Ensure that full costs and benefits are assessed for each project in the watershed or bioregion, with explicit consideration of natural capital and intrinsic values
Project proponent within well-developed guidelines and with multi-stakeholder input
No mandate or requirement; time constraints, lack of adequate tools and techniques; limited resources; falling into "more research" trap
Re-evaluate cost-benefit framework; improve existing and develop new valuation tools and techniques (considering natural capital and intrinsic values); apply immediately to all public works projects; amend all environmental legislation to address explicitly full costs and benefits of projects; redirect existing economic capabilities within agencies with respect to guidelines; ensure "proponent pays"; develop tools and techniques that are focussed on action planning
Establish the watershed or bioregion as the primary unit for visioning, planning, and management for environmentally- sustainable economic development
Time constraints; lack of requirement or mandate; lack or resources; political boundaries; limited information base; availability of synthesis tools
Set target date for establishment of institutional partnership; pool resources and use volunteers; amend Provincial legislation and State Water Quality Management Plans to empower institutional structures within watersheds or bioregions; collect and analyze economic, environmental, and societal data on watershed scale (prioritize data gathering); prioritize actions within the watershed; establish geographical information system capability at watershed/bioregion level; establish locally-based roundtables on sustainable development; perform state-of-the-environment and economy reporting at the watershed level
Ensure that "best management plan" manuals and guidance documents incorporate economic and non-economic benefits and costs for affected parties (e.g. farmers, landowners, developers)
States and Provinces with multi-stakeholder input
Difficulty in assessing benefits (limited tools and techniques); slow process; know-how not there in many cases
Encourage sharing of success stories (e.g. Chesapeake Bay); perform post-project evaluation of effectiveness (such quantitative information on effectiveness can provide compelling rationale for action elsewhere); place higher priority on development of adequate tools and techniques (will have to redirect resources); encourage establishment of coalitions to move forward
Governments should demonstrate environmental leadership by fostering demand for "green" products and services
All levels of government
Lack of priority; lack of full cost pricing (true cost of paper, gasoline, etc.); pressure from industry to maintain status quo and competitiveness
Governments should establish broad policy to purchase and use "green" products and services; educate public on value of using "green" products and services; develop procurement protocol that considers environmental and economic costs; educate purchasing and procurement agents; perform environmental management audits
Governments should make greater use of economic instruments to achieve "win-win" solutions for environment and economy (e.g. tradable permits, product charges, effluent fees, user fees)
All levels of government
Politically unpopular; perception of "license to pollute"; primary emphasis on end-of-pipe, command-and-control solutions; lack of public awareness of long-term benefits (e.g. fee structures); uncompetitiveness
Focus government instruments toward prevention (e.g. gas tax, tax incentive); more focussed public education on the value, benefits, and effectiveness of economic instruments; greater emphasis on education of senior government managers and elected officials; establish programs which encourage development of "green" technologies for global competitiveness