Environmental science

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the "Community" episode, see Environmental Science (Community).
Environmental science is an interdisciplinary academic field that integrates physical, biological and information
sciences (including but not limited
to ecology, biology, physics, chemistry, zoology, mineralogy, oceanology, limnology, soil
science,geology, atmospheric science, and geodesy) to the study of the environment, and the solution of
environmental problems. Environmental science emerged from the fields of natural history and medicine during
the Enlightenment.[1] Today it provides an integrated, quantitative, and interdisciplinary approach to the study
of environmental systems.[2]
Related areas of study include environmental studies and environmental engineering. Environmental
studies incorporates more of the social sciences for understanding human relationships, perceptions and policies
towards the environment. Environmental engineering focuses on design and technology for improving
environmental quality in every aspect.
Environmental scientists work on subjects like the understanding of earth processes, evaluating alternative energy
systems, pollution control and mitigation, natural resource management, and the effects of global climate
change. Environmental issues almost always include an interaction of physical, chemical, and biological processes.
Environmental scientists bring a systems approach to the analysis of environmental problems. Key elements of an
effective environmental scientist include the ability to relate space, and time relationships as well as quantitative
analysis.
Environmental science came alive as a substantive, active field of scientific investigation in the 1960s and 1970s
driven by (a) the need for a multi-disciplinary approach to analyze complex environmental problems, (b) the arrival
of substantive environmental laws requiring specific environmental protocols of investigation and (c) the growing
public awareness of a need for action in addressing environmental problems. Events that spurred this development
included the publication of Rachel Carson's landmark environmental book Silent Spring[3] along with major
environmental issues becoming very public, such as the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill, and theCuyahoga River of
Cleveland, Ohio, "catching fire" (also in 1969), and helped increase the visibility of environmental issues and create
this new field of study.
Terminology[edit]
See also: Glossary of environmental science
In common usage, "environmental science" and "ecology" are often used interchangeably, but technically, ecology
refers only to the study of organisms and their interactions with each other and their environment. Ecology could be
considered a subset of environmental science, which also could involve purely chemical or public health issues (for
example) ecologists would be unlikely to study. In practice, there is considerable overlap between the work of
ecologists and other environmental scientists.
The National Center for Education Statistics in the United States defines an academic program in environmental
science as follows:
A program that focuses on the application of biological, chemical, and physical principles to the study of the
physical environment and the solution of environmental problems, including subjects such as abating or controlling
environmental pollution and degradation; the interaction between human society and the natural environment; and
natural resources management. Includes instruction in biology, chemistry, physics, geosciences, climatology,
statistics, and mathematical modeling.[4]
Components[edit]
Atmospheric sciences[edit]
Main article: Atmospheric sciences
Atmospheric sciences focus on the Earth's atmosphere, with an emphasis upon its interrelation to other systems.
Atmospheric sciences can include studies of meteorology,greenhouse gas phenomena, atmospheric dispersion modeling of
airborne contaminants,[5][6] sound propagation phenomena related to noise pollution, and even light pollution.
Taking the example of the global warming phenomena, physicists create computer models of atmospheric circulation
and infra-red radiation transmission, chemists examine the inventory of atmospheric chemicals and their reactions,
biologists analyze the plant and animal contributions to carbon dioxide fluxes, and specialists such
as meteorologists andoceanographers add additional breadth in understanding the atmospheric dynamics.
Biodiversity of a coral reef. Corals adapt and modify their environment by forming calcium carbonate skeletons. This
provides growing conditions for future generations and forms a habitat for many other species.
Ecology[edit]
Main article: Ecology
Ecology is the study of the interactions between organisms and their environment. Ecologists might investigate the
relationship between a population of organisms and some physical characteristic of their environment, such as
concentration of a chemical; or they might investigate the interaction between two populations of different
organisms through some symbiotic or competitive relationship. For example, an interdisciplinary analysis of an
ecological system which is being impacted by one or more stressors might include several related environmental
science fields. In an estuarine setting where a proposed industrial development could impact certain species
bywater and air pollution, biologists would describe the flora and fauna, chemists would analyze the transport of water
pollutants to the marsh, physicists would calculate air pollution emissions and geologists would assist in
understanding the marsh soils and bay muds.
Environmental chemistry[edit]
Main article: Environmental chemistry
Environmental chemistry is the study of chemical alterations in the environment. Principal areas of study include soil
contamination and water pollution. The topics of analysis include chemical degradation in the environment, multiphase transport of chemicals (for example, evaporation of a solvent containing lake to yield solvent as an air
pollutant), and chemical effects upon biota.
As an example study, consider the case of a leaking solvent tank which has entered the habitat soil of an endangered
species of amphibian. As a method to resolve or understand the extent of soil contamination and subsurface
transport of solvent, a computer model would be implemented. Chemists would then characterize the molecular
bonding of the solvent to the specific soil type, and biologists would study the impacts upon soil arthropods, plants,
and ultimately pond-dwelling organisms that are the food of the endangered amphibian.

