|
|
|
|
|
| Wernstedt, Kris; Hersh, Robert; Probst, Katherine N.. |
| Supporters of the effort to link cleanups at hazardous waste sites to the sites' expected land uses claim that amending language in the federal Superfund statute to allow this may yield a number of benefits. These include rationalizing the cleanup process and decreasing cleanup costs, promoting economic development in the local communities that host Superfund sites, and helping such communities exercise more control over the cleanups. However, interviews with Superfund stakeholders and a detailed case study call into question these arguments. The current role of land use in cleanup, uncertainties about whether economic development is likely at the bulk of Superfund sites, the long-run viability of institutional controls, the willingness of communities to... |
| Tipo: Working or Discussion Paper |
Palavras-chave: Land use; Economic development; Superfund; Land Economics/Use; Q24; Q28; R52. |
| Ano: 1997 |
URL: http://purl.umn.edu/10540 |
| |
|
|
| Wernstedt, Kris; Probst, Katherine N.. |
| As the United States Congress debates revisions to the federal Superfund law, one of the most important topics of discussion is the degree to which cleanups at Superfund sites should be based on their expected future land use. This discussion has engaged the Superfund community for several years. Despite this apparent interest in linking cleanup with land use, however, surprisingly little analysis has been done on what role land use already plays in selecting remedies. RFF researchers have addressed the shortfall with case studies at three Superfund sites - Abex Corporation in Portsmouth, Virginia, Industri-Plex in Woburn, Massachusetts, and Fort Ord near Monterey, California - where land use has played a prominent role in the remedy selection process.... |
| Tipo: Working or Discussion Paper |
Palavras-chave: Land Economics/Use. |
| Ano: 1997 |
URL: http://purl.umn.edu/10593 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Davies, Terry; Probst, Katherine N.. |
| Federal, state, and local governments are major polluters of the environment. They account for more than 7% of SO2 air pollution emissions and more than 5% of all NO2 air emissions in the United States. Public entities are more likely than private ones to be in violation of the Clean Water Act, and they account for two-thirds of all major facilities in significant noncompliance with the act. Department of Energy nuclear sites are the worst hazardous waste problems in the nation. A lack of adequate data makes it difficult to fully characterize the extent of pollution caused by government agencies and to compare the performance of the public and private sectors. There are many reasons why government pollution is difficult to regulate. The paper discusses... |
| Tipo: Working or Discussion Paper |
Palavras-chave: Pollution control; Federal facilities; Regulation; Intergovernmental relations; Political Economy. |
| Ano: 2001 |
URL: http://purl.umn.edu/10594 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
