The Environmental Case: Translating Values Into Policy

by Judith A. Layzer, Sara R. (Rose) Rinfret

Answers to environmental issues are not black and white. Debates around policy are often among those with fundamentally different values, and the way that problems and solutions are defined plays a central role in shaping how those values are translated into policy. The Environmental Case captures the real-world complexity of creating environmental policy, and this much-anticipated Fifth Edition contains fifteen carefully constructed cases. Through her analysis, Sara Rinfret explores the background, players, contributing factors, and outcomes of each case, and gives readers insight into some of the most interesting and controversial issues in U.S. environmental policymaking.

Genres: Nonfiction, Environment, School, Politics, Science, Nature, Environmental Science

664 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2002

About the author

Judith A. Layzer was Professor of Environmental Policy in the Department of Urban Studies and Planning at MIT. She is the author of Natural Experiments: Ecosystem-Based Management and the Environment (MIT Press) and The Environmental Case: Translating Values into Policy.

Reviews

[Dana · Rating 4 out of 5]

For a graduate level course. Able to use Layzer as a reference in several classes.

[Josh Rea · Rating 4 out of 5]

Democracy is complex and flawed. This thought kept running through my mind as I read Layzer’s book on environmental politics. By its very nature of attempting to give everybody a voice, democratic policymaking runs the risk of being incredibly slow and resistant to change. This is only exacerbated by political money and the influence that industry has come to hold over our political system in America.

Environmental policymaking, as Layzer describes, comes down to a fundamental difference in values. There are those who believe in broader free-market strokes, contending that technological advances will solve any current environmental issue and thus businesses should be allowed free rein. Others fight for greater regulation on industries and their polluting activities, recognizing the severe costs to health and environment these ‘externalities’ bring. Others yet desire the protection of a serene wilderness.

Political science is one of the areas I wish to read more of. The machinations undertaken by actors ranging from industry and environmentalists to politicians of different parties are incredibly complex and rely greatly on compromise. But all too often, these compromising solutions are mere band-aids on gaping wounds, just shunting the issue further down the road for another day. Once policy does become implemented, it runs the risk of stagnating all while our real world contexts continue to shift and progress.

So how do we avoid the divisive nature of American politics that leads to this? Perhaps we assign greater weight upon the scientists and experts that specialize in the issues we tackle. The EU seems to be a better example of progressive policy-making. Science seems to be much less of a debate, and climate change is accepted as a pressing threat. The challenges in adopting such an approach, however, can be seen in the all-too-frequent criticisms of the EU: regulations have stifled business and innovation. In the US, where free-market capitalism has become the orthodoxy, any science-based environmental approach that naturally tends towards greater regulation will unfortunately be likely to be undermined and discredited. While I would argue that long-term environmental policy should take precedence over short-term business interests, pro-business advocates are not inherently wrong for believing otherwise. This ideological difference is at the root of environmental policymaking, and results in the regulatory deadlock we see all too often. I'm not sure how we resolve this difference. Perhaps this is just the sacrifice we make for the sake of democracy.

[Erin Maher · Rating 5 out of 5]

It’s sad to see the state of environmental policy ): this read isn’t lighthearted because it’s very candid and it details each “case” thoroughly with many dates. It was hard to follow without highlighting. All around it was very informative and some highlights were Love canal and Grazing. It’s really frustrating for me to read that my hypothesis of capitalism driving corporations/industries to prioritize profit over the wellbeing of humans, animals, environment and earth was confirmed. It’s really hard to change an entire system that has been in place for centuries and has always been the blue print. I’m desperate for a change but I fear it won’t be found in the American government.

[Adam · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this as required reading for a grad school course and then read it again for fun. While this is presented as a scholarly work discussing various cases to demonstrate environmental concepts, it doesn't come off as dry or boring. Some cases are more boring than others. Debating snowmobiling in Yellowstone certainly doesn't have the same wow factor as analyzing the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The chapter on the BP oil spill was probably the best.

[Echo · Rating 4 out of 5]

In-depth, fairly easy to read case studies of modern environmental policy in action. From Love Canal to Yellowstone to spotted owls, each case is cut down into pieces to examine all the players and their differing values and solutions. Even if you've read extensively about an issue in the news, you might be surprised at the many layers hidden beneath the surface that this book reveals!

[Shane · Rating 4 out of 5]

Provides an excellent overview of the people and politics behind US Environmental Policy. This isn't a book for solutions or extensive discussion of the problems, but provides an excellent historical and current overview of the politics.

[Steven · Rating 4 out of 5]

For a required reading this was not a bad book. I enjoyed most of it and it did not read like a traditional textbook.