Geosciences[edit]
Main article: Geosciences
Geosciences include environmental geology, environmental soil science, volcanic phenomena and evolution of the Earth's
crust. In some classification systems this can also include hydrology, including oceanography.
As an example study of soils erosion, calculations would be made of surface runoff by soil scientists. Fluvial
geomorphologists would assist in examining sediment transport in overland flow. Physicists would contribute by
assessing the changes in light transmission in the receiving waters. Biologists would analyze subsequent impacts to
aquatic flora and fauna from increases in water turbidity.
Environmental science examines the effects of humans on nature (Glen Canyon Dam in the U.S.)
In the U.S. the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 set forth requirements for analysis of major projects in
terms of specific environmental criteria. Numerous state laws have echoed these mandates, applying the principles
to local-scale actions. The upshot has been an explosion of documentation and study of environmental
consequences before the fact of development actions.
One can examine the specifics of environmental science by reading examples of Environmental Impact
Statements prepared under NEPA such as: Wastewater treatment expansion options discharging into the San
Diego/Tijuana Estuary, Expansion of the San Francisco International Airport, Development of the Houston, Metro
Transportation system, Expansion of the metropolitan Boston MBTA transit system, and Construction of Interstate
66 through Arlington, Virginia.
In England and Wales the Environment Agency (EA),[7] formed in 1996, is a public body for protecting and improving
the environment and enforces the regulations listed on the communities and local government site. [8] (formerly the
office of the deputy prime minister). The agency was set up under the Environment Act 1995 as an independent body
and works closely with UK Government to enforce the regulations.
Careers in Environmental Science are so varied it is difficult to consider them as one category. You could end up working from home most of the time or traveling
around the world on an annual basis. You could be doing desk work, field work, or some combination thereof. Your focus could be mathematical, physical, or
written. Of course the majority careers in Environmental Science are some blend in-between.
Those engaged in Environmental Policy, Planning, and Management usually work for a local government and are likely to be engaged in a lot of research
intensive work. Environmental Lawyers may be able to get out of the office to the courtroom, or, again, have intensive desk jobs. Wildlife Managers, Zoologists,
and Horticulturists are often thought to have positions which keep them working in a mix of indoors and out, but generally in one location. Oceanographers and
Meteorologists could spend their entire careers in the safety of a laboratory working upper level computer models, or much of their time at sea, studying the
weather. Microbiologists, Soil and Plant Scientists, and Ecologists could work in remediation efforts, for sanitation companies, in manufacturing, at a university,
for many private companies, law firms, not-for-profit groups, or government agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Park Service, or
the United States Geological Survey.
Knowing what is available to you professionally is half the battle when choosing a career. Finding something you enjoy doing within the broad scope of
Environmental Science shouldn't be terribly difficult when there are so many options. Environmental Consultants may have the best of many worlds, setting their
own schedules, seeking clients that need their particular form of expertise, and setting their own blend of ideal field work and intellectual work schedule. Find
what you enjoy doing, and it shouldn't be work, but a career.
Environmental scientists are problem solvers. They research environmental and health problems to determine their causes and come up with solutions. They
investigate issues like mysterious deformations in frogs, unexplained cancer occurrences in a neighborhood, or disease in the former asbestos mining town of
Libby, Montana.
Environmental scientists conduct research to identify the causes of these types of problems, and how to minimize or eliminate them. They also conduct
theoretical research that increases our understanding of how the natural world works. They use what they learn to make recommendations and develop
strategies for managing environmental problems.
Environmental science is a holistic and multidisciplinary field that integrates the biological, physical, and earth sciences. Its goal is to understand how earth works
and how it supports life. It also aims to identify, control, and prevent disruption to its systems and species caused by human activity.
Environmental scientists use their knowledge of earth's systems to protect the environment and human health. They do this by cleaning up contaminated areas,
making policy recommendations, or working with industry to reduce pollution and waste. They may also investigate the source of an environmental or health
problem, and devise strategies to combat it.
Ecosystem
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The relationship between the abiotic components and the biotic components of the ecosystem is termed
'holocoenosis'.
This article is about natural ecosystems. For the term used in man-made systems, see Digital ecosystem.
Coral reefs are a highly productivemarine ecosystem.[1]
Rainforest ecosystems are rich inbiodiversity. This is the Gambia River inSenegal's Niokolo-Koba National Park.
An ecosystem is a community of living organisms in conjunction with the nonliving components of their
environment (things like air, water and mineral soil), interacting as a system. [2] These biotic and abiotic
components are regarded as linked together through nutrient cycles and energy flows. [3] As ecosystems are defined
by the network of interactions among organisms, and between organisms and their environment, [4] they can be of
any size but usually encompass specific, limited spaces [5] (although some scientists say that the entire planet is an
ecosystem).[6]
Energy, water, nitrogen and soil minerals are other essential abiotic components of an ecosystem. The energy that
flows through ecosystems is obtained primarily from the sun. It generally enters the system
through photosynthesis, a process that also captures carbonfrom the atmosphere. By feeding on plants and on one
another, animals play an important role in the movement of matter and energy through the system. They also
influence the quantity of plant and microbial biomass present. By breaking down dead organic
matter,decomposers release carbon back to the atmosphere and facilitate nutrient cycling by converting nutrients
stored in dead biomass back to a form that can be readily used by plants and other microbes. [7]
Ecosystems are controlled both by external and internal factors. External factors such as climate, the parent
material which forms the soil and topography, control the overall structure of an ecosystem and the way things
work within it, but are not themselves influenced by the ecosystem. [8] Other external factors include time and
potential biota. Ecosystems are dynamic entitiesinvariably, they are subject to periodic disturbances and are in
the process of recovering from some past disturbance. [9] Ecosystems in similar environments that are located in
different parts of the world can have very different characteristics simply because they contain different species.
[8]
Theintroduction of non-native species can cause substantial shifts in ecosystem function. Internal factors not only
control ecosystem processes but are also controlled by them and are often subject to feedback loops.[8] While
the resource inputs are generally controlled by external processes like climate and parent material, the availability
of these resources within the ecosystem is controlled by internal factors like decomposition, root competition or
shading.[8] Other internal factors include disturbance, succession and the types of species present. Although

humans exist and operate within ecosystems, their cumulative effects are large enough to influence external
factors like climate.[8]
Biodiversity affects ecosystem function, as do the processes of disturbance and succession. Ecosystems provide a
variety of goods and services upon which people depend; the principles of ecosystem management suggest that
rather than managing individual species,natural resources should be managed at the level of the ecosystem itself.
Classifying ecosystems into ecologically homogeneous units is an important step towards effective ecosystem
management, but there is no single, agreed-upon way to do this.
History and development[edit]
The term "ecosystem" was first used in a publication by British ecologist Arthur Tansley.[fn 1][10] Tansley devised the
concept to draw attention to the importance of transfers of materials between organisms and their environment.
[11]
He later refined the term, describing it as "The whole system, ... including not only the organism-complex, but
also the whole complex of physical factors forming what we call the environment". [12] Tansley regarded ecosystems
not simply as natural units, but as mental isolates. [12] Tansley later[13]defined the spatial extent of ecosystems using
the term ecotope.
Ecosystem processes[edit]
Energy and carbon enter ecosystems through photosynthesis, are incorporated into living tissue, transferred to other
organisms that feed on the living and dead plant matter, and eventually released through respiration. [14] Most
mineral nutrients, on the other hand, are recycled within ecosystems. [15]
Ecosystems are controlled both by external and internal factors. External factors, also called state factors, control
the overall structure of an ecosystem and the way things work within it, but are not themselves influenced by the
ecosystem. The most important of these is climate.[8] Climate determines the biome in which the ecosystem is
embedded. Rainfall patterns and temperature seasonality determine the amount of water available to the
ecosystem and the supply of energy available (by influencing photosynthesis). [8]Parent material, the underlying
geological material that gives rise to soils, determines the nature of the soils present, and influences the supply of
mineral nutrients. Topographyalso controls ecosystem processes by affecting things like microclimate, soil
development and the movement of water through a system. This may be the difference between the ecosystem
present in wetland situated in a small depression on the landscape, and one present on an adjacent steep hillside. [8]
Other external factors that play an important role in ecosystem functioning include time and potential biota.
Ecosystems are dynamic entitiesinvariably, they are subject to periodic disturbances and are in the process of
recovering from some past disturbance.[9] Time plays a role in the development of soil from bare rock and
the recovery of a community from disturbance.[8] Similarly, the set of organisms that can potentially be present in an area
can also have a major impact on ecosystems. Ecosystems in similar environments that are located in different parts
of the world can end up doing things very differently simply because they have different pools of species present.
[8]
Theintroduction of non-native species can cause substantial shifts in ecosystem function.
Unlike external factors, internal factors in ecosystems not only control ecosystem processes, but are also controlled
by them. Consequently, they are often subject to feedback loops.[8] While the resource inputs are generally controlled
by external processes like climate and parent material, the availability of these resources within the ecosystem is
controlled by internal factors like decomposition, root competition or shading. [8] Other factors like disturbance,
succession or the types of species present are also internal factors. Human activities are important in almost all
ecosystems. Although humans exist and operate within ecosystems, their cumulative effects are large enough to
influence external factors like climate.[8]
Decomposition processes can be separated into three categoriesleaching, fragmentation and chemical alteration
of dead material. As water moves through dead organic matter, it dissolves and carries with it the water-soluble
components. These are then taken up by organisms in the soil, react with mineral soil, or are transported beyond
the confines of the ecosystem (and are considered "lost" to it). [19] Newly shed leaves and newly dead animals have
high concentrations of water-soluble components, and includesugars, amino acids and mineral nutrients. Leaching is
more important in wet environments, and much less important in dry ones.
Ecosystem processes are broad generalizations that actually take place through the actions of individual organisms.
The nature of the organismsthe species, functional groups and trophic levels to which they belongdictates the
sorts of actions these individuals are capable of carrying out, and the relative efficiency with which they do so.
Thus, ecosystem processes are driven by the number of species in an ecosystem, the exact nature of each
individual species, and the relative abundance organisms within these species. [24] Biodiversity plays an important
role in ecosystem functioning.
Ecosystems provide a variety of goods and services upon which people depend. [27] Ecosystem goods include the
"tangible, material products"[28] of ecosystem processesfood, construction material, medicinal plantsin addition
to less tangible items like tourism and recreation, and genes from wild plants and animals that can be used to
improve domestic species.[27] Ecosystem services, on the other hand, are generally "improvements in the condition
or location of things of value".[28] These include things like the maintenance of hydrological cycles, cleaning air and
water, the maintenance of oxygen in the atmosphere, crop pollination and even things like beauty, inspiration and
opportunities for research.[27] While ecosystem goods have traditionally been recognized as being the basis for
things of economic value, ecosystem services tend to be taken for granted. [28] While Gretchen Daily's original
definition distinguished between ecosystem goods and ecosystem services, Robert Costanza and colleagues' later
work and that of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessmentlumped all of these together as ecosystem services.
Ecosystem ecology studies "the flow of energy and materials through organisms and the physical environment". It
seeks to understand the processes which govern the stocks of material and energy in ecosystems, and the flow of
matter and energy through them. The study of ecosystems can cover 10 orders of magnitude, from the surface layers
of rocks to the surface of the planet.

