Robert Paterson

Improving compliance with state environmental regulations

This article reports on empirical tests of two theories for improving compliance with state environmental regulations. One theory argues for centralization of enforcement responsibilities with state agencies, while the other focuses on enforcement strategies, arguing for an approach that emphasizes capacity building and the social and moral bases of compliance in addition to deterrence and the threatened application of sanctions. Using evidence from North Carolina, we show that centralization does not necessarily enhance compliance, but cooperative enforcement strategies can improve the effectiveness of regulations that seek to attain performance standards. Compliance with simpler specification standards, however, can be attained just as well with easier to administer deterrent enforcement strategies based on frequent inspections and adequate sanctions.

Costs and benefits of urban erosion and sediment control: The North Carolina experience

The EPA’s new nonpoint source pollution control requirements will soon institutionalize urban erosion and sediment pollution control practices nationwide. The public and private sector costs and social benefits associated with North Carolina’s program (one of the strongest programs in the country in terms of implementation authority, staffing levels, and comprehensiveness of coverage) are examined to provide general policy guidance on questions relating to the likely burden the new best management practices will have on the development industry, the likely costs and benefits of such a program, and the feasibility of running a program on a cost recovery basis. We found that urban erosion and sediment control requirements were not particularly burdensome to the development industry (adding about 4% on average to development costs). Public-sector program costs ranged between

Integrating ecosystem services analysis into scenario planning practice: accounting for street tree benefits with i-Tree valuation in Central Texas.

2.4 and

Using Contingent Valuation in Environmental Planning

4.8 million in fiscal year 1989. Our contingent valuation survey suggests that urban households in North Carolina are willing to pay somewhere between

Putting a value on injuries to natural assets: The BP oil spill

7.1 and

Contingent valuation: Flawed logic? Response

14.2 million a year to maintain current levels of sediment pollution control. Our benefit-cost analysis suggests that the overall ratio is likely to be positive, although a definitive figure is elusive. Lastly, we found that several North Carolina localities have cost recovery fee systems that are at least partially self-financing.

Valuing shifts in the distribution of visibility in national parks and wilderness areas in the United States.

Scenario planning continues to gain momentum in the United States as an effective process for building consensus on long-range community plans and creating regional visions for the future. However, efforts to integrate more sophisticated information into the analytical framework to help identify important ecosystem services have lagged in practice. This is problematic because understanding the tradeoffs of land consumption patterns on ecological integrity is central to mitigating the environmental degradation caused by land use change and new development. In this paper we describe how an ecosystem services valuation model, i-Tree, was integrated into a mainstream scenario planning software tool, Envision Tomorrow, to assess the benefits of public street trees for alternative future development scenarios. The tool is then applied to development scenarios from the City of Hutto, TX, a Central Texas Sustainable Places Project demonstration community. The integrated tool represents a methodological improvement for scenario planning practice, offers a way to incorporate ecosystem services analysis into mainstream planning processes, and serves as an example of how open source software tools can expand the range of issues available for community and regional planning consideration, even in cases where community resources are limited. The tool also offers room for future improvements; feasible options include canopy analysis of various future land use typologies, as well as a generalized street tree model for broader U.S. application.

Unleashing the power of planning to create Disaster-Resistant communities

Abstract A problem in applying benefit-cost analysis to planning issues is the difficulty of imputing values to public goods like water quality. During the past thirty years, the contingent valuation (CV) survey method has been institutionalized as a technique for valuing these types of goods. This article traces the development of the method and summarizes recent federal guidelines. Examples from three recent studies, involving willingness to pay for nonpoint-source pollution controls, are used to illustrate issues about the technique. Considerations for planners who must undertake or evaluate CV studies are discussed.

PLANNING FOR STREET CONNECTIVITY: GETTING FROM HERE TO THERE

Stated-preference research supports

Techniques for Mitigating Urban Sprawl

17.2B in protections When large-scale accidents cause catastrophic damage to natural or cultural resources, government and industry are faced with the challenge of assessing the extent of damages and the magnitude of restoration that is warranted. Although market transactions for privately owned assets provide information about how valuable they are to the people involved, the public services of natural assets are not exchanged on markets; thus, efforts to learn about peoples values involve either untestable assumptions about how other things people do relate to these services or empirical estimates based on responses to stated-preference surveys. Valuation based on such surveys has been criticized because the respondents are not engaged in real transactions. Our research in the aftermath of the 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill addresses these criticisms using the first, nationally representative, stated-preference survey that tests whether responses are consistent with rational economic choices that are expected with real transactions. Our results confirm that the survey findings are consistent with economic decisions and would support investing at least