National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$74.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals (1996)
Policy Division (PD)

Citation Manager

. "Setting Environmental Goals: The View from Industry. A Review of Practices from the 1960s." Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 1996.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
294
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Linking Science and Technology to Society's Environmental Goals

grossly overly ambitious to the point that partial compliance by industry is the best that can be hoped for. The Clean Air and Clean Water Acts call for

the establishment of literally tens of thousands of discharge standards, mandate the creation of comprehensive monitoring networks … yet the laws allocated just 180 days for completion of many of these responsibilities. Today, more than seventeen years after the passage of the laws, many of those assignments have yet to be carried out.19

Second, federal environmental statutes often embody absolute goals (waters are to be "fishable and swimmable") and provide little guidance on appropriate metrics to be used in assessing progress towards the goal. The result is that the inevitable balancing of environmental and economic costs is performed implicitly, by firms acting on their own or in concert with regulatory bodies. Third, environmental goals established by government inevitably embody broader societal goals, such as redistribution of wealth or maintenance of certain productive sectors in the face of adverse environmental outcomes.

GOAL-SETTING IN THE STAGE OF PROACTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Several highly visible events, which occurred in the 1980s—the Bhopal toxic chemical release; the discovery of a hole in the ozone layer; and the Exxon Valdez oil spill—inextricably linked environmental degradation with the actions of industry. While the public sought to blame the chemical, petroleum, and other industries for their environmental wrongs, firms were simultaneously driven to accept responsibility for the environment. As a result, corporate environmental rhetoric is vastly different now as opposed to twenty, and even ten, years ago. A growing number of firms are participating in voluntary initiatives to reduce waste and restrict emissions, and industry leaders across a broad range of industries are changing their processes and products to make them more environmentally friendly. For some firms, environmental issues have been taken on as explicit business goals as the strategic importance of reducing the environmental burden of operations, and of communicating these commitments to the public, is recognized. In the words of one company, S.C. Johnson Wax,

The establishment of these goals was a recognition that environmental responsibility has become as integral a strategic element of the business as product performance and cost-effectiveness.20

The problems associated with environmental goal-setting by government have prompted repeated calls from many industry sectors for more flexible and "sensible" regulation. Industry associations for manufacturers see lobbying to restrict the purview of environmental regulation as a key part of their mandate. Of the 22 activities reported on by the Society of the Plastics Industry in its quarterly issue activity report published in May of 1995, eleven dealt directly with environmental

Page
294
Front Matter (R1-R12)
Part I: Committee Report (1-2)
Summary (3-14)
Society's Environmental Goals (15-26)
Use Social Science and Risk Assessment to Make Better Societal Choices (27-36)
Focus on Monitoring to Build Better Understanding of Our Ecological Systems (37-50)
Reduce the Adverse Impacts of Chemicals in the Environment (51-60)
Develop Environmental Options for the Energy System (61-72)
Use a Systems Engineering and Ecological Approach to Reduce Resource Use (73-80)
Improve Understanding of the Relationship Between Population and Consumption as a Means to Reducing the Environmental Impacts of Population Growth (81-86)
Set Environmental Goals Via Rates and Directions of Change (87-90)
Bibliography (91-94)
Part II: Commissioned Papers (95-96)
National Environmental Goals: Implementing the Laws, Visions of the Future, and Research (97-134)
Measurement of Environmental Quality in the United States (135-178)
Attitudes Toward the Environment Twenty-Five Years After Earth Day (179-190)
Environmental Goals and Science Policy: A Review of Selected Countries (191-242)
Can States Make a Market for Environmental Goals? (243-280)
Setting Environmental Goals: The View from Industry. A Review of Practices from the 1960s (281-326)
Status of Ecological Knowledge Related to Policy Decision-Making Needs in the Area of (327-344)
The Federal Budget and Environmental Priorities (345-398)
Part III: Keynote Addresses and Presentations (399-400)
D. James Baker, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (401-406)
Thomas Grumbly, U.S. Department of Energy (407-412)
Barry Gold, U.S. Department of the Interior (413-418)
Harlan Watson, House Committee on Science (419-422)
David Garman, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources (423-430)
John Wise and Peter Truitt, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (431-436)
Judith Espinosa and Peggy Duxbury, President's Council on (437-448)
Gilbert S. Omenn, University of Washington (449-462)
Part IV: Appendixes (463-464)
A Committee Member and Staff Biographical Information (465-470)
B Forum Agenda (471-474)
C Forum Participants (475-482)
D Summary of Responses to Call for Comments (483-488)
E Respondents to Call for Comments (489-496)
F Summary of Breakout-Group Discussions (497-500)
G Detecting Changes in Time and Space (501-504)
H Contents and Executive Summary of a Report of the Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government (505-516)
Index (517-530)