National Report on the

Racial and Socio-Economic Characteristics of Communities with Hazardous

Waste Sites. New York: United Church of Christ, Commission for Racial

Justice, 1987.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Equity: Reducing

Risk for All Communities: Report to the Administrator from the EPA Environ-

mental Equity Workgroup. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing

Office, 1992.

U.S. General Accounting Office. Siting of Hazardous Waste Landfills and

Their Correlation with Racial and Economic Status of Surrounding Communi-

ties. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1983.

ERIODICALS

Russell, D. “Environmental Racism.” Amicus Journal 11 (Spring 1989):

22–32.

Environmental refugees

The term environmental refugee was coined in the late 1980s

by the

United Nations Environment Programme

and re-

fers to people who are forced to leave their community

of origin because the land can no longer support them.

Environmental factors such as

soil erosion

drought

,or

floods, which are often coupled with poor socioeconomic

conditions, are the cause of this loss of

stability

and security.

Many environmental influences may cause such a displace-

ment and include the deterioration of agricultural land, natu-

ral or “unnatural” disasters,

climate

change, the destruction

resulting from war, and environmental

scarcity

Environmental scarcity can be supply induced, demand

induced, or structural. Supply induced scarcity refers to the

depletion of agricultural resources, as in the erosion of crop-

land or

overgrazing

. Demand induced scarcity occurs when

consumption of a resource increases or when

population

growth

occurs, as is occurring in countries such as Philip-

pines, Kenya, and Costa Rica. Structural scarcity results

from the unequal social distribution of a resource within a

community. The causes of environmental scarcity can occur

simultaneously and in combination with each other, as seen

in South Africa during the years of apartheid. Approximately

60% of the cropland in South Africa is marked by low organic

content, and half of the country receives less than 19.5 in

(500 mm) of annual precipitation. When these factors were

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental refugees

coupled with the rapid soil erosion, overcrowding, and un-

equal social distribution of resources experienced at this time,

environmental scarcity resulted. Other environmental influ-

ences such as climate change and natural disasters can greatly

compound the problems related to scarcity. Those countries

which are especially vulnerable to these other influences

are those which are already experiencing the precursors to

scarcity, for example, highly populated countries such as

Egypt and Bangladesh. On Haiti, per capita grain produc-

tion is half of what it was only 40 years ago and residents

only get about 80% of their minimum nutritional needs.

Environmental problems place an added burden on a situa-

tion that is already under pressure. When this combination

occurs in societies without strong social ties or political and

economic stability, many times the people within the popula-

tion have no choice but to relocate.

Environmental refugees tend to come from rural areas

and developing countries--those most vulnerable to the in-

fluences of scarcity, climate change, and natural disasters.

According to the

Centers for Disease Control and Preven-

tion

, since the early 1960s most emergencies involving refu-

gees have taken place in these

less developed countries

where resources are inadequate to support the population

during times of need. In 1995, CDC directed 45 relief

missions to developing countries such as Angola, Bosnia,

Haiti, and Sierra Leone.

The number of displaced people is rising worldwide.

Of these, the number forced to migrate because of economic

and environmental conditions is growing more rapidly than

refugees from political strife. According to Dr. Norman

Myers at the University of Oxford, there are 25 million

environmental refugees today, compared with 20 million

officially recognized refugees migrating due to political, reli-

gious, or ethical problems. It has been predicted that by the

year 2010, this number could rise to 50 million. The number

of migrants seeking environmental refuge is grossly underes-

timated because many do not actually cross borders but

are forced to wander within their own country. As global

warming causes major climate changes, these numbers could

increase even more. Climate change alone may displace 150

million more people by the middle of the next century. Not

only would a global climate change increase the number of

refugees, it could have a negative impact on agricultural

production which would seriously limit the amount of food

surpluses available to help displaced people.

