Environmental Legislation and the Locational Process

Abstract

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1970 was a response to concern about environmental deterioration. Much state legislation duplicated provisions about information disclosure in environmental impact statements and about the use of open hearings in the approval process. Successful location of many projects now depends on public acceptance and citizen influence on permitting agencies. Environmental protection remains a nationwide concern, a situation that may be the most important legacy of the federal and state policy legislation. SYMBOLICALLY enacted on 1 January 1970, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) has been described as the most important and farreaching environmental legislation ever passed by Congress.! The act heralded a decade of legislation designed to control society-induced environmental degradation. During the 1970s Congress passed more than twenty environmental laws or amendments, and more than half of the states enacted environmental-policy measures. The legislators were reflecting the views and pressures of their constituents, but the reasons for the emergence of a nationwide concern for the environment in the late 1960s and throughout the 1970s are not clear. Perhaps increased affluence combined with additional leisure time was a contributing factor. Evidence also suggests that an increasing number of Americans used their additional leisure time in environmentally related activities.2 Among the factors that were instrumental in arousing environmental consciousness were numerous episodes of pollution that occurred in the 1960s and 1970s. Several incidents posed serious health hazards and contributed to the heightened public concern over their sources.3 As exemplified by the fire on the Cuyahoga River in 1969, many events were incredulous, underscoring public perception that environmental degradation was preceding at an alarming rate.4 Public-opinion polls have documented strong support for environmental protection, but the nationwide concern for the environment peaked in 1970. Pollution ranked as the second-most important issue in the country, and most respondents considered the condition of the environment to be a crisis 1 Nicholas C. Yost, NEPA's Progeny: State Environmental Policy Acts, Environmental Law Reporter 3 (1974): 50090-50098; H. Paul Friesema and Paul J. Culhane, Social Impacts, Politics, and the Environmental Impact Statement Process, Natural Resources Journal 16 (1976): 339-356. 2 Tenth Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality, Council on Environmental Quality, Washington, D.C., 1979, 4. 3Gilbert F. White, Environment, Science 209 (1980): 183-190. 4Plain Dealer (Cleveland), 23 June 1969. * DR. SOUTH is an associate professor of geography at the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221. This content downloaded from 157.55.39.78 on Mon, 20 Jun 2016 07:25:52 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION 21 situation.5 Congressional response was a search for appropriate legislation to establish a federal environmental policy. Of the approximately forty bills or resolutions about the environment introduced in the 91st Congress, one bill, which contained both a declaration of policy and enforceable provisions, eventually emerged as the National Environmental Policy Act of 1970.6 A sweeping and somewhat ambiguous statement of federal policy, NEPA was antecedent for specific environmental legislation aimed at controlling individual sources of pollution and was replicated in many states. This article reviews NEPA and its progeny by focusing on the effects of environmental policy on the locational process. The study demonstrates that environmental-policy acts have important implications for successful siting of many proposed facilities. However, the implications are not simply varied sets of requirements and procedures; instead the acts have interjected exogenous, nontraditional factors into the locational process. Public concern about environmental deterioration was instrumental in enactment and implementation of NEPA, and public influence has now emerged as the final arbitrator for the location of a variety of proposed facilities.