A short essay on the importance of public engagement in environmental decision-making.

1. Summer Smith
February 27, 2012
THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN GOVERNMENT DECISION-
MAKING
True public participation in environmental decision-making is critical to effectively
implement environmental regulations. By “true,” I mean public participation beyond the
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. There are too many activities to
regulate with enforcement and compliance assistance alone. Public participation is
crucial to effective implementation because the resources of government agencies are not
equipped to handle or monitor everyone and everything. Public participation inevitably
produces and disseminates information. Information creates accountability. Information
is knowledge and power, so information can fuel a positive environmental movement,
with progress and positive change at the local level, at the regional level, and at the
national level. The citizens who will be affected deserve the right to have a say in
decisions that will detrimentally impact their health and their lives. When citizens – who
will be affected – learn about the consequences or detrimental impacts of potential
environmental decisions, they are more inclined to fight for “better” decisions (and by
“better” decisions, I mean decisions that will be better for human health and the
environment as a whole). This power of the citizens only serves to strengthen
government agencies, like the EPA.
The financial resources of the EPA can only go so far, and harnessing the power of the
people can help to relieve a bit of the financial burden because private citizens, NGO’s,
etc. will invest their own time and resources to produce and make use of the critical
1

2. Summer Smith
February 27, 2012
environmental information. As stated in the final report of the President’s Council on
Sustainable Development, “[w]e need a new collaborative decision process that leads to
better decisions; more rapid change; and more sensible use of human, natural, and
financial resources in achieving our [environment and development] goals.” I agree with
that statement. We need a collaborative decision-making process that unequivocally
involves affected citizen in the decision-making process. Decision-making that fails to
include true public participation will inevitably result in an imbalanced decision, a
decision that favors environmental degradation and harm to human health and welfare.
The current public participation process needs a makeover, or a major overhaul. The
public should be informed at the very beginning of a decision-making process, so that
there is a fair chance to, in fact, have a say as to whether the project should proceed or
not. When permits are at issue, the public must be notified before the permit is drafted.
Another important aspect of public engagement in environmental decision-making is
standing. I think that all environmental statutes should include private rights of action, so
that standing to challenge agency actions is not an impossibility. While private rights of
action could result in a bombardment of litigation, it is necessary to give citizens the right
and the power to make sure that these laws are complied with and enforced. Citizens
need clean air, clean water, healthy and safe food, and safe recreation. And, as far as I
am concerned, citizens should have the right to bring actions on behalf of animals –
whether it is the AWA, the ESA, the HMSA, the MMPA, or any other statutes that claim
to protect and safeguard animal welfare.
2

3. Summer Smith
February 27, 2012
Many “animal welfare” statutes purport to protect animals, but there is no means to
ensure that these statutes are followed by those who are regulated. If courts abhor to
grant standing to citizens who seek to protect the welfare of animals, then how else can
we go about protecting those specific animals? It makes no sense. There is a law in
place to protect a specific animal that is being cruelly treated and abused, and yet there is
no means to bring an action on behalf of the animal because the animal is not a “person,”
and you, as a human, are not the one who is actually injured. We need more public
participation in the treatment of animals. We need information to be produced and
disseminated. We need clarity in the entire process, so that we can move forward to a
sustainable, decent, moral, ethical, cruelty-free treatment of animals. Without public
participation in animal welfare objectives, there will never be any progress forward and
animals will continue to suffer despite the laws in place to “protect” them.
3