Although approximately three out of every five refu-

gees are fleeing from environmental hardships, this group

of refugees is not legally recognized. According to the 1951

Convention on the Status of Refugees as modified by the

1967 Protocol, a legal refugee is a person who escapes a

country and cannot re-enter due to fear of persecution for

reasons of race, religion, nationality, social affiliation, or

511

political opinion. This definition requires both the element

of persecution as well as cross-border

migration

. Because

of these two requirements, states are not legally compelled

to recognize environmental refugees; as mentioned above,

many of these refugees never leave their own country, and

it is unreasonable to expect them to prove fear of persecution.

Environmental refugees are often forced to enter a country

illegally since they cannot be granted protection or asylum.

Many of the Mexican immigrants who enter the United

States are escaping the sterile, unproductive land they have

been living on. Over 60% of the land in Mexico is degraded,

with soil erosion contributing to over 494,000 acres (200,000

ha) more land being rendered unproductive every year. Many

of the people considered to be economic migrants are actually

environmental refugees. Those that are recognized as politi-

cal refugees often must live in overcrowded refugee camps

which are no more prepared to sustain the population than

the land they are escaping from. Two thousand Somali refu-

gees forced to live in such camps on the border of Kenya

were displaced once more when

flooding

in 1994 ended a

long drought but destroyed relief food. Many environmental

refugees never resettle and must live the rest of their lives

migrating from place to place, looking for land that can

sustain them.

Researchers are currently working on ways to predict

where the next large migrations will come from and how to

prevent them from occurring. Predictive models are ex-

tremely difficult to produce because of the interaction be-

tween the socioeconomic status of the people and the envi-

ronmental influences on the land. Stuart Liederman, an

environmental scientist at the University of New Hampshire,

is developing a model which will predict which areas are at

risk of producing environmental refugees. This model is a

mathematical formula which could be used with any popula-

tion. One side of the equation combines the rate of environ-

mental decay, the amount of time over which this deteriora-

tion will take place, and the susceptibility of the people and

the

environment

. The other side of the equation combines

the restoration rate, the time it would take to reestablish the

environment, and the potential for recovery of the people

and the land. These predictions will allow for preventive

measures to be taken, for preparations to be made for future

refugees, and for restoring the devastated homelands of past

migrants. Creation of a working model may also help con-

vince policymakers that those escaping unlivable environ-

mental conditions need to be legally recognized as refugees.

Until environmental refugees are granted legal status,

there will be no protection or compensation granted these

individuals. The most effective way to deal with the growing

number of displaced persons is to concentrate on the reasons

they are being forced to leave their homelands. The increas-

ing number of people forced to leave their homeland due

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental resources

to ecological strife is an indicator of environmental quality.

Environmental protection is necessary to prevent the situa-

tion in many countries from getting worse. In the meantime,

measures must be taken to accommodate the needs of these

refugees, and the environment must be recognized as a legiti-

mate source of conflict for individuals seeking protection in

other lands.

[Jennifer L. McGrath]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Jacobson, J. L. Environmental Refugees: A Yardstick of Habitability.

Worldwatch Institute, 1988.

Tickell, C. “Environmental Refugees: The Human Impact of Global Envi-

ronmental Change.” In Greenhouse Glasnost: The Crisis of Global Warming,

edited by T. Minger. New York: Ecco Press, 1990.

Lindahl-Kiessling, K., and H. Landberg, eds. Population, Economic Develop-

ment, and the Environment. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.

ERIODICALS

Fell, N. “Outcasts from Eden.” New Scientist Magazine 151, no. 2045

(August 1996): 24–7.

Homer-Dixon, T. F. “Environmental Change and Economic Decline in

Developing Countries.” International Studies Notes 16, no. 1 (Winter

1991): 18.

Myers, N. “Environmental Refugees in a Globally Warmed World.” BioSci-

ence 43, no. 11 (December 1993): 752–61.

THER

Centers for Disease Control. Famine Affected, Refugee, and Displaced Popula-

tions: Recommendations For Public Health Issues. MMWR 1992; 41 (No

RR-13).

Environmental resources

An environmental resource is any material, service, or infor-

mation from the

environment

that is valuable to society.

