The purpose of this article is to find out the extent to which local governments in the United States are committed to the principles of sustainable development in their planning practices. This study presents the findings from a survey of all medium to large cities carried out in April 2006. The findings indicate that, instead of adopting sustainable development as a development framework, cities are adopting sustainability initiatives in a piecemeal, ad-hoc manner. A broader level commitment to the concept, as evidenced by presence of sustainability plans, indicators project measuring progress toward sustainability goals, or an office and staff devoted to sustainability activities, is exhibited by very few cities. Finally, there is little evidence that cities are connecting sustainability to equity and social justice issues.

This article reports on empirical tests of two theories for improving compliance with state environmental regulations. One theory argues for centralization of enforcement responsibilities with state agencies, while the other focuses on enforcement strategies, arguing for an approach that emphasizes capacity building and the social and moral bases of compliance in addition to deterrence and the threatened application of sanctions. Using evidence from North Carolina, we show that centralization does not necessarily enhance compliance, but cooperative enforcement strategies can improve the effectiveness of regulations that seek to attain performance standards. Compliance with simpler specification standards, however, can be attained just as well with easier to administer deterrent enforcement strategies based on frequent inspections and adequate sanctions.

No abstract

No abstract

/ The EPA's new nonpoint source pollution control requirements will soon institutionalize urban erosion and sediment pollution control practices nationwide. The public and private sector costs and social benefits associated with North Carolina's program (one of the strongest programs in the country in terms of implementation authority, staffing levels, and comprehensiveness of coverage) are examined to provide general policy guidance on questions relating to the likely burden the new best management practices will have on the development industry, the likely costs and benefits of such a program, and the feasibility of running a program on a cost recovery basis. We found that urban erosion and sediment control requirements were not particularly burdensome to the development industry (adding about 4% on average to development costs). Public-sector program costs ranged between $2.4 and $4.8 million in fiscal year 1989. Our contingent valuation survey suggests that urban households in North Carolina are willing to pay somewhere between $7.1 and $14.2 million a year to maintain current levels of sediment pollution control. Our benefit-cost analysis suggests that the overall ratio is likely to be positive, although a definitive figure is elusive. Lastly, we found that several North Carolina localities have cost recovery fee systems that are at least partially self-financing.Approximately six billion tons of soil erode from the nation's lands each year. As much as one-third of that load is deposited in waterbodies, making sediment the United States' largest water pollutant in terms of volume (Clark and others, 1985). That sedimentation is costly; Clark and others (1985) and Colacicco and others (1989) estimate that sediment and sediment-related pollution cause anywhere from $3.7 to $14 billion in damages each year in the United States, including lost farm productivity due to soil erosion, i