environmental policy examples homework

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction

History of environmental policy making

• Guiding concepts
• Financial incentives
• Environmental reporting and ecolabeling
• Global policy agreements

environmental policy

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Table Of Contents

environmental policy , any measure by a government or corporation or other public or private organization regarding the effects of human activities on the environment , particularly those measures that are designed to prevent or reduce harmful effects of human activities on ecosystems .

Environmental policies are needed because environmental values are usually not considered in organizational decision making . There are two main reasons for that omission. First, environmental effects are economic externalities . Polluters do not usually bear the consequences of their actions; the negative effects most often occur elsewhere or in the future. Second, natural resources are almost always underpriced because they are often assumed to have infinite availability. Together, those factors result in what American ecologist Garrett Hardin in 1968 called “the tragedy of the commons .” The pool of natural resources can be considered as a commons that everyone can use to their own benefit. For an individual, it is rational to use a common resource without considering its limitations, but that self-interested behaviour will lead to the depletion of the shared limited resource—and that is not in anyone’s interest. Individuals do so nevertheless because they reap the benefits in the short term, but the community pays the costs of depletion in the long term. Since incentives for individuals to use the commons sustainably are weak, government has a role in the protection of the commons.

Public policies aimed at environmental protection date back to ancient times. The earliest sewers were constructed in Mohenjo-daro ( Indus, or Harappan, civilization ) and in Rome ( ancient Roman civilization ), which date back some 4,500 years and 2,700 years ago, respectively. Other civilizations implemented environmental laws. The city-states of ancient Greece created laws that governed forest harvesting some 2,300 years ago, and feudal European societies established hunting preserves, which limited game and timber harvesting to royalty, effectively preventing overexploitation , by 1000 ce . The city of Paris developed Europe’s first large-scale sewer system during the 17th century. When the effects of industrialization and urbanization increased during the late 19th and early 20th centuries and threatened human health , governments developed additional rules and regulations for urban hygiene, sewage, sanitation, and housing, as well as the first laws devoted to protecting natural landscapes and wildlife (such as the creation of Yellowstone National Park as the world’s first national park in 1872). Wealthy individuals and private foundations, such as the Sierra Club (founded 1892) and the National Audubon Society (founded 1905), also contributed to efforts to conserve natural resources and wildlife.

People became aware of the harmful effects of emissions and use of chemicals in industry and pesticides in agriculture during the 1950s and ’60s. The emergence of Minamata disease in 1956 in Japan, which resulted from mercury discharges from nearby chemical companies, and the publication of Silent Spring (1962) by American biologist Rachel Carson , which highlighted the dangers of pollution , led to a greater public awareness of environmental issues and to detailed systems of regulations in many industrialized countries. In those regulations, governments forbade the use of hazardous substances or prescribed maximum emission levels of specific substances to ensure a minimum environmental quality. Such regulative systems, like the Clean Water and Clean Air acts in the United States , succeeded in effectively addressing point sources (i.e., any discernable discrete location or piece of equipment that discharges pollution), such as industrial plants and utilities, where the cause-and-effect relationship between the actors causing the negative environmental effect could be clearly established.

Nevertheless, some environmental problems persisted , often because of the many nonpoint (diffuse) sources, such as exhaust from private automobiles and pesticide and fertilizer runoff from small farms, that contributed to air and water pollution . Individually, those small sources may not be harmful, but the accumulation of their pollution can exceed the regulative minimum norms for environmental quality. Also, the increasing complexity of chains of cause and effect has contributed to persistent problems. In the 1980s the effects of acid rain showed that the causes of environmental pollution could be separated geographically from its effects. Pollution problems of all types underscored the message that Earth’s natural resources were being depleted and degraded.

From the late 1980s, sustainable development —(i.e., the fostering of economic growth while preserving the quality of the environment for future generations—became a leading concept in environmental policy making. With nature and natural resources considered as economic drivers, environmental policy making was no longer the exclusive domain of government. Instead, private industry and nongovernmental organizations assumed greater responsibility for the environment . Also, the concept emphasized that individual people and their communities play a key role in the effective implementation of policies.

Browse Course Material

Course info.

• Prof. Lawrence Susskind

Departments

• Urban Studies and Planning

As Taught In

• Environmental Policy
• Urban Studies

Learning Resource Types

Introduction to environmental policy and planning, assignments.

All papers should be no more than 1500 words long (5 pages, double-spaced, 12-point font), submitted as PDFs.

Assignment 1: National Environmental Policy-making

Due: Class 7

It should now be clear that national environmental policy-making is a much less structured and a much more haphazard process than many policy scientists have suggested. Given what you have read in Unit 1 and what we have discussed in class, provide the simplest model you can of national environmental policy-making for any country you choose. In developing your model, include a one-page diagram of your model and address the following questions:

• What are the key variables and forces at work in your model and why have you selected them?
• Which variables or forces are unique to “environmental” policy-making, if any (as compared to public policy-making in general)?
• To the extent that future environmental policy is largelyl a product of previous policy and practice, what’s your sense of how major shifts in national environmental policy might occur?

You can earn a maximum of 10 points. You will receive up to 2 points for the overall quality of your model. The diagram can earn up to 2 points. Answers to questions 1, 2, and 3 can earn 2 points each.

Assignment 2: Environmental Ethics

Due: Class 11

Traditionally economists have argued that humans are utility maximizers, although some behavioral economists and social psychologists have recently raised questions about this. With this in mind, please write a paper addressing the following questions:

• When environmentalists and environmental planners argue that each generation (and we as individuals) has a stewardship obligation toward the natural environment, is that just one more utilitarian argument? Or, is there a different ethical principle at stake?
• Please explain, with reference to the literature we read and discussed in Unit 2, where you stand on the utilitarian vs. deep ecology debate.
• Do you think Daly’s distinction between economic growth and economic development resolves the apparent rension between arguments on behalf of environmental protection and arguments on behalf of economic well-being?
• What is the strongest ethical argument you can make on behalf of sustainable development?

You can score up to 10 points. Your answer to question 1 is worth 3 points. Your answers to questions 2, 3, and 4 are worth 2 points each. An additional point will be awarded for the overall quality of your arguments.

Assignment 3: Environmental Assessment

Due: Class 18

Most environmental planners presume that policy decisions regarding the use of natural resources and patterns of development can be enhanced through the application of various analytical tools.

• Explain why and how you agree or disagree with this, with reference to each of the tools discussed in Unit 3.
• What do you think are the relative strengths and limitations of each of the analytical tools we discussed in Unit 3?

You can earn a total of 10 points; each question is worth up to five.

Assignment 4: Public Participation and Group Decision-Making

Due: Class 22

There is an ongoing debate between political philosophers and dispute resolution professionals regarding the most appropriate means of conceptualizing the public interest (with regards to the use ofnatural resources or patterns of urban development). The philosophers believe “deliberative polling” that provides a snapshot of what the “average citizen” prefers should be sufficient for elected officials to determine what actions to take in the public interest. Dispute resolution professionals argue the public interest can best be understood as the product of a consensus building dialogue among contending interests (not individuals) and that public officials armed with polling data can never know or produce on their own the public interest.

• In light of what you read and heard in Unit 4, what is your view of this debate?
• What should be most important, in your view, in assessing the relevant contributions that various public participation tools and techniques can make to environmental planning?
• What’s your reaction to the notion that a neutral facilitator can add value in important ways to environmental planning efforts?

You can earn a maximum of 10 points. Your response to questions 1, 2, and 3 are each worth up to 3 points. You will earn up to 1 additional point based on the quality of your overall arguments.

You are leaving MIT OpenCourseWare

We need your support today

Independent journalism is more important than ever. Vox is here to explain this unprecedented election cycle and help you understand the larger stakes. We will break down where the candidates stand on major issues, from economic policy to immigration, foreign policy, criminal justice, and abortion. We’ll answer your biggest questions, and we’ll explain what matters — and why. This timely and essential task, however, is expensive to produce.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Climate change policy can be overwhelming. Here’s a guide to the policies that work.

A new book from veteran energy analyst Hal Harvey simplifies decarbonization.

by David Roberts

Climate change is such a large and sprawling problem — there are so many forces involved, so many decision makers at so many levels — that solving it can seem hopelessly complex. There are so many options available to policymakers, each with their own fierce constituencies. Where to begin? Which clean-energy policies actually work?

That is the question Hal Harvey , long-time energy analyst and CEO of the energy policy firm Energy Innovation , set out to answer with a new tool.

The tool is the Energy Policy Simulator , which allows anyone to choose a package of energy policies and immediately see the impact on carbon emissions and other pollutants. (It’s like a video game for energy nerds.) It’s based on a model that attempts to replicate the physical economy, with detailed information about real-world assets.

Using that tool, Harvey and his team narrowed in on the policies that work, the places they work best, and the best way to design them. Their conclusions are summarized in a new book, Designing Climate Solutions: A Policy Guide for Low-Carbon Energy . It’s a compact but detailed how-to guide for developing energy policies that have real impact. (A fairly extensive miniature version of the book is online here , if you want to flip through.)

The results are oddly heartening, or at least clarifying.

For instance: The top 20 carbon emitting countries in the world are responsible for 80 percent of global emissions. Just seven countries emit more than a gigaton annually.

It’s daunting to lure the world’s nearly 200 countries into a globally unanimous agreement, like the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is forever attempting to do. (Witness the heroic work necessary to secure the Paris climate agreement, which isn’t even legally binding.) But 20 countries? Surely the world can get decent policies in place in 20 countries.

Just as they are geographically clustered, emissions are also clustered in a relatively small number of sectors.

Here is a graph from the book showing, in light blue, the total emissions currently projected for 2050 (it includes the effects of current policies). The colored squares are the sectors where additional policy-driven efforts can reduce emissions enough through 2050 to offer a 50 percent chance of avoiding more than 2 degrees Celsius of global temperature rise. (That is, you will recall, the commonly agreed international target, though many advocate shooting lower, for 1.5 degrees.)

Putting land use aside (it’s important, but the book focuses on energy policy), that’s five sectors. Well, technically it’s four sectors and one cross-sectoral policy, namely carbon pricing.

Four sectors + carbon pricing. That’s manageable! And it turns out, within those four sectors (+ carbon pricing), a total of just 10 types of policies can do the job.

The overall message is that climate policy doesn’t have to mean doing everything possible, everywhere possible. It’s mainly about applying a toolbox of 10 energy policies to four economic sectors in the 20 top-emitting countries, plus a bunch of carbon pricing and land-use reform. That will get us most of the way there, and it’s a tractable task. (Not easy. But tractable.)

Policymakers at every level — perhaps even some of those newly elected Democratic governors — will find the book a practical help. It tailors recommendations to different geographies and levels of economic development and gets into nitty-gritty design issues for each policy.

And it reminds them again and again: focus. There are about a dozen policies that work, but “there’s a fast fall-off after that dozen,” Harvey says. “There’s tons of things that sound good but just don’t make much of a difference.”

I chatted with Harvey by phone in November (when this piece was first published) about policy design, the role of carbon pricing, and the kind of R&D America really needs, among other things. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

David Roberts

Tell us a little bit about the tool you created to compare policies.

We’ve developed this [ Energy Policy Simulator ] now for eight countries, which together represent more than half the world’s carbon emissions.

The model is essentially a replica of the physical economy. For example, it knows how many cars there are in the United States. It knows how many miles they drive and what kind of fuel they use, and therefore the carbon emissions they emit. It knows how many retire each year, and what they’re replaced with.

By keeping track of all those cars over all those years, we can determine quite precisely what effect an incremental fuel efficiency standard will have. That’s just one of many options in the transportation sphere. You could have a gas tax, congestion pricing, feebates, or a carbon tax with an EV rebate. We measure well over 50 different policies.

The model also handles interactions among policies. It knows which policy is controlling at any given time. (You can’t just add them all up; it doesn’t work that way.)

The upshot is, the user can take any one of these policies and slide it up and down from zero to very strong and instantly see the effects on CO2, on a dozen other pollutants, and on cash flow.

One thing you stress in the book is timing. It’s important to get policies in place early, so technologies have time to develop.

There’s this naïve idea that the way technology works is, people sit in labs and think and worry and work on an idea, and then it pops into the world and becomes ubiquitous. The reality is, a very large fraction of progress on technologies happens through deployment.

One of the things we try to do is unpack the learning curves.

So there’s stuff that’s crazy out there and requires science — that might be algae, or carbon sequestration, or advanced nuclear power.

Then there’s stuff that’s pretty cool, seems to work, but requires a lot of engineering to get there — the solar field went through this phase during the late ’70s to the mid ’80s.

And then there’s the last stage on that learning curve, which comes from deployment, learning by doing. For that, you need very large volumes of sales, continued over time. The dramatic price reductions in wind and solar — and more recently in offshore wind — reflect this last part of the learning curve.

But this, somewhat ironically, is what Bill Gates doesn’t get. He thinks we need breakthroughs, when in fact the biggest breakthroughs we’ve had have been by incrementally making, e.g., batteries cheaper, cheaper, cheaper. We’re doing it with LEDs, by increasing scale, by deploying and deploying.

Throughout the book, you focus on policy design. It’s not enough to pass these policies, they have to work right. You extract a few design principles. Give me an example of one of those principles.

I’ll start with performance standards.

Performance standards — by that I mean C02-per-kWh, or fractions of renewables on the grid, or miles per gallon per car, or minimum energy standards for your building codes — have been the killer app in energy policy.

They have a bad rep from an age-old and completely upside-down debate about “command-and-control” policy. But we use performance standards all the time, and they work really well. Our buildings don’t burn down very much; they used to burn down all the time. Our meat’s not poisoned; it used to be poisoned, or you couldn’t tell. And so forth. If you just tell somebody, this is the minimum performance required, guess what? Engineers are really good at meeting it cost-effectively.

When you design performance standards, there are a few characteristics that make them work really well. The first, which I emphasize again and again, is continuous improvement. Don’t set a quantitative target, set a rate of improvement.

It’s the gift that keeps on giving. It tells manufacturers, you gotta get better and better and better. It helps them structure their R&D. Maybe most importantly, it uses political bandwidth once and delivers the goods forever.