This can refer to anything that people find useful in their

environs, or surroundings. Food from plants and animals,

wood for cooking, heating, and building, metals,

coal

, and

oil are all environmental resources. Clean land, air, and water

are environmental resources, as are the abilities of land, air,

and water to absorb society’s waste products. Heat from the

sun,

transportation

and

recreation

in lakes, rivers, and

oceans, a beautiful view, or the discovery of a new

species

are all environmental resources.

The environment provides a vast array of materials

and services that people use to live. Often these resources

have competing uses and values. A piece of land, for instance,

could be used as a farm, a park, a parking lot, or a housing

development. It could be mined or used as a

garbage

dump.

The topic of environmental resources, then, raises the ques-

tion, what do people find valuable in their environment,

512

and how do people choose to use the resources that their

environment provides?

Some resources are renewable, or infinite, and some

are non-renewable, or finite. Renewable resources like energy

from the sun are plentiful and will be available for a long

time. Finite resources, like oil and coal, are non-renewable

because once they are extracted from the earth and burned

they cannot be used again. These resources are in limited

supply and need to be used carefully. Many resources are

becoming more and more limited, especially as population

and industrial growth place increasing pressure on the envi-

ronment. Before the Industrial Revolution, for example, peo-

ple relied on their own strength and their animals for work

and transportation. The invention of the steam engine in

the 1850s radically altered peoples’ ability to do work and

to consume energy. Today we have transformed our environ-

ment with machines, cars, and

power plants

and in the

process we have burnt extraordinary amounts of coal, oil,

and

natural gas

. Some predict that world coal deposits will

last another 200 years, while oil and natural gas reserves will

last another one hundred years at current rates of consump-

tion. This rate of use is clearly not sustainable. The terms

finite and infinite are important because they indicate how

much of a given resource is available, and how fast people

can use that resource without limiting future supplies.

Some resources that were once taken for granted are

now becoming more valuable. One of these resources is

the environment’s ability to absorb the waste that people

produce. In Jakarta, Indonesia, people living in very close

quarters in small shanties along numerous tidal canals use

their only water supply for bathing, washing clothes, drink-

ing water, fishing, and as a toilet. It is common to see

people bathing just down stream from other people who are

defecating directly into the river. This scene illustrates a

central problem in environmental resource management.

These people have only one water source and many needs

in order to live. The demands that they place on these

resources seriously affect the health and quality of life for

all the people, but all of the needs must be met in some

way. Thoughtful management of these environmental re-

sources, like building latrines, could alleviate some of the

strain on the river and improve other uses of the same

resource. People all over the world have taken for granted

the valuable resources of air, land, and

water quality

that many rivers are undrinkable and unswimable because

they contain raw sewage, chemical fertilizers, and industrial

wastes. As people make decisions about what they will take

from their environment, they also must be conscious of what

they intend to put back into that environment.

Resource economics was established during a time in

human history when environmental resources were thought

to be limitless and without value until they were harvested

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental science

and brought to market. From this viewpoint, the world is

big enough that when one resource is exhausted another

resource can be found to take its place. Land is valuable

according to what can be taken from it in order to make a

profit. This kind of management leads to enormous short

term gains and is responsible for the speed and efficiency

of economic growth throughout the world. One the other

hand, this view overlooks longer term profits and the reality

that the world is an increasingly small, interconnected, and

fragile system. People can no longer assume that they can

find fresh new supplies when they use up what they have.

Very few places on earth remain untouched and unexploited.

The world’s remaining forests, if managed with care,

could supply all of society’s needs for timber and still remain

relatively healthy and intact. Forest resources can be renew-

able, since forests grow quickly enough to replace themselves

if used in moderation. Unfortunately, in many places forests

are being destroyed at an alarming rate. In Costa Rica,

Central America, 25% of the remaining forest land has disap-

peared since 1970. These forests have been cleared to harvest

tropical hardwoods, to create farmland and pasture for ani-

mals, and to forage wood for cooking and heating. In a

country struggling for economic growth, these are all impor-

tant needs, but they do not always make long term economic

sense. Farmers who graze cattle in tropical rain forests or

who clear trees off of steep hillsides destroy their land in a

matter of years with the idea that this is the fastest way to

make money. In the same way, loggers harvest trees for

immediate sale, even though many of these trees take hun-

dreds of years to replenish themselves. In fact, the price for

tropical hardwoods has gone up four-fold since 1970. The

trees cut and sold in 1970 represent a huge economic loss

to the Costa Rican economy, since they were sold for a

fraction of their present value. Often, the

soil

on this land

quickly erodes downhill into streams and rivers, clogging

the rivers with

sediment

and killing fish and other

wildlife

This has the added drawback of damaging hydroelectric and

irrigation dams

and hurting the fishing industry.

Despite these tragic losses, Costa Rica is a model in

Central America and in the world for finding alternative uses

for its

natural resources

. Costa Rica has set aside one fifth

of its total land area for

nature

preserves and

national park

lands. These beautiful and varied parks are valuable for several

reasons. First, they help to protect and preserve a huge diver-

sity of tropical species, many undiscovered and unstudied.

Second, they protect a great deal of vegetation that is impor-

tant in producing oxygen, stabilizing atmospheric chemistry,

and preventing global

climate

change. Third, the natural

beauty of these parks attracts many international tourists.

Tourism is one of Costa Rica’s major industries, providing

much needed economic development. People from around

the world appreciate the beauty and the wonder—the intangi-

513

ble values—of these resources. Local people who would have

been hired one time to cut down a forest can now be hired for

a lifetime to work as park rangers and guides. Some would

also argue that these nature preserves have value in themselves

without reference to human needs, simply because they are

filled with beautiful living birds, insects, plants, and animals.

Much of the dialogue in environmental resource man-

agement is about the need to balance the needs for economic

growth and prosperity with needs for sustainable resource

use. In a limited, finite world, there is a need to close the

gap between the rates of consumption and rates of supply.

The debate over how to assign value to different environmen-

tal resources is a lively one because the way that people think

about their environment directly affects how they interact

with the world.

[John Cunningham]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Ahmad, Y., et al. Environmental Accounting and Sustainable Development:

A UNEP World Bank Symposium. Washington, DC: World Bank, 1989.

ERIODICALS

Repetto, R. “Accounting for Environmental Assets.” Scientific American

266 (June 1992): 94–8+.

Environmental restoration

see

Restoration ecology

Environmental risk analysis

see

Risk analysis

Environmental science

Environmental science is often confused with other fields of

related interest, especially

ecology

, environmental studies,

environmental education

, and

environmental engi-

neering

. Renewed interest in environmental issues in the

late 1960s and early 1970s, gave rise to numerous programs

at many universities in the United States and other countries,

most under two rubrics: environmental science or environ-

mental studies. The former focused, as might be expected,

on scientific questions and issues of environmental interest;

the latter were often courses, with the emphasis on questions

environmental ethics

, aesthetics, literature, etc.

These new academic units marked the first formal

appearance of environmental science on most campuses, at

least by that label. But environmental science is essentially

the application of scientific methods and principles to the

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental stress

study of environmental questions, so it has probably been

around in some form as long as science itself. Air and

water

quality

research, for example, have been carried on in many

universities for many decades: that research is environmental

science.

By whatever label and in whatever unit, environmental

science is not constrained within any one discipline; it is a

comprehensive field. A considerable amount of environmen-

tal research is accomplished in specific departments such as

chemistry, physics, civil engineering, or the various biology

disciplines. Much of this work is confined to a single field,

with no interdisciplinary perspective. These programs gradu-

ate scientists who build on their specific training to continue

work on environmental problems, sometimes in a specific

department, sometimes in an interdisciplinary environmen-

tal science program.

Many new academic units are interdisciplinary, their

members and graduates specifically designated as environ-

mental scientists. Most have been trained in a specific disci-

pline, but they may have degrees from almost any scientific

background. In these units, the degrees granted—from B.S.

to Ph.D.—are in Environmental Science, not in a specific

discipline.

