Environmental Summit on the West
Phoenix, Arizona
December 4-5, 1998
Summary of Plenary and Breakout Sessions
January 1999

Preface and Table of Contents

This document contains the comments of governors and participants at the Western Governors' Association Environmental Summit on the West that was held in Phoenix, Arizona on December 4 and 5, 1998. Among other purposes, it will serve as a reference for the governors and others as revisions to and implementation of the Enlibra doctrine are considered.

The Summit opened with a plenary session during which governors and participants discussed their expectations for the meeting, the purpose of the doctrine and why new tools are needed to resolve environmental conflicts. Participants then separated into facilitated breakout sessions, each chaired by a governor or a governor's representative, to generate feedback on Enlibra. Overarching themes from the breakouts were captured by facilitators and reviewed by participants at a plenary session the following morning. Participants then separated into breakout sessions to address these themes and the implementation of the Enlibra doctrine. A closing plenary session was held that morning for breakout groups to report their key thoughts and governors to offer closing comments.

This summary was compiled by WGA staff and the facilitators from the notes taken during the breakout and plenary sessions. The facilitators' summary of themes from the first day breakout sessions is also included. Copies of this summary, the Enlibra doctrine and other related documents are available on the WGA Web site at www.westgov.org.

Closing Plenary Session, December 5
Morning Plenary Session, December 5
Facilitators' Summary - Round One Breakout Sessions
Breakout Group 1 (Orange) - Notes and Comments
Breakout Group 2 (Brown) - Notes and Comments
Breakout Group 3 (Purple) - Notes and Comments
Breakout Group 4 (Black) - Notes and Comments
Breakout Group 5 (Blue) - Notes and Comments
Breakout Group 6 (Yellow) - Notes and Comments
Breakout Group 7 (Green) - Notes and Comments
Breakout Group 8 (Red) - Notes and Comments

Closing Plenary Session

Saturday, December 4

Breakout Reports and Closing Comments

  • Governors issue an executive order - on the same day to garner media attention.
  • Implementation should be inclusive, early, and provide incentives to participate. Encourage groups to negotiate rather than litigate. Governors do something, please, that shows you are committed to Enlibra. Enlibra is a doctrine.
  • The "needs" of all the interests are legitimate. Enable all participants to participate through appropriate resources. Governors should examine successes. Technical assistance, facilitation by elected officials, meaningful recognitions, regulations should facilitate the process of moving forward. Governors should have an Enlibra facilitator in each state.
  • The role of the Governors in the process should be out in front. This is a model that would encourage moving the process forward and minimizing the judicial process. On the other hand, others emphasized the importance of the judicial process. Enlibra supports other ways to make decisions.
  • There is no absolute definition of balance, so we focused on using Enlibra as a tool. Discussed the necessity of preamble to put principles in context. Get input from others who are doing the same types of things. Examine real-life examples of successes and failures. Apply these principles by implementing a showcase.
  • A preamble or vision statement defining "for what" would be helpful. Implementation would have to come forth at the local level - but Governors, especially on the national level, offer sense of advocacy. Demonstration projects. Look at how these principles work in practice with existing processes.
  • In terms of balance, we may consider integration. In implementation there needs to be education and focus on the local level. We need to consider who pays.
  • Exchanging economic efficiency for social justice. Keep clarifying through an advisory core group. Private property rights. In terms of implementation, acknowledge existing groups "the poster child" of how it works, and put them through the media. Lend demo projects resources to get them going. Governors need to put their money where their mouth is. Pay facilitators. Training for the participants - speak to local groups. Still skeptical but willing to go along. Seek support from the Clinton administration for financial backing. Follow-up conference after we go back to our states and talk about Enlibra.
  • To move this forward we need to start today - through written communication (write about your experience). In order to legitimize this work ask Microsoft to add Enlibra to their spell checker.
  • We agree that there is a more civil way of doing things. I have noticed a lot of variety of opinion. Change happens. This meeting was brought about through necessity. We want to take a role in shaping change. We need legislatures' involvement. Enhance the environment, economy, and quality of human life. Networking - pick out two people, one you agreed with and another that you did not, and follow up with them. Even if you do not agree you may need the person you disagree with as a friend.
  • Collaboration is not necessarily consensus - it may lead to consensus.
  • Enlibra coordinators bring about on the ground processes and then come back in a year to look at them.

Morning Plenary Session

Saturday, December 5

Participant and Governor Comments

PARTICIPANT COMMENTS

  • Understand the hidden connections between things. Go for the root causes not symptoms -- so that we don't have to parachute cats.
  • With this much demand, parachutes will appear. Markets are wonderful mechanisms but they are not ends. They will not stimulate innovation. We need to stimulate innovation and actively use environmental policy to do it.
  • Additional principle -- direct commitment to environmental protection and public health. Without this we are open to skepticism
  • Missing -- the importance of public lands in shaping the heritage of the West. Even though we may disagree in their management, we all care. As Westerners we are special guardians of public lands.
  • Market solutions have solved environmental problems.
  • What is the overarching goal? Sustainability would be the overall theme.
  • Intent and implementation. The fear comes from that this is a new package, trojan horse. Just put it into process.
  • We have such a satisfaction with ourselves that we don't see the context of the discussion. The threat of the loss of open space and agriculturalists may result in the United States being an importer of food in the future. Let's solve problems, but put it in reality.
  • Set up Web sites, data bases as a follow up to make provisions. Post case studies and models.
  • A lot can be learned from the successes of the past. We need to compile a learning package that would chart a new course. Balance and stewardship emphasized.
  • In defense of the public land ranchers. There have been some abuses, but many successes. We have developed water. If we are out of business, these water sources will be gone. Unless both sides come to the table we will be gone. There are no governmental agencies that will do what the private land manager has. Who is going to take the place of the production units? Do we really want to loose the economics and the private land stewards?
  • There is a need to bridge rural and urban. This is fundamental. These life experiences lead to different perceptions of what nature is. My personal experiences with ranchers and loggers has been essential to broadening my point of view. We all, even those who work the land, have an inadequate view of how the natural system works. Collaboration opens minds. "We are all part of the meal."
  • Disenchanted with the lack of mention of property rights. Agriculture needs to be part of a successful outcome and recognition of property rights are imperative to the success of agriculture.
  • Sustainability. Crop land will remain. What we are losing are the farmers. There is one really good way to make agriculture sustainable and that is to make it profitable. I don't think this process will add to what we all ready have. What we need to do is come together and understand. Need eco-realism.

