A Precautionary Tool: Alternatives Assessment ***

1. A Precautionary Tool: Alternatives Assessment*** *** Carolyn Raffensperger CAPCOA Los Angeles September 20, 2007

2. History of Alternatives Assessment • 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to integrate environmental values into their decision making processes by considering the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions. • 1970 California passes CEQA (Fifteen states and Puerto Rico have little NEPAs) • 1998 Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle identifies Alternatives Assessment as key to the principle. • (note: Dr. Mary O’Brien has been instrumental in extending alternatives assessment beyond NEPA.)

3. The Basic Message • “There is wisdom in NEPA’s basic message -- look before you leap environmentally so that you can prevent problems in the first place rather than having to repair or clean them up after they occur.” • Nicholas Yost, drafted NEPA regulations and was a deputy Attorney General in California

4. Why Alternatives Assessment • Prevent and mitigate cumulative impacts in disproportionately affected communities • Prevent harm to future generations • Make wise decisions about shared resources ( the commons) • Drive innovation • Prevent costs to the public for cleaning up messes. (Its cheaper to prevent than clean up or cure.)

5. Benefit of Assessing Alternatives • Breaks decision-making out of the old binary mode of yes/no, either/or questions. • It is a formal method for helping us effectively meet our goals.

6. Who else has an alternatives assessment policy? San Francisco’s Purchasing Ordinance Endangered Species Act Massachusetts’ Toxic Use Reduction Institute

7. Wingspread Statement When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.

8. What is the precautionary principle? A strategy to prevent harm rather than measure and manage risk.

9. Elements of the precautionary principle • Plausible threats of harm • Lack of scientific certainty • Precautionary action to prevent harm Note: every formulation of the precautionary principle contains these three elements.

10. 5 steps to implement precaution • Set Goals • Heed Early Warnings • Shift the Burden of Proof • Examine Alternativesand Select the Best • Democratic Participation Note: These are linked and iterative steps.

11. Philosophy of Precaution and Alternatives • It is not acceptable to harm people when there are reasonable alternatives. • It is not acceptable to harm future generations when there are reasonable alternatives. • It is not acceptable to add cumulative impacts to damaged communities and ecosystems when there are reasonable alternatives.

12. Steps in evaluating alternatives • Set a goal. • Identify reasonable alternatives that will help meet the goal. • Determine the environmental, social and health benefits of each alternative. • Evaluate the possible harm from each alternative. • Choose the alternative that does the least harm, adds the fewest cumulative impacts, and maybe even improves the environment.

13. Setting goals • It is only within the context of a community goal that the acceptability of a risk has any meaning. • Goals determine the range of alternatives that should be considered.

14. Identifying reasonable alternatives • “Solve for pattern” Choose alternatives that do not create other kinds of problems. Jobs vs. the environment is a false choice. • Who participates in identifying alternatives is crucial. • Competition will drive more innovative alternatives. • Democratic participation will elicit more just and innovative alternatives.

15. Identifying benefits of various alternatives • How are benefits allocated? • Who benefits?

16. Evaluating possible harm from each alternative • Who is harmed? • How is harm distributed in time and space? • What are your boundaries of consideration?

17. Mapping benefits and harms • If you drew concentric circles around the facility or project, do the benefits and harms fall in the same spatial boundaries? Do the harms fall within one boundary and the benefits fall way outside that boundary?

18. Choosing the best alternative • At present there is no requirement to choose the alternative that most benefits the public health and well-being. If you choose anything less, you have violated the public trust.

19. According to CEQA:Future Generations • The CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.2[c]) require that an EIR discuss the extent to which a project, during its initial or continued phases (i.e., construction and operations), would commit nonrenewable resources that future generations would be unable to reverse.

20. According to CEQA:Cumulative Impacts • a cumulative impact consists of an impact that is created as a result of the combination of the project together with other projects causing related impacts. These impacts occur when the incremental impact of the project, when combined with the effects of other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, are cumulatively considerable. This typically occurs when impacts compound or increase existing environmental problems.

21. Alternatives Assessment Process • Planning Tool or • Procedural Hurdle? • The real question is whether the search for better alternatives is meaningful and whether the best alternative is chosen. Ultimately these are political questions.

22. One lesson from San Francisco • Asking the proponent of an activity to also describe the alternatives will not result in sophisticated, valid alternatives. S.F. issues an RFP for products and competitors submit product proposals for consideration. The alternatives are developed through competition.

23. Role of Government • An environmental agency’s key responsibility is to serve as a trustee of the commons for this and future generations. • How can alternatives assessment help you take this responsibility seriously?

24. Questions • What if we began to imagine agency choices benefiting public health rather than permitting pollution? • What if air districts appointed a legal guardian for future generations with the capacity to evaluate all permits and decisions for their impact on generations to come? • What if air districts made it agency policy that it will always choose the best environmental and public health alternative?

25. Resources • Precautionary Tools for Reshaping Environmental Policy. Edited by Nancy Myers and Carolyn Raffensperger • Making Better Environmental Decisions: An Alternative to Risk Assessment. By Mary O’Brien • Alternatives Assessment Framework of the Lowell Center for Sustainable Production. By Mark Rossi, Joel Tickner, Ken Geiser