Environmental science is not ecology, though that

discipline may be included. Ecologists are interested in the

interactions between some kind of organism and its sur-

roundings. Most ecological research and training does not

focus on environmental problems except as those problems

impact the organism of interest. Environmental scientists

may or may not include organisms in their field of view:

they mostly focus on the environmental problem, which may

be purely physical in

nature

. For example,

acid deposition

can be studied as a problem of emissions and characteristics

of the

atmosphere

without necessarily examining its impact

on organisms. An alternate focus might be on the

acidifica-

tion

of lakes and the resulting implications for resident fish.

Both studies require expertise from more than one traditional

discipline; they are studies in environmental science. See also

Air quality; Environment; Environmental ethics; Nature;

Water quality

[Gerald L. Young Ph.D.]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Cunningham, W. P. Environmental Science: A Global Concern. Dubuque,

IA: William C. Brown, 1992.

Henry, J. G., and G. W. Heinke. Environmental Science and Engineering.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1989.

Jorgensen, S. E., and I. Johnson. Principles of Environmental Science and

Technology. 2nd ed. Amsterdam, NY: Elsevier, 1989.

514

Environmental stress

In the ecological context, environmental stress can be consid-

ered any environmental influence that causes a discernible

ecological change, especially in terms of a constraint on

ecosystem

development. Stressing agents (or stressors) can

be exogenous to the ecosystem, as in the cases of long-range

transported acidifying substances, toxic gases, or pesticides.

Stress can also cause change as a result of an accentuation

of some pre-existing site factor beyond a threshold for bio-

logical tolerance, for example thermal

nutrient

availability, wind, or temperature extremes.

Often implicit within the notion of environmental

stress, particularly from the perspective of ecosystem manag-

ers, is a judgement about the quality of the ecological change.

That is, from the human perspective, whether the effect is

“good” or “bad.”

Environmental stressors can be divided into several,

not necessarily exclusive, classes of causal agencies:

“Physical stress” refers to episodic events (or disturbance)

associated with intense but usually brief loadings of kinetic

energy, perhaps caused by a windstorm, volcanic eruption,

tidal wave, or an explosion.

Wildfire is another episodic stress, usually causing a mass

mortality

of ecosystem dominants such as trees or shrubs

and a rapid

combustion

of much of the

biomass

of the

ecosystem.

Pollution occurs when certain

chemicals

are bio-available

in a sufficiently large amount to cause toxicity. Toxic stres-

sors include gaseous air pollutants such as

sulfur dioxide

and

ozone

, metals such as

lead

and

mercury

, residues of

pesticides, and even nutrients that may be beneficial at

small rates of supply but damaging at higher rates of

Nutrient impoverishment implies an inadequate availability

of physiologically essential chemicals, which imposes an

oligotrophic

constraint upon ecosystem development.

Thermal stress occurs when heat energy is released into

an ecosystem, perhaps by aquatic discharges of low-grade

heat from

power plants

and other industrial sources.

Exploitative stress refers to the selective removal of particu-

lar

species

or size classes. Exploitation by humans includes

the harvesting of forests or wild animals, but it can also

involve natural herbivory and predation, as with infesta-

tions of defoliating insects such as locusts, spruce budworm,

gypsy moth

, or irruptions of predators such as crown-

of-thorns starfish.

Climatic stress is associated with an insufficient or excessive

regime of moisture, solar radiation, or temperature. These

can act over the shorter term as weather, or over the longer

term as

climate

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmental Working Group

Within most of these contexts, stress can be exerted

either chronically or episodically. For example, the toxic

gas sulfur dioxide can be present in a chronically elevated

concentration in an urbanized region with a large number

of point sources of

emission

. Alternatively, where the emis-

sion of sulfur dioxide is dominated by a single, large

point

source

such as a

smelter

or power plant, the toxic stress

associated with this gas occurs as relatively short-term events

fumigation

Environmental stress can be caused by natural agencies

as well as resulting directly or indirectly from the activities

of humans. For example, sulfur dioxide can be emitted from

smelters, power plants, and homes, but it can also be emitted

in large quantities by volcanoes. Similarly, climate change

has always occurred naturally, but it may also be forced by

human activities that result in emissions of

carbon dioxide

methane

, and

nitrous oxide

into the

atmosphere

Over most of Earth’s history, natural stressors have

been the dominant constraints on ecological development.