GOVERNOR COMMENTS

  • Where do we go from here? There is clearly and understandably distrust. But how do we continue this dialogue? We need a mechanism to incorporate comments and ideas. We need a larger commitment to the process of continued dialogue.
  • I have learned. Define why it is that we need to do this. In order to create the velocity to solve environmental problems we need to continue this movement. Ultimately create a balance. Polarization can create waste of resources. We need a symbol of balance and stewardship.
  • Shared environmental philosophy or doctrine. A method of achieving balance and good stewardship for the environment. Principles are pathways that time has demonstrated as successful. We did not invent them but we are giving voice to them.
  • Shared among whom? Anyone who is willing to adopt them. Lets have principles that are truly applicable. Once we have defined it, how can we spread the concept?

Facilitators Summary -- Round One Breakout Sessions

1. National Standards/Neighborhood Solutions

  • Better definitions of what we mean by national," "neighborhood, "standards," and solutions."
  • Because "neighborhoods" tend to be exclusive, may choose to use "community."
  • We need measurable standards.
  • Use local experiences to inform the national standards.
  • Standards should be objectives. Setting objectives beyond standards.
  • Standards need to be created at the right level. For instance, open space is not a national standard. There are local, state and national standards.
  • Accountability and monitoring are imperative.
  • Federal standards are necessary because sometimes the states or the locals don't do it.
  • Who represents the national interest?
  • We need to ensure the capacity of states and locals, including the availability of financial and technical resources, to solve pressing problems.
  • How do we empower the communities to come up with solutions?

2. Collaboration, not polarization

  • There is a need to define collaboration. Should it be "cooperation" instead of "collaboration?"
  • Collaboration will not work if there is not an equal balance of power.
  • Incentives to participate.
  • Collaboration cannot be a scapegoat for inaction, or another unfunded mandate. A mechanism is needed to support efforts, implementation of solutions, and monitoring.
  • Collaboration is difficult when polarization and conflict are "in the job description."
  • There is a fear by some to participate because they perceive it may limit other options.
  • Principle should not express negative but focus on efforts at consensus.
  • Representation needs to be inclusive.
  • People need adequate resources to support their participation.
  • People at the table need to be able to make commitments.
  • Clarify what the process is intended to accomplish.

3. Reward results, not programs

  • How are we going to monitor and measure? We need to create a process for implementation.
  • We should reward results, but we need to know what we are rewarding.
  • Recognize and reward existing planning efforts and collaboration on the local and national levels.
  • Reward results on the ground.
  • There should be standards for rewards so that we can make sure that we are valuing the same thing.
  • Incentives should be connected to sustainable outcomes.
  • Equity in who benefits, who pays, and who decides.
  • We should reward innovation and models that achieve results.

4. Science for facts, process for priorities

  • Emphasis on rigorous, peer reviewed natural, social, and economic science.
  • Define the process for setting priorities.
  • Science is a tool for policy making. Values and politics need to be recognized as part of the decision-making process.
  • You need to monitor and report on progress, as well as utilize principles of adaptive management.
  • Science processes need to be open and fair.
  • Set priorities then bring in the science.
  • Environmental understanding is crucial and we need investment in that education.
  • The public needs to understand what the science is telling them and realistically assess the uncertainty of the data.
  • We need to build environmental ethic through transfer of knowledge.

5. Markets before mandates

  • Sometimes the economic model isn't always valid. Markets can be damaging to people, communities, and the environment.
  • Sometimes mandates are needed to make the system work.
  • We should focus on incentives rather than markets.
  • We need markets and mandates.

6. Change a heart, change a nation

  • Issues need to be made more relevant to individuals.
  • In informing people, there needs to be a focus on where there is broad agreement, rather than letting disagreement define the issue.
  • We need to invest in long-term strategy for broad-based environmental education.
  • There needs to be an emphasis on environmental literacy in public education.
  • The collaborative process is an educational process in itself.
  • Change a heart is too emotional.

7. Recognition of costs and benefits

  • Costs and benefits need to be defined, and conceived of more holistically.
  • We need to discuss issues of sustainability. Social costs should be considered. Not every benefit can be quantifiable.
  • Local governments and citizens often have fewer resources to calculate costs and benefits effectively.
  • There is a need to recognize non-quantifiable benefits plus accumulated costs and benefits.
  • Time needs to be a greater factor in the analysis under various alternatives.
  • The concept of efficiency needs to be given more consideration.
  • Focus on risk analysis.

8. Solutions transcend political boundaries

  • Who is responsible to solve the problem if you transcend boundaries?
  • There is a need to bridge rural and urban.
  • How do international and tribal boundaries fit into these principles?
  • We need to recognize that some of our "solutions" may cause greater global issues or problems elsewhere.
  • Power and authority differences make this principle difficult to implement.
  • State leadership is needed to model this principle and provide adequate resources.
  • Need to improve coordination among agencies and branches of government.

Proposed principles

  • Continuous improvement -- innovation.
  • Precautionary Principle -- In case of doubt, first do no harm.
  • Environmental justice and/or social, economic, and environmental equity.
  • There needs to be a statement of our overall commitment to the environment.
  • Communication -- must inform people with adequate information of key issues and decisions.
  • Stimulate innovation.
  • Try to address root causes not symptoms.
  • Internalize responsibility for problems -- e.g., polluter pays.

Other issues

  • Compliance with Enlibra needs to be voluntary.
  • We need to develop a common vocabulary.
  • Economics need to be better reflected in all the principles.
  • There needs to be recognition of the relationship among principles.
  • There needs to be recognition of the context in which the principles are applied (e.g., public or private lands).
  • Regulatory processes need to be flexible, as well as more open and inclusive.
  • States also need to bring assets to the table.
  • We need to make collaborative processes more efficient through the use of technology.
  • The value of the collaborative process is the building of relationships.
  • The application of the Enlibra principles need to be evaluated at all levels.

