Explore the vast range of titles available.

Addressing the problems of the twenty-first century will require new initiatives that complement traditional regulatory activities. Existing regulations, such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act are important safety nets in the United States for protecting human health and the environment. However, emerging challenges such as climate change and resource depletion require fresh approaches toward environmental stewardship and integrated problem-solving. This Community Essay describes the evolution of programs and activities at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) since 1970 toward the goal of a more resilient and sustainable society. While adhering to its historical roots in controlling pollution, it delineates how USEPA has also adopted a broader perspective on sustainability and resilience. The essay concludes with recommendations for future actions, including creative use of environmental policies and regulations, application of systems science, promotion of innovative technologies, collaboration with multiple stakeholder groups, and public communication regarding the need for sustainable environmental management.

How can our society address the complex interaction of environmental, social, and economic problems in the 21st century? We propose that federal agencies in the United States complement their existing regulatory framework with new initiatives based on the \"innovation cycle\" for sustainability. This approach includes engaging stakeholders, advancing sustainability science and systems thinking, encouraging public-private partnerships, and developing decision-support capabilities to enable sustainable and resilient solutions. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is moving in this direction through new actions defined in the agency's Strategic Plan for 2014-2018. In this Community Essay, we highlight examples of how the innovation cycle enables progress on critical issues facing USEPA and other agencies, and we argue for increased government-business collaboration, federal agency coordination, and public involvement.

When President Nixon created the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1970 he said the environment must be perceived as a single, interrelated system. We are nowhere close to achieving this vision. Jim Titus and his colleagues [1] highlight one example of where one set of regulations or permits may be in conflict with another and where regulations were crafted in the absence of understanding the cumulative impact of global warming. The issue here is how to deal with the impacts of climate change on sea level and the latter's impact on wetland polices, clean water regulations, and ecosystem services. The Titus paper could also be called `The tripping points of sea level rise'. Titus and his colleagues have looked at the impact of such sea level rise on the east coast of the United States. Adaptive responses include costly large- scale investment in shore protection (e.g. dikes, sand replenishment) and/or ecosystem migration (retreat), where coastal ecosystems move inland. Shore protection is limited by available funds, while ecosystem migrations are limited by available land use. The driving factor is the high probability of sea level rise due to climate change. Estimating sea level rise is difficult because of local land and coastal dynamics including rising or falling land areas. It is estimated that sea level could rise between 8 inches and 2 feet by the end of this century [2]. The extensive data analysis done by Titus et al of current land use is important because, as they observe, `property owners and land use agencies have generally not decided how they will respond to sea level rise, nor have they prepared maps delineating where shore protection and retreat are likely'. This is the first of two `tripping points', namely the need for adaptive planning for a pending environmental challenge that will create economic and environment conflict among land owners, federal and state agencies, and businesses. One way to address this gap in adaptive management, according to Titus et al, is for communities to develop a common vision about which lands will be protected and which lands will yield to the rising sea, similar to the way land use plans identify commercial, residential, agricultural, and conservation lands. The supplementary material in their paper (as well as a related web site suggested by the peer review process of this journal) provides maps that depict the likelihood of shore protection based on existing land use data and the assessment of the local governments. Such maps, they suggest, might be used as a starting point to promote dialogue within communities about which lands should be protected and which lands are allowed to become submerged. A second tripping point relates to conflict between existing environmental laws and their collective ability to respond to the impacts of global warming. For example, property owners are automatically issued permits for construction of hard shore-protection structures (e.g. bulkheads and revetments) without an assessment of their environmental impact. Normally, under the Clean Water Act, the impact of each permit is assessed separately, but there is a special expedited process for activities with no cumulative impact. The Corps of Engineers concluded that shore protection does not have a cumulative impact, and that might be true if shore erosion was rare and stable shores the general rule. But once we recognize that the sea level is rising, then shore erosion becomes the general rule and a cumulative impact is likely. Under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), cumulative impacts have been defined as `the impacts of an activity ``added to other past present and reasonably future actions'' regardless of who takes the other actions'. If the NEPA were actually evoked, it would considerably delay permit approvals and substantially impact the Corps of Engineers' process for issuing permits. The potential impact of sea level rise clearly requires a holistic approach to coastal management in which options for shore protection or retreats are clearly identified and where economic, ecosystem and social impacts can be clearly evaluated. At stake are both the future of wetlands that provide important ecosystem services and the safety and sustainability of our coastal communities. This is a huge challenge requiring adequate data, long-term planning, federal-state cooperation, and integration of environmental laws. The time is at hand to assess a business-as-usual response to sea level rise or to explore a more holistic and integrated approach. President Obama has said: `The threat from climate change is serious, it is urgent, and it is growing. Our generation's response to this challenge will be judged by history, for if we fail to meet it—boldly, swiftly, and together—we risk consigning future generations to an irreversible catastrophe' [3]. Though the President was talking about action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, cooperation to address the consequences of rising sea level and changing climate is just as urgent. References [1] Titus J G et al 2009 State and local governments plan for development of most land vulnerable to rising sea level along the US Atlantic coast Environ. Res. Lett. 4 044008 [2] US Global Change Research Program 2009 Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States (June 2009) [3] www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-at-UN-Secretary-General-Ban-Ki-moons-Climate-Change-Summit/