California’s building code gets tighter every three years. It only took one law, in the 1970s, to make that happen. That bill, Title 24, was signed when Jerry Brown was the youngest governor in California’s history. He’s now the oldest governor in California’s history. In between, Republicans and Democrats alike saw the building code get stronger and stronger. It didn’t require cashing in political capital, going back to the legislature, debating it — it just happens.

I’ll give a counter-example. [President] Gerald Ford doubled fuel efficiency in cars between 1975 and 1985 with a fuel efficiency standard. And then we went to sleep for 25 years. For 25 years, we didn’t increase fuel efficiency. We took all the technological improvement that was coming down the pike and devoted it to mass and power — cars doubled power and increased weight by 40 percent.

We pay two kinds of tax for that: first, enormous amounts of carbon dioxide; second, if we had had continuous improvement, we would have saved a trillion dollars that we sent to countries that hate us.

And we let our auto companies become uncompetitive, because the Germans and the Japanese were improving all the while. So we have the auto companies go bankrupt — two out of the three.

Again, if Gerald Ford had simply said “4 percent a year” instead of “26 miles per gallon,” we would have avoided all that.

These days, people across the political spectrum are talking about carbon pricing. How does it fit into the larger effort?

The thing about carbon pricing is, it’s helpful, but it’s not dispositive. There are a number of sectors that are impervious to a carbon price, or close to impervious.

A carbon price works when it’s part of a package that includes R&D and performance standards. It does not work in isolation. It helps, but it doesn’t do nearly as much as is required.

Also, it has to be a real number. Twenty bucks a ton doesn’t affect much at all.

What is the lowest real number?

First of all, it’s okay to start at a low number, as long as you have a steady ramp — it’s back to continuous improvement. That’s actually a smart way to do it, so you don’t shock the system.

I think you need to push it to 50 bucks a ton — which is what’s going to happen in Canada over the next four years — in order to have a meaningful impact on carbon emissions.

A carbon price is good at reaching (this is just gonna roll off the tongue, ready?) price-sensitive, heterogeneous industries. What I mean by that is, it’s hard to set a performance standard that works for glass, pulp and paper, steel, chemicals, and so forth. So in those realms, setting a price is a nice way to handle it. Then businesses can simply internalize the costs and make better decisions.

Here’s where [a price on carbon] doesn’t work.

It doesn’t work in buildings, at all. The people who design and build buildings never pay the utility bills, and in much of America, people who own the buildings don’t pay the bills either. So the poor renter is stuck with a leaky building, but has no ability to put capital into the building and fix it, or to get it right in the first place. The only policy that’s ever worked at scale in buildings is a strong building code.

It doesn’t do much in transportation, because fuel is a relatively small part of driving a vehicle, and the more efficient the vehicle, the less the fuel price matters. For proof of this, look at the European Union, where [fuel] taxes are [the equivalent of] over 400 dollars a ton [of carbon]. They still need a fuel efficiency standard to get fuel efficiency where it needs to go — even at 400 bucks a ton, which I don’t think we’re talking about on the US Senate floor these days.

Tell me about the hybrid carbon pricing system you describe in the book. You try to capture the best parts of a cap-and-trade system and a tax.

The debate between a carbon tax and a carbon cap has to be one of the sillier ways to waste electrical energy.

Years of my life.

Dude, you got off easy. There are some poor souls at RFF who are still wracking their brains against this one.

For most reasonable ranges of either, they’re the same.

What you’re worried about with the carbon cap is the price might be really high or really low. If it’s really high, it’ll cause economic shock, if it’s really low, it won’t do anything.

But the answer to that is to put a price floor and a price ceiling on those permits, as we do in California. If the price is too low, you just don’t auction off as many. And if it’s too high, you just release more permits, because you really don’t want to tank the economy as part of your climate solution.

Same with the carbon tax. You can adjust it too, if you want. If you put in a 10-dollar carbon tax and you discover it has no effect on anything except cement production, then you can raise it up a little bit. Then it’s looking more and more like a cap.

By putting reasonable boundaries on either of these systems, they start to look a lot alike; they start to behave a lot alike.

I was a little surprised by the prominent role of the industrial sector in emission reductions.

There are about 10 industries that dominate energy consumption in industry. They’re the ones you’d expect: steel, concrete, pulp and paper, chemicals, non-ferrous metals, fertilizers, and so forth.

What you have to do is think hard about how to get each of these quite different businesses, with different constraints and opportunities, on to a decarbonizing path.

As I said, the best policy with them is a significant, steadily rising, long-term carbon price — whether it’s a cap or a tax. That will induce them to see what they can electrify. There are cements, for example, that are half the carbon or less of normal cement. And cement is 5 percent of global carbon — it’s a big number.

But it’s not easy to break into that business. It’s very low-margin and it’s got a lot of sunk capital costs. So without a pretty serious price signal, you’re not going to get there. There are some things you can do with performance standards, but fundamentally pricing is what matters — plus serious R&D.

It’s a different kind of R&D than America likes to do. Our R&D ever since World War II has focused on fundamental truths: the meaning of life; what’s inside a quark; stuff like that. We don’t really have that many institutions that focus on new ways to run a mini-mill for steel. Or new chemical reactions that require a lot less energy and have a lot less waste. Or ways to use waste heat from industry.

The Germans have a really interesting set of institutions called the Fraunhofer Institutes . There are 70 of them — one for every problem you can think about. Their job is exactly to figure out this kind of thing. I think it would behoove America to think more about that part of learning, which I call the engineering part of the learning curve. You’re doing really gritty work. It’s not theoretical stuff. It’s not breakthrough stuff either, but it’s where we have to go with industry.

Your modeling does not include any carbon sequestration through 2050. You frame it as a post-2050 technology. How did you come to that conclusion? What’s the role of negative emissions in the big picture?

This gets back to an absolutely fundamental strategic question that everybody who cares about this stuff needs to ask at the beginning, which is: What policies or technologies are going to get the most tons [of carbon reductions] the fastest? That’s the carbon imperative.

If you delay, if you don’t do the really big stuff now, then your future has to be unfathomably heroic. In fact, even if you had free negative emissions that were infinite, you might not solve the problem, because we’re going to spin some natural systems into an unrecoverable runaway. We defrost the tundra and it releases soil carbon and methane. Or the melting lubricates more melting, and so forth.

If you start with this fundamental strategic question — most tons fastest — then you realize that carbon sequestration is perhaps something you should think about [with regard to] path dependency, but as a major focus today, while we’re not rapidly shutting down every coal plant and every natural gas facility, not converting the auto fleet, not launching building codes ... it’s crazy. It really is an abnegation of responsibility to focus on the last five percent while you ignore the first 95 percent.

That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do R&D. We argue for R&D. We need more options in the future. But the logic — that, well, all the IPCC scenarios show that we have to go negative, therefore that’s where we’re gonna put our attention — completely misapprehends the nature of carbon math.

Let me add one more thing to that. Right now, solar is coming in at negative dollars per ton, because it’s cheaper than what it is replacing, and it offers benefits, in the form of electricity. Then you contrast it with carbon capture, which is coming in at hundreds of dollars per ton and offers no benefits. It’s a pure tax on society to build these direct-air capture machines, or grow a bunch of biomass and build a bunch of gas pipelines and pump everything underground.

If you have one technology that is always gonna be dead weight on the economy, and the other one levitates the economy, and one’s not available, and one is available ... what the hell.

The book also has nothing about behavior change — no turning off lights or going vegetarian. Do you find that lever unrealistic?

It’s a policy design book, and there aren’t many policies that have people change their diet. Michael Bloomberg taxed sugar, so there’s one. But we’re not gonna have the tons-of-barbecue-per-capita tax in North Carolina. (I probably shouldn’t use the word “tons” there, but you get the point.)

We have limited political bandwidth. If you’re serious about change, you have to identify the decision makers that can innovate the most tons the fastest. Then you have to a develop a strategy to influence them. There are 7.5 billion decision makers on diet. There are 250 utility commissioners in America — and utility commissioners control half the carbon in America.

If you made everybody do meatless Mondays or taco-free Tuesdays or whatever’s next, you’re still nibbling away at less than 1 percent, unless you can get billions of people to do it.

Trying to invoke behavior change on something as personal as eating en masse is morally sound, it’s ecologically a good idea, but as a carbon strategy, it doesn’t scratch the surface.

What can cities do on carbon?

This is gonna make me more enemies, but ... cities have almost no power over carbon. Some cities have building codes tougher than the state’s, but that’s rare. They control traffic patterns, kinda, but since we have so many municipalities, it tends to be a metropolitan planning organization within the state agency that does that.

What about zoning?

Well ... what about zoning? You can do an urban growth boundary, but that’s a state policy. You could do mixed-use zoning. That’s a great idea.

I gotta say, the urban mobility piece of your little dot graph seems sadly small to me.

That’s a huge element in an aborning country, like China, or the big cities in Africa, or the Middle East. In a mature economy, with all the infrastructure in place, the time constants are just slower. I’m still completely in favor of it: urban growth boundaries, really functional mass transit, bike lanes, mixed use. And that is emphatically city or regional policy.

Paul Hawken’s Drawdown Project looked at options for reducing greenhouse gases and found that educating girls and family planning were the two most potent.

When I was at the Hewlett Foundation, we sponsored a study by the National Center for Atmospheric Research that asked the question: Globally, if you met unmet need for contraceptives — that is to say, no coercion whatsoever — what would it cost and what would the carbon impact be?

We found large-scale abatement at less than a dollar a ton. So I’m completely in favor of that.

Here’s the thing about the Drawdown book: It’s a technology book, not a policy book. And it’s geographically indifferent — it doesn’t say you have to do this in the top 20 countries, or anywhere. It doesn’t mention policy, it doesn’t mention geography — and without those two things, it’s not a plan. I think it’s a good contribution to the world, but it doesn’t tell anyone what to do on Monday morning.

And that’s your book. The Monday-morning book.

If you’re an energy person — if you’re the aide to the governor of Wyoming, say, or Georgia or Colorado — this book tells you very clearly not only what to do, but how to do it.

• Future Perfect

Most Popular

• The twisted political logic behind Trump’s attacks on Haitian immigrant
• Sign up for Vox’s daily newsletter
• Laura Loomer, Trump’s new favorite conspiracy theorist, explained
• Take a mental break with the newest Vox crossword
• How Republicans became the party of raunch

Today, Explained

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

This is the title for the native ad

More in Climate

561 research papers in, the case for degrowth is still weak.

We buy stuff. We throw it away. There’s a system to stop this toxic cycle.

A frightening wildlife disease is killing millions of bats in the US. Humans are collateral damage.

The case for and against fracking, politics aside.

The largest mass transit system in the United States is overdue for an upgrade.

It’s pretty much just as gross as it sounds.

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

JavaScript appears to be disabled on this computer. Please click here to see any active alerts .

Homework Resources about Environmental Issues

​ Encontrar recursos para estudiantes y maestros.

Need a little help with your science, social studies, or other homework assignments?

• Climate Change

Science and Research

Carl Gets Some Rest (PDF 765 KB, 12 pp) Carl is a car who wants some rest. Follow Carl and his friends on their adventure in this coloring book.

Why is Coco Orange? Read how Coco and his friends at Lizard Lick Elementary solve this mystery as they learn about air quality and how to stay healthy when the air quality is bad.

RadTown Learn about radiation where you live: where sources of radiation are found and how they are used. Explore the Burbs, Countryside, Downtown or Waterfront. Just pick and click!

NASA's Climate Kids Explore games and activities from NASA to help break down the important issue of climate change.

Prehistoric Climate Change Use fossils as a thermometer to read temperature 55 million years ago, and watch a fossil digger.

Every Kid in a Park Hey fourth graders! See America’s natural wonders and historic sites for free.

Fall Colors See how the landscape changes in autumn on your National Forests and Grasslands.

Save Our Species Pictures and facts about some of the endangered plants and animals in the United States, including why they are endangered.

Energy Kids Energy facts, history, games, activities, and an energy calculator are waiting for you from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Learn about where energy comes from, how it's used, and how to save it.

ENERGY STAR Kids You can use energy wisely and be an energy star! Find out ways to be smarter about what energy you use and how to use it.

Mercury Messes with the Environment Follow Blue the Heron and friends to learn how mercury affects the environment and your health in this activity book.

Lea en español: El Mercurio Causa Problemas para el Medioambiente

Asthma and Allergies What is asthma? What causes it? What can you do? What is medical science doing to help?

Dusty the Asthma Goldfish and his Asthma Triggers Funbook (PDF 1.3MB, 8 pp) and Dusty La Carpa Dorada del Asma y sus Provocadores del Asma - Revista de Muñequitos (PDF 1.4MB, 8 pp) A fun book that teaches you about asthma.

Help! It's a Roach! Is your family bugged by roaches? You're not alone. Although people may think roaches like dirty places, even the cleanest homes can have them.

National Institute of Environmental Health Science Games, puzzles, art, and more -- all about science, the environment, and environmental careers.

Say What? Play It Safe With Your Ears. Play It Safe With Your Health (PDF 6.5 MB, 15pp) This is an activity book for older students about noise pollution and its effects on human health. It teaches children how to identify noise pollution and how to minimize its impact on their hearing.

Sunwise Kids Do you know how to protect yourself from the sun? Here's what to do and why it's important.

Wood Smoke Activity Book In this activity book, young students can learn basics about safety around woodburning stoves.

Basic Facts about Waste Learn about the amount and types of waste produced by households, businesses, and industries. Find out how these wastes are managed to protect human health and the environment.

Recycle City A game, an interactive book, and other puzzles will teach you hundreds of ways a whole town can reduce, reuse, and recycle.

Food Waste Most people don't realize how much food they throw away every day — from uneaten leftovers to spoiled produce. Learn how to reduce food waste.

Planet Protectors Learn to reduce, reuse and recycle as a Planet Protector.

Acid Rain Students Site Learn about acid rain and it's effects on the environment and you!

How's My Waterway This tool allows students to explore information about their drinking water, local stream conditions, and whether their waterways are suitable for swimming or eating fish and if they support aquatic life.