Breakout Group 1 (Orange)

Notes and Comments

Governors: Michael Leavitt

Facilitator: Michael Dues

WGA Staff: Rich Bechtel

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4

Responses to the Enlibra Doctrine

  • We need tools. What we have now is "stranded inspiration." Lots of people are inspired by the Enlibra principles, but we don't know what to do to enact them.
  • We need balance between environmental, economic, and quality of life values. The overall goal is balance and stewardship.
  • There is virtue in having a set of principles to guide us as we work to accelerate the velocity of progress. We make progress when people make up their minds, changing people's hearts is the key.
  • We may have reached a higher order of accountability, where we can begin to rely on individual responsibility concerning environmental issues.
  • We need to clearly identify who matters in these processes, and who pays, and who decides.
  • We need mechanisms and funding to compensate for what we take through regulation.
  • Regulations must be understandable and workable.
  • Lead by example. Look to local success stories for examples.
  • Identify outstanding issues, and move toward consensus through conflict resolution.
  • We need national standards, with neighborhood solutions. The neighborhood principle is important. National standards must reflect regional conditions. This will require a robust federal, state, and local partnership.
  • There must be community accountability for implementing principles. We need methods of accountability for people to trust the process. (Historically, locals have often failed in their environmental responsibilities.)
  • Solutions must have an economic basis. We need to document the economic benefits of cleaning up the environment. We need to distribute the costs and benefits equitably. This includes bridging rural and urban interests.
  • Use grants and rewards to promote actions consistent with Enlibra principles.
  • We need forums to resolve issues, not litigation. Litigation is slow, expensive, and polarizing.

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5

Implementation: How to Talk About It

  • Pull together groups of local people to discuss ways to implement Enlibra.
  • Take Enlibra to the Federal government - - change their design.
  • Use the word "cooperation" rather than "collaboration."
  • Enlibra is a hard word to sell. What about "stewardship?"
  • Create a Web discussion group on Enlibra principles.
  • Portray Enlibra as old fashioned problem solving.
  • Start at the lowest levels with education in the schools. If kids understand Enlibra, they will empower it.
  • Build an inventory of models - - examples of success.
  • Do community based training.

Whom to Include

  • Government leaders must continue to lead the discussion.
  • We've tried for 20 years to bring polar positions to the table. Only when the middle ground comes to the table do we make progress.
  • In establishing working groups, we tend to go to the people we know (the professionals). We need to go beyond these to include the middle ground.
  • Native American tribes are a key. We need to bring them in on this.
  • We need outreach to governments abroad. This is a global issue that requires international cooperation.

Values to Bring to the Effort

  • Maintain civility in our debates. Remember that everybody has a right to be at the table.
  • Integrate hope and skepticism. We need broader application than just the West.
  • Remember that we need to secure people's basic needs (jobs) or they can't deal on this idealistic level.
  • Enlibra, and our children's needs must be placed above our own.
  • Think through how we each implement this in a complex system--personal responsibility.
  • Mutual respect is essential. We must remember that some people pay a much greater price than others for these changes. (How do we protect the individual with property interests in this?) Everybody needs to be willing to bring something to the table.
  • We've allowed ourselves to pit environmental concerns against "little" productive people -- pushing out the small producers, so that only the big can survive.
  • We must respect the cultural component as we move forward.

About our Processes

  • Time is money. Simplify and shorten processes.
  • Processes need to be open, inclusive, and transparent.
  • Provide seed funding. It's an investment.
  • Monitoring and accountability are essential. "Trust, but verify."
  • Allow alternative paths in environmental management. Reward good management alternatives, without creating loopholes. Support changes in legislation that allow innovative solutions. Focus on communities having clear environmental goals, with flexibility in how they meet goals.
  • Give equal attention to unintended consequences of environmental management policies.
  • Brief government leaders about the active roles they can play.

Additional Principles

  • Include as the first principle a clear commitment to preserve the environment.
  • Include people in design and development environmental management processes.
  • We need a global perspective. We're importing 40% of our wood, transferring environmental consequences to other countries.

Breakout Group 2 (Brown)

Notes and Comments

Governor: Jane Dee Hull represented by Maria Baier and Russell Rhoades

Facilitator: Larry Spears

WGA Staff: Bruce Flinn

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4

Identified Problems with the Current Enlibra Principles

  • The principles are too general. The devil is in the details.
  • Enlibra is generally supportable only because its principles so general.
  • Enlibra will be used as a club by the powerful to beat small constituencies.
  • Enlibra provides elements of a good vision, which is important and should not be underestimated.
  • Enlibra is a confusing blend of administrative ideas, random ideas from random minds. It is a catch-all and not systematic.
  • The Enlibra embrace of cost/benefits is dangerous due to the past manipulated applications of the analysis to the harm of the environment.
  • The federal agencies talk good, but do not embrace the Enlibra approach. They will use it as a club against other interests.
  • Enlibra implies that there is a common agreed to set of national standards, which is false. Examples include the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act, which are in limbo and abused by some during the uncertainty. These are examples of the lack of an agreed to set of national standards when the standard-setting acts are under a cloud.
  • Governors want it both ways. They want Enlibra to meet their advocacy needs, but want to gut federal environmental standards at every turn. Ultimately, they can not have it both ways. You can not rock one end of a boat. Consistency is key.
  • Enlibra fails to recognize where there are science conflicts and where there is an absence of any science at all. The principle on science naively assumes a clear distinction between science and priorities. Reality is much more complex and overlapping.
  • Enlibra fails to recognize international boundaries, tribal boundaries, cultural boundaries and scientific discipline boundaries.
  • Enlibra offends tribal governments by not including them seamlessly in the narrative and principles. They see Enlibra as a weapon in the governors' ongoing efforts to subvert tribal governments.
  • Enlibra fails to define the "middle." Who is addressed in this middle? Is this middle a compromise or is there real middle constituency? Asserting the existence of the middle by well-meaning, but naïve, governors is not the same as the reality of the middle.
  • The best for the West does not equal the best for the nation or the best for the world.

