U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

SUSTAINABILITY

and the

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

National Advisory Committee 

for Environmental Policy & 

Technology

November 14, 2011
• To advance science and 

technology

• To advise government and 

the nation

• On policy for advancing 

science, engineering and 

medicine

• On applications of science, 

engineering, and 

medicine to policy issues

The Academies

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

Sustainability and the U.S. EPA

Science and Technology for Sustainability Program

Policy and Global Affairs Division

National Research Council

The National Academies
• A committee under the Science and Technology for Sustainability 

Program conducted a study at the request of the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Office of Research and 

Development to help define efforts to incorporate sustainability 

concepts into agency programs

• This study builds on existing sustainability efforts in EPA by 

strengthening the analytic and scientific basis for sustainability as 

it applies to human health and environmental protection within the 

agency's decision-making process

Sustainability and the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
• Bernard Goldstein (IOM) 

(Chair) - University of 

Pittsburgh

• Leslie Carothers –

Environmental Law Institute

• Terry Davies – Resources for 

the Future

• John Dernbach – Widener 

University School of Law

• Paul Gilman – Covanta 

Energy Corporation

• Neil Hawkins – The Dow 

Chemical Company

• Michael Kavanaugh (NAE) –

Geosyntec Consultants

• Steve Polasky (NAS) –

University of Minnesota

• Kenneth Ruffing –

Organisation for Economic 

Co-operation and 

Development

• Ted Russell – Georgia Tech

• Susanna Sutherland – City 

of Knoxville

• Lauren Zeise – California 

Environmental Protection 

Agency

Sustainability and the 

USEPA Committee Members
• Study launched November 30, 2011

• 2 day meeting – December 14-15, 2010

• The committee heard EPA officials, state 

agencies, industry, universities, and nongovernmental organizations during data 

gathering sessions

• 5 day meeting – February 7-11, 2011

• Weekly conference calls

COMMITTEE PROCESS
Report Released

• Pre-Publication: August 2, 2011

• Final: September 15, 2011
Sustainability 

and the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

The consensus report answers the following questions:

• What should be the operational framework for sustainability for EPA?

• What scientific and analytical tools are needed to support the 

framework?

• How can the EPA decision making process rooted in the risk 

assessment/risk management (RA/RM) paradigm be integrated into this 

new sustainability framework?

• What expertise is needed to support the framework? 
Why Now?

• Current and emerging emerging problems are more 

complex and challenging

• Sophisticated tools are becoming increasingly available 

to address these complex problems

• Sustainability is becoming a common approach to 

address broader economic, social and environmental 

issues

• The potential value to the development and 

competitiveness of the United States through using a 

sustainability approach that allows consideration of 

economic and social issues in environmental protection 

is becoming evident
• Develop a framework for EPA to solve complex 

environmental challenges through a more integrated, 

systems approach

• Similar to the 1983 NRC report Risk Assessment in the 

Federal Government

• Recommended framework will be scaled up under the 

broader NRC study, Sustainability Linkages in the 

Federal Government, that will begin in September 2011

Sustainability and the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 The committee did not devote significant time to 

defining sustainability. It noted that the description of 

environmental goals in the 1969 National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was fully consistent 

with sustainability. Support for these goals has been 

repetitively reaffirmed, including Executive Order 

13514, where sustainability is defined as:

Sustainability: to create and maintain conditions, 

under which humans and nature can exist in 

productive harmony, that permit fulfilling the social, 

economic, and other requirements of present and 

future generations (NEPA 1969; Executive Order 

13514, 2009).

DEFINITION
• Sustainability is a Process and a Goal

• Staged and programmatic implementation – will lead 

to accelerated programs and to a growing body of 

agency successes and experiences with sustainability

• Sustainability Framework Level 1:

Components that define the agency-wide process

• Sustainability Framework Level 2: Elements of 

Sustainability Assessment and Management (SAM)

APPROACH TO TASK
The committee examined the benefits, where EPA has 

statutory authority and discretion in regulatory and 

non-regulatory programs, of building sustainability 

considerations into its administration of these 

statutes. Because EPA did not request that the 

committee address laws pertaining to EPA or to 

organizational and institutional aspects of the agency’s 

operations, the committee did not examine these 

topics

APPROACH TO TASK
Sustainability Framework
Sustainability Framework

Level 1
Sustainability Framework

Level 2
 

The Sustainability Assessment and 

Management process is intended to 

be equally applicable to human 

health, ecological risks and other 

challenges

SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK
What should be the operational framework for 

sustainability for EPA? 

The committee recommends EPA adopt the proposed Sustainability 

Framework

The proposed Sustainability Framework requires a comprehensive 

approach including specific processes for incorporating 

sustainability into decisions and actions. 

As part of the framework, EPA should incorporate into its decision 

making upfront consideration of sustainability options and analyses 

that cover the three sustainability domains (social, environmental, 

and economic), as well as trade-off considerations. 

The framework was developed with the intent that EPA could apply it 

to any decision to which a need arose.

(Recommendation 3.1)
What scientific and analytical tools are needed 

to support the framework?

The committee recommends EPA develop a “sustainability toolbox” that 

includes a suite of tools for use in the Sustainability Assessment and 

Management approach. 