Drinking Water Activities for Students and Teachers These resources provide a basic understanding of drinking water terms and where water comes from.

Okeanos Explorer NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer , "America’s Ship for Ocean Exploration," is the only federally funded U.S. ship assigned to systematically explore our largely unknown ocean for the purpose of discovery and the advancement of knowledge.

Thirstin's Wacky Water Adventure Activity Book (PDF 566K, 15 pp) A collection of activities and coloring book pages.

Water Science School The U.S. Geological Survey offers information on many aspects of water, along with pictures, data, maps, and an interactive center where you can give opinions and test your water knowledge.

Science Topics Explore a wide variety of environmental and health science areas at EPA.

Science Matters newsletter Learn about research (and get ideas) from this ongoing collection of well-written, not-too-technical articles about EPA Research and Development. Read stories and articles online, and you can also subscribe to receive the newsletter.

• Students Home
• Classroom Resources and Project Ideas
• Games, Quizzes, and Videos

Environmental Policy Statements

A policy statement is an essential tool to the environmental health practice. It sets the stage for expectations and performance of persons, individuals or groups, and it precedes the development of specific procedures or practices that should be followed to realize the expectations of the policy.

The goal of a policy statement is to implement a new policy. The success of a policy's implementation depends on the ability of the author(s) of the policy statement to convey the meaning of the policy and modes of implementation effectively. The more explicit and clear you can be when writing a policy statement the more likely that it will succeed.

An Annotated Example of a Policy Statement

Annotations to the left point out the Key Elements of an Environmental Policy Statement as described in this guide.

Key Elements of an Environmental Policy Statement

A policy statement is generally a brief document, but it can be far reaching in its ramifications. This guide will inform you of the key elements required to make policy statements effective.

A policy statement should include the following:

• A call to action (the policy)

A justification for the policy

Those to whom the policy should apply, those responsible for implementing the policy, how the policy should be implemented and evaluated, include guiding principles if necessary, a call to action:the policy.

Clearly state the policy and the actions that need to be taken as a result of the policy. Include all the details necessary for sucessful implementation of the policy. Be as explicit as you can: are you trying to avoid oil spills or are your trying to avoid open ocean oil spills from tanker bilge pumps ?

1. ABACUS INTERNATIONAL will manage chemicals in a responsible manner that minimizes potential environmental and health impacts and fully considers the following: legal requirements and governmental policies, customer expectations and concerns, short and long-term benefits, costs and liabilities, and viable material and process alternatives.

2. Catamount Industries personnel will manage mechanical lifting equipment in manners to minimize liability for such equipment use and to reduce, as far as is practicable, reportable injuries caused by use of such equipment. The injury goal shall be less than 1 per 100,000 person-hours and the liability goal shall be $0 per year.

If people have a firm understanding of why a policy is important they are more likely to implement it. Justify the policy based on research, project goals, or new regulations.

1. This policy is enacted by the EPA as part of the mandate to inform the public of the facts surrounding pesticides and food as laid forth in the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. Mounting public pressure has led the EPA to adopt policies that exceed the guidelines proposed in the mandate.

2. We are enacting this policy based on research which has shown that over 1000 deaths occur each year in the United States as a result of exposure to second hand tobacco smoke. Several thousand cases of respiratory diseases are diagnosed as a result of exposure to second hand tobacco smoke.

Make it explicit as to who the policy applies to, therefore no one should be unaware that this policy affects them and the work they do. This statement may be crucial if liability has to be determined when something goes wrong.

1. This Policy applies to all worldwide ABACUS INTERNATIONAL businesses, operations and facilities. All references to chemicals in this policy include process chemicals, product component parts, fuels, hazardous materials or hazardous wastes. This policy does not apply to systems owned and operated by the lessor on property where ABACUS INTERNATIONAL is the lessee.

2. This policy shall apply to all Catamount Industries personnel, contractors, part time workers and assistants who shall be paid by or under the control of Catamount Industries during regularly scheduled work. This policy shall apply to all mechanical lifting equipment owned, leased or used by Catamount Industries personnel, contractors, part time workers and assistants paid by or under the control of Catamount Industries.

Make it explicit as to who is responsible for implementing the policy. Those who are responsible won't know until you tell them and if you want the policy to be implemented, you'd better let them know up front.

1. All developmental and design engineers, all production managers and process supervisors, and all line lead workers of ABACUS INTERNATIONAL shall be familiar with the procedures mandated under this policy and shall assure the implementation of them. All ABACUS INTERNATIONAL workers shall be made aware of this policy by their direct supervisors and shall be individually responsible for following the procedures set forth under this policy that may relate to the job being performed by that worker.

2. Job superintendents and crew leaders of Catamount Industries shall be familiar with this policy and assure implementation of work safe procedures developed under this policy. All workers of Catamount Industries will be responsible, after training by the crew leader or job superintendent, to implement the appropriate job safe procedure related to the task at hand mandated by this policy.

Sometimes you may let those who are responsible for implementing the policy choose how they wish to implement the policy. If this is not the case make it very clear as to how the policy should be implemented.

In both cases you want to explain how the implementation process should be evaluated, including who is responsible for the evaluation.

1. The policy will be implemented by a three part campaign including, print material for distribution at local grocery stores, a national television public service announcement which will run for the next twelve months, and a Web site which will continue to be updated for the next three years at such time it will become necessary to reassess the project and appropriate new funding.

2. Developmental and design engineers of ABACUS INTERNATIONAL shall design evaluation procedures for all processes that fall under this policy to ensure that these processes comply. Lead workers shall gather information and execute the evaluation procedures to evaluate the policy. Deficiencies, in the policy or in the evaluation procedure, shall be addressed jointly by developmental and design engineers in cooperation with lead workers.

3. Job superintendents shall gather data on each Catamount Industries site at the completion of a job to determine if the goals of this policy have been met. These determinations shall be made part of the annual-job-safe-performance log by the respective job superintendent.

In a complex policy statement, guiding principles may be explained to allow better development of procedures or practices to comply with that policy.

1. Manufacturing Process Design - Assure all manufacturing process designs consider chemical and process alternatives, and engineering controls that: (i) Minimize or eliminate employee health risks from chemical exposure; (ii) Minimize chemical consumption and chemical waste generation.

2. Equipment Acquisition - Assure all lifting equipment when it comes into control of Catamount Industries will meet minimum requirements as set for by the Occupational Health and Safety Administration under applicable regulations.

Bhlem, Kenneth, & Neal Bastek. (1999). Environmental Policy Statements. Writing@CSU . Colorado State University. https://writing.colostate.edu/guides/guide.cfm?guideid=82

Creating an Effective Environmental Policy

Try our Legal AI - it's free while in beta 🚀

Genie's Legal AI can draft , risk-review and negotiate 1000s of legal documents

Note: Want to skip the guide and go straight to the free templates? No problem - scroll to the bottom. Also note: This is not legal advice.

Introduction

Environmental policy has a critical role to play in protecting our environment, providing us with the framework for how society should interact with and manage our natural surroundings. It sets the standard for responsible behaviour and helps ensure that our activities do not cause undue harm. With Genie AI’s extensive dataset, community template library, and step-by-step guidance, it is possible to create a high quality environmental policy without paying a lawyer.

The purpose of environmental policies is twofold: they function as blueprints surrounding how human activities and interactions should be conducted; while also establishing consistency in how we interact with the environment. Without these policies in place there would be no common guidelines or regulations to follow which could lead to destruction of the environment. In addition, environmental policies reduce risk of potential disasters such as oil spills, air pollution or water contamination by setting standards for safety and responsibility when interacting with the environment - similarly making sure that our activities do not lead to long-term damage such as climate change or destruction of wildlife habitats. Moreover, it ensures that all individuals and organisations are held accountable for their actions.

At Genie AI we believe strongly that everyone should have access to high quality legal documents like an effective environmental policy - which can be drafted and customised through free templates available on our community library today! All you need is access to this guide – no Genie AI account required – just dedicated support from us on how best you can create one yourself quickly & easily. So why not read on below for more information?

Definitions (feel free to skip)

Environmental Objectives and Targets: Goals set by an organization or individual that are specific to their current situation and resources, with specific deadlines for each goal.

Scope: The areas of environmental concern that the policy will address, and the activities that will be impacted.

Analyze: To study and assess the current state of the environment, including existing regulations, laws, and policies.

Plan of Action: The steps needed to reach environmental objectives, including identifying resources and personnel, determining a timeline, and addressing potential risks.

Implement: To put a plan into action, including ensuring resources and personnel are available, tasks are completed on time, and risks are addressed.

Monitor and Evaluate: To track progress towards environmental objectives and assess performance, in order to identify areas of improvement.

Communicate: To make stakeholders and the public aware of the environmental policy through educational materials and public engagement opportunities.

Update: To review and adjust the environmental policy as needed to ensure objectives are met.

Document: To record the environmental policy and any progress towards objectives to ensure the policy is successful.

Invest: To put resources and personnel in place to make sure the policy is successful.

Define the purpose and scope of the environmental policy

Identify environmental objectives and targets, establish measurable goals, identify specific deadlines for reaching goals, analyze the current environmental situation, conduct research to assess current conditions, gather data on current conditions, develop a plan of action to reach environmental objectives, identify resources and personnel needed, determine the timeline for completing tasks, identify potential risks and mitigation strategies, implement the plan of action, monitor and evaluate the environmental policy, track progress towards objectives, collect data to assess performance, communicate the environmental policy to stakeholders and the public, create educational materials, identify opportunities for public engagement, update the environmental policy as needed, review the policy regularly, make adjustments to ensure objectives are met, document the environmental policy and progress, invest in resources and personnel to ensure the policy is successful, get started.

• Identify the need for an environmental policy and determine the goals you want to achieve
• Decide who the policy applies to, including any external stakeholders
• Consider factors such as potential environmental impacts, regulatory requirements, and best practices
• Define the scope of the policy and its expected outcomes
• Draft the policy and review it to ensure that it meets the goals set out
• Publish the policy and provide communication on the policy to all stakeholders
• How you’ll know when you can check this off your list and move on to the next step: Once the environmental policy is drafted and reviewed, and it is published and communicated to stakeholders, this step is complete.
• Assess the current environmental impact to determine the objectives and targets that need to be set
• Gain a clear understanding of the environmental issues that your organization should prioritize
• Research and analyze the environmental implications of your organization’s activities
• Develop specific goals and objectives that will reduce environmental impact
• Set realistic targets that are measurable and achievable
• Ensure that goals and targets are relevant to the organization’s operations
• Once objectives and targets have been identified, document and communicate them to stakeholders
• Evaluate the objectives and targets periodically to ensure they are still relevant and achievable
• Brainstorm measurable goals that are specific and achievable
• Set SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound) environmental goals
• Ensure that all goals are measurable and quantifiable
• Use existing data and resources to determine what is realistic and achievable
• Set goals that are realistic and achievable, with achievable timelines
• When you have established the goals, create a timeline and set deadlines for each goal
• Once all goals have been established and deadlines have been set, you can move on to the next step.
• Brainstorm and discuss possible timelines for achieving each goal
• Establish realistic deadlines for each goal, taking into account any external factors such as funding and resources
• Create a timeline that includes deadlines for each goal, and assign tasks and responsibilities to specific individuals or teams
• Once deadlines are established, review regularly to ensure progress is being made and goals are on track to be achieved
• When all deadlines have been met, review progress and make necessary changes to the timeline, if necessary
• Check off this step when all deadlines have been established and assigned to responsible parties, and progress is being monitored.
• Research current environmental conditions and regulations
• Evaluate existing data on environmental impact of operations
• Analyze potential environmental risks that may arise due to current operations
• Identify potential areas of improvement
• Gather feedback from stakeholders on current environmental conditions
• When complete, summarize findings in a report or presentation format
• Once complete, you can move on to the next step of conducting research to assess current conditions.
• Identify current environmental conditions and issues that need to be addressed
• Identify any existing environmental policies or programs
• Ask community members, business owners, and other stakeholders for input
• Analyze any current legislation related to environmental protection
• Research environmental protection initiatives from other places or organizations
• Collect data on environmental conditions and trends
• When finished, have a clear understanding of the current conditions and the existing policies, legislation, and initiatives related to environmental protection.
• Identify what needs to be assessed and the data that needs to be gathered
• Research and collect data from relevant sources, such as local and national government agencies
• Analyze the data to identify any potential gaps or areas of concern
• Use the data to create a comprehensive report of current environmental conditions
• When the data is collected, analyzed and a comprehensive report has been created, this step can be checked off.
• Brainstorm a list of potential action items that can be taken to reach the environmental objectives
• Identify resources such as personnel, funding, or materials needed for each action item
• Prioritize the list of action items based on the resources needed and the expected impact of each action item
• Develop a timeline for completing each action item
• Create a plan for monitoring progress and evaluating the effectiveness of the action items
• Once the plan of action is completed and approved, you can move on to the next step.
• Create a task list of the resources and personnel needed to achieve the environmental objectives
• Assign responsibilities to individuals or teams who will be responsible for each task
• Consider resources such as personnel, equipment, and materials that may be needed
• Review any existing resources and personnel who may be available to help
• Determine what additional resources and personnel may need to be acquired
• Develop a budget for any additional resources and personnel necessary
• When all resources and personnel have been identified and assigned, the task is complete
• Analyze the tasks that need to be completed and prioritize them according to urgency.
• Estimate the time required to complete each task and assign deadlines.
• Create a timeline that is realistic and achievable.
• Communicate the timeline to all stakeholders.
• Check in periodically to ensure the timeline is being met.
• Once all tasks are completed according to the timeline, the environmental policy will be ready to be implemented.
• Identify potential risks associated with the current environmental policy, such as emissions, waste management, energy usage, and water usage.
• Research ways to mitigate these risks, such as energy efficiency measures, waste management strategies, and emissions reduction techniques.
• Create a matrix of risks and mitigation strategies and prioritize them according to importance.
• Once risks and mitigation strategies have been identified and prioritized, you can move on to the next step.
• Outline the specific steps necessary to enact the environmental policy
• Assign the responsibility for each step to the appropriate department or individual
• Clearly communicate the environmental policy to all stakeholders
• Create a timeline for completion of the policy
• Monitor progress and hold stakeholders accountable for meeting the timeline
• Update the policy as needed and inform stakeholders of any changes
• When all steps have been completed and the policy is implemented, check this step off your list and move on to the next step.
• Establish an appropriate monitoring system and protocol to track the progress of the environmental policy
• Establish a timeline for the monitoring and evaluation
• Collect data on a regular basis to measure the progress of the environmental policy
• Analyze data collected to identify areas of improvement
• Report findings to the appropriate stakeholders
• Make necessary adjustments to the environmental policy based on the evaluation
• Once the necessary adjustments to the environmental policy have been made, you can move on to the next step of tracking progress towards objectives.
• Establish a timeline for the objectives of the environmental policy
• Set up a system to track progress towards those objectives
• Regularly measure and assess how close the policy is to meeting its objectives
• Make notes and document any changes that need to be made in order to meet the objectives of the policy
• When all objectives have been met, the progress tracking system can be considered complete.
• Develop a method to track data related to the environmental policy objectives
• Establish a timeline for collecting data regularly
• Set up a system to measure progress, such as key performance indicators (KPIs)
• Analyze the data to identify trends and areas for improvement
• Evaluate environmental policy performance against pre-set goals
• When all of the above are completed, you’ll be ready to move on to the next step of Communicating the environmental policy to stakeholders and the public
• Hold meetings with stakeholders and the public to explain the environmental policy and answer any questions they may have
• Issue press releases and create other promotional materials to communicate the policy to a wider audience
• Utilize multimedia platforms such as websites, newsletters, and social media to share information about the policy
• Post signs and use other visual cues to remind people about the policy
• Ensure that all staff are informed of the policy and its objectives

