Sustainable Development and its Discontents

Sustainable development (or sustainability) is a decision-making framework for maintaining and achieving human well-being, both in the present and into the future. The framework requires both consideration and achievement of environmental protection, social justice and economic development. In that framework, environmental protection must be integrated into decisions about social and economic development, and social justice and economic viability must be integrated into decisions about environmental quality. First endorsed by the world’s nations in 1992, this framework is intended to provide an effective response to the twin global challenges of growing environmental degradation and widespread extreme poverty. Sustainability provides a framework for humans to live in harmony with nature, rather than at nature’s expense. It may therefore be one of the most important ideas to come out of the 20th century. In the last two decades, the framework has become a touchstone in nearly every economic sector and at every level of government, unleashing an extraordinary range of creativity in all of those realms. Sustainable development is having a significant effect on the practice of law and on the way in which laws are written and implemented. Understanding the framework is increasingly important for law makers and lawyers. As sustainable development (or sustainability) has grown in prominence, its critics have become more numerous and more vocal. Three major lines of criticism are that the term is “too boring” to command public attention, “too vague” to provide guidance, and “too late” to address the world’s problems. Critics suggest goals such as abundance, environmental integrity, and resilience. Beginning with the international agreements that shaped the concept of sustainable development, this Article provides a functional and historical analysis of the meaning of sustainable development. It then analyzes and responds to each of these criticisms in turn. While the critics, understood constructively, suggest ways of strengthening this framework, they do not provide a compelling alternative. The challenge for lawyers, law makers, and others is to use and improve this framework to make better decisions.

Climate Change Policy & the Natural Gas Transmission Sector

Various emission reduction strategies are proposed to manage climate change in the U.S. This applied capstone evaluates the most likely policy options considering impacts and benefits to the natural gas transmission sector (NGT). It examines a case-study including a comparison of policy options to recommend the most beneficial program to the NGT sector. Two conclusions of major importance are: a federally preempted cap-and-trade program would be the most cost-effective for the NGT sector and the NGT sector should not be the point of regulation of any climate policy. Recommendations, strategies, and costs for implementation of a compliance plan for a federally preempted cap-and-trade program were developed as a tool for NGT companies as part of this applied capstone project.

Effective Surface Water Quality Policies: A Contrast of Policies in the United States and the European Union

The United States and the European Union each have their own policy approach to protect surface water quality. Both policy approaches are similar in many ways. Both rely heavily on command and control. However, there are differences in the application of the details. Both the U.S. and E.U. began current efforts to protect surface water quality in the 1970s, yet quality continues to less than desired in both places. Both have reduced point source pollutants but have had difficulty controlling non-point source pollutants even though policies have been in place for many decades. The successes and failures of the two policies are studied in this project to determine which aspects of both policies will best protect surface water quality in an increasingly complex future.