Collectively, the suite of tools should have the ability to analyze present and 

future consequences of alternative decision options on the full range of 

social, environmental, and economic indicators. 

Application of these tools, ranging from simple to complex, should have the 

capability for showing distributional impacts of alternative options with 

particular reference to vulnerable or disadvantaged groups and ecosystems. 

(Recommendation 4.1)
• Risk Assessment

• Life-Cycle Assessment

• Benefit-Cost Analysis

• Ecosystem Services Valuation

• Integrated Assessment Models

• Sustainability Impact Assessment

• Environmental Justice Tools

• Present and Future Scenario Tools

EXAMPLES OF TOOLS
• Tradeoff and synergy – key element of SAM

• The objective is to maximize synergies (social, 

environmental, and economic benefits of a decision) 

and to minimize the adverse effects of conflicts among 

the three pillars

• Important for EPA to establish a systematic way to 

analyze and quantify alternatives

– e.g., spatially explicit models of multiple ecosystem services 

and biodiversity, Polasky, 2011

• Analysis can be used to identify new strategies that 

may improve results for key objectives

TRADEOFF AND SYNERGY ANALYSIS
Trade-off decisions must not compromise the 

fundamental objective of net sustainability gain

• Maximum net gains

• Burden of argument on trade-off proponent

• Avoidance of significant adverse effects

• Protection of the future

• Explicit justification

• Open process

*Gibson, R. 2006. Sustainability assessment: Basic components of a practical approach. IAPA 24(3):170-182. 

EXAMPLE OF A POSSIBLE TOOL

Gibson Guidelines for Approaching 

Tradeoff Analysis*
How can the EPA decision making process 

rooted in the risk assessment/risk 

management (RA/RM) paradigm be 

integrated into this new sustainability 

framework?

The committee recommends EPA include risk assessment as a tool, 

when appropriate, as a key input in its sustainability decision 

making. (Recommendation 5.1)
In keeping with the Red Book, the Committee separated risk 

assessment (RA) from risk management (RM)

 Four step RA paradigm reaffirmed as a valuable tool for 

sustainability

 Committee noted that RM used in two ways currently: a formal

description of EPA’s policies related to control of environmental 

risk and an informal term denoting any EPA approach to 

management of current or potential threat

 Sustainability goes beyond RM as sustainability is primarily 

concerned with maximizing benefit, while addressing risks of 

concern, rather than being an exercise focused mainly on 

achieving risk based standards.

Interface Between Risk

and Sustainability
 The focus on risk based standards sometimes includes 

risk-risk and risk-benefit trade-offs in management 

decisions but does not necessarily or typically 

encompass the social (including health), 

environmental, and economic pillars of sustainability

 Risk management does not fully encompass the 

sustainability paradigm in which the management of 

risk is perceived as an opportunity to maximize 

benefits while controlling environmental harm 

Interface Between Risk

and Sustainability
Interface Between Risk

and Sustainability
Interface Between Risk

and Sustainability

SAM and RA/RM Phase I

Problem formulation and scoping – stakeholder involvement

SAM and RA/RM Phase II

Planning and conducting assessments (including RA) to help 

discriminate policy options

Analysis (including trade-off/synergy) would address critical social, 

environmental and economic features associated with the different 

options 

This stage could receive technical peer review and stakeholder comment

SAM and RA/RM Phase III

Decision-makers consider results, struggle with trade-offs, make 

decisions
What expertise is needed to support the 

framework? 1 of 2

The committee recommends that EPA hire multidisciplinary professionals 

who are proficient in many disciplines, who have experience in the 

development and implementation in the sustainability assessment tools 

described, and who have a working knowledge in all three pillars and their 

application to environmental issues. 

The Agency should hire leaders and scientists including from outside 

sectors to aid the agency in shifting to a more cross-cutting mind set. 

Although EPA has existing staff in all the main areas of sustainability-related 

fields, the agency should further facilitate collaboration among existing 

professional expertise to encourage dialogue and understanding of the 

various fields and work already being done within EPA.

(Recommendation 6.10)
What expertise is needed to support the 

framework? 2 of 2

The committee recommends EPA institute a focused program of 

change management to achieve the goal of incorporating 

sustainability into of all the agency’s thinking, to foster agency-wide 

innovation, to optimize the social, environmental, and economic 

benefits of its decisions, and create a new culture among all EPA 

employees. (Recommendation 6.1)
• Foster change and innovation at 

all levels of EPA

• Learn from others and from what 

you are doing

• Broaden disciplinary approaches 

toward understanding 

underlying processes

• Consider longer term time 

horizons

Changing the Culture 

of the Agency
• Overall management system framework for 

sustainability for the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency

• Approach driven by sustainability principles and goals 

and involves setting, meeting and reporting on 

measurable performance objectives

• Sustainability Assessment and Management (SAM) 

component incorporates sustainability into individual 

EPA decisions and actions

SUMMARY
Three Overlapping Phases in 

the History of the EPA

1) Command and Control

2) Risk assessment / Risk management

3) Sustainability
Drilling Rig in Rural Upshur County, 

WV

Source: WVSORO, Modern Shale Gas Development in the U.S.: A Primer, (2009) U.S. Dept of Energy