National Governance: Still Stumbling Toward Sustainability
Editor's Summary
Editor's Summary
On November 4, 2008, voters around the country considered 153 statewide ballot measures in 36 states, including 84 measures referred by state legislatures and 59 citizen-driven initiatives. In the post-election media analysis, many ballot pundits focused on the outcomes of elections involving social issues, such as gay marriage and abortion, and gave little attention to the 47 measures--almost one-third of the total--that will arguably more directly influence the pace, direction, and shape of growth in America's communities and regions.
When President Richard M. Nixon created the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1970, his vision was of "a strong, independent agency." The first EPA Administrator, William D. Ruckelshaus, established three principles for the Agency: (1) support for the scientific process and reliance on scientific results; (2) adherence to rule of law, including faithful implementation and enforcement of environmental laws; and (3) avoidance of excessive politicization.
I. A "Green Magnet" to Incubate Solutions for a Green Planet
Editors' Summary
The philosophy of ecosystem management (EM) has come to dominate the field of environmental law. Even in the absence of explicit adoption of EM processes in legislation, agency practices tend to reflect its premises: that the best approach to environmental governance is to understand, measure, control, and change ecosystems to produce the highest and best environment in human terms.
On May 12, 2009, President Barak Obama issued Executive Order No. 13508 to address protection and restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. The Bay is in bad shape and getting worse. Something more needs to be done, and the order proclaims "a renewed commitment" on the part of the federal government toward that end. Bravo! But how will the federal government approach the task? The order makes clear that the future of the Bay depends on two themes of governance: ecosystem management to establish the substantive context; and adaptive management to design the method of implementation.
Who would have thought that the notion of adaptive management could be controversial? But it is, for good reason, and my colleagues J.B.Ruhl and Bruce Pardy ably present two poles of the debate. In Ruhl's view, the problem is that ecosystems are complex and expecting approaches to manage them to spring full-blown and flawless is unrealistic. Better to let scientists and managers maneuver forward, finding their way. Existing legal requirements are a handicap. Flexibility is the answer.