Trade-offs in assessing environmental impacts

Summary

The evolution of the environmental issue has moved through the early stage of technological fixes and estimable economic costs into an area of larger uncertainty and higher information costs.

The economic costs of pollution control are about one percent of the GNP. The technological fixes have improved air and water quality somewhat; but in air quality little reduction in nitrogen oxides has been achieved, and in water quality about 25 percent of the water is poor or worse, with high fecal coliform bacteria.

The next stage of environmental improvement is to reduce hazardous chemical elements in the environment. In these areas, the health and biological effects are still uncertain, information costs are high, and subjective judgments are common.

As uncertainty and qualitative judgments have become more prominent in environmental decisions, delays have been introduced into the decision loops, raising regulatory costs, and heightening adversary stresses between business and environmentalists. The stresses place an aura of arbitrariness over regulations in a milieu where the governability of society is already questioned. This is not the time to retreat from environmental improvement, but to try to simplify the decision process. Two possible alternatives are to codify court precedents into a more rigorous reliance on agency administration law, or to revert to the common rules of civil law that complainants must show damage and cause before an award is allowable by an administrative agency. Either of these options would free the decision making process of delays and allow it to function prospectively, while allowing environmental damages from inadequate decisions to be remedied retroactively. Potential liabilities may increase, but at least the decision process could move forward without being frustrated by regulatory delays.