Premium
Policy Implementation and the Environmental Protection Agency: What Factors Influence Remediation at Superfund Sites?
Author(s) -
Daley Dorothy M.,
Layton David F.
Publication year - 2004
Publication title -
policy studies journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.773
H-Index - 69
eISSN - 1541-0072
pISSN - 0190-292X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2004.00071.x
Subject(s) - superfund , agency (philosophy) , environmental remediation , remedial education , remedial action , environmental planning , hazardous waste , politics , business , political science , public administration , waste management , engineering , environmental science , law , sociology , contamination , ecology , social science , biology
Since the early 1990s, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has struggled to make Superfund, the program that addresses the nation's worst hazardous waste sites, “faster, fairer, and more efficient.” Indeed, agency figures reflect substantial changes in recent years. Since 1993, over 500 Superfund sites have reached the “construction completion” stage in remediation. Comparatively, in the program's first 13 years, only 156 sites reached construction completion. This article explores why some Superfund sites are more likely to be remediated than others. We use survival analysis to empirically test three theoretical models of Superfund remedial progress: (1) Administrative Convenience/Transaction Costs; (2) Problem Severity; and (3) Political Pressure models. The results indicate that the EPA is more likely to tackle “easier” or low‐risk sites within the program, community involvement in Superfund is associated with decreased remedial progress, and remedial action is more likely to occur when political oversight is present.