U.S. Environmental Policy and Politics: From the 1960s to the 1990s

Abstract

Environmental policy and politics in the United States have changed dramatically over the past three decades. What began in the late 1960s as an heroic effort by an incipient environmental movement to conserve dwindling natural resources and prevent further deterioration of the air, water, and land has been transformed over more than three decades into an extraordinarily complex, diverse, and often controversial array of environmental policies. Those policies occupy a continuing position of high visibility on the political agenda at all levels of government, and environmental values are widely embraced by the American public. Yet throughout the 1990s environmental policies and programs were characterized as much by sharp political conflict as by the consensus over policy goals and means that reigned during the early to mid-1970s. As the twenty-first century approaches, there is considerable value in looking back at this exceptional period to under-stand the nature of the transformation and its implications for the future.

How science makes environmental controversies worse

“…From this perspective it is useful to recall that, when comprehensive environmental laws were enacted in the US during the late 1960s and early 1970s, scientific knowledge about the state of the environment was much less comprehensive and sophisticated than it is today, when almost all environmental laws and regulations are under political attack. The implementation of a broad legal framework for environmental protection in the US was a response to a social and political consensus, not authoritative knowledge (e.g., Kraft and Vig, 1997).…”

Defeating Kyoto: The Conservative Movement's Impact on U.S. Climate Change Policy

“…Immediately after the 104th Congress began, the House Committee on Science played a heightened role in attacking existing environmental policies and programs while promoting anti-environmental policies (Kraft 2000). Under the leadership of a handful of powerful Republicans, the Committee on Science led an all-out assault on existing environmental regulatory research programs.…”

“…Indeed, Brown (1997:14) claims, "the hearings produced no credible substantiation of any of the claims of scienti c misconduct." However, the mere convening of the hearings signaled a shift in the policy arena for the standing of environmental science (Kraft 2000). Henceforth, the work of "mainstream" peer-reviewed scientists was unduly criticized, while the non-peer-reviewed work of skeptics associated with conservative think tanks and industry organizations was inevitably privileged above others.…”

Local Growth Coalitions and Air Pollution Controls: The Ecological Modernization of the US in Historical Perspective

“…The advancement and application of 'clean' technologies is the objective of the US clean air policy regime [Lowry, 1992;Ringquist, 1993;Bryner, 1995;Cahn, 1995;Grant, 1996;Kraft, 2000;Gonzalez, 2001a: Ch.6]. This is because of the economic position of those groups and individuals providing the crucial political capital of the US clean air movementmembers of local growth coalitions.…”

“…Despite the mobilisation of large numbers of people around environmental issues, the air pollution regulatory policies produced during this period and into the contemporary era continue to emphasise technology to abate air pollution [Lowry, 1992;Ringquist, 1993;Bryner, 1995;Cahn, 1995;Grant, 1996;Kraft, 2000;Gonzalez, 2001a: Ch.6]. Thus, the incorporation of millions of middle-and working-class people into the clean air movement has not substantially affected the contours or trajectory of US clean air policies.…”