Increasingly, however, the direct and indirect consequences

of human activities are becoming dominant environmental

stressors. This is caused by both the increasing human popu-

lation and by the progressively increasing intensification of

the per-capita effect of humans on the

environment

[Bill Freedman Ph.D.]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Freedman, B. “Environmental Stress and the Management of Ecological

Reserves.” In Science and the Management of Protected Areas, edited by J.

H. M. Willison, et al. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1992.

Grime, J. P. Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes. New York: Wiley, 1979.

Environmental Stress Index

Environmental Stress

Index (ZPG) is a survey to determine

the quality of life in American cities. Zero Population

Growth, Inc. based in Washington D.C., conducted this

“Urban Stress Test” in the late 1980s. One hundred and

ninety-two cities were selected throughout the United States.

The population-linked survey was based on 11 criteria: Pop-

ulation change; Population density; Education; Violent

crime; Community economics; Individual economics (per-

cent below federal poverty level and per capita income);

Births (percent of teenage births and infant

mortality

);

Air

quality

(meeting

Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) standards);

Hazardous waste

(number of EPA-

designated hazardous waste sites); Water (quality and sup-

ply); Sewage (model cities provide better than secondary

treatment of their

wastewater

515

Cites were ranked one to six with number one being

best. The cities with the lower scores were called model

cities. The cities with the higher scores were called the

stressed cities. Among the model cities were Abilene, Texas,

with an index of 1.6; Roanoke, Virginia, 1.6; Berkeley, Cali-

fornia, 2.0; Colorado Springs, Colorado, 2.0; and Peoria,

Illinois, 2.0.

Among America’s worst cities were Phoenix, Arizona,

5; Houston, Texas, 4.5; Los Angeles, 4.3; Honolulu, Hawaii,

4.3; and Baltimore, Maryland, 4.3.

Environmental Working Group

The Environmental Working Group is a public interest

research group that monitors public agencies and public

policies on topics relating to environmental and social justice.

EWG publicizes its findings in research reports that empha-

size both national and local implications of federal laws and

activities. These research reports are based on analysis of

public databases, often obtained through the Freedom of

Information Act. In operation since 1993, EWG is a non-

profit organization funded by grants from private founda-

tions. EWG is based in Washington, D.C. and Oakland,

California, and is associated with the Tides Center of San

Francisco. The organization performs its research both inde-

pendently and in collaboration with other public interest

research groups such as the

Sierra Club

and the Surface

Transportation

Policy Project (a nonprofit coalition focus-

ing on social and environmental quality in transportation

policy).

EWG specializes in analyzing large computer data-

bases maintained by government agencies, such as the Toxic

Release Inventory database maintained by the

Environmen-

tal Protection Agency

to record spills of toxic

chemicals

into the air or water, or the Regulatory Analysis Manage-

ment System, maintained by the

Army Corps of Engineers

for internal tracking of permits granted for filling and drain-

ing

wetlands

. Because many of these data sources are capa-

ble of exposing actions or policies embarrassing to public

agencies, EWG has often obtained data by using the Free-

dom of Information Act, which legally enforces public re-

lease of data belonging to the public domain. Many of the

databases researched by EWG have never been thoroughly

analyzed before, even by the agency collecting the data.

EWG is unusual in working with primary data—going di-

rectly to the original database—rather than basing its re-

search on secondary sources, anecdotal information, or inter-

views.

Research findings are published both in print and elec-

tronically on the Internet. Electronic publishing allows im-

mediate and inexpensive distribution of reports that concern

Environmental Encyclopedia 3

Environmentalism

issues of current interest. EWG is a prolific source of infor-

mation, producing extensive, detailed reports, often at a rate

of more than one a month. Among the environmental topics

on which the EWG has reported are drinking

water qual-

ity

, wetland protection and destruction, and the impacts of

agricultural pesticides on both farm workers and consumers.