Ecology addresses the full scale of life, from tiny bacteria to processes that span
the entire planet. Ecologists study many diverse andcomplex relations among
species, such aspredation and pollination. The diversity of life is organized into
different habitats, from terrestrial(middle) to aquatic ecosystems.
Ecology (from Greek: , "house"; -, "study of"[A]) is the scientific analysis and study of interactions among
organisms and their environment. It is an interdisciplinary field that includes biology and Earth science. Ecology
includes the study of interactionsorganisms have with each other, other organisms, and with abiotic components of
their environment. Topics of interest to ecologists include the diversity, distribution, amount (biomass), and number
(population) of particular organisms; as well as cooperation and competition between organisms, both within and
among ecosystems. Ecosystems are composed of dynamically interacting parts including organisms,
the communities they make up, and the non-living components of their environment. Ecosystem processes, such

as primary production, pedogenesis, nutrient cycling, and various niche construction activities, regulate the flux of
energy and matter through an environment. These processes are sustained by organisms with specific life history
traits, and the variety of organisms is called biodiversity. Biodiversity, which refers to the varieties
of species, genes, and ecosystems, enhances certainecosystem services.
Ecology is not synonymous with environment, environmentalism, natural history, or environmental science. It is
closely related toevolutionary biology, genetics, and ethology. An important focus for ecologists is to improve the
understanding of how biodiversity affects ecological function. Ecologists seek to explain:
Life processes, interactions and adaptations
The movement of materials and energy through living communities
The successional development of ecosystems
The abundance and distribution of organisms and biodiversity in the context of the environment.

If I was elected president, I would make a law that if you cut down a tree, you have to plant a new one in its place.
Thousands of trees are cut down a week!
Yes, I know that we need all the wood for all sorts of things, but have you noticed that all the trees are gone? People
are constantly cutting down trees.
Where are the rainforests, or the wide woods, or the pine forests? They're all cut down! If I was elected president, I
would make that law for sure. I would probably make more wonderful laws, but that's the one I want the most.
Remember: don't cut down those trees in your backyard.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is I would not make fun of people because they are black,
brown, white or any color. They are still great. Be the way you want to be treated. Don't cry, because no one will
make fun of you anymore.
If I were elected president, I would be honest and kind to everybody in America. I would arrest all the bad people
and I would make every day Earth Day so we can keep our Earth clean.
If I were elected president, I would make abortion illegal. I would also make world peace a huge priority. I could help
make a lot of fundraisers for missionaries and get them the money that they need for building new churches in
places like Africa. The reason I think this is because God's word is the most important thing in my life.
If I were elected president, I would help every school in the United States get new books and art equipment. Some
schools like mine spend their money on fun things and learning activities. Every sick, hungry, homeless child would
get homes and a supply of food that would last them for three years. I would donate money to people in hospitals
so they can pay for their medical bills and their doctors.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is there would be no more war. I do not believe that it is right
to kill each other. We are on Earth to love each other, not kill each other. Instead of war we should talk things out.
If I were elected president, one change I would make would be to change the driving age to 18. Hopefully, there
would be fewer accidents. It would cause less havoc on the road. It would give everyone time to mature and be
more responsible.
If I were elected president, I would make a new holiday called "Love Our Children." It would be about loving all the
children in the world who don't have much. On this holiday, food stands will open up so the kids can get food,
candy, drinks and clothing. During this holiday, schools would be half-day. I would make a parade so all the children
would be noticed riding on a float. That would be a nice change!
If I were elected president, I wouldn't let people buy things from other countries. We can help make our country look
better. Please buy American products to help our companies and citizens.
If I were elected president, I would change the speed limit. The cars would not crash because they would go slower.
Making college free will help our community. More people will have an opportunity to attend college. This means
that young adults will be better educated and get better jobs. Better jobs lead to happier homes. Another reason to
make college free is to keep problem kids off of the streets. Some kids in poor neighborhoods choose drugs and
crime, and many join gangs. Offering them college for free will help them make better choices for their family.
If I were president, I would stop pet abuse. If people did not feed and water their pets, they would be punished. The
people would not be able to have any more pets. The pets would be taken away to an animal shelter until they were
adopted to a good home. Pets would be taken care of in my presidency.
If I were president, I would make changes by developing a plan of taking care of the hungry and homeless people in
the United States. We could use lottery money that is earned by having food available in shelters for the people
that have no money to buy food. If we help out with other countries, why can't we take care of people in our own
country?
If I were elected president, one change I would make is stopping the polluting of our oceans, air, sky and earth. That
is what I would tell people. You would not burn that many fossil fuels. So that would mean you can walk to school or
you can ride your bike to school, too. That is what I am telling you! Next time you are riding in a car, think about
how much fossil fuel you are using.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is to make sure kids aren't mean to each other. I would also
make people have good homes and food in their stomachs. I would like for people to stop drinking, doing drugs, and
smoking. Those are all bad things.
If I were elected president, one change I would make would be making nurses at public schools in Indiana stay full
day. If nurses stayed all day, kids who need medical attention could be helped rather than sent home.
If I were elected president, one change I would make would be drinking and driving. Drinking and driving is not
good. Go to jail for 15 days.
If I were elected president, I would do homework except on Wednesdays. There would be running in the hallways,
and we would watch a movie every day.
If I were elected president, one change I would make would be to provide employment to everyone in this country. I
would do this by building more factories to produce most of the things in this country, rather than importing things
from other countries. This can be possible only if we are able to build low-cost factories and work efficiently.
Building factories and providing employment helps us grow our country and reduce poverty. This is an essential
foundation of building a strong nation.
If I were president, I would try to enforce laws about obesity.
Many people in our country are overweight. Starting at age 7, if you were overweight by a certain limit, you would
have a doctor write a prescription for a weight-loss program. Attending every day and keeping track of a healthy
diet, Americans would lose weight. Schools also need health programs to increase awareness. Kids starting their life

