scholarly journals The Public Health Aspects of Environmental Enforcement

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Kundis Craig
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Environmental Regulation ◽  
Clean Water Act ◽  
Health Benefits ◽  
Clean Air Act ◽  
Clean Water ◽  
Environmental Enforcement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Clean Air

Beyond being an environmental concern, pollution is a public health problem. As a result, enforcement of anti-pollution statutes, such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, not only protects the environment, but also furthers fundamental public health goals. Moreover, public health benefits provide politically salient arguments for continuing and even strengthening environmental protection that can counteract any political opposition that can arise as a result of the costs of environmental regulation and compliance to regulated entities and the taxpayers.Thus, it is worth examining the extent to which the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) considers the public health in its environmental enforcement priorities and decisions. Focusing on the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, this Article undertakes such an examination by: (1) outlining the statutory connections between public health considerations and environmental regulation; (2) examining the EPA’s enforcement priorities and guidance; and (3) criticizing the EPA’s presentation of its own enforcement effectiveness over the last decade.This Article concludes that public health considerations do play a significant role in environmental enforcement policies and decisionmaking. However, the EPA’s commitment to presenting the public health benefits of its enforcement actions has varied considerably over the last decade. With the release of its FY2009 enforcement assessment, however, the EPA has both expanded its analysis of the connection between environmental pollution enforcement and public health benefits and created new tools to enhance the transparency of these benefits to the affected public.

ASSESSING THE FRAMEWORK OF POLICY OUTCOMES: THE CASE OF THE U.S. CLEAN AIR ACT AND CLEAN WATER ACT

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (04) ◽  
pp. 1450034 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUKE FOWLER
Keyword(s):  
Water Quality ◽  
Air Pollutants ◽  
Clean Water Act ◽  
Clean Air Act ◽  
Management Control ◽  
Assessment Criteria ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
Clean Water ◽  
Clean Air ◽  
The U.S

The Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean Water Act (CWA) have been the lynchpins of the U.S. environmental policy for the last half century. Under both acts the federal government sets standards and the states implement, the outcomes of the CAA and CWA have not been the same however. While criteria air pollutants across the nation have been reduced or maintained under the management control strategies of the CAA, far less is known about the effects the CWA has had on water quality, even though, most agree water quality has improved since its implementation. These acts are built on similar frameworks, but the real difference lies on the embedded identification of assessment criteria. The CAA creates a rigid framework for the consistent identification and monitoring of air pollutants, while the CWA relies on a much more flexible system that varies over space and time. Thus, it is the embedded environmental assessment criteria within these acts that have led to different outcomes for similar policies.

APPLICABILITY OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT TO INDIAN TRIBES—MAY TRIBES STOP OR CONSTRAIN A CLEANUP?1

1993 ◽  
Vol 1993 (1) ◽  
pp. 675-679
Author(s):  
Michael L. Emge
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Clean Water Act ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Clean Water ◽  
Tribal Sovereignty ◽  
General Application ◽  
The Public ◽  
Indian Tribes ◽  
Tribal Lands

ABSTRACT Indian tribes retain their sovereign rights of self-government and self-determination unless it is specifically waived by the tribe or abrogated by the U. S. Congress, through treaty or statute. The Clean Water Act does not specifically abrogate tribal sovereignty. This raises the issue of what would occur if an on-scene coordinator decides that cleanup of tribal lands is necessary to protect the public health and welfare, but the tribe does not want the cleanup activities to proceed? May a tribe impede cleanup efforts? During the cleanup of the barge Nestucca oil spill, this occurred when the Quinault Tribe did not allow the OSC to clean lands that the tribe holds sacred. This issue with the Clean Water Act has not been decided by Congress, nor by the courts. Recently, courts have applied at least three different approaches to determine if a statute of general application, such as the Clean Water Act, applies to Indian tribes. The different tests do not always yield the same result. An on-scene coordinator, when confronted with this scenario, might handle the situation in several different ways, or perhaps move to prevent such an occurrence. The different approaches used by the courts can be taken together to gain a sense of whether the Clean Water Act may preempt tribal sovereignty.

scholarly journals Picking Up Where the TMDL Leaves Off: Using the Partnership Wild and Scenic River Framework for Collaborative River Restoration

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 1878
Author(s):  
Alan R. Hunt ◽  
Meiyin Wu ◽  
Tsung-Ta David Hsu ◽  
Nancy Roberts-Lawler ◽  
Jessica Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Water Quality ◽  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
Bacterial Contamination ◽  
Resource Constraints ◽  
Clean Water Act ◽  
The United States ◽  
Clean Water ◽  
Private Land ◽  
The Public ◽  
Wild And Scenic Rivers

The National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act protects less than ¼ of a percent of the United States’ river miles, focusing on free-flowing rivers of good water quality with outstandingly remarkable values for recreation, scenery, and other unique river attributes. It predates the enactment of the Clean Water Act, yet includes a clear anti-degradation principle, that pollution should be reduced and eliminated on designated rivers, in cooperation with the federal Environmental Protection Agency and state pollution control agencies. However, the federal Clean Water Act lacks a clear management framework for implementing restoration activities to reduce non-point source pollution, of which bacterial contamination impacts nearly 40% of the Wild and Scenic Rivers. A case study of the Musconetcong River, in rural mountainous New Jersey, indicates that the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act can be utilized to mobilize and align non-governmental, governmental, philanthropic, and private land-owner resources for restoring river water quality. For example, coordinated restoration efforts on one tributary reduced bacterial contamination by 95%, surpassing the TMDL goal of a 93% reduction. Stakeholder interviews and focus groups indicated widespread knowledge and motivation to improve water quality, but resource constraints limited the scale and scope of restoration efforts. The authors postulate that the Partnership framework, enabled in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, facilitated neo-endogenous rural development through improving water quality for recreational usage, whereby bottom-up restoration activities were catalyzed via federal designation and resource provision. However, further efforts to address water quality via voluntary participatory frameworks were ultimately limited by the public sector’s inadequate funding and inaction with regard to water and wildlife resources in the public trust.