When you can check this off your list and move on to the next step:

• When all stakeholders and the public have been informed of the policy
• When the policy has been communicated in a variety of ways, both online and offline
• Develop resources that explain the details of the environmental policy, including its purpose and how it will be implemented
• Create materials that are appropriate for different audiences, such as employees, government agencies, and the public
• Design materials that are easily accessible and understandable, such as educational videos, infographics, and other visuals
• Distribute materials through various channels, such as print, web, social media, and other digital outlets
• When educational materials have been created and distributed, this step can be checked off the list.
• Conduct surveys to find out what environmental issues the public is most concerned about
• Reach out to local community organizations and leaders to find out what kind of public engagement activities they are interested in
• Develop a strategy for engaging the public in environmental topics, such as hosting public meetings, creating forums for discussion, or establishing a public comment period
• Develop materials to use for public engagement, such as brochures, flyers, and presentations
• Create a timeline for when public engagement activities should take place
• Monitor public feedback and adjust the strategy as needed

Check off when:

• You have identified opportunities for public engagement, developed a strategy and timeline, and created materials for use in public engagement activities.
• Check regularly for changes in the legal and regulatory environment that can affect the policy
• Review and revise the policy as needed to ensure it is up to date with current regulations
• Meet with stakeholders and green groups to discuss updates to the policy
• Document the changes you make to the policy
• Publish the updates to the policy to your organization’s website
• When complete, check this off your list and move on to the next step.
• Schedule regular reviews of the policy to ensure it is still relevant and up-to-date.
• Assign a responsible party or team to lead the review, and ensure their input is taken into consideration.
• Use feedback from members of the organization, stakeholders, and the public to inform the review process.
• Make adjustments to the environmental policy, such as revising objectives or changing language, based on the findings of the review.
• When the review is complete and the updated policy is finalized, you can check this step off your list and move on to the next step.
• Monitor progress of the policy regularly and identify areas for improvement
• Adjust the policy as needed to ensure objectives are being met
• Involve stakeholders in assessing the effectiveness of the policy
• Evaluate the policy to see if changes need to be made
• Once the policy is running smoothly, you can move on to the next step of documenting the environmental policy and progress.
• Create a document that outlines the environmental policy, its goals, and the steps necessary to reach those goals
• Ensure the document is easily accessible to those who need to follow and adhere to the policy
• Include a timeline of milestones and check-in dates with the environmental policy document
• Once the document is complete and distributed, you can check this step off your list and move on to the next step.

• Establish a team dedicated to achieving the goals of the environmental policy. • Ensure that adequate resources and personnel are allocated to the team. • Train personnel in the necessary knowledge and skills to implement the policy. • Monitor progress regularly and adjust resources as needed. • Set measurable goals and objectives to track progress. • Develop methods to measure the effectiveness of the policy. • Reward personnel or teams who achieve goals and objectives. • When personnel and resources are in place, the policy can be implemented.

Q: How do I create an environmental policy that complies with current UK laws?

Asked by Michael on June 8th, 2022. A: Creating an environmental policy that complies with the current UK laws will require a comprehensive understanding of the regulations and legislation that apply to your business. Depending on the type of business you operate, you may need to consider regulations such as the Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations, the Waste Management Licensing Regulations and the Environmental Protection Act. You should also research any additional regulations that may apply to your specific industry or sector. It is also important to ensure that your policy is regularly updated as regulations can change over time.

Q: Are there any international regulations that I need to consider when creating an environmental policy?

Asked by Rachel on December 9th, 2022. A: When creating an environmental policy, it is important to consider both national and international regulations. Depending on the size and scope of your business, you may need to consider regulations such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Paris Agreement and the EU Emissions Trading System. Additionally, if your business operates in multiple countries, you will need to ensure that your policy is tailored to each individual jurisdiction and complies with any relevant local laws.

Q: What is the best way to communicate my environmental policy to employees?

Asked by Christopher on April 5th, 2022. A: It is important to communicate your environmental policy clearly and effectively to all employees so that they understand their responsibilities. You should ensure that all employees are aware of their roles and responsibilities within the organisation and how they can contribute towards achieving environmental objectives. Communication should be ongoing, with regular updates regarding any changes or updates to the policy. Additionally, it may be beneficial to include training sessions or seminars so that employees can ask questions and gain a better understanding of their role in achieving environmental goals.

Q: How do I ensure my environmental policy is effective?

Asked by Jessica on October 27th, 2022. A: To ensure your environmental policy is effective, you should ensure it has measurable objectives that can be tracked over time. This will allow you to monitor progress and make necessary adjustments where needed in order to achieve better results. Additionally, you should ensure that all employees are aware of their individual roles in achieving objectives and have regular performance reviews where progress can be discussed. Finally, it is important to engage with stakeholders such as customers, suppliers and members of the local community so that they can provide feedback on how the policy is being implemented and whether it is meeting expectations.

Example dispute

Suing a company for environmental policy violations.

• Identify the relevant environmental laws or regulations that have been violated by the company.
• Gather evidence to support the claim, such as photographs, reports, or witness statements.
• File a lawsuit in the proper court with the proper jurisdiction.
• Show the court that the company’s actions were in violation of the environmental laws or regulations.
• If the court finds in favor of the plaintiff, it may order the defendant to take certain actions to remedy the violation, such as paying for the cleanup of a contaminated site or imposing a fine on the company.
• If there are damages, the court can also order the defendant to pay the plaintiff for any losses incurred as a result of the violation.

Templates available (free to use)

Environmental Policy

Helpful? Want to know more? Message me on Linkedin

Links to get you started

‍ Our Legal AI Assistant (free while in beta) Contract Template Library Legal Clause Library

Try the world's most advanced AI Legal Assistant, today

Smarter.com

Key Components of an Environmental Policy Template: A Step-by-Step Guide

In today’s environmentally conscious world, businesses are increasingly recognizing the importance of having an effective environmental policy in place. An environmental policy serves as a roadmap for organizations to define their commitment towards sustainable practices and outline strategies to minimize their impact on the environment. Creating an environmental policy from scratch can be a daunting task, but with a well-designed template, the process becomes much easier. In this article, we will explore the key components of an environmental policy template and provide a step-by-step guide to help you create one for your organization.

Introduction

The introduction section sets the tone for your environmental policy by providing a clear statement of your organization’s commitment to environmental sustainability. It should highlight the purpose and scope of the policy and demonstrate top management support for its implementation. This section should also mention any relevant laws or regulations that your organization is required to comply with.

Start by explaining why your organization is creating an environmental policy and how it aligns with your overall mission and values. Emphasize the importance of sustainability in today’s global landscape and how it impacts not only the environment but also society and business operations.

Clearly define the scope of your environmental policy by specifying which aspects of your organization’s activities it covers. For example, if you are a manufacturing company, you may want to include sections on energy consumption, waste management, and pollution prevention.

Highlight any legal obligations or industry-specific regulations that your organization must adhere to. This demonstrates your commitment to compliance and helps build trust with stakeholders.

Environmental Objectives

The second section of your environmental policy template should outline specific objectives that your organization aims to achieve in order to reduce its environmental impact. These objectives should be measurable, time-bound, and aligned with relevant sustainability goals such as those outlined by the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Start by identifying the key environmental issues that are most relevant to your organization. This could include areas such as greenhouse gas emissions, water usage, waste generation, or biodiversity conservation.

Set SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) objectives for each environmental issue identified. For example, if your organization aims to reduce its carbon footprint, a SMART objective could be to achieve a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2025.

Provide a brief explanation of the strategies and actions that your organization will undertake to achieve these objectives. This could include initiatives such as implementing energy-efficient technologies, promoting recycling programs, or investing in renewable energy sources.

Roles and Responsibilities

Clearly defining roles and responsibilities is crucial for the successful implementation of an environmental policy. This section should outline who within the organization is responsible for carrying out specific tasks related to environmental management and sustainability.

Identify the key stakeholders who will be involved in implementing and monitoring your environmental policy. This may include top management, sustainability officers, department heads, or designated teams responsible for specific areas such as energy management or waste reduction.

Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder. For example, top management may be responsible for setting overall goals and providing resources for implementation, while department heads may be responsible for ensuring compliance within their respective departments.

Emphasize the importance of employee engagement and awareness in achieving environmental goals. Encourage all employees to take responsibility for their own actions by promoting sustainable practices and providing training opportunities on environmental awareness.

Monitoring and Review

Regular monitoring and review are essential to ensure that your environmental policy remains effective over time. This section should outline how your organization will monitor progress towards its objectives and regularly review the policy’s effectiveness.

Identify key performance indicators (KPIs) that will be used to measure progress towards your environmental objectives. These could include metrics such as energy consumption, waste reduction, or water usage.

Explain how data will be collected and analyzed to track progress. This could involve regular audits, data collection systems, or third-party certifications.

Outline how often the policy will be reviewed and by whom. This ensures that your organization remains adaptable to new environmental challenges and can make necessary updates to its strategies and objectives.

Creating an effective environmental policy is a crucial step for organizations committed to sustainability. By following a well-designed template and considering the key components outlined in this article, you can develop a comprehensive environmental policy that aligns with your organization’s values, goals, and legal obligations. Remember that an environmental policy is not just a document but a commitment towards building a better future for our planet.

This text was generated using a large language model, and select text has been reviewed and moderated for purposes such as readability.

MORE FROM SMARTER.COM

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

• Student information
• Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

With racism in the public eye and the pandemic wreaking havoc on vulnerable populations disadvantaged by ecological hazards, the need to ensure environmental justice has become more apparent – and more important – than ever, according to plans laid out by the Biden administration . Stanford research on environmental, social and legal issues reveals some of the strengths and limitations of these commitments.

Students and community organizers in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, protest over concerns about lead in area schools’ water systems. (Image credit: Joe Brusky/Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines environmental justice as “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin or income, with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies.” This means that vulnerable human populations and the Earth should be fostered together as one interlinked system. Instead, a long history of social inequity has left some of the most vulnerable Americans, including so-called “fenceline” and “frontline” communities most affected by pollution and climate change, reckoning with injustices that are generations in the making.

Below, environmental litigator Deborah Sivas, along with history Professor Emeritus Clayborne Carson , African and African American Studies research fellow Hadiya Sewer, Stanford legal historian Gregory Ablavsky and environmental health sciences PhD candidate David Gonzalez discuss some of the Biden administration’s environmental justice plans. While some policies show the potential for unparalleled federal accountability, the scholars argue that others may fall short of even beginning to improve disparities that compromise the health, well-being and basic livelihood of tens of millions of Americans.

What is the connection between civil rights and environmental justice?

Carson: We have environmental problems that affect poor communities much more than wealthy communities, which is the result of the fact that environmentalism 30 or 40 years ago tended to be very upper-middle class-oriented. Take the placement of parks, for example – in general, richer people have more access to parks. Race affects class. Class then affects your options. It’s more of a human rights issue today than a civil rights issue.

When you broaden it to human rights, then we’re talking about a wide variety of things that affect the opportunities open to people as people, not as citizens: Do we have a right to clean water? Do we have a right to decent housing? Do we have a right to an environment free of pathogens?

Sewer: For Black communities, environmental justice is a critical component of ongoing struggles for racial justice. Environmental racism is part and parcel of the structural violence inherent in anti-Blackness. The routine, state-sanctioned disavowal of Black lives includes both the overt racial terror of police killings and the insidiousness of racist environmental policy and planning. Environmental justice asks us to pose tough questions about the ecological legacies of slavery, imperialism, colonialism and racial capitalism.

How could Biden’s pledge to establish an Environmental and Climate Justice division within the Department of Justice help vulnerable communities?

Sivas: Such a new division could vigorously enforce the pollution laws we have on the books and, where necessary, seek additional legislative authority to hold polluters accountable. Our clean air and water laws already provide authority for quite significant civil and criminal penalties against violators, but under both Republican and Democratic administrations, EPA has historically been reluctant to zealously enforce them. If the Biden administration is serious, it would retain enthusiastic prosecutors and charge the new DOJ division with a mission that is focused laser-like on protecting frontline/fenceline communities. It must also quickly rebuild institutional capacity at the EPA.

What hurdles will the federal government face in helping frontline and fenceline communities?

Sivas: The demographics of these communities have been driven by historic discrimination, including such practices as redlining, blockbusting and restrictive covenants. The resulting residential patterns that exist today have clustered many of the most polluting industries in predominantly lower-income communities of color. Targeting federal resources for more monitoring and data collection in these communities is useful and to some extent empowering, but merely documenting the problem is far from sufficient. We need policies that actually reduce the pollution burdens in these communities.