General Comments on Enlibra

  • Enlibra includes an anti-federal government tone. Enlibra viewed by a third party would recognize it as a new club used by parochial western governors to grab control from the federal government to undercut emerging national standards.
  • Enlibra should include the phrase "Recognizing the need for enforcement and compliance…" before Principles 2 and 3.
  • Federal agencies are big and need to be included in Enlibra documents with better tone. The legacy of past hostility between governors and federal agencies must be acknowledged.
  • Enlibra should ignore the past (unpleasant) and look to the future.
  • Constituencies are not the same as the public interest.
  • Recognize ecosystem restoration
  • Enlibra should recognize that there is a fundamental difference between federal regulatory agencies (EPA) and federal stewardship agencies (BLM, Forest Service). Enlibra is aimed at regulatory agencies and basically ignores the important stewardship agency function.
  • Local soil and conservation district elected officials should be acknowledged and involved.
  • Enlibra needs a set of key definitions as the end of the document for clarity and to avoid misunderstanding.
  • The existence of conflicting federal environmental goals and agencies should be addressed explicitly and proactively by the Council on Environmental Quality.
  • Cost/benefit analysis always excludes major and minor constituencies and constitutes a danger, because it is used as a selective, biased tool by governors to harm the environment.
  • It is hard to give monetary value to many important, but intangible, elements and, therefore, these elements and values are missed or ignored.
  • Enlibra is not a solution itself, but only a tool.
  • Principles 2, 4, and 6 are of paramount importance for remedying polarization.
  • Enlibra ignores that local standards may be higher than national standards. States should set higher standards than the federal government to preserve the land we love more than others. The standards function should not be left to the federal level. Governors are stupid to leave the standards function to the federal government in the Enlibra document, unless they secretly want all standards at the lowest possible levels in relation to their environment.
  • Principle 5 is vague. It must be clarified what the criteria is for when compensation is necessary.
  • Incentives are not a replacement for regulations, but a supplement to them. Incentives are important tools, but not the sole solution. Regulation provides an important floor on performance. Incentives accelerate and exceed standards.
  • Principle 7 should include the value of time to accomplish the remedial tasks, which is not monetized.
  • Enlibra needs to acknowledge the need for criteria for political evaluation of outcomes of consensus processes.
  • Emphasize the need for agreed timetables for each consensus process.
  • Emphasize the need for a clear mission and product from the start of each consensus process.
  • "Stewardship" is not a clear concept for the public. The American Farm Bureau has done extensive focus group work on this word and it does not resonate with the public. The public is confused.

Suggestions for Additional Enlibra Principles

  • Add a principle regarding full disclosure of data as a basis for Enlibra processes, particularly from industry and government.
  • Add a principle recognizing the importance of intergenerational equity, and reference intergenerational equity, particularly in the Cost/Benefit and Incentive principles.
  • Define "balance:" Does it include balance between present constituencies or broader balance that protects the environment.
  • Add a principle that recognizes adaptive management of the Enlibra principles to each unique situation.
  • The Enlibra preamble should include a recognition of the differences in constituency resources to participate in these processes. Implications of false equity of resources is harmful.
  • Add a principle regarding the application of Enlibra processes to problem prevention or mitigation before crises.
  • Acknowledge the importance of thinking about watershed/airshed regions.
  • Combine Principle 5 with 1.
  • Recognize the relationship of social and economic aspects of the environment.
  • Apply the Enlibra process to state processes as well as to federal processes.
  • Balance federal/state/local applications of the Enlibra principles.
  • Specify that the ultimate goal of Enlibra is to help species, habitat and the environment. The goal is presently vague.
  • Recognize human rights in the environment, particularly property rights. Enlibra presently omits human and constitutional rights, which are more important than environmental values. Enlibra will encourage takings and theft of private property.
  • Add evaluation to the Enlibra process. Enlibra itself should be formally evaluated at the end of a set term of years.
  • Evaluation processes are an essential component of all environmental decision processes. This evaluation must include all stakeholders.
  • There is a danger of shifting environmental harms in a local area to another geographical area with fewer environmental safeguards (i.e., another state or another country).

Comments on Enlibra Principle 1 (National Standards)

  • The standards are unclear.
  • The principle must be restated within the context of each problem.
  • The governors should coordinate the federal agencies in their jurisdictions through monthly breakfasts with the governors.
  • Higher and clearer (than federal standards) local standards are possible. Enlibra is an abdication by governors of the standard-setting process because they are weak and irresponsible and want to avoid setting standards.
  • The concept of "standards" hides a false premise that all environmental policy is pollution policy. These standards do not reflect the habitat and biodiversity elements where no standards now exist or are possible.
  • The principle fails to recognize local conditions that may not fit national standards (i.e., natural dust in Arizona is natural, but is treated as pollution.)

Comments on Enlibra Principle 2 (Collaboration)

  • Structured relationship forums are needed in each state. Governors should create an infrastructure of such forums within and outside of government, but coordinated. Governors need to bring the financial resources to support these forums.
  • The principle assumes that all important interests have present constituencies. Issues without constituencies can not be ignored, which is implied in Enlibra.
  • Enlibra needs a definition of "common good."
  • Success in collaboration is only good when all parties have equal cards. Enlibra should acknowledge the problem of later repudiation of agreements by the organizations represented and by outsiders. The problem is the authority of participant persons to bind their constituencies to the agreement.

Comments on Enlibra Principle 3 (Reward Results)

  • Enlibra does not acknowledge measurement problems and the subjectivity of the determination of what you count. "What you count counts."
  • A definition of "performance-based" is needed.
  • Some things are more easily counted and therefore distort the evaluation picture.

Comments on Enlibra Principle 4 (Science/Priorities)

  • Enlibra fails to acknowledge the validity of experience as a source of authority, separate from science. Enlibra fails to recognize that there are conflicts between science and experience. Both should be respected.
  • Science is used to discourage public participation.
  • "Dueling Science," the battle of scientists shows that there is no one science.
  • Enlibra fails to recognize academic discipline boundaries in the controversies.
  • Science is subjectivity and must be recognized as policy-relevant.
  • There is a danger of overwhelming an issue with data.
  • Enlibra fails to recognize inconclusive science situations. When science is not conclusive, we should err on the side of protecting species.
  • Bad science infects public policy processes. Peer review and checking of science is essential.
  • Use all scientific disciplines. Enlibra should recognize the importance of the application of the sciences of sociology and economics as well as biology.

Comments on Enlibra Principle 5 (Market Incentives)

  • Incentives do not apply to all situations.
  • Incentives do not replace regulation.
  • There is a need to recognize a "safe harbor" that protects against "second bites" by regulators after a party agrees.
  • Incentives are not coherent without standards based on values.
  • There is a need for a "new framework" for incentives that identifies the criteria for who receives incentives and how they are counted. (This could be a spinoff project in the Enlibra process and a role for the Enlibra Panel).
  • A different set of incentives is needed for rural and urban cases. Add non-market incentives (e.g., local pride recognition, awards, certifications, publicity). There is a need for focusing incentives to meet local markets.

Comments on Enlibra Principle 6 (Change a Heart)

  • Include recognition of local culture and customs in Principles 1 and 4.
  • Education must start locally.
  • Governors must see themselves as educators of the public.
  • Governors must understand education is not advocacy. They were elected for advocacy, but they must govern as educators, which means balanced, widely accessible, simple information and public recognition of the ambiguities and merit in opposing views.
  • Mutual education of the parties in a consensus process is one of the most important elements for agreement.
  • Recognize the role of empathy.
  • Everyone must change, including environmental advocates, due to constantly changing conditions.
  • Education can not be forced. Buy-in is essential for change.
  • Education must recognize the link of economics and social elements to the environment.
  • Education must acknowledge the fears of loss of both biodiversity and cultural values.