Developing scientific criteria and indicators should play a critical role in charting a sustainable path for the rapidly developing biofuel industry. The challenge ahead in developing such criteria and indicators is to address the limitations on data and modeling.

Although the world faces serious environmental, economic, and social challenges, we believe that a combination of science and innovation, effective governance, and public-private collaboration can help to overcome many of them and achieve sustainable development. Numerous government policies are now promoting sustainable management practices, while many people in the business and financial communities view sustainability as a means to reduce long-term risk, enhance competitiveness, and promote social well-being. Advances in science and technology are creating new economic opportunities and producing sustainable solutions, while expanded public access to global data and information is helping to shape business and government policies. Looking ahead, sustainability will be best pursued by building on these trends and encouraging new collaborative initiatives among governments, businesses, and the nonprofit sector. This article is an example of a collaboration that includes government, business, academic, nongovernmental, and international organizations.

Although the world faces serious environmental, economic, and social challenges, we believe that a combination of science and innovation, effective governance, and public-private collaboration can help to overcome many of them and achieve sustainable development. Numerous government policies are now promoting sustainable management practices, while many people in the business and financial communities view sustainability as a means to reduce long-term risk, enhance competitiveness, and promote social well-being. Advances in science and technology are creating new economic opportunities and producing sustainable solutions, while expanded public access to global data and information is helping to shape business and government policies. Looking ahead, sustainability will be best pursued by building on these trends and encouraging new collaborative initiatives among governments, businesses, and the nonprofit sector. This article is an example of a collaboration that includes government, business, academic, nongovernmental, and international organizations.

Considerable international efforts are underway to address water and sanitation needs in developing countries. The 2003 G8 Action Plan on water sets the right tone, but more is needed. Three activities deserve additional support and greater cooperation between government and non-government organizations. These are: immediate steps to improve health and sanitation, multilateral efforts to foster good governance, and the development of innovative financial mechanisms to make local and investment capital available for water infrastructure development. Public understanding of these three approaches is often misunderstood, as evinced by the Stakeholder Dialogue at the 2003 World Water Forum. Achieving the Millennium goals on water and sanitation requires greater public and private sector cooperation in these three areas. A significant accomplishment for the next G8 meeting would be to strengthen partnerships between public and private sectors in these areas.

How can a regulatory agency with historic roots in controlling pollution implement sustainability? How does an agency organized by individual media offices for air, water, toxics, and waste develop an integrated systems approach to environmental protection? Aligning and integrating programs is crucial for sustained environmental protection, especially in urban areas. The role of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) extends beyond setting national standards for air and water, protecting against chemical discharges, and restoring contaminated lands. The agency has the potential to become a national environmental architect by promoting research and innovation targeted at urban sustainability. To develop tools for creating a truly sustainable urban environmental infrastructure, EPA must develop approaches for adapting to potential climate change impacts on urban systems. In short, EPA needs an urban environmental strategy.