Protecting the environment is often not the primary objective of businesses. As the world has become more environmentally aware, the necessity of environmental regulations becomes apparent. Voluntary Environmental Programs: A Policy Perspective examines different approaches to environmental protection in business. Typically, environmental improvements on the part of industry result from government regulations that command certain action from industry and then control how well it performs. An alternative approach is voluntary environmental agreements, where firms voluntarily commit to make certain environmental improvements individually, as part of an industry association, or under the guidance of a government entity. For example, many new initiatives targeting climate change originate from companies that voluntarily commit to reduce their carbon output or footprint.

Since the early 1990s, voluntary programs have played an increasingly prominent role in environmental management in the U.S. and other industrialized countries. Programs have attempted to address problems ranging from climate change and energy efficiency, to more localized air and water pollution problems. But do they work? Despite a growing theoretical literature, there is limited empirical evidence on their success or the situations most conducive to the approaches. Even less is known about their cost-effectiveness. Getting credible answers is important. Research to date has been largely limited to individual programs. This innovative book seeks to clarify what is known by looking at a range of program types, including different approaches adopted in different nations. The focus is on assessing actual performance via seven case studies, including the U.S. Climate Wise program, the U.S. EPA's 33/50 program on toxic chemicals, the U.K. Climate Change Agreements, and the Keidanren Voluntary Action Plan in Japan. The central goals of Reality Check are understanding outcomes and, more specifically, the relationship between outcomes and design. By including in-depth analyses by experts from the U.S., Europe, and Japan, the book advances scholarship and provides practical information for the future design of voluntary programs to stakeholders and policymakers on all sides of the Atlantic and Pacific.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was introduced on December 2, 1970 by President Richard Nixon. The agency is charged with protecting human health and the environment, by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress. The EPA's struggle to protect health and the environment is seen through each of its official publications. These publications outline new policies, detail problems with enforcing laws, document the need for new legislation, and describe new tactics to use to solve these issues. This collection of publications ranges from historic documents to reports released in the new millennium, and features works like: Bicycle for a Better Environment, Health Effects of Increasing Sulfur Oxides Emissions Draft, and Women and Environmental Health.

This pioneer work in a complex, interdisciplinary, and still-developing field explores the prospects for a more comprehensive approach to evaluating environmental programs. Experts in the fields of biology, chemistry, ecology, economics, management, planning, sociology, political science, and public administration provide coherent, integrated perspectives on the task of environmental program evaluation. The essays are organized thematically, covering institutional, scientific, economic, and administrative topics. The volume will be a valuable text for practitioners, regulators, policymakers, and scholars in the fields of program evaluation, environmental policy, and environmental science. A volume in the series The Environment and the Human Condition

A new book from the National Research Council recommends changes in how the federal government evaluates the efficiency of research at EPA and other agencies. Assessing efficiency should be considered only one part of gauging a program's quality, relevance, and effectiveness. The efficiency of research processes and that of investments should be evaluated using different approaches. Investment efficiency should examine whether an agency's R&D portfolio, including the budget, is relevant, of high quality, matches the agency's strategic plan. These evaluations require panels of experts. In contrast, process efficiency should focus on "inputs" (the people, funds, and facilities dedicated to research) and "outputs" (the services, grants, publications, monitoring, and new techniques produced by research), as well as their timelines and should be evaluated using quantitative measures. The committee recommends that the efficiency of EPA's research programs be evaluated according to the same standards used at other agencies. To ensure this, OMB should train and oversee its budget examiners so that the PART questionnaire is implemented consistently and equitably across agencies.

A recent shift in the U.S. strategy for environmental protection is the use of voluntary programs and self- regulation for pollution control rather than mandated command- and-control approaches. If voluntary approaches are successful in reducing pollution, they also have the potential to be more cost?effective than existing command? and?control regulations because they allow firms flexibility to choose the most appropriate pollution control strategy, lower information costs and reduce the administrative burden on environmental agencies. Current analytical research concerning voluntary programs has examined their welfare impacts and the cost-effectiveness of using voluntary programs together with mandatory regulations. Recent empirical studies have been limited to examining firms' motivations to participate in voluntary programs. From an environmental policy perspective it is also important to investigate whether voluntary programs are more effective at reducing pollution than traditional approaches. It is necessary to explore the relative roles of mandatory regulations and voluntary programs and if they are complements or substitutes in pollution control. It is also vital to examine the consequences of participation on a firm's economic performance. If the government does not provide any financial incentive for participation in voluntary programs, their long-term feasibility as policy tools depends on their impact on a firm's profitability. These issues are examined in the context of firms in the U.S. chemical industry and their participation in EPA's 33/50 Program. Panel data for the years 1988-1993 are used. We evaluate the impact of the Program by developing a two-stage generalized least squares model that corrects for self-selection bias and controls for the effect of firm-specific factors on a firm's level of pollution and its economic performance. The empirical analysis shows that firms decided to participate in the 33/50 Program because of rational economic self-interest. Incentives for participation include expected gains due to public recognition and technical assistance and expected reductions in future liabilities and compliance costs under mandatory environmental regulations. This suggests that participation in voluntary programs depends on a framework of mandatory regulation that provide a credible threat of penalties if firms do not voluntarily self-regulate their emissions. We demonstrate that the Program led to a statistically significant decline in the release of toxic chemicals after controlling for sample-selection bias, the impact of mandatory regulations and firm-specific characteristics. We also find that the program had a negative and statistically significant impact on the net income of firms in the short run, but that future profitability of firms improved significantly as a result of the program.

This report addresses the conceptual basis, design, and implementation of the National Environmental Performance Track program. The voluntary program sought to encourage facilities to improve their environmental performance and provide a more collaborative relationship between facilities and regulators. While the program had mixed success, EPA should continue to seek out new approaches to complement and enhance traditional regulatory approaches.