Environmental Studies
Warner
Pacific College
August
10, 2014
Contrary to
‘common knowledge’, environmental regulation is vital for the economic
development of the United States. Rick Melberth, from the Center for Effective
Government, says that studies and reports from economists, business
strategists, Office of Management and Budget, Congressional Research Service,
and the Clean Air Council illustrate that “industry messaging on the
regulations is misleading and that the benefits of key public protections far
outweigh their costs to business.” (2011). Studies show that environmental
regulation in fact, does not harm the economy, but rather aids it, spurring
innovation and new sectors growth.
Studying the
economic impact of environmental regulations is difficult given the complexity
of both the environment and the economy. Stephen Meyer (1995), Professor of
Political Science at MIT, notes that nation level studies have a variety of
methodological issues as we cannot control for “coincidental political,
economic, technological, and social changes” (p. 2). Meyer goes on to explain
that state studies, however, control for many of the variables in national
studies. Thus Meyer’s hypothesis that environmental regulation does not
negatively impact the economy focuses on state economies with and without
strong environmental regulations. His findings support that while specific
environmental regulations do have real effects on individual businesses, “these
effects are limited in scope and duration and are fewer in number than popular
political mythology allows. They do not rise above the background noise of
state economies either singly or cumulatively” (p. 15).
We do have
tangible evidence of national environmental regulation and its impacts on a
national economy as well. Focusing on the Clean Air Act (CAA) we can see the
very real implications of environmental regulation on the economy. The CAA was
originally passed in 1963 and was a research program but major regulatory
amendments were passed in 1970, 1977, and 1990. The act was created to control
air pollution nationally and throughout the years has been amended to focus on
emissions from various sources and different chemicals as well as ozone
protection. A peer-reviewed 2011 EPA report looking at the results of the CAA
from 1990 to 2020 found the “central benefits estimate exceeds costs by a
factor of more than 30 to 1” (2011). The CAA has been found to protect from
pollution-related health problems and premature death, thereby improving the
health and productivity of the U.S. workforce. The CAA has been a good
investment as well showing that the benefits exceed costs on average by a factor
of 30 to 1. With 40 years of experience we can reasonably predict that cleaner
air and a healthy economy go together and are not exclusive of one another. We
also see that the CAA has encouraged technology investments that have put
unemployed or under-employed Americans to work. And lastly, environmental
technology and services has grown exponentially giving the United States a head
start in new industries. (2011)
We have
demonstrated that with thoughtful planning paired with a thorough understanding
of the intricacies between our actions and the environmental consequences, we
can create environmental regulation that does helps out economy.
References
Melberth,
R., (2011). Business economists: Current regulatory environment good for
business and economy. Center for
Effective Government. Retrieved from http://www.foreffectivegov.org/node/11832
Meyer,
S., (1995) The Economic Impact of Environmental Regulation. Journal of Environmental Law and Practice. Retrieved
from http://crywolfproject.org/evidence/economic-impact-environmental-regulation
Environmental
Protection Agency. (2011). The benefits and costs of the Clean Air Act from
1990 to 2020: Summary Report. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/summaryreport.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment