Document ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2013-0122-0006
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2013-05-03T04:00Z

SUSTAINABILITY: THE SOCIAL PILLAR

Questions for EPA, NACEPT

These are initial questions for discussion. After further consideration, a formal charge will be developed. 

   * What should EPA's role be vis-à-vis the social pillar of sustainability? 
             Sustainability is generally understood to include three interlocking "pillars": environmental, economic and social. EPA's mission is to protect human health and the environment. What is EPA's proper role relating to the social pillar? What are the pros and cons of different roles? How should EPA avoid the appearance of "mission creep"? What else should EPA avoid? 
   * What should the social pillar include for EPA? 
         oo What should EPA's key points of focus be and how (if at all) should EPA consider them in an integrated manner?
         oo Should EPA's focus be domestic only or international as well? 
         oo How should EPA use social science to understand impacts? 
         oo How would EPA know if it was succeeding? 
   * How well is EPA doing now vis-à-vis the social pillar and how ought the agency to improve? 
         oo Is EPA's current involvement appropriate and effective? What are its current capabilities, strengths and weaknesses? Are there any important gaps ? 
         oo Should EPA support and/or rely on what others (e.g., companies, NGOs) are doing and if so how?
         oo What should EPA be doing with other agencies of Federal, state and local government?  

EPA's Principal Current Involvement in the Social Pillar of Sustainability

   * Environmental justice		OEJ, programs, regions
   * Tribal affairs			OITA, programs, regions
   * Sustainable communities 	OP/OSC, ORD, Brownfields & Superfund, CARE, regions
   * Working conditions*		Programs (esp. OCSPP), regions, ORD
   * Children's health*		OCH, programs, regions
   * Environmental education	OEAEE, regions
   * Teleworking 			OARM
   * Information, transparency,	OEI, OEAEE, OP/OSEM, programs, regions
      civic engagement		 
   * Public knowledge and attitudes	OEI, OEAEE
   * International development and	OIA, OGC, programs 
      international rule of law	
      
*EPA generally considers health to be part of the environmental pillar, while some others consider it a part of the social pillar. Under either perspective, worker and children's health have aspects that should probably be considered under the social pillar. 

Outside Points of Reference 

   1.    ISO 26000  -  "Guidance on Social Responsibility" 
   Includes the following elements (a rough checklist for the social pillar):  
   * Principles of social responsibility: 
   oo             Accountability
   oo             Transparency 
   oo             Ethical behavior
   oo             Respect for stakeholder interests
   oo             Respect for the rule of law
   oo             Respect for international norms of behavior
   oo             Respect for human rights
   * Social responsibility core subjects
   oo             Human rights
   oo             Labor practices
   oo             The environment
   oo             Fair operating practices
   oo             Consumer issues
   oo             Community involvement and development 

   2.    U.S. Department of Transportation
   Transportation Planning for Sustainability Guidebook, January 2011, excerpt from p. 18
   https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/climate_change/sustainability/resources_and_publications/guidebook/sustain.pdf

   Social Sustainability Assessment

Of the three major objectives of sustainability, transportation agencies both in the US and abroad struggle most with assessing social sustainability. This may be due to difficulty in defining social sustainability or to a lack of appropriate data to conduct the analyses that provide meaningful information for decision-making. In terms of definitions, socially sustainable (urban) transportation (SSUT) has been defined as transportation that provides equitable access to opportunities, minimizes social exclusion, and improves (or does not diminish) an individual's quality of life (25). The literature seems to indicate that sustainability efforts have tended to include system performance and environmental criteria, less of economic criteria, and much less of social criteria. Social sustainability research includes three aspects: social equity, social exclusion and quality of life, with a common thread as the fair distribution of society's benefits and burdens. Equity refers to the fairness of distribution of resources based on need, which can be in conflict with total system efficiency. Exclusion is the result of spatial, temporal, financial or personal obstacles, and quality of life (more of a subjective measure) is a multidimensional construct measuring the ability to seek happiness and fulfill needs (25). 

There have been several efforts to translate those definitions into social sustainability indicators. Steg and Gifford (2005) present a list of 22 quality of life indicators adapted from Poortinga et al. (26,27). The Swiss Government's Sustainable Development Initiative (28), Sustainable Seattle Coalition's community sustainability indicators, and PROSPECTS (Europe) are good sources of SSUT indicators. However, there is often difficulty in identifying appropriate data sources for desirable indicators. In this case, developing indicators requires creative use of available data. For example, several variables can be combined into a quality of life index; when considered alone the data may indicate one condition state, but when considered jointly the data may suggest trade-offs that occur. 

The UK experience suggests that disaggregating traditional transportation statistics by geography or socioeconomic group could be an effective method for analyzing social equity (29). Such an analysis would require census data (demographics, geopolitical 19 boundaries) and available transportation statistics. A Geographic Information System (GIS) could also aid in such an analysis.

Environmental Justice (EJ) and Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) policies are the most common ways that US agencies address social equity, through consideration of the local context and an extensive public involvement process. More comprehensive assessment methodologies are needed. Health Impact Assessment (HIA) (described in detail in Chapter 5) is an example of such a method, and is starting to be used for transportation planning efforts in both the US and abroad.