off right ? running every day will keep them in shape and out of gangs as well. If I were president, America would be
in shape!
If I were elected president of the United States of America, one change I would make is to make abortion illegal,
because if you are pregnant with a little innocent baby, it doesn't deserve to be killed just because you don't want
to take on the responsibility. Look at it this way. If your mom had aborted you, you wouldn't be able to say that
abortion is all right.
If I were elected president, one change I would make would be to hire a physical education teacher for all schools,
and they would work full-time.
I feel there is a great need for physical education teachers, because most kids don't get the exercise they need.
Also, many kids have diabetes from eating too much fast food and not exercising at least three times a week.
If I were elected president, one change I would make would be to have world peace. Because I think we are all one
world and we should act like that and not be going into war. I would sign a peace paper with all of the countries.
And if you were fighting with siblings or friends, you should talk about your problem and not get into a fight.
One change I would make is to end the war because people are dying. They're shooting each other, and the soldiers
are not living long.
My brother is in the war. He could die. The other soldiers are also in danger when the bombs explode. We may have
World War III, and many of our soldiers will die and we will have no more.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is to pay more attention to children with special needs. I would
try to install more wheelchair bathrooms in schools and businesses. I would also start more sports leagues for
disabled children. They are no different than anyone else and should get the same amount of attention.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is to allow everyone's opinions to be heard. Many times we're
told our opinions don't matter. I would encourage all to stand up for themselves. I would remain indefatigable until
my plan proceeds. Everyone will know I'm listening to them.
If I were elected president, the parks and the animals in them would be treated with good care. I would make sure
that everyone in my country would be respectful and caring to each other. Then I would plan a day that every
school would raise money for those who have cancer. Everyone knows that we like weekends because those are the
only days that we can take a break from school. Maybe each month there will be two days off, even if it isn't a
holiday.
America loves cars. They know how much pollution their cars emit, but they just don't care. Or do they? If I were
elected president, I would give them choices. First, I would require all vehicles to average 40 mpg or more on all
passenger vehicles. This would apply to car manufacturers. Second, I would require alternate energy sources to be
used to help achieve this goal. Other fuels, such as ethanol, can be used. Ethanol can be made from corn.
Electricity-powered cars produce little, if any, pollution. Solar-powered cars produce NO pollution at all. Hydrogen
power, aside from the required pressure tank, is even better. It requires little or no modification to the engine and
can be made easily. Also, it produces absolutely no pollution! Also, bicycles and walking help conserve our oil
supply. And what about our four-legged friends? They don't use any oil at all.
If I were elected president, one thing I would end is the war in Iraq. It is not a pretty sight at all. I don't know why we
have to fight. Why can't we make a peace treaty or work it out and not hurt other people? I think the soldiers should
be home with their wives and husbands.
If I were elected president, one change I would make would be every school in the country would have to wear
school-colored uniforms. People think if you wear something nice and they wear something casual and you say they
look horrible, you're being mean and hurting their feelings.
If I were elected president, one change is that drugs would be illegal. But not the kind that help you, such as
medicine. If you or anyone saw someone doing it, tell the police or someone you trust. The drugs are bad for are
bodies and lungs. Even if you just smell it. It will make a difference for everyone. You'll be a big help.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is that everyone would be treated with an equal amount of
respect that they deserve. We were all born by God. We should not treat some people with a tiny bit of respect and
some people with too much respect.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is to get rid of nuclear weapons because they would hurt
many people. The people do not deserve to get hurt by nuclear weapons. I would try my best to collect them all
from around the world. I would then build a large vault to store them in. I would put people in charge of protecting
the weapons so no one could ever use them.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is to build a jail that is strong enough that no one could ever
break out.
As president, I will also have guards that guard the schools so that all the kids are safe.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is to try to lower gas prices, because gas is needed a lot and it
costs a small fortune. I would do this by encouraging Americans to carpool, ride the bus, walk and ride bikes instead
of driving a car.
Six cents on every dollar? I would add six cents to each purchase and not six cents on every dollar. It should be
changed, because paying only six cents on an item rather than six cents on every dollar would save extra cash.
It allows people to save money on what they buy. It would allow you to buy more things, and that would make a big
difference!
If I were president, I would launch a campaign to stop young people from smoking before it is too late. I would call
this initiative "Don't Smoke; It's No Joke."
Many kids start smoking at an early age either because their parents smoke or because they think it is cool. What
most kids don't realize is that smoking is highly addictive and will eventually lead to cancer, tooth loss, other health
problems, and even death.
Many cities and states have created No Smoking Policies to protect workers and the public from the dangers of
second-hand smoke. As president, I would travel the country and seek financial support for my program. I would
also give speeches in local community centers in order to get my message out to all kids who may be affected. I
hope that, as president, I could convince enough people to quit smoking that it would no longer be a public health
concern in our country.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is that wars would stop. I would stop sending people over to
Iraq. I wish that it could just be peaceful there. I wish it would stop just like the world wars did. People keep going
over there and getting hurt and sometimes dying.
If I were elected president, one change I would make is buses should have seat belts in case a bus tips over. Also,
that way no one gets hurt. I don't want anybody to get hurt or die.
I would be very sad. I don't like being sad because I don't like people getting hurt. I like them happy as can be.

MICHAEL J. SANDEL: I would invest in an infrastructure for civic renewal not just
roads and bridges, but schools, transit, playgrounds, parks, community centers,
health clinics, libraries and national service.