Comments on Enlibra Principle 7 (Costs/Benefits)

  • Not only money is involved in sound cost/benefit analysis.
  • Cost data can not be easily applied to the environment.
  • We need a definition of what health is worth, and how to express this beyond money.
  • Cost/benefit analysis is a tool, and not a substitute to decisions and choices. It informs. It does not dictate.
  • Cost/benefit analysis must clarify to whom the costs will be applied. Costs may mean sacrifices to one and adjustments to others.
  • A ratio model should replace cost/benefit analysis.
  • Cost/benefit analysis should recognize the element of time.
  • Cost/benefit is not the same as cost effectiveness. Enlibra should use cost effectiveness after setting the standards. Cost/benefit analysis should be used for setting standards.

Comments on Enlibra Principle 8 (Boundaries)

  • Enlibra fails to acknowledge cultural boundaries, tribal boundaries, international boundaries, and scientific discipline boundaries.
  • Enlibra reflects cultural elitism, ignoring rural and blue collar groups.
  • Enlibra should recognize the problems of transboundary approaches in removing power from local areas.
  • Encourage the standardization of standards across boundaries.
  • We need state and county leadership for advocating regional solutions.

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5

Practical Steps to Remedy Current Distrust of Enlibra

  • Governors should acknowledge in Enlibra that governors are not neutral convenors, but advocates.
  • Governors should explicitly agree to abide by the outcome of agreement processes.
  • Governors should act consistently within the West. Constituencies can not agree to participate in a process in one state, if that means harming their position in a neighboring hostile state.
  • Governors presently urge Enlibra on others, but fail to bind themselves to use Enlibra principles.
  • Governors should issue executive orders in each state binding all state agencies and linking executive agency leader compensation and recognition to Enlibra implementation.
  • Governors should formally reaffirm their commitment to national standards and stop undercutting national standards (Endangered Species Act) in congressional processes.
  • Governors should make a public acknowledgment of the environmentalists as their constituencies and recognizing their legitimacy and credibility in public discussion.
  • Governors must acknowledge past successes (e.g., Flaming Gorge Dam) in their jurisdictions and current processes.
  • Governors must provide resources to equalize the positions of parties at the table. Some constituencies with important views can not afford participation financially.
  • Governors should acknowledge the danger of co-opting constituencies in consensus processes.
  • Governors should convene heads of all federal agencies in their states for regular meetings together to force coordination of the application of federal policies.
  • Governors should make a public anti-theft statement that the purpose of Enlibra is not to steal property and to express a willingness to pay for what the public takes from private landowners.
  • Governors should convene periodic gatherings of constituencies, and provide state-by-state breakout groups for consultation during these meetings. These meetings are also valuable because they allow individuals from organizations to meet together (without attribution) to learn, which helps their organizations to understand better.
  • Governors went East to announce Enlibra (through columnist Broder) as an end-run to try to force West constituencies to accept Enlibra. This is manipulative and deceptive. Be open about your strategy in the West.
  • Governors should be committed to visible and consistent enforcing of a "no-end-run" rule on process participants, even the governor's friends. This will strengthen the integrity of the Enlibra process.
  • Governors should articulate how success will be measured.

Ideas for Implementing Enlibra

  • Measure the success of Enlibra by setting criteria like levels of public participation and resulting higher standards.
  • Recognize current (in progress) processes in each state.
  • WGA should certify state processes as "Enlibra Projects."
  • Governors should convene processes as the request of a party.
  • Governors should issue Enlibra executive orders in each state.
  • Governors should recognize the existence of environmental groups in the executive order.
  • Governors should be cautious and implement Enlibra one agency at a time.
  • Legislatures should review the governor's budgets by the criteria of Enlibra implementation efforts.
  • State agencies should develop a written inventory of Enlibra policies in the state.
  • WGA and each governor should create a recognition program for "Stewards of the Land" with public visibility and funds to recognize farmers and ranchers.
  • Governors should insist on inclusion of marginal, small interests in processes.
  • Governors should talk to their congressional delegations to get endorsement and understanding of Enlibra, so the state leadership is coordinated for Enlibra.
  • Link Enlibra to executive agency quality management award programs.
  • Create a state Enlibra office in each state.
  • Convene town hall meetings before each initiative to get public education going.
  • Include local government leaders in processes.
  • Keep public meetings early and small in size to promote participation.
  • Create a state Enlibra fund to provide grants for joint projects by opposing constituencies to encourage Enlibra activities.
  • Create an Enlibra Board of constituency representatives to oversee and encourage the development of Enlibra.
  • Governors should link Enlibra to the U.S. Institute at the Udall Center.
  • Use county leaders to identify issues needing consensus processes.
  • Governors should consult with the state judicial system leaders to develop judicial deference to consensus processes and include consensus processes in "exhaustion of remedies" standards. Provide for a cooling off period, like marriage counseling, before litigation.
  • During a consensus process, provide an interim solution to minimize damage during the process, like a temporary injunction mechanism within Enlibra.
  • Recognize ripeness issues. Not all issues are ripe for consensus. Issues may need the gun-at-the-head for success.
  • Do Enlibra before crises occur.
  • Revise the Endangered Species Act to make it a positive reward system.
  • Equalize the resources of parties in the process.

Breakout Group 3 (Purple)

Notes and Comments

Governor: John Kitzhaber

Facilitator: Chris Carlson

WGA Staff:Shaun McGrath

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4

Discussion of the Principles

The group began by prioritizing which Principles to discuss first given the limited time for the break-out. The group chose to discuss principles 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 (in that order), and also discussed the need for a preamble and a few new principles.

Overall Themes

  • The group emphasized the importance of the interrelationship of the principles. They believe that the context, as well as the particular issue itself, will have great significance as to how the principles relate and are applied.
  • It was suggested that the framing of the principles be more positive statements, rather than using either/or type wording, such as "Collaboration, Not Polarization"

Common themes that emerged from discussing the individual principles

Principle 1. National Standards, Neighborhood Solutions

  • Public lands -- there was a question whether this principle was written with public lands in mind, and strong concern voiced if this principle were to apply to public lands management. It was suggested that a separate principle be developed that would apply to public lands issues and their unique set of problems.
  • National standards are more appropriate for some issues, state or local standards for others.
  • In developing 'Neighborhood Solutions,' it is important to define what "neighborhood" includes, and ensure that the solutions are relevant to local governments and local citizens.