A major obstacle is that the federal government has little legal authority to affect state and local land use. The new administration can try to fund, work with and/or pressure local and state governments to address these issues, but the competing economic and political pressures from polluting industries are often overwhelming.

Ablavsky: In general, for Native peoples, the struggle for environmental justice is part of a larger struggle for the right to have their own laws and customs dictate relationships with the land – which is distinct from, even if it at times intersects with, the values of environmentalism.

In many ways, the new administration has pledged a broad return to the generally pro-tribal policies pursued by the Obama administration – placing more lands under Native jurisdiction through a process called land-to-trust. Biden’s Secretary of the Interior is Deb Haaland, a member of Laguna Pueblo, the first Native person to head the agency that includes not only the Bureau of Indian Affairs but also many of the agencies – the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, for example – that set the nation’s environmental agenda.

What can the administration do to harness scientific research for positive change?

Gonzalez : The administration should roll back anti-scientific policies implemented under the Trump administration. In January, the EPA promulgated what they termed a transparency rule introduced by the Trump administration, which would require regulators to give less weight to studies that don’t make their underlying data public. With this policy in place, many of the studies that have investigated environmental hazards – and identified disproportionate impacts among marginalized communities – would be given less attention. The data are confidential for a reason: to protect the privacy of the study participants. For example, my colleagues and I work with clinical data on birth outcomes and maternal health , which is obviously sensitive and confidential. Diminishing this kind of work could lead to more harm.

Sivas is the Luke W. Cole Professor of Environmental Law and director of Stanford’s  Environmental and Natural Resources Law and Policy Program  and its  Environmental Law Clinic; she is also a senior fellow with the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment . Carson is also a senior fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, & Rule of Law at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Gonzalez is a PhD candidate in the Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources (E-IPER) who taught Shades of Green: Redesigning and Rethinking the Environmental Justice Movements in 2019 and 2020. Ablavsky is an associate professor of law, the Helen L. Crocker Faculty Scholar and associate professor of history, by courtesy.

To read all stories about Stanford science, subscribe to the biweekly   Stanford Science Digest .

Related stories

• Q&A: Environmental policies for all Americans?
• How Biden can jumpstart U.S. nuclear waste strategy
• Making America green again
• Wildfire solutions
• Research and policy in a changing Arctic
• The future of America’s drinking water

Media Contacts

Deborah Sivas, Stanford Law School: (650) 723-0325, [email protected]

Hadiya Sewer, School of Humanities and Sciences: [email protected]

Gregory Ablavsky, Stanford Law School: (650) 723-4057, [email protected]

David Gonzalez, School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences: [email protected]

Danielle Torrent Tucker, School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences: (650) 497-9541, [email protected]

• 10 min read

[Template] How to Write An Environmental Policy in 20 Minutes or Less – Step-by-Step Guide

• 26th April 2022

Drafting an environmental policy is a valuable way for a company to clarify its commitment to managing its environmental impact. It can also serve as a valuable component of your ESG toolbox.   

An environmental policy can help provide a vision for employees to understand their roles and responsibilities. It can also help improve company decisions, reduce costs, and improve efficiency across the organisation. 

Promoting an environmental policy can also help improve relationships with customers and suppliers that want to see a commitment to sustainability. 

Download policy template

What is an environmental policy?

An enviromental policy sets out a business’ aims and principles with regard to managing the environmental effects of its operations. It outlines the measures that an organisation is taking or has pledged to take with regard to the effect of their activities on the environment, particularly measures that are designed to reduce harmful effects of their activities on environmental ecosystems.

What is included in an environmental policy?

There is no standard content and each policy should be relevant to the particular organisation that’s writing it, including the organisation’s activities, priorities, and concerns. Organisations should perform an environmental assessment which will hopefully identify the main environmental issues that are relevant to their specific business, and write the policy based on that. An environmental policy should include a statement on the organisation’s objectives with regard to reducing the way they manage the environmental effects of their operations. For example, a policy might include the following:

• Information about the organisation’s operations
• A statement of commitment by the organisation to improve their environmental performance, including reducing their pollution, their carbon footprint, and managing their environmental impacts.
• A statement about the organisation’s expectations regarding environmental issues from suppliers and contractors
• A statement of intention to at the very least comply with local regulations
• A statement on what your organisation does to educate and train employees in environmental issues and the impact of their activities
• A statement about how your organisation monitors its progress on environmental aims and targets on a regular basis
• A commitment from the organisation to communicate its environmental aims to staff, customers, investors and external stakeholders.

Who is responsible for writing the environmental policy?

The environmental policy should be written by someone who has an understanding of the business and its runnings and should be signed and backed by senior management.

Should your business create an environmental policy?

Creating an environmental policy can have significant value for a business and benefit internal operations as well as brand reputation. Having an environmental policy in place will help ensure your business complies with environmental legislation and that your organisation takes the necessary steps to reduce waste and environmental impact both with regard to materials and energy usage within your operations. In addition, having a policy will help ensure employees are informed about their environmental roles and responsibilities. 

In order to create an effective environmental policy, you should first assess where your business currently stands in terms of its environmental activities. It may be worth outlining the company’s history of environmental decisions, its current carbon footprint, and the main challenges the company faces. 

Create your own Sustainability Policy in just 20 minutes with VinciWorks’ Template

Creating an environmental policy has never been easier than now with VinciWorks’ environmental policy template. You can easily customise the template to fit the needs of your organisation. The template features a brief overview of the subject and guides readers through the policy, clarifying such points as the goal of the policy, who in the organisation is responsible for the policy, and who it applies to. There are also statements and explanations about the natural environment and an organisation’s assets, sustainable travel, waste and recycling and sustainable procurement. In addition, the template includes a statement about an organisation’s duty to the wider world, a section on information technology and sustainability, and guidance for training and staff involvement.

What should an environmental policy look like?  

There is no single standard format for crafting an environmental policy, but there are several best practices to follow: 

• The document should be short, ideally no longer than a single page.
• The policy should clearly state the organisation’s objectives.
• The policy needs to make sense in terms of the wider objectives of the business. There is no point in creating targets for waste reduction or new behaviours if these are going to detract from the overall function and performance of the business. Key factors to consider include cost and risk reduction and PR and sales benefits.
• It should be displayed publicly and online, and should be easy for everyone to read and understand. 
• It should be realistic, achievable and relevant to the company’s activities. 
• It should include the signatures of the company’s leadership to show their personal buy-in of the plan. 

In order to create an effective environmental policy, you should first assess where your business currently stands in terms of its environmental activities. It may be worth outlining the company’s history of environmental decisions, its current carbon footprint, and the main challenges the company faces. 

It may also be worthwhile to conduct a benchmarking exercise to establish how your company compares against similar businesses.

What should an environmental policy do?

A good environmental policy should contain brief statements on the company’s plans to: 

• Continually improve environmental performance
• Manage its environmental impact
• Manage expectations regarding suppliers and other value chain links
• Comply with relevant environmental legislation
• Educate employees regarding the environmental effects of their activities
• Continue monitoring and review of its environmental performance on a regular basis 

Specific challenges you may want to address could include:

• Transportation
• Efficient use of energy and water
• Recycling packaging materials
• Minimising waste
• Use of environmentally-friendly materials
• Industry-specific legislation and standards
• And other company-specific topics

You should make sure to keep your environmental policy updated with regular policy reviews and reports on the progress of key performance indicators. You should also make sure that the policy is adapted as consensus positions in the scientific and business communities evolve. 

Creating and maintaining a well-crafted environmental policy can be an invaluable tool for a company to convey its sustainability objectives to employees, investors, suppliers, and customers. As more and more companies seek to improve their ESG performance, formulating an environmental policy is an important early step.

Environmental Policy Frequently Asked Questions

Do i need to have any particular expertise to use the guide and write our environmental policy.

The great thing about the template is that it enables basically anyone in the organisation to write and use the policy. As it is easy to use and understand, it can be adapted and used by CEOs, office managers, general staff, and interns alike.

Is the environmental policy template in this guide applicable to any type of business?

Yes, the template is general enough to be used in a wide variety of industries and businesses including office-based organisations, manufacturing, the hospitality industry, the retail industry, and more. Also, it is fully adaptable, allowing you to customise the template to be even more specifically applicable to your business.

Are the environmental policy templates country specific?

No, the template can be used universally.

How long will it take for me to use the templates and create an environmental policy?

We’d estimate that generally a policy can be created using the template in up to 20 minutes. 

We need an environmental policy for a piece of work we are pitching, will this guide give us what we need?

Yes, the guide will cover the requirement for an environmental policy as part of a proposal. Using the template to create a policy will not only help you create a great policy quickly, but also ensure that you have a rich, genuine guide to use both for proposals and tenders and as an internal guide for your business.

Contact VinciWorks Team

Related articles.

Professional Services and CSRD 

• 27th August 2024

What your company needs to know about CSDDD now

• 26th August 2024

SEARCH HERE:

• Anti-bribery
• Anti-Bribery and Corruption
• Anti-Money Laundering
• Artificial Intelligence
• Asbestos Management
• Aspiring leaders
• Bitesize Q&A videos
• Blog Resources
• Business Protection Resources
• Case Studies
• Changes to CPD
• Code of Conduct
• Competition Law
• Compliance Knowledge Base | FCA Compliance
• Compliance Knowledge Base | Protecting Assets
• Compliance LMS resources
• Course & Product Updates
• Customs Controls
• Cyber Security
• Display Screen Equipment | DeltaNet
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Driving at Work
• eLearning Techniques
• Emergency Response | DeltaNet
• Environmental Awareness
• Equality and Diversity
• Fire Safety
• Food Safety
• Fraud Awareness
• Hazardous Substances
• Health and Safety
• Health and Safety Resources
• Information Security Knowledge Base | DeltaNet
• Legionella and Water Safety
• Manual Handling
• Members' Update
• Mental Health
• Modern Slavery
• Modern Slavery Act
• Money Laundering News
• New and Expectant Mothers
• Omnitrack Release Notes
• Performance
• Personal Safety
• Policy Templates
• Popular download
• Records Management
• Risk Assessment
• Safeguarding
• Slips and Trips
• Social Media Awareness
• Tax Evasion
• Testimonials
• The Pearn Kandola Suite
• Thought Leadership
• Travel Safety
• Uncategorised
• VinciWorks Portal
• Wellbeing Resources
• Whistleblowing
• Working at Height
• Workplace Stress

Recent Posts

• Five key steps to take to avoid conflicts of interest in the workplace
• Companies slammed with a fresh wave of GDPR fines with Clearview still in EU’s data crosshairs
• Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill or ‘Martyn’s Law’ is back on the legislative table: here’s what you should be doing to prepare
• UK signs first international treaty addressing AI risks 
• Hong Kong fines WeChat Pay HK for AML/CFT breaches

Writing an environment policy

Writing an environmental policy gives your green and climate action structure and direction. It outlines your goals and declares your environmental commitment to the world. It is an important step and we’re here to help you take it.

To help you write an environmental policy that applies to your organisation, this page covers all the areas to consider with example statements. Work through the prompts, reflect on your organisation, set your own environmental goals then share your policy webpage with us so we can help promote your work!

An environment policy sets out commitments or pledges that will improve your environmental impact. It should be short, honest and public. Then it’s time to think about how to fulfil your commitments. This requires an environmental action plan that details targets, actions, timescales and measurement – the specific steps you will take to fulfil the planet pledges in your policy.

Why do we need an environmental policy?

An environmental policy demonstrates commitment from senior management to take action. It also provides guidance by outlining the changes you are going to make at the broadest level. It should be clear and understandable.

How long should our environmental policy be?

Your environmental policy should outline your broad aims and commitments. 1 or 2 sides of A4 is plenty – you will need to think about specific targets and goals but these will be part of a far more detailed action plan.

What do you do with an environmental policy?

Publish your environmental policy and promote it along with your changes and climate action. If you are making changes, celebrate them! It will help you connect with environmentally aware students and influence other ELT providers to make changes too.

What should an environmental policy include?

Your environmental policy should communicate a real commitment by senior management to improve your impact on the environment and cover all the different areas you are going to make changes. It should be personal to your organisation, reflecting your offer, team, premises and area.

Although there is no standard content, environmental policies for most English language teaching centres and organisations in the UK will have similar themes:

• Guiding principles
• Energy, water and utilities
• Travel and transport
• Consumption, waste and recycling
• Food and drink
• Partners and suppliers
• Learning, teaching and engaging with nature
• Communication and recognition
• Community and participation

How to write an environmental policy

Set the scene.

Start your policy with a brief introduction. This should outline the purpose of your document and describe the importance of environmental responsibility to your organisation. Consider including who has approved it the policy and who is responsible for its implementation.

Set out your commitments

Your commitments should be ambitious, action-steering goals. We have listed key themes and areas to include in your environmental policy with factors to consider and example commitments. You can also click through to read more information and find more detailed actions you can take to fulfil each commitment.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Think about: how you are going to approach your environmental work; your values; and what you need to be successful, like setting clear specific targets, assigning a lead and monitoring progress.

Example commitments:

Involve the whole team Set clear, measurable targets in a detailed action plan Monitor our environmental impact and review our progress quarterly Share our successes and failures honestly

UTILITIES AND ENERGY

Think about: how much gas, electricity and water you use; your energy company and sources; where can you find efficiencies, such as insulation and energy saving settings; and how you can improve practices. Don’t forget your digital carbon footprint .

Example commitments, we will:

Use zero-carbon energy supplies/ green energy suppliers Reduce energy use and water consumption Reduce our digital carbon footprint Divest from fossil fuels

TRAVEL AND TRANSPORT

Think about: the vehicles you own and use; student flights, airport transfers, activities and excursions; staff commutes and travel on company business; and different modes of transport.

