Stepping stones, step change, and climate change: Why muddling through is insufficient

Corporate Environmental Strategy

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 368-377

  Monsma, David ^a   Mazurek, Janice ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039973884     PISSN: 10667938     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1066-7938(00)80052-4     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Aspen Institute. Aspen Series on the Environment in the 21st Century, December 7-9, 1998.
2. Charles Lindblom espoused that altering policy in small steps was the most effective form of political change because some problems are simply so complex that they lack a single, optimal solution. Lindblom argued that, overall, the high risks associated with complex problems make radical decision-making a less successful avenue because it is hard to evaluate the outcome.
3. Many of the environmental statutes provide some kind of variance, although EPA has not produced, and industry has not demanded, a comprehensive variance program. In this sense, reinvention has served in an ad hoc way to stretch the elasticity of the current system, sometime employing site-specific rulemaking to avoid legal infirmity.
4. Eco 1999, International Congress, Paris, France, June 7-9, 1999.
5. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Voluntary Approaches for Environmental Protection in OECD Countries, ENV/EPOC/ GEEI(98)29/FINAL, Paris, France, OECD, 1998.
6. J.C. Davies and J. Mazurek, Pollution Control in the United States: Evaluating the System, Resources for the Future, Washington D.C., 1998.
7. Commission of the European Communities, "Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Environmental Agreements," 1996. COM(96) 561 final.
8. J.C. Davies and J. Mazurek, Pollution Control in the United States: Evaluating the System, Resources for the Future, Washington D.C., 1998.
9. R. Hersh, A Review of Integrated Pollution Control Efforts in Selected Countries, Discussion Paper 97-15, Resources for the Future, Washington D.C., 1996.
10. W.C. Nuijen, "Long Term Agreements on Energy Efficiency, In Industry," Proceedings, International Workshop on Industrial Energy Efficiency Policies: Understanding Success and Failure, Utrecht, The Netherlands, June 11-2, 1998.
11. K Johannsen and M. Togeby, "Evaluations of the Danish Agreement Scheme," AKF, Institute of Local Government Studies B Denmark, Proceedings, European Research Network on Voluntary Agreements (CAVA) workshop, Gent, Belgium, November 26-27, 1998.
12. S. Ramesohl, "The 'Declaration of German Industry on Global Warming Prevention' A model for effective and self-improving climate policy processes?" Proceedings, CAVA workshop, Gent, Belgium, November 26-27, 1998.
13. 2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Germany and Their Recent First Evaluation," Proceedings, CAVA workshop, Gent, Belgium, November 26-27, 1998.
14. D. Ditz and J. Ranganathan, Measuring Up, Toward a Common Framework for Tracking Corporate Environmental Performance, World Resources Institute, 1997.
15. B. Mclean, "Evolution of Marketable Permits: The US Experience with Sulfur Dioxide Allowance Trading," In Proceedings from Controlling Carbon and Sulfur, International Trading Initiatives, Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, London, December 5-6, 1996.
16. IPCC Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
17. The US Energy Information Administration currently projects carbon dioxide emissions to grow to thirty-three percent above 1990 levels by 2010: (see United States, Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (1999a): Annual Energy Outlook 1999, Report # DOE/EIA-0383 (99), Washington, 1999.
18. U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable Development Indicators, Sustainable Development In The United States: An Experimental Set of Indicators, 1998, pp. 98 ("We can not be certain whether future increases in energy per capita or for the population as a whole could be sustained - even with improvements in energy efficiency...").
19. In contrast to a carbon tax or emissions limits, Credit for Early Action proposals promise that entities which voluntarily take action to reduce greenhouse gases prior to the imposition of a domestic emissions charges or emission limits will receive a credit against future carbon taxes or emission limits. U.S. House of Representatives (1999): H.R. 2520, 106th Congress; U.S. Senate (1999): S.547, 106th Congress; and U.S. Senate (1998): S.2617, 105th Congress, 2d Session.
20. National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), Setting Priorities, Getting Results: A New Direction for EPA, Washington, D.C., NAPA, 1995.
21. J.C. Davies, J. Mazurek, N. Darnall, and K McCarthy, Industry Incentives for Environmental Improvement: Evaluation of U.S. Federal Initiatives, Global Environmental Management Initiative, Washington, D.C., 1996.
22. Within two months of issuing its second major report and holding a well-attended national town meeting on sustainable development, the PCSD (and much of sustainable development), was retired on June 30th, 1999. A poorly constructed focus study, over relied upon by the EPA and the Clinton Administration, probably led both to remove the phrase sustainable development from public policy initiatives as politically unpalatable or unpopular. The term livability, encompassing the more immediately tangible (and narrower) goals of redevelopment and issues of sprawl, has replaced sustainable development as most favored think tank direction.