Page images
PDF
EPUB

II. CONCLUSIONS

The human race is, in fact, managing the environment today. The powerful forces of technology at our disposal give us capabilities to alter and control the populations of other species, and the natural resources of air, water, minerals and food supplies. The task of optimizing the use of the world to the benefit of man is inescapable. There is no retreat to a passive, noninterfering, Eden-like relationship with

nature.

The population of human beings is already great enough to require a careful and methodical approach to the environment, if all are to achieve a reasonable standard of living. There is little doubt that population pressures will increase for many years to come. Thus, the environment, both natural and artificial, will be subjected to heavier usage in the future than in the past.

One lesson of this technological age is that machines must be kept in good condition if they are to deliver high performance. This appears to apply to the mechanisms operating in ecosystems, as living things interact with each other and their physical surroundings. From this viewpoint, the maintenance of a high environmental quality is rationalized on the simple basis that it is the best way to run the world. Degradation of the environment increases overall costs and may eliminate desired options of management. A high quality environment is also the most efficient environment in serving man's needs.

The long-term support for civilization must be based on a farsighted management of a healthy productive worldwide environment. The two are incapable of separation.

It is difficult to evaluate changes or uses for immediate gain in terms of their eventual effect on the status of the environment. There are conflicts when environmental quality is managed by different policies, originating in conservation, agriculture, esthetics, recreation, economic development, human health, and so forth.

An overall policy for the environment must be established which integrates these purposes and objectives and which provides for choice when they are incompatible. Within such a policy, for example, pollution abatement would be balanced against other national needs and other threats to environmental quality. Choices are not always quantitative and trade-offs are not systematic.

It is the mistakes in management, and not the concept of management, which should be our concern. Science and technology must be employed to reduce the number of mistakes in environmental management and to improve our ability to take the long view.

Increased knowledge and a national policy can result in individual (and, therefore, institutional) attitudes toward the environment which will support a restoration and maintenance of quality. This personal responsibility is the only means of achieving the indicated goals. The ultimate quality of the environment depends on the discipline of its human inhabitants.

The human environment is recognized as a whole (the "web of life"), but virtually all activities are directed at small parts. A lifetime spans many years but is lived a day at a time. These simplistic facts mean that a comprehensive policy toward the environment cannot help but be philosophical rather than specific. Regardless, such a policy does exist in the habits and attitudes of a nation. Presumably, these can be changed by discussion and education to become more mature. The quality of the environment is not a human health issue, per se. It is more a matter of the unacceptability, at face value, of offensive odors, discolored water, low visibility, eye irritation, littered landscapes, and nuisance soiling.

The recent history of Federal legislation and its administration illustrates the searching of society for a better balance between immediate exploitation of resources and a recognition of noneconomic, long-term values. The present laws relate pollution to the impairment of a desired use. The refinement of the relationship depends on scientific knowledge and technical economics.

The intent of Congress in these laws is to avoid arbitrary regulation and to establish a fact-based, rational decisionmaking process which integrates all the needs of society. The evidence to date is that the laws are floundering due to inadequate information, and misinterpretation of existing facts. The translation of information into action has not been smooth.

Both administrative and judicial bodies are being asked to act without being able to document the basis for their decisions. Because the pace of technological change is rapid, and the pressures on natural resources from a rising standard of living and a growing population are great, actions cannot often be delayed. Some will be correct and others will turn out to be wrong. There is a difference between actions to correct clear and present dangers and those required for gradual eventual improvements which may take generations to accomplish. When the difference is not recognized, disappointing delays are likely

to occur.

If errors in management are to be minimized, a greatly accelerated search for knowledge of the environment is necessary. Data must be organized and correctly interpreted. The physical, biological, and social sciences must be deployed to obtain this knowledge. A research strategy must be devised to get the relevant facts as soon as possible. An organizational structure of public and private institutions must use the facts efficiently and objectively.

The past several years have demonstrated this need but there is today no Federal Government plan to satisfy it. The short term, highly visible, demands on scientific resources are a barrier to formulating this strategy for ecological research and environmental engineering. But the leadership of the Nation, both public and private, must organize and carry out such a program. Otherwise, future subcommittees will again study the problem of environmental management and come to the same conclusion as does this one:

A well intentioned but poorly informed society is haphazardly deploying a powerful, accelerating technology in a complex and somewhat fragile environment. The consequences are only vaguely discernible.

III. RECOMMENDATIONS

A. NATIONAL POLICY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

1. A national policy of the United States for the environment should be developed by Government and private sector interests. Worldwide effects should be considered during the planning of this policy.

