Greenversations

Each week we write about the science behind environmental protection. Previous Science Wednesdays.

The state of the nation’s environment is changing. Sometimes the changes are obvious and sometimes they are subtle. When does it matter and why should we care?

One of the more visible and memorable events of the early environmental movement was when the Cuyahoga River, which runs through the heart of my hometown of Cleveland, Ohio, caught fire in 1969. Some say that it was this event that prompted President Nixon to sign the Clean Water Act into law and create the Environmental Protection Agency.

The River that once burned now runs through a lively and bustling downtown area to Lake Erie. This is not to say that the water quality in the river and lake are now pristine, but that the improvements over time are so profound that it’s noticeable to the naked eye.

Even here in Washington, D.C., there are ways to observe environmental progress. I am lucky enough to garden in the city—a rare treat in the concrete jungle. Over the years I’ve observed changes in the insects and birds that visit our garden. Last spring my bachelor buttons were swarming with bees. This year, however, there weren’t as many.

What should I make of these changes in nature’s pollinators and natural pest management? What should our garden, city, and country do? Are the changes even relevant and is it appropriate for me to draw any conclusions? After all, I’ve only observed these changes while in pursuit of some other goal, such as watering my tomatoes, or driving through downtown Cleveland to catch a ball game.

If you find yourself wondering about the changing state of the nation’s environment and what it all means, there is one place you can go to find objective, scientifically sound information: EPA’s Report on the Environment.

EPA released its Report on the Environment (ROE) in May 2008 and has been updating it online ever since. It’s here that you can find information on the nation’s bird populations, stream water quality, air quality, and much more.

The ROE uses environmental indicators to present the status (i.e. condition) of and trends in (i.e., are things improving or not) for 85 different measurable areas of our nation’s environment in land, water, air, human health and ecosystems.

Check out the interactive Web site to see for yourself and tell us what you want to know about the nation’s changing environment.

About the author: Madalene Stevens joined EPA in 2001 and works on EPA’s Report on the Environment.

Each week we write about the science behind environmental protection. Previous Science Wednesdays.

About the Author: Jay Messer, Ph.D. is a Senior Science Advisor at the National Center for Environmental Assessment in EPA’s Office of Research and Development. He is a lead writer of EPA’s 2008 Report on the Environment.

Watching my retirement recede into the future as the financial crisis deepened put me in mind of EPA’s 2008 Report on the Environment.

The purposes of the Report are to “provide valuable input to EPA in devel­oping its strategic outlook and priorities, and [to] allow EPA and the public to assess whether the Agency is succeeding in its overall mission to protect human health and the environment.”

The release of the Report last spring marked the first time that such a wide range of objective, transparent, and scientifically-solid information about environmental status and trends has appeared under in a single EPA publication. I believe that it makes a valuable contribution in telling us how we’ve done over time (not bad!), but I’m less sanguine about its influence on planning for the future.

We in EPA are certainly familiar with “performance measures:”

• EPAstat presents measures of quarterly performance, primarily aimed at short-term management “outputs,” and
• EPA’s Annual Performance and Accountability Reports present measures of annual performance aimed at output and longer-term (e.g., 5-year) “outcome” targets for specific programs.

Performance measures are important management tools, but most of the agencies responsible for overseeing banks and securities received scores of “adequate” or better on their latest performance reviews. Apparently we needed more to protect the economy. So we probably need more to protect the environment.

Rather than measuring the performance of particular programs, the indicators in the Report on the Environment ideally reflect more on the outcomes of the way resources are allocated across and among programs, and on multi-program and multi-agency efforts to solve environmental problems and fill critical data gaps. EPA’s latest Strategic Plan notes that many of its targets are consistent with the trends in the Report, but there is no forum in which the Report is systematically used to inform strategic thinking at a higher level.

This is not a problem unique to EPA. Environmental agencies around the globe are facing the same challenge, and a review of several major environmental decisions suggests that environmental indicators seldom demonstrably inform strategic decisions. I’d argue that this needs to change and that EPA can and should provide international leadership in effectively using indicator information in strategic planning.

Because we all look forward to a healthy, well-protected environment that we can (eventually) retire to!