Principle 3. Reward Results, Not Programs

  • The rewards must be appropriate; the incentives (for rewards) must also be appropriate
  • Federal laws create huge disincentives
  • Encourage innovation.
  • WGA needs to provide models for rewards and incentives.

Principle 4. Science for Facts, Process for Priorities

  • There were two suggestions for rewording: In the title, it is not 'Process for Priorities' so much as 'Process for Deciding on Policies.' They also recommended that the last sentence be reworded to clarify that it is the role of the authorized policy makers to make the final decisions; not the 'interested stakeholders.' "There comes a time in the collaborative process when the interested stakeholders AUTHORIZED POLICY MAKERS must evaluate the scientific evidence on which there may be disagreement and make difficult policy decisions."
  • Need for wordsmithing - clarify "peer review" for science.
  • There needs to be acknowledgment that good science is an important tool for good decisionmaking.

Principle 5. Markets Before Mandates

  • There were suggestions for rewording this principle, because mandates are important as a backstop, and should therefore not be completely eliminated (i.e. "replaced.") Change the wording in the subtitle as follows: "Replace Command and Control with Economic Incentives SHOULD BE USED Whenever Appropriate AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO COMMAND AND CONTROL."
  • Implementation -- WGA should provide information about market-based tools and how they can be applied.
  • Rewards and incentives need to take into account how to address the relationship between public and private lands, and the problems that arise on sites of mixed ownership (public/private checkerboard). Additionally, strong concern was expressed that this principle should not apply to public lands.

Principle 6. Change a Heart, Change a Nation

  • The group questioned whether the last sentence ["One important way for government to promote individual responsibility is by rewarding those who meet their stewardship responsibilities, rather than imposing additional restrictions on their activities."] belonged under this principle or under 3 or 4.
  • Issues need to be made more relevant to individuals.
  • We need to find a way to build public understanding and appreciation for those aspects of an issue where there is broad agreement. It is now often the case that the areas of disagreement (which may be relatively small in comparison to the areas of agreement) control the media's attention and policy maker's attention, thus stymying efforts on making improvements in those areas where there is agreement.
  • Implementation -- Governors should undertake a campaign for "environmental literacy" in public education.

Principle 7. Recognition of Costs and Benefits

  • This principle needs to incorporate the concept of "life cycle" costs and benefits, i.e. costs and benefits must be evaluated for the whole system, a holistic perspective.
  • The impacts on the resource base and environmental efficiency should be added to the factors that need to be assessed and considered.
  • Need to look at the capacity and mechanisms available to local government and private landowners for calculating costs and benefits.

Missing principles

The group discussed the need for the following principles in addition to those already included in the WGA resolution:

  • The group emphasized the need for development of a preamble which would set an overall tone for the principles and place up front a statement of commitment to the environment. The group agreed that the preamble should express support and commitment to "social, economic and environmental equity," which includes the concept of environmental justice. The preamble should also acknowledge the importance of public lands in the West and the role of private land ownership. The preamble should also make a statement about the need for citizen involvement, particularly from the local level, and should state that regulatory flexibility does not eliminate the need for regulatory compliance.
  • Somewhere, the principles (possibly a new principle?) should state that the development of rules by federal and state governments needs to be done more openly and collaboratively.
  • Environmental Justice needs to be addressed -- either in the preamble (see above), or perhaps through a principle for "social, economic, and environmental sustainability/ equity."
  • A separate principle needs to be developed that addresses the unique issues involved with public lands.

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5

Discussion of Implementation

  • The term 'Enlibra' was created as a symbol for stewardship and balance. We need to further work to define 'stewardship' and 'balance.'
  • We need to establish a transition team to incorporate the changes to the Principles that we have discussed.
  • We need to see who else is already incorporating these ideas, and create a repository of examples/models/success stories. Also need to gather examples of failures which allowed thinking outside the box.
  • We need to reach out to other groups.
  • We need to hold another meeting.
  • The governors need to find the 'touchstones' in the federal government to ensure their participation in implementing the Principles.
  • A major problem with getting local, grassroots people involved is money.
  • Need to establish western pilot projects.

Breakout Group 4 (black)

Notes and Comments

Governor: Jim Geringer

Facilitator: James Walsh

WGA Staff: Rich Halvey

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4

National Standards, Neighborhood Solutions

  • Rural communities want an opportunity to participate in the process, but not necessarily local control.
  • There needs to be a demonstration that locals are competent to handle problems.
  • There is a need to minimize states competition with each other.
  • Standards should not always be quantitative.
  • There is a need for national standards because of border/transport issues.
  • National standards should represent a floor.
  • National standards cannot be a substitute for stronger state standards.
  • Standards may have different meanings depending on a specific area.
  • The principle should not preclude the involvement of regulatory agencies even at a local level.
  • Some issues do not merit national standards.
  • The concept of neighborhood has to include levels below the state level.
  • National standards should not stifle innovation.
  • The process by which standards are set is critical and must be well thought out.
  • Resources to implement the standards should be provided.
  • Decisions need to be crafted at the local level.
  • There is a need to improve on national processes.
  • There will be a loss of credibility if local standards are seen as a substitute for federal standards.
  • There needs to be a focus on the neighborhood because that is where the problem exists.
  • The concept of neighborhood can include a larger geographic area depending on the issue being addressed.
  • There needs to be a way to deal with asymmetry and to find new ways to support ad hoc citizen efforts.
  • There needs to be a recognition that neighborhood solutions can have impacts beyond the immediate neighborhood.
  • Locals need the proper authority/control of the process.
  • After a solution is implemented, there needs to be feedback on how well it is doing.
  • In order to fully realize the concept of neighborhood solutions, legislatures have to eliminate laws limiting a state's ability to adopt different standards.
  • National standards do not always work for all situations. They can learn from neighborhood solutions.
  • There is a need to debate the applicability of performance based versus prescriptive standards.
  • There is a need to consider that standards may need to be tailored to different areas of the country because of differences in geography, topography, climate, population density.

