Search results

The virtual inability to open new hazardous waste management facilities in Canada and the United States stems directly from a form of community opposition so common and vehement that it is commonly identified as a syndrome: Not In My Back Yard (or NIMBY). Whether such facilities are proposed by governmental agencies or by private waste management firms, communities are usually shocked to learn that they have been selected to host these facilities and take collective action to thwart them. Such actions have blocked many poorly planned facilities and stimulated greater interest in preventive, waste reduction strategies. They have also, however, thwarted the adoption of new waste management technologies and created serious geographic inequities in the distribution of waste management responsibility across the two nations. Beyond NIMBY examines positive alternatives to prevailing approaches to siting and the familiar NIMBY outcomes. In particular, it shows that certain siting strategies in Canadian provinces and American states have created successful siting agreements, broad public support, and comprehensive systems of waste management and prevention. These strategies include continuous public involvement in waste policy deliberations, a commitment to pursue siting only among communities that volunteer after extended democratic dialogue, and extensive packages of economic compensation and assurances of safe, long-term facility management. Equally important are guarantees that any new facility will be only part of a broader waste strategy for a particular province, state, or region and will not be allowed to become a magnet for wastes from areas that have not taken serious steps to address their own waste problems. The book concludes with the suggestion that these strategies can be applied to other NIMBY-blocked proposals, such as siting for prisons,

AbstractMethane is a potent greenhouse gas but it has received strikingly less social science attention than carbon dioxide in examining climate policy options. This article explores American state policy toward methane that is not captured and instead released into the atmosphere during oil and gas production. It examines whether states have adopted market‐based approaches to price methane flaring and venting through long‐standing severance taxes on natural gas extraction. Such taxes exist in all but one production state, routinely materializing after prolonged adoption battles. Most states have maintained methane release exemptions from these taxes through either statute or administrative discretion between 1960 and 2000, although a few have allowed some form of pricing. Two state legislatures have explored applying these taxes to methane releases on multiple occasions since 2000, amid expanded shale era output and growing public concern about climate and air quality impacts. Steadfast production industry opposition, rather than technical feasibility, emerges as the primary factor leading to rejection in these cases. Even when framing releases as a conventional air contaminant or as permanent loss of a nonrenewable natural resource, states largely continue to exempt flared or vented methane from severance taxes.

AbstractMultilevel governance poses several challenges for the politics of climate change. On the one hand, the unequal distribution of power and interests can serve as a barrier to implementing coherent policy at a federal level. On the other, these features also enable policy leadership among sub‐federal units. In the context of wide variation in climate policy at both national and sub‐federal levels in Canada and in the United States, this paper utilizes an original data set to examine public attitudes and perceptions toward climate science and climate change policy in two federal systems. Drawing on national and provincial/state level data from telephone surveys administered in the United States and in Canada, the paper provides insight into where the public stands on the climate change issue in two of the most carbon‐intensive federal systems in the world. The paper includes the first directly comparable public opinion data on how Canadians and Americans form their opinions regarding climate matters and provides insight into the preferences of these two populations regarding climate policies at both the national and sub‐federal levels. Key findings are examined in the context of growing policy experiments at the sub‐federal level in both countries and limited national level progress in the adoption of climate change legislation.

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Figures and Tables -- Preface -- Introduction: The Roots of Moral Austerity in Environmental Policy Discourse -- Part I. Moral Principles and Environmental Policy: Basic Issues and Dilemmas -- Issue 1: Science as a Substitute for Moral Principle? Science as a Substitute for Moral Principle -- Science Is No Substitute for Moral Principle -- Issue 2: Environmental Justice without Social Justice? Why Environmental Thought and Action Must Include Considerations of Social Justice -- Environmental Justice: Private Preference or Public Necessity? -- Issue 3: Nature Has Only an Instrumental Value Sustainability: Descriptive or Performative? -- Are Environmental Values All Instrumental? -- Issue 4: Intrinsic Value Implies No Use and a Threat to Democratic Governance A Practical Concept of Nature's Intrinsic Value -- On Intrinsic Value and Environmental Ethics -- Part II. Case Studies in Sustainable Environmental Policy and Law -- Introduction -- The Subnational Role in Sustainable Development: Lessons from American States and Canadian Provinces -- Sustainable Development and Natural Hazards Mitigation -- Sustainable Governance -- Sustainability in the United States: Legal Tools and Initiatives -- Sustainable Development and the Use of Public Lands -- The Impact of Political Institutions on Preservation of U.S. and Canadian National Parks -- Global Environmental Accountability: The Missing Link in the Pursuit of Sustainable Development? -- Part III. Moral Principles and Sustainable Environmental Policy: An Analysis of Ends and Means -- Introduction -- Issue 1: Science and Sustainability Sustainability, Sustainable Development, and Values -- Saving All the Parts: Science and Sustainability -- Discussion -- Issue 2: Environmental Policy, Sustainability, and Social Justice Why Environmental Public Policy Analysis Must Include Explicit Normative Considerations: Reflections on Seven Illustrations -- Sustainability and Environmental Justice: A Necessary Connection -- Discussion -- Issue 3: A Sustainable Environment as an Instrumental Value? The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Environment -- Why Not Foxy Hedgehogs? -- Discussion -- Issue 4: A Sustainable Environment as an Intrinsic Value? Sustainability: Restricting the Policy Debate -- Comments on Sustainability -- Discussion -- Conclusion: Democratic Competence, Accountability, and Education in the Twenty-first Century -- Notes -- References -- Contributors -- Index