SHARON OLDS: Id grant the very rich the boon of helping them help others, as a
form of gratitude for their good fortune.
ANDREW WEIL: Id tell the nation that I was powerless to control the war machine,
Wall Street, big oil and the other interests that run the country, and I would urge
Americans to form a new political party not beholden to them.
DANNY MEYER: Id appoint a blue-ribbon committee of 14 accomplished citizens
one each representing these nonpolitical walks of American life: arts, science,
sports, big business, entrepreneurs, tech, medicine, law, education, environment,
defense, religion, farming and philanthropy and charge them with imagining
innovative industries that put Americans to work and add value to our world.
JAMES Q. WILSON: With my staff, I would decide what my administration was for.
Once I had clarified that, I would write several speeches on how to cope with a
stagnant economy, how to deal with countries (such as Iran and Syria) that harass
their own populations, and how the United States is committed to the survival of
Israel. These speeches would not attack the other party or previous presidents but
would describe the views I supported.
JENNIFER EGAN: Id decide (privately) from the outset that mine would be a oneterm presidency. Freed from the stranglehold of ensuring my own political longevity,
I would focus entirely on achieving what I think most Americans want: a stable and
productive economy; an environmentally viable planet; a humane, efficient
government capable of educating its young and protecting its vulnerable members.
SISTER MARY DAVID WALGENBACH: I would require members of Congress to
participate in a weeklong workshop on dialogue, negotiation and compromise
before the next session. All sessions would begin with 10 minutes of silence.
GEOFFREY CANADA: I would have a grown-up talk with the American people,
emphasizing that we are facing a crisis and solving it will require a spirit of shared
sacrifice. Those of us who have benefited mightily from this country and made
billions, as well as those who make the minimum wage, must all sacrifice.
PATRICIA RYAN MADSON: I would invite all of the members of Congress to join me
in an improvisation retreat. We would spend the time practicing saying yes to
each other and really listening to one anothers offers.
STEPHEN HANNOCK: Immediately after August break, every member of the House
and Senate would be required to move for two weeks, with family, to a town or
small city in a country outside North America. (Those serving more than one term
may only visit an English speaking country once and not on the first trip.)
JAMES DYSON: The United States still spends more than any other nation on
research and development. But others are moving up, not least China. America
needs to inspire a new generation of risk takers. And it starts in school.
NEIL deGRASSE TYSON: When youre scientifically literate, the world looks
different. Science provides a particular way of questioning what you see and hear.
When empowered by this state of mind, objective realities matter. These are the
truths on which good governance should be based and which exist outside of
particular belief systems.
As the 21st century approaches with science and technology assuming increasing importance in society, The
growing role of science and technology in managing environmental quality has led to a greatly expanded portfolio
of activities at the Academy complex related to the environment and natural resources. In recent years, Academy
groups have studied issues as varied as the carcinogens that occur naturally in food, river management in the
Grand Canyon, global climate change, and the long-term disposal of radioactive wastes. Reports on subjects such
as these have provided objective analyses of issues around which great controversy swirls. The issues summarized
in this paper from past reports continue to be relevant to the work of the Academy complex and to the nation.
Science and Policy: The Destruction of the Ozone Layer
In the early 1970s, researchers began to consider the fate in the atmosphere of a particular group of chemicals known as chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs) that have been widely used as refrigerants and in industry. These scientists demonstrated that, when these chemicals rise high into the
stratosphere, they react with sunlight to produce chemical radicals that cause the destruction of ozone molecules. This ozone in the stratosphere
shields the earth's surface from the harmful ultraviolet light of the sun. In 1984, researchers measured drastic reductions in stratospheric ozone
over Antarctica in early spring, which could be linked directly to the catalytic action of CFCs.
Since 1987, more than 150 countries have signed a series of international agreements, beginning with the Montreal Protocol, that call for a phased
reduction in the manufacture and eventual release of CFCs. Although depletion of stratospheric ozone will continue for several decades, the
ozone layer is expected to recover eventually, and the potential consequences will be much less severe than they would have been had research
not led to the early recognition of the problem
The federal government's application of the principles laid out in the 1983 report has been fundamentally sound.
But the government needs to do a better job of laying out the scientific and policy bases for its decisions. For
example, when a government agency presents estimates of risk to government officials and the public,
it should give not only a single-point estimate of risk, but also the associated sources and magnitudes
of uncertainty.