Social justice and policy issues that EWG has researched

include campaign finance reform, inequalities and ineffi-

ciency in farm subsidy programs, and threats to public health

and the

environment

from

medical waste

. For each gen-

eral topic, EWG usually publishes a series of articles ranging

from the nature and impacts of a federal law to what individ-

uals can do about the current problem. Also included with

research reports are state-by-state and county summaries of

statistics

, which provide details of local implications of the

general policy issues.

[Mary Ann Cunningham Ph.D.]

ESOURCES

OOKS

Cook, K. A., and A. Art. City Slickers: Farm Subsidy Recipients in America’s

Big Cities. Washington, DC: Environmental Working Group, 1995.

Environmental Working Group. Dishonorable Discharge: Toxic Pollution of

America’s Waters. Washington, DC: Environmental Working Group, 1996.

RGANIZATIONS

Environmental Working Group, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 600,

Washington, D.C. USA 20009 (202) 667-6982, Fax: (202) 232-2592,

Email: info@ewg.org, <http://www.ewg.org>

Environmentalism

Environmentalism is the ethical and political perspective

that places the health, harmony, and integrity of the natural

environment

at the center of human attention and concern.

From this perspective human beings are viewed as part of

nature

rather than as overseers. Therefore to care for the

environment is to care about human beings since we cannot

live without the survival of the natural

habitat

Although there are many different views within the

very broad and inclusive environmentalist perspective, several

common features can be discerned. The first is environmen-

talism’s emphasis on the interdependence of life and the

conditions that make life possible. Human beings, like other

animals, need clean air to breathe, clean water to drink, and

nutritious food to eat. Without these necessities, life would

be impossible. Environmentalism views these conditions as

being both basic and interconnected. For example, fish con-

taminated with polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB),

mercury

and other toxic substances are not only hazardous to humans

but to bears, eagles, gulls, and other predators. Likewise,

mighty

whales

depend on tiny

plankton

, cows on corn,

516

koala bears on eucalyptus leaves, bees on flowers, and flowers

on bees and birds, and so on through all

species

and ecosys-

tems. All animals, human and nonhuman alike, are interde-

pendent participants in the cycle of birth, life, death, decay,

and rebirth.

A second emphasis of environmentalism is on the

sanctity of life—not only human life but all life, from

the tiniest microorganism to the largest whale. Since the

fate of our species is inextricably tied with theirs and

since life requires certain conditions to sustain it, environ-

mentalists contend that we have an obligation to respect

and care for the conditions that nurture and sustain life

in its many forms.

While environmentalists agree on some issues, there

are also a number of disagreements about the purposes of

environmentalism and about how to best achieve those ends.

Some environmentalists emphasize the desirability of con-

serving

natural resources

for

recreation

, sightseeing,

hunting

, and other human activities, both for present and

future generations

. Such a utilitarian view has been sharply

criticized by Arne Naess and other proponents of

deep

ecology

who claim that the natural environment has its

own

intrinsic value

apart from any aesthetic, recreational,

or other value assigned to it by human beings. Bears, for

example, have their own intrinsic value or worth, quite apart

from that assigned to their existence via

shadow pricing

or other mechanism by bear-watchers, hunters, or other

human beings.

Environmentalists also differ on how best to conserve,

reserve, and protect the natural environment. Some groups,

such as the

Sierra Club

and

the Nature Conservancy

, favor

gradual, low-key legislative and educational efforts to inform

and influence policy makers and the general public about

environmental issues. Other more radical environmental

groups, such as the

Sea Shepherd Conservation Society

and

Earth First!

, favor carrying out direct action by em-

ploying the tactics of ecotage (ecological sabotage), or

mon-

key-wrenching

, to stop

strip mining

logging

, drift net

fishing, and other activities that they deem dangerous to

animals and ecosystems. Within this environmental spec-

trum are many other groups, including the

World Wildlife

Fund

Greenpeace

Earth Island Institute

, Clean Water

Action, and other organizations which use various tech-

niques to inform, educate, and influence public opinion re-

garding environmental issues and to lobby policy makers.

Despite these and other differences over means and

ends, environmentalists agree that the natural environment,

whether valued instrumentally or intrinsically, is valuable

and worth preserving for present and future generations.

[Terence Ball]