Collaboration Not Polarization

  • Requires an informed and respectful constituency.
  • Must consider when collaboration becomes capitulation.
  • There is a need to address whether the outcome is meaningful.
  • Collaboration promotes understanding on both sides and can work well to solve problems.
  • Successful groups define consensus for their processes.
  • Collaboration is founded on the idea of a shared vision.
  • Collaboration is the result of a process. Polarization represents a comfortable position for a respective interest.
  • People can change their views given an appropriate process.
  • We should not be intimidated by the idea of polarization. It allows people to say what they really think about an issue.
  • Collaboration will be limited where there is not a common vision.
  • The process needs to be guided to focus on the problem.
  • Collaboration does not necessarily imply consensus; it does function to narrow understanding.
  • Collaboration causes people to hear a wide range of differing opinions.
  • Collaboration can define limits to an agency's ability to negotiate.
  • People need to be empowered to make decisions.
  • Processes do not always have an equal give and take because of resource differences among the participants.
  • One of the roles of government is to catalyze collaboration.
  • Government can facilitate the process to provide collaboration.
  • There is a need to separate wants from needs.
  • The consensus process can force people to listen.
  • Trust is fundamental.
  • Information is based on trust.
  • How do we address issues in concert with everything else that is going on?
  • Trust must be built over time.
  • There is a need to always reassess, amend as necessary and continue to move forward.
  • People who are part of the process have the responsibility to communicate with similar constituents who are not actively involved in order for the process to be encompassing.
  • There is a need to honor the concept of collaboration throughout the entire process.
  • The participation of environmental groups is critical but often lacking. There must be incentives provided to keep them engaged.
  • Collaboration can cause limitations to the balance of differing viewpoints.
  • All parties must demonstrate good faith throughout the process.
  • Collaboration is not the same as mediation. Mediation means there has to be a deal.
  • Collaboration is not the process currently used for gaining comments.

Reward Results, Not Programs

  • The current system is not focused on objectives.
  • This is the most important principle because it drives the others.
  • People need to be educated on goals.
  • Regulations need to allow results oriented products.
  • Regulations too often focus on the process.
  • Having a plan does not ensure implementation or tracking.
  • There is a need to determine that what was promised is being done and what is being done is sufficient.
  • Value/judge results, not process.
  • Define the outcomes being sought in order to establish a shared vision.
  • There is a need to focus on results.
  • The monitoring process should be more active, not just reporting and measurement.
  • Strategic planning must replace bean counting.
  • Make the right thing easy and the wrong thing hard.

Markets Before Mandates

  • There is a need to create better markets.
  • People are willing to pay for a better environment if they understand how.
  • There are institutional impediments to communities acting collectively.
  • It is not always easy to come up with funds to create a better environment.
  • The governors should consider changing the title of this principle-maybe use incentives instead of markets.
  • The government interferes with the market system working.
  • Regulations stifle innovation.
  • How can markets be created where they don't exist?
  • There is a need to connect land managers to the process.
  • People make choices based on unreal cost (full cost).
  • Mandates can actually create markets.
  • We are really after sustainability.
  • People need to see the benefit before they will pay.

Change a Heart, Change a Nation

  • The title may be too vague.
  • Does not mention the need for information.
  • To make this work, current environmental auditing laws need to be repealed.
  • We need to work to create awareness for the long term.
  • We should consider melding Principle 6 with Principle 4.
  • Science can be seen as an objective educational component.
  • Everything is policy until it becomes practice.
  • There is no stewardship without stewards.
  • Educational needs are more targeted.
  • There is a need to understand why a particular solution was chosen and the stewardship is rewarded.
  • People react more positively to positive reinforcement.
  • It is important to address the feelings of people. This will lead to better results.
  • Realization will come in a variety of ways.
  • We must bring a greater consciousness to individual choices.
  • There is a need to get people to understand the individual impacts they are having on the environment.
  • An example was provided where the storm drains emptying into the Chesapeake Bay were labeled resulting in a substantial reduction in the amount of waste being poured into them.
  • Politicians must be educated too.
  • We must not let larger problems go unregulated.
  • We must identify benchmarks.
  • The Planet Texas example was mentioned as a process that led to more collaboration and civility.
  • There is a need to clarify some of the descriptive text associated with the principle.
  • Environmental understanding is crucial.
  • No time frame or scale is implied.

Recognition of Benefits and Costs

  • Social costs should be considered.
  • There is a need to fully recognize the benefits side of the equation.
  • There is a need to appropriately calculate costs.
  • The analysis should focus on risk.
  • Recognize that not every benefit has a quantifiable cost and not every cost has a quantifiable benefit.

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5

Group Emphasis

  • Change "reward" results to "value or judge" results.
  • There were not enough positive statements about the advantages of markets.
  • It needs to be clearer that the regulatory process must also encourage collaboration.
  • Some market mechanisms are not working because of subsidies or externalities.
  • "Tragedy of the Commons" - private ownership can improve markets.
  • We should have a study to look at western federal systems having disincentives for conservation. There should be financial incentives to do the right thing and the minimization of institutional disincentives.
  • We should create new accountability mechanisms.
  • The principles are best used to guide discussions.
  • The principles should be applied to real issues.

Potential New Principles

  • There needs to be an overt commitment to protection of the environment and public health.
  • Focus on the health of both urban and rural communities.
  • There need to be mechanisms to keep open space.
  • Environmental protection should not be to the exclusion of other values (e.g., property rights).
  • We should manage for resource sustainability.
  • There needs to be a preamble for the principles. The preamble should be a vision statement used to help promote the market idea.
  • There needs to be a commitment to simplicity and clarity.
  • There needs to be a balance between competing interests with competing objectives.
  • Environmental health, enhanced economic productivity, and increased quality of community and life are what the principles are designed to do.

Implementation Issues

  • Agencies need to recognize the principles and apply them.
  • There needs to be a measure of how we will know when we have arrived.
  • There needs to be a way of translating the vision into reality.
  • Local people need to take a leadership role.
  • There need to be changes in some laws to allow for community based, consensus driven positions.
  • There should be positive and negative awards for projects.
  • Implementation must occur from the bottom up.
  • We should encourage demonstration projects to use the principles or look at existing projects which have already used the principles.
  • Existing command and control programs should be minimized so that this doesn't become another layer on top of them.
  • States should create a fund to support local collaborative projects.
  • Define the appropriate role for community based organizations.
  • This needs to be integrated as a way of doing business.
  • The Governors have to get out in front of the effort and promote it where possible.
  • We have to identify the limitations that can result due to corporate fiduciary responsibility.
  • Everyone has a role to play.
  • Every player has to have equal exposure.