In the past, government often has taken a relatively narrow view of risk assessment, seeing it as a technical process
resulting in information that is to be translated for the use of decision-makers and the public. In fact, risk analysis
needs to be a combination of analysis and deliberation that is driven by the need to make decisions and solve
problems. Risk assessment needs to include all interested and affected parties from the beginning of the process,
and those parties need to feel that they have been appropriately involved and informed to the extent possible with
available knowledge.
Federal agencies need to build the organizational capability to involve affected and interested parties
in the risk-assessment process. (A-2) For example, agencies need to improve coordination between the entities
that handle scientific analysis and the entities that interact with outside parties. Agencies also need to develop
mechanisms that encourage feedback on their procedures, so that they can be improved.
Implementing a broader approach to risk assessment might involve higher initial costs and more time for some
decisions, but it also offers the potential for decisions that are more widely understood and accepted. A wider
acceptance might reduce the costs that often result today from challenges to decisions and from delays in
implementing them.
Managing risks successfully also depends on effective two-way communication between scientists, public officials,
and citizens. The main role of public officials in designing messages about risk is to inform decision-makers,
whether they are industry managers, concerned citizens, or government officials. The risk-communication process
will be successful to the extent that it improves the base of accurate information that decision-makers use and
satisfies them that they are adequately informed to the extent of available knowledge. That requires setting
realistic goals for the process, safeguarding openness and balance, relying on expertise about the risks and the
communication process, relating messages to the audiences' perspectives, and ensuring that the information is
complete.
Science Should Underlie Our Environmental
Policies
Environmental policies are influenced by economic, social, and political forces. To ensure that the execution of these
policies protects human health and ecosystems effectively and efficiently, scientific and technical information needs
to be an integral consideration from the earliest stages of policymaking.
The history of wetlands in the United States offers a good example of the role that science can play in
environmental management. Throughout much of American history, wetlands have been viewed both as an
unproductive resource and a liability, so government policies have encouraged the filling and draining of wetlands
to provide land for cities, homes, and agricultural fields. But research has demonstrated that areas left as wetlands
perform many valuable functions for society. They provide habitat for waterfowl and other species, absorb
floodwaters, and maintain the quality of surface water and groundwater by filtering it.
Conflicts between those who desire to convert wetlands to other purposes and those who want to preserve
wetlands have focused attention on how wetlands are defined. This conflict has been exacerbated by the fact that
different government agencies use different definitions to delineate wetlands. For example, definitions of wetlands
have been proposed that would permit much greater extents of conversion of wetlands for development.
Although judgment and policy will always play a role in identifying the extent of wetlands protection needed,
scientific understanding of wetlands is sufficient to establish a reference definition by which the
definitions and actions of government agencies can be judged. (B-1) Establishing a reference definition in
legislation would improve the objectivity, efficiency, consistency, and credibility of wetlands identification. It also
could provide the basis for consolidating all regulatory functions in a single federal agency, which would greatly
facilitate the coordination of wetlands regulation. The result could be less controversy over wetlands regulation and
wiser protection of wetlands.
Scientific information can also make environmental policies that protect endangered species more effective and
consistent. Developments in conservation biology, population genetics, and ecological theory over the last two
decades have greatly increased our understanding of the risks to species. In particular, we now know the extent to
which protecting species in the wild requires conserving habitats. When a species is listed as endangered, a
core amount of "survival habitat" should be protectedwithout reference to economic impactas a
short-term interim measure. (B-2) The adoption of a required recovery plan for the species would then specify
the habitat necessary for longer-term survival. Changes in the Endangered Species Act that reflect this and other
new understandings of how to protect threatened species could improve the act's effectiveness and reduce the
conflicts over human use of resources that it has engendered.
In some cases, research has pointed to environmental policies that are flawed or even counterproductive because
of their failure to incorporate available scientific and technical information. For example, the national efforts to
achieve ambient-air quality standards for ozone in the lower atmosphere (tropospheric ozone)which when it builds
up at ground level in urban areas can cause serious health problemshave been misdirected for more than two
decades and have therefore largely failed. The principal measure of tropospheric ozone trends is unreliable, and
both data on the problem and approaches to solving it have serious flaws. Government agencies need to
review and revise their methods for tracking tropospheric ozone formation. (B-3) The Environmental
Protection Agency has begun, through participation in the North American Research Strategy for Tropospheric
Ozone (NARSTO) program, to collect many of the types of environmental data called for in the National Research
Council's ozone report. The NARSTO program is in its early phases, and a new Research Council committee will
assess the NARSTO program's early implementation. The committee will remain active for at least four years to
provide periodic advice to NARSTO. Efforts in this field need to continue so that scientific understanding can be
incorporated into public policy.
A similar case in which scientific understanding of an environmental problem has yet to be incorporated into policy
involves the decreased visibility in US parks and wilderness areas. Today, the average visual range in much of the
western United States is one-half to two-thirds of what it would be without pollution from human sources; in the
eastern United States, the visual range is as little as one-fifth. Current policies focus on individual polluters, such as
nearby power plants. But much of the haze caused by pollution comes from automobiles, factories, and other
sources spread over hundreds of miles. To reduce the haze caused by pollution, policymakers must adopt a
wider-ranging, regional approach to air pollution. (B-4) Scientific knowledge and control technologies are
now adequate to meet the visibility objectives that have been laid out in legislation.
Many of the environmental issues in which scientific information is pivotal are exceedingly complex, involving an
intricate interplay of scientific, economic, and social factors. Consider the plight of the Pacific salmon. Pacific salmon
have disappeared from about 40% of their historical breeding ranges in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California
over the last century, and many remaining populations are severely reduced. Because of their unusual anadromous
life-cyclesalmon are born in clear cold streams, migrate to the ocean and grow there, and then travel back to
spawn in the streams where they hatchedthe salmon problem encompasses a broad range of issues, including
agriculture, dams, forestry, grazing, hatcheries, fishing, and urbanization. To preserve the Pacific salmon, a
comprehensive approach is needed that uses scientific and technical information to accommodate the

goal of preservation in the inevitable presence of human activities. (B-5) For example, hatchery planning,
management, and operations need to undergo a fundamental reorientation with the overall goal of rebuilding wild
salmon populations by promoting genetic diversity. Fishery management, better ways to transport salmon around
dams, and cooperative agreements that encompass entire waterway systems are all needed if salmon populations
are to recover.
Another concern is the management of the world's marine fisheries. Many fish stocks in US waters are less
abundant than before 1976, when legislation establishing a 200-mile fisheries conservation zone was enacted.
Many fisheries are in decline because they are being overexploited. Sustaining fish catches over the long term
requires improved understanding of marine ecosystems; improved data collection, analysis, and
dissemination; and more conservative management. (C-4)
Finally, the use of scientific and technical information gathered after a program has been put into place can be
critical in the effectiveness of the program. The Glen Canyon environmental studies conducted between 1983 and
1995 led to major changes in the operation of the Glen Canyon Dam on the Colorado River above Grand Canyon.
Continuing review of these studies by a National Research Council committee helped to broaden them to include
the full ecosystems of the areas affected by the dam. (B-6) This broadening has led to means for operating the Glen
Canyon Dam that are environmentally more advantageous. The willingness of a government agency charged with
managing a complex environmental problem to accept and incorporate external review point to more effective ways
to address future environmental problems.
Better Scientific and Technical Understanding
Is Required for Policymaking
In many instances, the scientific and technical information available today is inadequate to support complete and
unambiguous solutions to complex environmental problems. In such cases, the value judgments inherent in all
environmental policies become especially prominent. The testing of chemicals for carcinogenicity is one situation in
which the lack of scientific information hampers policymaking. Different government agencies apply different
regulatory mechanisms to the problem, but all use measures of carcinogenicity encumbered by uncertainties. For
example, a common way to test for carcinogenicity is to feed large amounts of a single chemical to rodents. But
human diets consist of small amounts of many chemicals, some of which can contribute to cancers and some of
which protect against them. More studies of humans are needed to improve understanding of the relationship
between the available animal data and human diets. Improved testing methods, expanded epidemiological
studies, and more data on the effects of diet on humans are needed to gain a better understanding of
how diet can contribute to cancer. (C-1)
Disposing of Radioactive Wastes
The disposal of radioactive wastes provides a vivid illustration of both the relevance and the
limitations of scientific and technical knowledge on highly controversial public issues. The state of
California has been considering the Ward Valley site in the eastern Mojave Desert for the disposal of
low-level radioactive wastes. Studies of the site have concluded that groundwater contamination at
the site is highly unlikely. However, concerns by some segments of the public have not been
allayed, and development of the site is currently halted.
The scientific and political challenges are even greater in considering the disposal of long-lived highlevel radioactive wastes at the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada. It is scientifically feasible to assess
waste isolation at the site on the time scale of the geologic stability of the area, which exceeds 1
million years for Yucca Mountain. However, there is no scientific basis for predicting the behavior of
individual humans thousands of years into the future. Specifying future scenarios for evaluating
potential human risk therefore requires a policy rather than a scientific decision.
For more information:
Ward Valley: An Examination of Seven Issues in Earth Sciences and Ecology, Committee to
Review Specific Scientific and Technical Safety Issues Related to the Ward Valley, California, LowLevel Radioactive Waste Site, 1995
Technical Bases for Yucca Mountain Standards, Committee on Technical Bases for Yucca Mountain
Standards, 1995
A lack of scientific information also hampers the management of rangelands in the United States. The absence of a
consistently defined standard for the health of rangeland ecosystems seriously limits current efforts to assess the
status of US rangelands. Agencies should evaluate rangeland health by three criteria: the stability of
soils and watersheds, the integrity of nutrient cycles and energy flows, and the functioning of
ecological processes that enable rangelands to recover from damage. (C-2) Research that produces more
knowledge about these factors would lead to better decisions about how to protect the ecological health of
rangelands. As discussed earlier, even less well understood than the management of rangeland is the management
of the world's marine fisheries.
The value of scientific information in forming environmental policies is the main impetus for efforts to gather data
on the nation's plant and animal life. Despite many laws and policies to protect animals and plants from extinction,
the nation's biological diversity is in danger of decline. That is partly because of a lack of basic knowledge about the
number of species in the United States, the effect of human activities on ecosystems, and interrelationships among
species. The public and private sectors should cooperate in a program to gather, analyze, understand,
and maintain scientific information on the nation's biological resources. (C-3) Such a program could
identify trends while management options are still available, evaluate the effectiveness of such options, and direct
attention to areas where problems are most likely to develop in the near future, such as urban-expansion zones,
estuaries, rivers, and areas with intensive fishing, logging, or mining activity. By pooling the efforts of the public and
private sectors and by disseminating information widely, such a program could help to prevent costly confrontations
over plant and animal life.
For more information on improving scientific understanding of environmental issues:
C-1. Carcinogens and Anticarcinogens in the Human Diet: A Comparison of Naturally Occurring and Synthetic
Substances, Committee on Comparative Toxicity of Naturally Occurring Carcinogens, 1996
C-2. Rangeland Health: New Methods to Classify, Inventory, and Monitor Rangelands, Committee on Rangeland
Classification, 1994
C-3. A Biological Survey for the Nation, Committee on the Formation of the National Biological Survey, 1993
Appropriate Goals and Priorities Must Be Set
for Environmental-Cleanup Initiatives