Quit all domestic flights Hold meetings online wherever possible Reduce staff travel and prioritise train travel wherever possible Help students choose low-carbon travel during their stay Fund environmental projects to help mitigate the impact of all student travel, both to our course and during their stay

CONSUMPTION, WASTE & RECYCLING

Think about: buying and using less; monitoring quantities of general waste and recyclable waste; providing recycling facilities; quitting single use plastics and other one-use items; staff and student behaviour; pollution; and extending the life of products and devices.

Minimise use of paper, plastic and other materials / become zero-waste Prevent pollution and stop use of toxic materials (e.g. cleaning products, highlighters) Use materials from sustainable and/or recycled sources Refuse, reduce, repair, reuse, recycle

FOOD AND DRINK

Think about: staff food; student meals or snacks; event catering; homestay hosts; and food waste, sourcing and seasonality. Food that comes from animals like meat and dairy have the highest carbon footprint.

Serve only plant based meals in our canteen / at events Always give students the option of plant-based meals Provide information to students on why we are providing plant-based meals Work with the catering team to reduce food waste

SUPPLIERS AND PARTNERS

Think about: supplier policies, transport, materials and supply chain; choosing new suppliers or working together for change; talking with homestay hosts and other accommodation providers; working with agents and partners; and other ethical commitments like fair trade.

Work with suppliers to encourage high environmental standards Work only with suppliers that meet our standards of … Raise awareness with agents and ETOs

LEARNING, TEACHING & ENGAGING WITH NATURE

Think about: including environmental topics throughout the curriculum; engaging students in climate change topics that are relevant to their life; encouraging agency through student activities; learning in nature; learning environment; tone and assumptions.

Example commitments, we will: 

Embed environmental topics into teaching Help students connect with and respect nature Create a culture of learning and respect among staff and students Support and encourage teachers with training and information

COMMUNICATION & RECOGNITION 

Think about: transparency and accountability; gaining support from staff and stakeholders; attracting environmentally conscientious students; and achieving green accreditation, quality standards and other recognition. Sharing your activities and green credentials will not only inspire others and help create more change, but will help you connect with student values too.

Communicate our environmental impact clearly and widely Raise awareness of environmental issues in our organisation and sector Promote environmentally friendly lifestyles in school, in our community and in the UK ELT sector Gain Green Standard Schools status

COMMUNITY & PARTICIPATION

Think about: staff and student involvement from decision making to delivery; staff training, roles and responsibilities: local projects and connections beyond your organisation. Lasting change needs everyone onboard.

Create a green group/ action group/ student and staff committee Support staff with the necessary training, information, time and resources Support local environmental projects and fund climate action

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Gen Z, Millennials Stand Out for Climate Change Activism, Social Media Engagement With Issue
• 2. Climate, energy and environmental policy

Table of Contents

• 1. Climate engagement and activism
• 3. Local impact of climate change, environmental problems
• Acknowledgments
• Methodology
• Appendix: Detailed charts and tables

A majority of Americans consider climate change a priority today so that future generations can have a sustainable planet, and this view is held across generations.

Looking to the future, the public is closely divided on what it will take to address climate change: While about half say it’s likely major lifestyle changes in the U.S. will be needed to deal with climate change impacts, almost as many say it’s more likely new developments in technology will address most of the problems cause by climate change.

On policy, majorities prioritize the use of renewable energy and back the expanded use of specific sources like wind and solar. Americans offer more support than opposition to a range of policies aimed at reducing the effects of climate change, including key climate-related aspects of President Joe Biden’s recent infrastructure proposal. Still, Americans do not back a complete break with carbon: A majority says oil and gas should still be part of the energy mix in the U.S., and about half oppose phasing out gas-powered vehicles by 2035.

Overall, 64% of U.S. adults say reducing the effects of climate change needs to be “a top priority to ensure a sustainable planet for future generations, even if that means fewer resources for addressing other important problems today.” By contrast, 34% say that reducing the effects of climate change needs to be “a lower priority, with so many other important problems facing Americans today, even if that means more climate problems for future generations.”

There are stark partisan differences over this sentiment. Nearly nine-in-ten Democrats (87%) say efforts to reduce the effects of climate change need to be prioritized today to ensure a sustainable planet. By contrast, 61% of Republicans say that efforts to reduce the effects of climate change need to be a lower priority, with so many other important problems facing Americans today. (Democrats and Republicans include those who lean to each party.)

Asked to look to the future 50 years from now, 51% of Americans say it’s more likely that major changes to everyday life in the U.S. will be needed to address the problems caused by global climate change. By contrast, 46% say it’s more likely that new technology will be able to address most of the problems caused by global climate change.

Most Democrats (69%) expect that in 50 years major lifestyle changes in the U.S. will be needed to address the problems caused by climate change. By contrast, among Republicans, two-thirds (66%) say it’s likelier that new technology will be able to address most climate change problems in the U.S. Among Republicans, this view is widely held (81%) among the majority who do not see climate change as an important personal concern; Republicans who express greater personal concern about climate change are more likely to say major changes to everyday life in the future will be needed to address problems caused by climate change.

Overall, majorities across generations believe that climate change should be a top priority today to ensure a sustainable planet for future generations. Generational divisions are more prominent among Republicans than Democrats, however.

Among Republicans, about half of Gen Zers (49%) and Millennials (48%) give top priority to reducing the effect of climate change today, even if that means fewer resources to deal with other important problems. By contrast, majorities of Gen X (61%) and Baby Boomer and older Republicans (71%) say reducing the effects of climate change needs to a lower priority today, given the other problems Americans are facing.

Generational differences among Democrats on this question are modest, with clear majorities giving priority to dealing with climate change today.

Majority of Americans prioritize developing alternative energy sources, but only a third would phase out all fossil fuels

Burning fossil fuels for electricity and in cars and trucks are among the primary sources of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. Americans broadly favor increasing the use of renewable energy sources, but a majority reject the idea of phasing out fossil fuel energy sources completely. And Americans are about evenly divided on the idea of phasing out the production of new gasoline cars and trucks by 2035.

There are familiar partisan divisions over nearly every aspect of energy policy, particularly when it comes to fossil fuels. Political divides have widened over the past year as Republican support for alternative energy sources – including wind and solar power – has fallen while support for expanding offshore oil drilling, hydraulic fracturing and coal mining has ticked up.

Within both parties, Gen Zers and Millennials are more supportive of proposals to move away from fossil fuels than their older counterparts.

A majority of Americans (71%) continue to say that the U.S. should prioritize developing alternative energy, while a much smaller share (27%) prioritizes expanding the production of oil, coal and natural gas.

The share of Republicans who prioritize developing alternative energy sources over expanding the production of fossil fuels has fallen 18 percentage points in the past year. As a result, Republicans are now closely divided between these two energy priorities. Democrats remain near consensus levels in their support for prioritizing development of alternative energy levels.

Among Republicans, there are significant generational differences in support for increasing the development of renewable energy sources. Majorities of Gen Z (63%) and Millennial (62%) Republicans prioritize increased development of renewable sources, such as wind and solar. Smaller shares of Gen X Republicans (50%) and just 33% of Baby Boomer and older Republicans prioritize this approach over the expanding of fossil fuel development. For more details, including longer-term trends over time, see the Appendix .

Republicans and Democrats also differ over the best way to encourage reliance on renewable energy sources. Most Democrats (81%) continue to see a need for government regulations to increase reliance on renewable energy. On the other hand, two-thirds of Republicans (67%) say the private marketplace alone will be enough. See the Appendix for details.

In keeping with support for prioritizing the development of renewable energy, most Americans favor expanding solar panel farms (84%) and wind turbine farms (77%). By contrast, majorities oppose more coal mining (61%), more hydraulic fracturing (56%) and more offshore oil and gas drilling (55%).

Americans are divided over expanding nuclear power: 50% favor more nuclear power plants, while 47% are opposed.

Republican support for expanding solar power is down 11 points in the last year (from 84% to 73%), and support for wind power has fallen 13 points (from 75% to 62%). Democrats’ widely held support for increasing both energy sources remains largely unchanged.

In addition, there has been an increase since 2020 in the shares of Republicans who support expanding hydraulic fracturing of natural gas (up 10 points), offshore oil and gas drilling (up 6 points) and coal mining (up 6 points). See the Appendix for details.

Even so, younger Republicans remain less likely than their older counterparts to support expanding fossil fuel sources, consistent with past Center surveys.

For instance, 79% of Baby Boomer and older Republicans support more offshore oil and gas drilling, while roughly half (48%) of Gen Z Republicans say the same (a difference of 31 points). There are similar divides over hydraulic fracturing, the primary extraction technique for natural gas (74% of Baby Boomer and older Republicans favor vs. 44% of Gen Z Republicans).

Nearly two-thirds of Americans support using a mix of fossil fuel and renewable energy sources, younger adults more inclined to phase out fossil fuels completely

While a large share of U.S. adults would prioritize alternative energy development over expanding the use of fossil fuels, most adults are not inclined to give up reliance on fossil fuels altogether.

The survey finds 64% of Americans say they support ongoing use of oil, coal and natural gas as well as renewable energy sources, while a third (33%) say the country should phase out the use of fossil fuels completely.

There are sharp differences of opinion about this issue by party. Most Republicans (86%) say that the U.S. should rely on a mix of fossil fuel and renewable energy sources. Democrats are about evenly divided, with 47% in favor of using a mix of sources and 50% calling for a phase out of fossil fuels. About two-thirds of liberal Democrats (65%) support phasing out fossil fuels but fewer moderate and conservative Democrats say the same (39%).

There are also generational divisions on this issue, with younger generations more likely to support giving up fossil fuel use over time. In fact, majorities of Democratic Gen Zers (60%) and Millennials (57%) support phasing out fossil fuel use completely.

Americans are closely divided over phasing out gas-powered vehicles; Democrats, younger adults are more receptive to the idea

Climate advocates point to electric vehicles as a way to cut down on carbon emissions and reduce climate change. Americans are about equally divided on the idea of phasing out production of gasoline cars and trucks by 2035. A little under half (47%) say they would favor such a proposal, while 51% are opposed.

As with other proposals on climate and energy issues, partisans express opposing viewpoints. About two-thirds of Democrats (68%) support phasing out gasoline cars by 2035, while 76% of Republicans oppose this.

Most U.S. adults oppose oil drilling in ANWR but are more divided over Keystone XL decision

The issue of whether or not to allow oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has long been a controversy in energy policy. Overall, most Americans (70%) oppose the idea, while 27% are in favor.

Nearly all Democrats (89%) say they oppose allowing oil and gas drilling in the ANWR. Republicans are about evenly divided, with half in favor of allowing this and 48% opposed.

One of Biden’s  first actions as president  was revoking the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. The pipeline would have carried oil from Canada into the U.S.

About half of Americans (49%) say canceling the pipeline was the right decision, while 45% say it was the wrong decision.

Most Democrats (78%) say it was the right decision, while most Republicans (80%) say otherwise. See details in the  Appendix .

But there are also generational dynamics in views about gasoline-powered vehicles, with younger adults more supportive than older adults of phasing out gas cars and trucks. Narrow majorities of Gen Zers (56%) and Millennials (57%) support such a proposal, compared with 38% of Baby Boomer and older Americans. This pattern holds within both parties, though sizable partisan divides remain across all generations. See the Appendix for a look at how these generational and partisan divides compare across measures.

The public is broadly familiar with electric vehicles: About nine-in-ten have heard either a lot (30%) or a little (62%) about them. When it comes to first-hand experience, 7% of adults say they currently have an electric or hybrid vehicle; 93% say they do not.

People who say they have heard a lot about electric vehicles are closely divided over the idea of phasing out gas-powered cars and trucks by a margin of 52% in favor to 48% opposed. Not surprisingly, those who currently own an electric or hybrid vehicle are largely in favor of this idea (68% vs. 31% opposed).

Broad public support for a number of policies to address climate change, including some proposed in Biden infrastructure plan

In late March, the Biden administration announced a $2 trillion infrastructure plan with several elements they argue would help reduce the effects of climate change. The new Center survey finds majorities of Americans support a number of proposals to address global climate change, including three specific elements in Biden’s infrastructure plan.

There are sharp partisan divisions over many of these proposals, as expected. In addition, there are concerns, particularly among Democrats, that Biden’s policy proposals will not go far enough in efforts to reduce the effects of climate change.

Majorities of U.S. adults support a range of approaches to address climate change

The new Center survey finds majorities back three specific elements of Biden’s infrastructure plan. More than seven-in-ten Americans (74%) favor a proposed requirement for power companies to use more energy from renewable sources, such as solar and wind, to reduce carbon emissions. A smaller majority – 62% – favors federal spending to build a network of electric vehicle charging stations across the country in order to increase the use of electric cars and trucks.

And 63% of Americans support the idea of raising corporate taxes to pay for more energy efficient buildings and improved roads and bridges, a key funding mechanism in Biden’s infrastructure proposal.

Biden has closely tied his climate-focused infrastructure proposals with economic and job growth. Half of U.S. adults think that the Biden administration’s plan to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure in ways that are aimed at reducing the effects of climate change will help the economy. Three-in-ten think this will hurt the economy, and 18% say it will make no difference.

Americans continue to broadly support a number of longer-standing proposals to reduce the effects of climate change. Nine-in-ten Americans favor planting additional trees to absorb carbon dioxide emissions. About eight-in-ten (81%) favor providing a tax credit for businesses that develop technology that can capture and store carbon emissions before they enter the atmosphere. Both of these ideas were part of a set of policies supported by congressional Republicans last year .

Large majorities of Americans also favor tougher restrictions on power plant carbon emissions (76%), taxing corporations based on the amount of carbon emissions they produce (70%) and tougher fuel-efficiency standards for automobiles and trucks (70%).

54% of Democrats think Biden administration’s climate policies will not go far enough

Three months into the Biden administration, there is no clear consensus over the administration’s approach on climate change. About four-in-ten Americans (41%) think the Biden administration’s policies to reduce the effects of climate change will not go far enough. Roughly three-in-ten (29%) think the Biden administration will go too far, and a similar share (28%) say the administration’s approach will be about right.

Republicans and Democrats have far different expectations for the Biden’s administration policies on climate change. A narrow majority of Democrats and those who lean to the Democratic Party (54%) –including 63% of liberal Democrats – think the administration’s policies will not go far enough to reduce the effects of climate change.

