Search

The article highlights California's tri-partite statutory structure aimed at the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and global warming, linking air quality, transportation, and sustainable land use through regional and local planning. It examines laws to prevent global warming and greenhouse gas emissions by linking air quality, transportation, and sustainable land use1 through regional and local planning.

BACKGROUND: Both public health, and the health of the natural environment, are affected by policy decisions made across portfolios as diverse as finance, planning, transport, housing, education, and agriculture. A response to the interdependent character of public health has been the "health in all policies" (HiAP) approach. OBJECTIVES: With reference to parallels between health and environment, this paper argues that lessons from HiAP are useful for creating a new integrated environmental management approach termed "environment in all polices" (EiAP). DISCUSSION: This paper covers the theoretical foundations of HiAP, which is based on an understanding that health is strongly socially determined. The paper then highlights how lessons learned from HiAP's implementation in Finland, California, and South Australia might be applied to EiAP. It is too early to learn from evaluations of HiAP, but it is apparent that there is no single tool kit for its application. The properties that are likely to be necessary for an effective EiAP approach include a jurisdiction-specific approach, ongoing and strong leadership from a central agency, independent analysis, and a champion. We then apply these properties to Victoria (Australia) to demonstrate how EiAP might work. CONCLUSIONS: We encourage further exploration of the feasibility of EiAP as an approach that could make explicit the sometimes surprising environmental implications of a whole range of strategic policies. CITATION: Browne GR, Rutherfurd ID. 2017. The case for "environment in all policies": lessons from the "health in all policies" approach in public health. Environ Health Perspect 125:149-154; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP294 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We study how government green procurement policies influence private-sector demand for similar products. Specifically, we measure the impact of municipal policies requiring governments to construct green buildings on private-sector adoption of the US Green Building Council׳s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standard. Using matching methods, panel data, and instrumental variables, we find that government procurement rules produce spillover effects that stimulate both private-sector adoption of the LEED standard and investments in green building expertise by local suppliers. These findings suggest that government procurement policies can accelerate the diffusion of new environmental standards that require coordinated complementary investments by various types of private adopter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article shares reflections about the climate change program of California. Topics discussed include the state's goal to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions under the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act, the state's launch of a market-based cap-and-trade program, and the view that the federal government should follow California's model in terms of its climate change policy.

The article examines the California Assembly Bill 1493. California is the first state in the U.S. to pass legislation directing its environmental protection agency to promulgate regulations establishing standards for greenhouse gas emissions from new motor vehicles. The background of the 1493 bill regulations is presented including the beginnings of the many preemption challenges against which California must defend. The arguments for and against Clean Air Act, Energy Policy and Conservation Act, and foreign policy preemption are discussed. How and why each of the preemption challenges fails are also summarized.

Examines California's utilization of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) to influence outer continental shelf (OCS) energy development; Overview of the history of he conflicts between California and the federal government regarding OCS energy development; Analysis of the Ninth Circuit's decision in the latest battle, "California Coastal Commission v. Norton"; Conclusion that the Ninth Circuit was correct in holding that the suspension of thirty-six OCS leases off California are subject to state consistency review pursuant to section 307(c)(1) of the CZMA.

In this paper, we ask how the written composition of public policies structure an environmental governance system. We answer this question using semi-automated text analyses of 22 state-level policies governing oil and gas development in California between 2007 and 2017. The findings portray an environmental governance system that is both partitioned and connected into different focal areas (called "targeted action situations") through certain actors, issues, and rules. We conclude with substantive insights about California's oil and gas governance system, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions for analyzing the composition of public policy to advance knowledge about hybrid governance. • A coercive or regulatory form of governing system can appear responsive to signals in its environment. • Policy-making venues produce policies that connect actors in the broader governance system via targeted action situations. • Interdependent action situations are connected in multiple ways. • The actors, issues, and rules in a governance system tend to partition or connect the system. • The institutional grammar can be adapted to study public policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the announcement of California Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. at the United Nations Environment Programme and the Climate and Clean Air Coalition meeting in 2015 on the state's reduction of short-lived climate pollutants to reduce methane and hydrofluorocarbons emissions.

Reports that California's Environmental Protection Agency has decided to cease its controversial plan to destroy records of dissenting scientific opinions on environmental hazards. The suit against the agency brought by three organizations; The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC); The Environmental Law Center; The Society of Professional Journalists.