An important battle is currently taking place over the future direction of environmental enforcement in the United States. The conflict is in part between businesses and government; more fundamentally, however, it is between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states. EPA's vision of effective enforcement is one grounded in deterrence, the theory that generally underlies societal efforts to control unlawful behavior. Many states, by contrast, have been shifting to a more conciliatory, cooperation-oriented approach. Since environmental law rests on a federalism model giving states authority to implement federal statutes but only under federal oversight, and since the states' brand of enforcement does not follow EPA's deterrence-based policies, the area is rife with tension.

Several recent Articles in the Environmental Law Reporter have discussed significant enforcement issues, including research about the efficacy of deterrence-based policies and efforts by EPA to tweak its traditional enforcement approach. Those Articles, however, address only part of the current ferment about environmental enforcement. This Article looks at the broader canvas of enforcement issues today: the debate between the states and EPA over deterrence versus cooperation as a means to achieve compliance with environmental law.