Scientific and technical information is critical for setting priorities and goals for environmental-cleanup initiatives.
For example, an estimated 300,000-400,000 sites across the country have groundwater and soil contamination.
These sites include thousands of underground storage tanks at gas stations as well as the massive nuclear-weapons
production facility at Hanford, Washington. Costs of cleaning up contaminated groundwater sites are estimated to
be as high as $1 trillion over the next 30 years. Federal and state laws require that these sites be restored to meet
drinking-water standards. Although current technology can meet that objective at a portion of the nation's
contaminated groundwater sites, total cleanup at many sites is not now feasible.
The government should set cleanup goals for contaminated groundwater at each site based on the
hydrogeology of the site, the types of contaminants disposed of, and the state of technology. (D-1) At
sites where cleanup is not now feasible, research is needed to determine techniques that would be appropriate.
Scientific and technical information is only one of many factors that must be considered in setting goals for
environmental action. In particular, public participation in risk assessment, risk management, and the
projected cost of cleanup can be critical in developing and gaining public acceptance of environmental
initiatives. (D-2) Several key points from a review of the Department of Energy's efforts to clean up the nation's
nuclear-weapons sites emphasize public participation:
Lack of trust in government agencies or officials can be a major impediment to reaching consensusnot only on the
type and degree of remediation needed, but also on the process used to make decisions.
The multiple concerned parties need to be involved throughout the whole process, beginning with planning, not just
in the review of the results.
Because values and philosophical views differ, an open, clear, equitable, and inclusive process is essential.
Although more information is always preferable to less information, the absence of complete information should not
be an excuse for a lack of progress.
The process used by the federal agencies to set environmental goalsfor example, choosing sites for remediation
varies widely from agency to agency. A single national process would provide a better basis for decisions about
setting goals, about how much cleanup or containment should be undertaken at each site, when it should occur,
and the cost. The federal government should consider the development of a unified national process of
hazardous-waste site analysis to replace the current multiplicity of approaches. (D-3) Such a system
would lead to greater consultation and collaboration among agencies and to increased consistency in scientific
assessments and decision-making. It would also be more objective, more equitable, and more open to public
scrutiny.

The Pricing of Goods and Services Should

Reflect Total Social Costs, Including
Environmental Consequences
The social sciences can help to improve the quality of the nation's environmental policies. Economics research, for
example, has explored the total costs of particular goods and services, including the environmental costs, and has
suggested ways of incorporating the costs into the prices that people pay for goods and services.
A leading example of an environmental concern where market incentives could be useful is global climate change.
Although great uncertainties regarding the causes and impacts of global warming remain, government could use
market incentives in a number of ways to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and simultaneously achieve other
socially desirable goals. If energy were priced at its full social costwhich means setting the price of each form of
energy at a cost necessary to recoup all societal costs not normally assessed in present pricing mechanisms
wasteful uses of energy could be curtailed. However, the practical implementation of such pricing system entails
technical and political difficulties, including issues of world competitiveness. The federal government should
study in detail the full social-cost pricing of energy with a goal of gradually introducing such a system.
(E-1) Including all social, environmental, and other costs in energy prices would provide consumers and producers
with the appropriate information for deciding about fuel mix, new investments, and research and development.
At the same time, continued regulation is important in controlling some potential contributors to global change,
such as the CFCs and halocarbons that are being phased out to reduce the threat to stratospheric ozone.
When market signals conflict with environmental objectives, policies designed to achieve those objectives tend to
be ineffective. An example is the existing system for setting fuel-economy standards, which requires that
domestically produced and imported vehicles sold by each manufacturer achieve a specified average fuel economy.
Under the current regime of low fuel prices, consumers have relatively limited interest in purchasingand
manufacturers in producingcars and light trucks with high fuel economy. If gains in fuel economy are obtained in
new vehicles at the expense of other attributes that consumers value, consumers might retain their current vehicles
longer or find themselves with little choice but to purchase vehicles that do not meet their desires.
The federal government should consider fuel-price increases as an alternative or a supplement to
vehicle-efficiency regulation. (E-2) Increases in fuel prices should not be characterized as taxes because the
purpose is not to raise revenuecollected funds could be used to offset other taxes. Increasing fuel prices would
provide a market signal to channel consumer behavior in a direction consistent with societal objectives. It also
would affect the use of all vehicles on the road, not just new vehicles. For example, there is widespread discussion
of the nation's decaying transportation infrastructureroads, bridges, and the likeand of the need for substantial
investment in its restoration and improvement. Funds collected at the gas pump for this purpose would pass the
costs of the investment on to those who directly benefit from it.
There are ways to increase fuel prices without necessarily increasing the total costs to consumers of owning and
operating vehicles. For example, at least some portion of automotive-insurance costs is properly related to the
number and location of miles traveled. The recovery of a portion of the costs of insurance by charges at the gas
pump might allow an equitable recovery of insurance costs. Because insurance costs are a substantial fraction of
the operating costs of a vehicle, collecting a portion of them at the gas pump instead of by a direct payment to the
insurance company might provide an important incentive for more-efficient use of fuelwith no net out-of-pocket
impact on the average consumer.
Economic incentives can have a powerful effect on the traffic congestion that frustrates millions of American
motorists every working day. With a travel demand that far outpaces the provision of highway capacity, there is
little prospect that congestion will be eased simply by building new highways or transit systems. One response to
the problem is to use pricing measures to provide direct incentives to motorists to reduce or shift their travel so as
to use highway capacity more efficiently and reduce the emissions caused by stop-and-go traffic. An example of
such an approach is time-of-day tolls (congestion pricing): a premium is charged to motorists who wish to drive
during peak-travel periods. Tolls on roads or bridges, fees to enter congested areas, or changes in the structure of
parking and transit pricing can all affect when and where people choose to drive.