2. Hazards to human health from environmental degradation cannot be the sole basis of policy (although research to elucidate these relationships should be accelerated). Legally useful cause-and-effect data may be so difficult to obtain that dependence on human health as the determinant of abatement action may delay management progress. 3. Elements of the policy should include:

a. Use of the environment for the benefit of all mankind; b. Maximized productivity of the environment consistent with continued usage into the very long-term future;

c. Systematic management of applied science and technology to achieve best usage;

d. Incentives to industry, land developers and local governments;

e. International agreement on projects which have widespread or long-term effects;

f. Anticipatory assessment of new and extended applications of science:

g. Avoidance of speculative statements and emotional appeals in public relations;

h. An increased education and information program for the public in ecological principles.

4. The policy should be expressed in legislation after due deliberation by both Houses of the Congress. Informal joint House-Senate study groups should be convened from time to time to coordinate national policy in operational programs.

B. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENT

1. The Office of Science and Technology should coordinate allocations and priorities in Federal agency R. & D. funding so that a greatly expanded knowledge of the environment is secured. The activities of the Committee on Environmental Quality should be conducted in a more open manner and be summarized in a promptly issued annual report to the Congress.

2. Baseline ecological information should be obtained by adequate funding and organization of the international biological program and the environmental sciences and biology program of the National Science Foundation.

3. Social science information to reduce the need for subjective choice. among environmental values should be developed rapidly under the leadership of the National Science Foundation.

C. ORGANIZATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT 1. The Department of the Interior should be designated as the lead agency in coordinating environmental engineering operations of all Federal programs.

2. The hearings record suggests that the major environmental engineering operations of all Federal agencies should be placed together in the Department of the Interior. For example, the domestic environment related activities of the Corps of Engineers should be transferred from the Department of Defense. The nonhealth programs of the National Center for Air Pollution Control and the Solid Waste Division within the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare should be separated and transferred to the Department of the Interior.

It is recommended that the appropriate committees of the Congress (including the Subcommittee on Executive and Legislative Reorganization of the House Committee on Government Operations and the Subcommittee on Executive Reorganization of the Senate Committee on Government Operations) should immediately undertake the study which will be necessary to implement this suggestion in its organizational detail. The Executive Office of the President should consider initiating reorganization plans which may be necessary.

3. Human health criteria for environmental contamination (including air and water) should continue to be constructed and published under the direction of the DHEW, but with the full participation of all interests in an open manner characterized by the scientific method. 4. In each agency with substantial programs related to the environment, a high level official should be designated to supervise and correlate such activities.

5. An "Environmental Cabinet" should be formed of the designated officials from each agency plus the Chairman of the FCST Committee on Environmental Quality. This group, under the leadership of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior, should assure conformity of Federal operations with the national policy for the environment. If this mechanism does not achieve coordination, then a legislatively created special council should receive further consideration.

6. The Congress should proceed to develop an independent capability for assessing the impact of technology on the environment.

IV FINDINGS

This section summarizes the principal observations on environmental quality made by the subcommittee on the basis of past hearings, studies, consultations and reports. Page citations refer to statements appearing in the subcommittee's most recent hearings described in the Introduction (op cit ref. 1).

A. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ISSUES

The subcommittee has noted a sequence of public opinion, political action, and corrective measures which is common to most pollution problems. The same sequence may be expected in many other instances of technological impact on society. Because of the long-term goal of achieving a technology assessment capability for the Congress, the sequence is described here, insofar as it is understood.

1. Apathy

The subtle nature of environmental quality problems makes it possible for effects to become quite advanced before the public becomes aware of them. Despite the fact that billions of dollars have been spent for waste treatment in the past five decades, the average citizen is not aware of the effort. Sanitary sewerage, garbage, and trash collection are designed to remove the wastes from view. In this same period the life expectancy has risen continuously, mortality is at its lowest point in history and the public health must be considered as good. Therefore, the current, rather sophisticated concern with environmental hazards does not gain immediate attention.

The slow degradations of air, water, and landscape are difficult to detect in the busy atmosphere of day-to-day living.

2. View With Alarm

The early stages of quality loss often are noticed by naturalists, recreation enthusiasts, resort operators, and scientists who work in the outdoors. Also there are technologists who recognize very sensitive ecological situations which may be easily upset. Depending on their ability to communicate, and their access to mass media, an early warning can be obtained. Often, the alarm is exaggerated (purposely or not) and a negative response is obtained from other observers who do not view the trend as serious. There is a peculiar receptivity in the public for forecasts of natural or manmade disasters. But curiosity is often limited to a "Sunday supplement" treatment and if the date of the cataclysm is more than a few years ahead, then apathy prevails.

The public information system of scientists, media, and officials can not always produce an objective report. A scientist may find an obscure, little-understood anomaly in a highly sensitive, delicate ecosystem. He proceeds to speculate imaginatively that irreversible, disastrous results might occur. Antipollution agencies and private groups

94-613 0-68- -3

« PreviousContinue »