In contrast, six-in-ten Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say the Biden administration’s policies will go too far, including 74% of conservative Republicans.

There are some generational differences in views on this this issue among Republicans, in line with differences over the importance of addressing climate change. About as many Gen Z Republicans say Biden’s climate policies will not go far enough (35%) as say the policies will go too far (38%). By comparison, a 72% majority of Republicans in the Baby Boomer or older generations think the Biden administration will go too far on climate change.

When it comes to views about proposals aimed at reducing climate change, however, there are few differences of opinion across generations among either party. Yet large differences remain between Republicans and Democrats overall.

Democrats’ views about five proposals aimed at reducing the effects of climate change are uniformly positive. Roughly 85% to 95% of Democrats support each.

Republicans and Republican leaners are most supportive of proposals to absorb carbon emissions by planting large numbers of trees (88%), followed by a proposal to provide a corporate tax credit for carbon-capture technology (73%). A majority of the GOP (58%) favor tougher restrictions on carbon emissions from power plants. About half of Republicans favor taxing corporate carbon emissions (50%) or tougher fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks (49%).

There are no divisions within the GOP by generation across these issues, though ideological divides are often sharp. For example, 65% of moderate and liberal Republicans favor tougher fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks, compared with 40% of conservative Republicans.

Republicans and Democrats are also deeply divided over climate-focused proposals in the Biden administration’s infrastructure plan.

Large majorities of Democrats favor requiring power companies to use more energy from renewable sources (92%), raising corporate taxes to pay for energy efficient buildings and improved roads (84%) and building a network of electric vehicle charging stations across the country (82%).

About half of Republicans (52%) support requiring power companies to use more energy from renewable sources. There is less support for federal spending to build a nationwide network of electric vehicle charging stations (38%). An equal share of Republicans (38%) support the idea of raising taxes on corporations to pay for more energy efficient buildings and better roads, although more moderates and liberals in the GOP (59%) than conservatives (27%) support this idea.

There is comparatively more support for these proposals among younger Republicans, particularly for federal spending to build electric vehicle charging stations and requirements for power plants to use more renewable sources.

Republicans and Democrats at odds over economic impact of Biden’s infrastructure plan

Democrats are largely optimistic that the Biden administration’s plan to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure in ways aimed at reducing the effects of climate change will help the economy. About eight-in-ten Democrats (78%) say this.

Among Republicans, a majority (59%) thinks this proposed plan will hurt the economy, while only about two-in-ten (18%) say it will help. Conservative Republicans (71%) are especially inclined to say the climate-focused infrastructure proposal will hurt the economy.

Generational differences are largely modest but occur in both parties. Baby Boomer Republicans are the most pessimistic about the plan’s economic impact, while Boomer Democrats are the most optimistic that the plan will help the economy.

What are important considerations to Americans in climate proposals?

When it comes to proposals to reduce the effects of global climate change, protecting the environment for future generations and increasing jobs and economic growth are the top considerations Americans would like to see in policy proposals.

Asked to think about what is important to them in proposals to reduce the effects of climate change, 64% of the public says protecting the quality of the environment for future generations is a very important consideration to them personally; 28% say it’s somewhat important to them and just 6% say it’s not too or not at all important to them.

A majority (60%) also says that increasing job and economic growth is a very important consideration to them personally when it comes to proposals to reduce the effects of climate change.

About half (52%) say keeping consumer costs low is a very important consideration to them personally in climate proposals. Making sure proposals help lower-income communities is seen as a very important consideration by 45% of the public.

About a third (34%) say getting to net-zero carbon emissions as quickly as possible is a very important consideration to them personally. Joe Biden has set a goal for the U.S. to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

Limiting the burden of regulations on businesses is seen as a very important climate policy consideration by 24% of the public – the lowest share who say this across the six items asked in the survey. However, majorities view all six factors, including limiting the regulatory burden on businesses, as at least somewhat important considerations in climate proposals.

Partisans have differing priorities when it comes to climate change proposals. Among Republicans, increasing job and economic growth (65% very important) and keeping consumer costs low (61%) are their top considerations. Among Democrats, protecting the quality of the environment for future generations is their clear top consideration (79% very important), followed by making sure proposals help lower-income communities (59%) and increasing job and economic growth (58%). About half of Democrats (51%) say getting to net-zero carbon emissions as quickly as possible is very important to them.

Public sees actions from businesses, ordinary Americans as insufficient on climate change

Americans see a range of actors as falling short in efforts to help reduce the effects of global climate change. The public is broadly critical of the lack of action from large businesses and the energy industry – but also views elected officials, as well as ordinary Americans, as failing to do their part.

Nearly seven-in-ten adults (69%) say large businesses and corporations are doing too little to help reduce the effects of global climate change, while just 21% say they are doing about the right amount and very few (8%) say they are doing too much to address climate change. Similarly, a majority of the public (62%) says the energy industry is doing too little to help reduce the effects of global climate change.

The public also extends criticism on climate inaction to Americans themselves and the officials they vote into elected office. Overall, 66% say ordinary Americans are doing too little to help reduce the effects of climate change, and 60% say this about their state’s elected officials. A separate question that asks about the actions of the federal government across a range of environmental areas finds that 59% say the federal government is doing too little on climate change.

Americans are less critical of their own individual actions in helping to address climate change: Roughly half (48%) believe they, themselves, are doing about the right amount to help reduce the effects of climate change. Still, almost as many (47%) say they are doing too little to help.

When it comes to the role of environmental advocacy organizations, 48% say they are doing about the right amount to help reduce the effects of climate change, compared with 29% who say they are doing too little and 22% who say they are doing too much.

There are stark partisan differences in views of the role groups and individuals are playing to help reduce the effects of climate change. Large majorities of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say large businesses (85%), ordinary Americans (82%), the energy industry (80%) and their state elected officials (79%) are doing too little to help reduce climate change impacts. By contrast, about half of Republicans and Republican leaners or fewer say these actors are doing too little to address climate change. Republicans are much more likely to say most of these groups are doing about the right amount than to say they are doing too much to address climate change.

Generational differences in views are most pronounced on this question within the GOP. In general, Gen Z and Millennial Republicans are more likely than older Republicans to say groups and individuals are doing too little to help reduce the effects of climate change. For instance, 57% of Gen Z and 59% of Millennial Republicans say large businesses are doing too little to help address climate change, compared with 50% of Gen X Republicans and 43% of Baby Boomer and older Republicans.

A 54% majority of U.S. adults see climate scientists’ role on policy as too limited, though some have doubts about scientists’ understanding

As the Biden administration, Congress and state and local governments debate how best to address climate change, 54% of Americans think climate scientists have too little influence on policy debates about climate change. Smaller shares say climate scientists have about the right amount (22%) or too much (22%) influence on climate policy.

At the same time, Americans appear to have reservations about climate scientists’ expertise and understanding. Only about two-in-ten Americans (18%) say climate scientists understand “very well” the best ways to address climate change. Another 42% say climate scientists understand ways to address climate change “fairly well”; 38% say they understand this not too or not at all well.

Public views of climate scientists’ understanding are more positive, if still generally skeptical, on the fundamentals of whether climate change is occurring (37% say scientists understand this very well) and what causes climate change (28%).

Americans’ overall views about climate scientists’ expertise and understanding of what is happening to the Earth’s climate are similar to 2016, the last time Pew Research Center asked these questions.

In keeping with the wide political divisions over climate policy issues, Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to rate climate scientists’ understanding highly. And these partisan divides have widened since 2016. For example, Democrats are 43 percentage points more likely than Republicans to say climate scientists understand very well whether or not climate change is occurring. This gap was 25 points in 2016. See the Appendix for details.

Similarly, far larger shares of Democrats than Republicans believe climate scientists have too little say in climate debates (77% vs. 27%).

Younger generations are especially likely to think climate scientists have too little say on climate policy debates. However, these generational dynamics occur only within the GOP.

Millennial (38%) and Gen Z (41%) Republicans are more likely than Baby Boomers and older generations of Republicans (18%) to think climate scientists have too little influence on related policy debates. About half of older Republicans (53%) say climate scientists have too much influence in these debates.

Roughly three-quarters to eight-in-ten Democrats across younger and older generations think climate scientists have too little say in climate policy debates.

Majority of Americans continue to say federal government is doing too little to protect key aspects of the environment

When it comes to environmental protection, a majority of Americans continue to see a role for stricter environmental regulations and majorities view the federal government as doing too little across most areas of environmental concern asked about in the survey, such as protecting air quality.

Gen Z and Millennials offer the broadest support for environmental regulations and for more government action to protect specific aspects of the environment.

Partisan gaps over government action to protect the environment remain very large and differences over the value of stricter environmental regulations have widened since last asked in September 2019 during the administration of Donald Trump.

There are generational and partisan differences over value of environmental regulations

Overall, 56% of Americans say that stricter environmental laws are worth the cost, compared with a smaller share (41%) who say they cost too many jobs and hurt the economy.

On balance Gen Z and Millennials are both much more likely to  stricter environmental laws as worth the cost than to say they cost too many jobs and hurt the economy (by 59% to 33% and 63% to 35%, respectively). Gen X and Boomer and older adults also see stricter environmental laws as worth the cost, though by narrower margins.

A large majority of Democrats (81%) believe that stricter environmental laws are worth the cost. By contrast, 71% of Republicans say they cost too many jobs and hurt the economy. Republicans have become much more likely to take a critical view of stricter environmental regulations since September 2019, when 55% said they hurt the economy and cost too many jobs. (For more details on this change over time, see the Appendix ).

Generational differences in views occur primarily within the GOP and not among Democrats. Among Republicans, Gen Z (35%) and Millennials (34%) are more likely than Baby Boomer and older adults (20%) to say stricter environmental laws are worth the cost, though larger shares across cohorts say these regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy. Roughly eight-in-ten Democrats across generations say that stricter environmental laws are worth the cost.

Far more Americans say government is doing too little, rather than too much, on key areas of environmental protection

Consistent with Center surveys over the past few years, majorities of U.S. adults support more government action to address a range of environmental concerns, including air and water quality as well as climate change.

Overall, 63% say the federal government is doing too little to protect the water quality of lakes, rivers and streams. Majorities also say the government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change (59%), protect air quality (59%) and protect animals and their habitats (57%). About half (51%) say the federal government is doing too little to protect open lands in national parks and nature preserves. Across all five items, small shares of the public believe the government is doing too much to address any one of these environmental issues.

There are wide differences in views on these issues by political party, with Democrats much more likely than Republicans to think that government efforts in these areas are insufficient.

While still the predominant viewpoint, the shares of Democrats who say the government is doing too little across these five areas are 6 to 10 percentage points lower than they were in May of 2020, before Joe Biden took office. Republicans’ views on these questions have been largely steady, although the share of Republicans who believe the federal government is doing too little to address climate change is down 5 percentage points, from 35% in May 2020 to 30% today.

Partisan groups remain far apart when it comes to assessment of government action on climate change: 83% of Democrats and Democratic leaners think the government’s efforts are insufficient, vs. 30% of Republicans and GOP leaners, a difference of 53 percentage points. Conservative Republicans stand out on this from their fellow partisans with a moderate or liberal ideology: 19% say the federal government is doing too little to address climate change compared with 49% of moderate or liberal Republicans.

Gen Zers and Millennials are more likely than older Americans to say the government is doing too little to address specific areas of environmental concern, though these divides are driven primarily by differences by generation within the GOP.

About two-thirds of Gen Zers (66%) and Millennials (65%) say the federal government is doing too little to protect air quality, compared with 58% of Gen X and 52% of Baby Boomer and older adults.

Similarly, 68% of Gen Zers and 66% of Millennials say the federal government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change versus 57% of Gen X and 52% of Baby Boomer and older adults.

Among Republicans, Gen Zers and Millennials are more likely than Baby Boomer and older adults to say the federal government is doing too little to address all five of these areas of environmental concern. Majorities of Democrats across generations say the government is doing too little to address these environmental issues.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Baby Boomers
• Climate, Energy & Environment
• Generation X
• Generation Z
• Generations, Age & Politics
• Millennials
• Politics Online
• Silent Generation
• Social Media & the News

Majority of Americans support more nuclear power in the country

Americans’ extreme weather policy views and personal experiences, u.s. adults under 30 have different foreign policy priorities than older adults, about 3 in 10 americans would seriously consider buying an electric vehicle, how americans view national, local and personal energy choices, most popular, report materials.

• American Trends Panel Wave 89

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan, nonadvocacy fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, computational social science research and other data-driven research. Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.

© 2024 Pew Research Center

Please note that the contents of this site are not being updated since October 1, 2023.

As of October 2, 2023, Acclr Business Information Services (Info entrepreneurs) will be delivered directly by CED’s Business Information Services . To find out more about CCMM’s other Acclr services, please visit this page: Acclr – Business Services | CCMM.

• Advice and guidance
• Starting a business
• Personalized Guidance
• Seminars on Business Opportunities
• Certification of Export Documents
• Market Studies
• Export Financing
• International Trade Training
• Connection with the World Bank
• Trade Missions
• SME Passport
• Export Resources
• Import Resources
• Networking Activities
• Networking Training
• CCMM Member Directory
• Market Studies and Research Services
• Business plan
• Registration and legal structures
• Guidance for Drafting a Business Plan
• Help in Seeking Funding
• News, Grants, and Competitions
• Funding Meet-and-Greet
• Resources for Drafting a Business Plan
• Regulations / Permits / Licences
• Personalized Market Information Research
• Personalized Meetings with Guest Experts
• Government Subsidies and Programs
• Training for your employees
• Employee Management
• Interconnection Program
• Wage Subsidies
• French courses
• Merchant-Student Pairing
• Intellectual property
• Marketing and sales
• Operations management
• Hiring and managing human resources
• Growth and innovation
• Importing and exporting
• Calls for tenders
• Support organizations
• Sale / Closure / Bankruptcy
• Business intelligence
• Business lists and profiles
• Market data
• Market trends
• Business advice
• Business plan management consultant
• Legal structures consultant
• Accounting consultant
• Legal consultant
• Export certification
• Resource centre

How to write an environmental policy

An environmental policy is a written statement, usually signed by senior management, which outlines a business' aims and principles in relation to managing the environmental effects and aspects of its operations. Although putting one in place is voluntary, an increasing number of businesses are choosing to do so.