Although they are politically difficult and complex, pricing measures have benefits that are sufficiently
promising that local and state governments, toll authorities, and private investors should experiment
with their application. (E-3) Continuation of federal support for experimentation and removal of federal
restrictions on experimentation would create more opportunities at the local level. Market-oriented solutions, such
as congestion pricing, might be a far more effective way to curb the congestion and environmental costs of highway
use than are the current federal limitations on the construction of new highways. (E-4)
Pricing mechanisms can usefully be supplemented by other interventions that take advantage of how the targeted
individuals and organizations attend to, understand, and make use of information about technologies that affect
energy use. Adoption of a new technology often depends on whether the potential adopters use and trust sources
of information on the new technology. To make policies more effective, government needs to get accurate
information to the potential adopters of technologies from sources that companies trust and in forms
that they find useful. (E-5) That might mean finding ways to make the adopters' own experience a reliable
source of information, working with intermediary organizations, or creating ways that official information can be
independently verified.
Adaptive Management Promotes Effective
Interactions Between Managers and Scientists
Uncertainty about the impacts and effectiveness of environmental policies suggests the benefits of being flexible
and adaptive. We need to learn from our experiences and incorporate new and better information into the
management process. Programs and policies tend to be more effective if they are able to change to reflect new
knowledge and new circumstances.
The need for flexibility is especially apparent if the relevant knowledge base is sketchy or is rapidly changing. In the
Bering Sea, for example, there are no definitive explanations of why many populations of sea lions, seals, and birds
have undergone large and sometimes sudden declines. Many suggestions have been put forwardsuch as the
effects of commercial fishing or changes in sea icebut information remains scarce. The Bering Sea is in
international waters between North America (including the United States) and Asia, so management of these waters
is difficult.
Fish and wildlife management actions in the Bering Sea should be designed so that their effects can
be studied, should take ecosystem processes into account, and should not focus only on individual
species. (F-1) Better coordination is needed among the nations and institutions that make decisions concerning
use of Bering Sea resources. A comprehensive directory of Bering Sea databases would help to organize the data
needed to make these determinations.
The complexity of many environmental problems highlights the need for adaptive-management strategies. For
example, solutions to the Pacific salmon problem will be complex and often hard to agree on. The current
uncertainty and controversy over the benefits of habitat-improvement projects, hatcheries, and other management
and restoration approaches for Pacific salmon are due largely to a lack of adequate scientific information.
Watershed analysis, adaptive management, careful inventory, and strong regional monitoring
programs are needed to provide the context within which management decisions can be made. (F-2)
Another example of the need for adaptive management is the management of coastal areas. Coastal ecosystems
are under stress because of a variety of human activities, and many have experienced widespread degradation.
More knowledge about coastal ecosystems, including the human component, is needed to manage these systems in
a manner that will preserve their value and restore degraded systems, while allowing economic development and a
high quality of life.
Adaptive-management systemsin which science is a substantial part of planning, evaluating, and modifying
management strategiescan improve interactions between scientists and managers for the purpose of creating
more-effective environmental policy in coastal areas. Government should use adaptive-management
approaches in coastal policymaking and implementation, and it should improve the allocation and
coordination of resources to achieve effective interactions between coastal scientists and
policymakers. (F-3)
We Must Move Toward a Sustainable
Relationship with the Natural World
Environmental policies usually have focused either on specific media (air, water, or land) or on specific resources
(petroleum, groundwater, or marine ecosystems). But media and resources are bound up in systems characterized
by complex interconnections. To address environmental issues in their full complexity, policies should reflect a
broad systemwide perspective.
For some environmental issues, the transition toward this broader perspective is under way. Integrated coastal
management, which seeks to identify environmental objectives and cost-effective strategies for achieving them on
a regional and iterative basis, can help to protect coastal waterways from pollution. (G-1) Industrial ecology, which
treats industry in much the same way that biologists view natural ecosystems, applies a systems perspective to
producer and consumer activities in order to reduce waste. (G-2) On an even broader scale, the multidisciplinary
field of earth system science seeks to understand the past, present, and future behavior of the whole earth system,
including the effects of humans on that system. (G-3)
Regulatory Coordination
Numerous laws, regulations, and regulatory bodies at the federal, state, and local levels govern
actions pertaining to the environment. For example, the large number of regulators with jurisdiction
over the decontamination and decommissioning of facilitiessuch as the uranium-enrichment
facilities at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Portsmouth, Ohio; and Paducah, Kentuckyand the large
numbers of applicable laws and regulations virtually ensure an overlapping and conflicting
regulatory regime. This complex regulatory environment can result in costly and labor-intensive site
practices and can be counterproductive to protecting public health and safety. The regulatory
environment also can cause delays, thus extending surveillance and maintenance expenditures. In
major cleanup efforts, the federal government should expeditiously seek to coordinate all regulatory
aspects with appropriate local, state, and federal agencies to ensure efficient and effective actions.
For more information:
Affordable Cleanup? Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and
Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities, Committee on Decontamination
and Decommissioning of Uranium Enrichment Facilities, 1996
A systemwide perspective on environmental issues will be essential to using the earth's resources in a
sustainable manner. (G-4) In the broadest sense, sustainable development requires that we meet the needs of
the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Achieving sustainable
development will require changes in lifestyle, industrial processes, the types and amounts of resources used, and

the products that are manufactured. Technology is therefore a key component of national and international efforts
to achieve environmentally sustainable development for all nations. Governments should encourage industry
to develop and deploy environmentally advantageous technologies through economic incentives and
support universities and other research institutions in developing and implementing these
technologies. All parties should pursue arrangements for monitoring and assessing environmental
conditions and their economic implications. (G-4)
A major influence on the sustainability of future development will be the growth of human populations, both locally
and globally. If current predictions of population growth prove accurate and patterns of human activity on the planet
remain unchanged, science and technology might not be able to prevent irreversible degradation of the natural
environment and continued poverty for much of the world. Family-planning services, effective and available
contraceptives for women and men, improvements in the social and economic status of women, and
development policies that address basic human needs are all required to control population growth.
The natural and social sciences will be crucial in developing new options for limiting population growth, protecting
the natural environment, and improving the quality of human life. (G-5)
The broader perspectives needed to address pressing environmental problems are emerging. The challenge now is
to understand and incorporate these perspectives in policies that achieve both immediate and long-term objectives.