Valuing Clean Air

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Halvorson
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
Environmental Concern ◽  
Clean Air Act ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Elected Officials ◽  
Liberal State ◽  
Monetary Approach ◽  
Clean Air ◽  
Roll Back

The passage of the Clean Air Act and the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1970 marked a sweeping transformation in American politics. In a few short years, the environmental movement pushed Republican and Democratic elected officials to articulate a right to clean air as part of a bevy of new federal guarantees. Charged with delivering on those promises, the EPA represented a bold assertion that the federal government had a responsibility to protect the environment, the authority to command private business to reduce their pollution, and the capacity to dictate how they did so. But revolutions are always contested and the starburst of environmental concern that propelled the Clean Air Act and the EPA coincided with economic convulsions that shook the liberal state to its core. As powerful businesses pressed to roll back regulations, elected officials from both parties questioned whether the nation could keep its environmental promises. Pushing on, the EPA adopted a monetized approach to environmental value that sat at odds with environmentalist notions of natural rights but provided a critical shield for the agency’s rulemaking, as environmental protection came to serve as a key battleground in larger debates over markets, government, and public welfare. The EPA’s success and the potential limits of its monetary approach are evident in the very air we breathe today—far cleaner and healthier as a result of the EPA’s actions, but holding new threats in a rapidly changing climate.

Environmental Protection in the United States Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Industry: An Overview of Regulation of Wastewater Under the U.S. Clean Water Act

1988 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca W. Hanmer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
Clean Water Act ◽  
Paper Industry ◽  
Oxygen Demand ◽  
The United States ◽  
Pulp And Paper ◽  
Clean Water ◽  
Pulp Paper

The pulp, paper, and paperboard industry in the United States is the larqest industrial user of water with half of the facilities discharging wastewater directly to our Nation's waters. The major pollutants of concern have historically been the conventional pollutants: biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), total suspended solids (TSS), and pH. Biological treatment systems are currently employed to reduce these pollutants. Sludges generated by these treatment systems have been categorized as nonhazardous and are generally landfilled. Under the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated all the reguired regulations for this industry. The national regulations are applied to individual pulp and paper mills through permits issued by EPA Regional or State staff. Permit limits can be written that are more restrictive than the national regulations to protect local water guality. In its current projects concerning the pulp and paper industry, EPA is focusing on the reduction of toxic pollutants. The Agency is conducting a joint EPA/industry program to study dioxin discharges at bleached kraft mills. The Agency will also undertake a comprehensive review of the pulp and paper regulations in 1988.

scholarly journals Public health benefits and risks of fish consumption: current scientific evidence v. media coverage

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1885-1892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico A Pasquaré ◽  
Roberta Bettinetti ◽  
Sonia Fumagalli ◽  
Davide A Vignati
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Fish Consumption ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Information Source ◽  
Health Benefits ◽  
Fish Intake ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Media

AbstractObjectiveTo evaluate if and how the current degree of scientific uncertainty about the safety of fish consumption is incorporated at the media level.DesignWe used a dedicated software (TalTac®) to investigate the content of 169 news articles related to ‘mercury and fish consumption’ that appeared from 1990 to 2010 in the two Italian broadsheets with the highest circulation figures, in order to identify journalistic frames used in the coverage of benefits v. risks associated with fish consumption. Hypotheses were made on how the public might change fish consumption patterns as a result of media coverage.SettingItaly.ResultsThe two newspapers have different agendas in covering the issue. La Repubblica appears to support the view that, besides health benefits, there may be risks associated with fish consumption, while Corriere della Sera emphasizes health benefits more than possible risks. Depending on the preferred information source, the public could: (i) reduce its fish intake; (ii) increase its fish intake; or (iii) become confused about the problem and sceptical towards the media, as a result of conflicting journalistic frames.ConclusionsThe Italian media, in cooperation with scientists, public health nutritionists and dietitians, should place more emphasis on the existence of a few fish species with high to very high Hg levels and relatively low contents of beneficial n-3 fatty acids (e.g. swordfish and shark). This would enable consumers to make more educated purchasing decisions to maximize the benefits of n-3 intake while reducing possible risks from consuming Hg-contaminated fish.

The public health benefits of mobile phones

BMJ ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 323 (7310) ◽  
pp. 447-447
Author(s):  
D. Lawlor
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mobile Phones ◽  
Health Benefits ◽  
The Public

Identifying the public health benefits of livestock-dependent, agro-ecosystems under climate change

2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shana Gillette
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Health Benefits ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Disease Avoidance ◽  
Potential Health ◽  
The Public ◽  
Disease Risks ◽  
Livestock Systems

AbstractAs the demand for meat continues to grow in South Asia and Africa and access to communal sources of water and forage shrinks, intensification of small-scale livestock systems in peri-urban areas is expected to expand. In South East Asia, smallholder transition to livestock intensification has been transformative, increasing economic opportunities while also introducing new disease risks. While we have an understanding of the emerging disease burden from livestock intensification; we have just begun to understand the possible public health benefits of sustainable landscapes and the potential health savings accrued from disease avoidance. To date, few studies have attempted to quantify the health benefits attributable to sustainable agro-ecosystems, especially in regard to livestock systems. In this paper, I will examine what is needed to measure and communicate the public health benefits and cost-savings (from disease avoidance) of sustainable agro-ecosystems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document