Having an environmental policy is essential if you want to implement an environmental management standard such as ISO 14001. It's also vital if you currently work or intend to work with large organisations, or if you need to demonstrate to customers and other stakeholders that you are committed to managing your environmental impacts in a responsible way.

This guide sets out the benefits of having an environmental policy. It makes suggestions for selecting the right format and content. It also gives useful tips on how to keep the policy up to date and how to extend its scope to include corporate social responsibility and sustainable development.

The benefits of an environmental policy

Selecting the right format for your environmental policy, creating content for an environmental policy, checklist: good practice for drafting an environmental policy, keep your environmental policy up to date, extend the scope of your policy.

An environmental policy forms the foundation of environmental improvements made for your business, as defined by senior management. It sets out key aims and principles.

Having an environmental policy can provide significant benefits to your business . These include:

• helping you to stay within the law
• improving information for employees about their environmental roles and responsibilities
• improving cost control
• reducing incidents that result in liability
• conserving raw materials and energy
• improving your monitoring of environmental impacts
• improving the efficiency of your processes

However, the benefits are not restricted simply to internal operations. By demonstrating commitment to environmental management, you can develop positive relations with external stakeholders, such as investors, insurers, customers, suppliers, regulators and the local community. This in turn can lead to an improved corporate image and financial benefits, such as increased investment, customer sales and market share.

It's important to bear in mind that these benefits are unlikely to be achieved if you just have an environmental policy in place. If you set up an environmental management system (EMS) this requires you to implement a program to systematically deliver your policy in a strategic way.

External certification of your EMS will help you demonstrate to customers, investors, regulators and other stakeholders that the environmental claims you make in your policy are credible, reliable and have been independently checked.

If you don't choose to set up a formal EMS, it's a good idea to at least apply some of the steps to ensure your policy is effective. This can include assessing the environmental impact of your business, developing appropriate key performance indicators, setting objectives and targets and reviewing these regularly.

There is no standard format for writing an environmental policy, but to give it the best chance of success, it's important you plan it carefully. For your policy to be successful you need to get buy-in from management , by emphasising the key benefits such as cost reduction, improved risk management and marketing.

Once you have secured this commitment, it's a good idea to assess where your business currently stands in terms of environmental management. This could include drawing up an environmental history of your business, its impact and the risks faced by it.

You could also carry out a benchmarking exercise to establish how you compare against similar businesses.

It's important to tailor your environmental policy to reflect your business and its culture. A good starting point is to collect and review examples of policies written by other businesses and select the format and style most appropriate to your own business. However, avoid copying someone else's policy.

There are a few basic rules to follow:

• keep the statement short - if it's longer than a sheet of 8 ½ X 11, then it's probably too long
• the statement is meant for everyone to see, so make sure it's easy to read and understand
• the statement must be realistic, achievable and relevant to your company's activities and practices
• demonstrate commitment to making the policy work and get the statement signed, dated and endorsed by the owner, managing director or other senior manager
• make the policy available on your website
• ask new employees and suppliers to read a copy of the policy

There is no standard content for an environmental policy, although policies normally contain the same themes. Bear in mind that your policy should be personal to your business, and as such reflect the activities, priorities and concerns most relevant to it.

Before you write your policy you should assess which aspects of your business affect the environment and what the potential impacts are. There are a number of techniques that you could use when carrying out the assessment.

The content of your policy should be based on the results of your assessment, which should have identified the key issues that apply to your business.

Your policy should contain brief statements on the following criteria:

• The business mission and information about its operations. Bear in mind that if your business activities or operations change significantly, the policy may need to be amended.
• A commitment to continually improve your environmental performance.
• A commitment to effectively manage your significant environmental impacts.
• The expectations that your business has in relation to external parties such as suppliers and contractors.
• Recognition that you will comply with relevant environmental legislation as a minimum level of performance.
• Education and training of employees in environmental issues and the environmental effects of their activities.
• Monitoring progress and reviewing environmental performance against targets and objectives on a regular basis (usually annually or in the first six months initially). See the page in this guide on how to keep your environmental policy up to date.
• A commitment to communicate your business' environmental aims and objectives to all staff, as well as to customers, investors and other external stakeholders.

Additional issues relevant to your business, and which you may wish to address in your environmental policy, could include:

• recycling of packaging materials
• minimising waste
• efficient use of water and energy
• use of biodegradable chemicals
• minimising use of solvents and lead-based paints
• use of timber or wood products from sustainable (managed) forests
• procedures to minimise noise disturbance to neighbours
• phasing out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other ozone-depleting substances

If your business is linked closely to key customers through the supply chain, obtain a copy of their environmental policy, so that your statements can reflect their requirements and needs.

Your policy should demonstrate commitment by senior management and is usually signed by the chairman or chief executive.

You may want to integrate your environmental policy with other policies on health and safety, quality management, corporate social responsibility or sustainability.

The checklist below may help you to draft a policy appropriate to your business. Choose examples of the statements that would apply to your business and make the statements as specific as possible for your operations:

• comply with environmental legislation and other requirements, such as approved codes of practice
• importance of environmental issues to your business
• assess the environmental impact of all historic, current and likely future operations
• continually seek to improve environmental performance , e.g. by doing a regular walk-around survey of your business to see if you are using energy and water efficiently and whether measures to reduce waste and pollution are effective
• reduce pollution, emissions and waste , e.g. emissions from transport, oil leaks and spills, excessive noise, heat or vibration generated by the activities of your business
• reduce the use of all raw materials, energy and supplies
• raise awareness, encourage participation and train employees in environmental matters
• expect similar environmental standards from all suppliers and contractors
• assist customers to use products and services in an environmentally sensitive way
• liaise with the local community
• participate in discussions about environmental issues
• communicate environmental aims and objectives to employees and external stakeholders
• agree to commit to environmental principles and continual improvement at the highest level in your business

To check that your company's current activities still comply with your environmental policy, it's a good idea to carry out a regular review - usually on an annual basis, or in the first six months initially. These are key to ensuring that there is continual improvement in environmental performance and that more specific environmental targets are set on a yearly basis. Bear in mind that if your business activities or operations change significantly, the policy may need to be amended.

If your policy is not kept up to date, and it is not backed up with some form of environmental improvement (such as a formal environmental management system or less formal program of improvements), other organisations may think that you're not taking your environmental responsibilities seriously. Consequently, they may decide to take their business elsewhere.

Similarly, if your policy says that you are taking your environmental responsibilities seriously but you fail to back this up, you may face questions over the quality of operations in other parts of your business. This could tarnish your reputation with customers and suppliers.

It's a good idea to involve employees in the reviewing process. If employees are expected to deliver on environmental policy commitments, they may be a good source of ideas for improvements. The environmental policy should be available for all new employees to read and to all existing employees if it changes significantly.

Your environmental policy doesn't have to exist in isolation. In fact, it can be useful to extend the scope of your policy to cover corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. You could choose to develop this either within a single policy or create separate, linked policies. An extended policy acknowledges the fact that different groups of people rely on your business and outlines how you go about minimising your impact on the environment.

By developing a corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy, you are showing that you are:

• Dealing with suppliers and employees in a responsible way - for example by being open and honest about your products and services and avoiding pressure selling. It also means going beyond the legal minimum when dealing with employees and promoting best practice.
• Building up a good relationship with the local community - for example by supporting a local charity or sponsoring a local event.
• Minimising your impact on the environment and cutting pollution and waste – by using energy efficiency measures, e.g. switching off lights, reducing the use of water. You could also consider minimising waste and reducing the environmental impact of your business generally, e.g. buying locally to cut fuel costs.

Equally, you can show that you take sustainable development seriously by:

• considering the life cycle of your products and services and designing them to be as sustainable as possible
• buying materials and resources that come from renewable sources
• reusing or recycling your waste, or passing it on to other businesses to use as a resource
• going beyond your legal obligations and anticipating changes so that you can make adjustments before legislation comes into force
• involving employees and other stakeholders in sustainable development -by involving them in training and incentives to encourage buy-in to your strategy

Original document, How to write an environmental policy , © Crown copyright 2009 Source: Business Link UK (now GOV.UK/Business ) Adapted for Québec by Info entrepreneurs

Our information is provided free of charge and is intended to be helpful to a large range of UK-based (gov.uk/business) and Québec-based (infoentrepreneurs.org) businesses. Because of its general nature the information cannot be taken as comprehensive and should never be used as a substitute for legal or professional advice. We cannot guarantee that the information applies to the individual circumstances of your business. Despite our best efforts it is possible that some information may be out of date.

• The websites operators cannot take any responsibility for the consequences of errors or omissions.
• You should always follow the links to more detailed information from the relevant government department or agency.
• Any reliance you place on our information or linked to on other websites will be at your own risk. You should consider seeking the advice of independent advisors, and should always check your decisions against your normal business methods and best practice in your field of business.
• The websites operators, their agents and employees, are not liable for any losses or damages arising from your use of our websites, other than in respect of death or personal injury caused by their negligence or in respect of fraud.

Need help? Our qualified agents can help you. Contact us!

• Create my account

The address of this page is: https://www.infoentrepreneurs.org/en/guides/how-to-write-an-environmental-policy/

INFO ENTREPRENEURS

380 St-Antoine West Suite W204 (mezzanine level) Montréal, Québec, Canada H2Y 3X7

www.infoentrepreneurs.org

514-496-4636 | 888-576-4444 [email protected]

Consent to Cookies

This website uses necessary cookies to ensure its proper functioning and security. Other cookies and optional technologies make it possible to facilitate, improve or personalize your navigation on our website. If you click "Refuse", some portions of our website may not function properly. Learn more about our privacy policy.

Click on one of the two buttons to access the content you wish to view.

Environmental policies and evaluation

Environmental policies can help galvanise the green transition. However, they must be carefully implemented to avoid negative repercussions for the environment, local communities and the economy. OECD analysis and evaluation guides countries on appropriate policy choices and mixes to ensure their economic efficiency and environmental effectiveness.

• Report: The Economic Consequences of Outdoor Air Pollution
• Report: Mortality Risk Valuation in Environment Health and Transport Policies

Select a language

Key messages, evaluating environmental policy impacts.

Policymakers face the challenge of supporting a healthy environment while fostering inclusive and sustainable economic development. OECD analysis helps policymakers understand the impacts of environmental policies to mitigate their adverse effects.

The results of a decade of ex-post OECD research show that implementing more stringent environmental policies has had little effect on economic performance and employment of industry despite achieving substantial environmental benefits. Despite the small average effects, localised impacts can be larger in  generating winners and losers. While environmental policies can deliver economic benefits for some industries and firms, others may lose – specifically the most polluting and least-efficient firms. Environmental policies need to be designed in a way that amplify the positive effects on the economy while supporting workers, industries and regions that are most affected, without sacrificing the benefits for the environment.

Modelling the future scale and context of environmental challenges

Policies are crucial to preserving and protecting the environment, but their economic and environmental implications are not always clear. The OECD has a long history using economic models and quantitative assessments to inform policymakers of the costs, benefits and potential trade-offs of environmental policies. 

The OECD produces Environmental Outlooks to help policymakers understand the scale and context of the environmental challenges they face in the coming decades, as well as the economic and environmental implications of the policies that could be used to address these challenges. The OECD Environmental Outlooks use models to make projections about what the world might look like in the future. They also present the results of “what if…” simulations which model the potential effects of policies designed to tackle key environmental problems.

Assessing countries’ environmental progress

OECD Environmental Performance Reviews provide independent assessments of countries’ progress towards their environmental policy objectives. Reviews promote peer learning, enhance government accountability, and provide targeted recommendations aimed at improving environmental performance, individually and collectively. They are supported by a broad range of economic and environmental data, and evidence-based analysis. Each cycle of Environmental Performance Reviews covers all OECD countries and selected partner economies.

Utilising environmentally-related taxes or fees

Taxes, subsidies, and other economic instruments provide important market signals that can influence the behaviour of producers and consumers. Taxing sources of environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions is an efficient and effective way to combat climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution. Environmental taxes can also contribute to revenue mobilisation and redistribution. The OECD’s data and analysis help to ensure that green taxes encourage environmentally friendly choices and support broader tax policy goals of fair and sustainable economic growth.

• Ensuring environmental compliance

While the number and ambition of national and international environmental laws and regulations is growing, their implementation remains a challenge. Environmental compliance assurance ensures that regulated entities adhere to environmental laws and regulations set up by governments. Compliance assurance must be tailored to varied behaviour and risk-based. It requires a robust institutional framework and must be a part of the environmental cycle.

Policymakers use a diverse set of instruments to tackle environmental issues  

Environmentally related taxes and fees increase the cost of polluting products or activities and discourage their consumption and production, regardless of the intended purpose of taxes or fees. Taxes and fees account for the majority of policy instruments in the OECD PINE database.

The use of environmental policy instruments has expanded in recent decades

Responding to growing demands for monitoring and analysing policies that affect the environment and natural resources requires reliable, comprehensive, and timely data on a range of policy instruments. Since the early 1970s, the role of economic instruments has been growing: the number of applications for pollution control and natural resource management has increased considerably; the variety of policy instruments in use has grown; and other types of economic instruments (e.g., deposit-refund schemes, performance bonds or liability payments) have also appeared. Today, over 4 100 policy instruments relevant to environmental protection and natural resource management have been deployed in 134 countries.

Latest insights

Related data

• Dashboard Climate Action Dashboard The Climate Action Dashboard by the OECD features key indicators to track progress towards climate objectives and provide a snapshot of country climate action. It is one of the four components of the International Programme for Action on Climate, set up to help countries pursue progress towards net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and a more resilient economy by 2050.
• Indicator Land cover change Land cover change is the change of natural and semi-natural land to other land cover types.

Related publications

Related policy issues

• Environment-economy modelling and outlooks
• Social and economic impacts of environmental policies
• Environmental country reviews