Breakout Group 5 (Blue)

Notes and Comments

Governors: Tony Knowles and Tauese Sunia represented by Jim Ayers and Jan Lipsen

Facilitator: Sara Flitner

WGA Staff: Shelley Nolde

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4

General comments related to more than one principle

  • Concerned about the capacity of the states (intellectual, governmental, and organizational) to carry out the principles. Others think this applies to the federal government as well
  • Concerned about the political will and dollars to carry out Enlibra
  • People will be looking for their "words" (property rights, national interests in public lands, etc.) in the principles
  • The American flag needs to be on the podium at WGA meetings along with state flags

Principle #1 - National Standards, Neighborhood Solutions

  • Broaden framework of all decisions beyond narrow interests
  • Independent compliance and effectiveness auditing must be used to determine if standards are being met
  • Clarify roles of levels of government, particularly local/county representatives
  • Need local solutions to problem of lack of legal access to public lands
  • Federal mandates often leave out local expertise
  • Process must always be inclusive - use existing examples of what works
  • Recognize national interests in local decisions
  • Avoid tyranny of majority - manage natural resources specifically, not generically
  • The word "community" is more diverse and inclusive, use it instead of "neighborhood"
  • Community decisions could utilize federal technical assistance and vice versa.
  • State/feds must set priorities - cross boundaries; provide technical assistance
  • Prefer the word "Involvement" instead of "Solutions"

Principle #2 - Collaboration, Not Polarization

  • Structure of most decision-making processes doesn't encourage real community involvement
  • Need local land use plans developed collaboratively and locally
  • Look at collaboration first not after everything else has failed
  • Building relationships - encourages sustainable solutions
  • Identify common ground - collaboration won't work without it
  • Shared vision and managing expectations are both important
  • Decide how to measure success (consensus or not)
  • Need better ways to engage parties
  • Enlibra is new paradigm
  • Feds are committed to new perspective
  • Collaboration does not make "good press" - need to educate the media
  • Need rewards for collaboration
  • Need ground rules (e.g., respect) and common language
  • Work on easy projects first to build relationships and trust; then you can do harder projects
  • Need to consider property rights; need to respect what all interests bring to the table
  • Fair and equal representation of various perspectives are critical
  • Buy-in from all parties is essential
  • "One-issue" parties can stop process
  • Need criteria to evaluate what's appropriate for Enlibra
  • Laws can be too inflexible to effectively use collaborative processes
  • Must communicate success
  • Must not attempt collaboration if decisions are already essentially made (i.e., a "done deal")
  • "Wolf in sheep's clothes" - is action the true intent of party?
  • Hard to deal with bad press
  • Compromise is imperative (not always equal)

Principle #3 - Reward Results, Not Programs

  • Need measurable outcomes
  • Establish indicators for measuring outcomes and progress toward the outcomes
  • We like incentives, not penalties

Principle #4 - Science for Facts, Process for Priorities

  • Need methods for assessing science and collaborating on what is acceptable baseline data (peer review)
  • Use professional societies to help with the science, but use them with caution
  • Distinguishing between science and values or emotions is important

Principle #5 - Markets Before Mandates

  • Language is unclear (members of the group were unsure about the meaning of the principle)
  • Support cost incentives over "command/control"
  • Numeric performance standards vs. technology-based standards
  • There is no one-size application/solution for all problems solutions supported by market-driven incentives are sustainable
  • Broaden incentives to include voluntary participation
  • There should be incentives for technology/action that exceed standards

Principle #6 - Change a Heart, Change a Nation

  • There is a need for dollars, access, and training for communities about how to participate in collaborative processes
  • Be careful about language; I don't like the "change a heart" because it sounds too "enviro" and I'm concerned about what is being taught in the schools
  • Incorporate ecology/science education (value-neutral) in public schools
  • Governors must support broader education and include variety of disciplines in natural resource decisions

Principle #7 - Recognition of Costs and Benefits

  • Ensure that cumulative effects are considered
  • Recognize environmental limits
  • Hard to quantify inherent value of air and biodiversity
  • Risk analysis (cost vs. benefit) should be done
  • Aesthetic values must be considered
  • Must consider accepting short-term pain for long-term gain

Principle #8 - Solutions Transcend Political Boundaries

  • Must have empowered decision-makers at table, especially from state agencies
  • Look at watersheds as a way to cross boundaries
  • This is the toughest of the principles to implement
  • Success depends on leadership and the distribution of power. Stakeholders need to share in the power

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5

General Comments

  • Must not lose momentum

must be topic at next Governors meeting

use of web site

corporation involvement

attorneys general

county commissioners

  • NACo is a key organization
  • Each state should have a core group to work on implementation
  • Need to have local workshops

Additional Principles

  • Incorporate the precautionary principle into #4 (science)

Property Rights Discussion

  • Property rights need to be clearly discussed. Not sure where topic fits, but must be addressed at every step. The term is referenced in the U.S. Constitution
  • Perhaps write a preamble which talks about private property, commitment to environment, etc. Talk about property, then rights derive from the property
  • Property values are also an important component of discussion
  • If we want principles to apply globally (universally), must be careful about being too specific about U.S. property rights concepts
  • Preamble is critical
  • Property rights "to do what" are key to implementing Enlibra
  • Enlibra as the fulcrum balancing public and private lands and rights
  • Property owners are asking "what outcome do you want?" Then, we will conform, but want to determine ourselves HOW we achieve the goals
  • Maintain customs and cultures, local people making local decisions and providing input when decisions are made at higher levels
  • Property stewardship vs. rights (different values in American Samoa and with Indian Tribes)
  • Property rights is not about doing whatever they want, rather that if regulations take something away they are compensated
  • "Property interest" is new principle [should be a new Enlibra principle]. Must be addressed carefully to cover rights, stewardship, cultures, etc. "Assessing the issue of interests in discussions about environmental issues"
  • Involve all those with legitimate interests
  • If we can intermingle the concept of property rights in all of the principles, that's ok. Otherwise need a separate principle.
  • Need property rights discussed for marketing - to get buy-in. Not everyone understands the importance of the issue.
  • Don't get too specific on property rights IF it would limit the applicability of the principles.
  • Put the two most volatile issues (paranoias from the enviros and the business folks) right up front in a preamble:

1. A healthy environment is necessary (words from the "change a heart" principle)

2. Property rights.......

  • The property rights issue is inherent in the principles already
  • The over-riding principle is stewardship, then the implementation may be different on different ownerships
  • Could change #7 to recognize rights, costs and benefits

Implementation

  • Need to focus on Enlibra process
  • Governors need to say how they are going to change the way they do business; make Enlibra real -WALK THE TALK
  • Principles should focus on the public/private interface - where issues overlap
  • Need to explicitly mention tribes in documents, and better involve them in discussions
  • Tribes need to be involved; it's a two way street, and boundaries need to be crossed
  • Governors need to start right away identifying and publicizing success stories
  • Do a case study of a current landmark decision. Use case study methodology. Apply the principles to get different outcomes
  • Produce a book of examples
  • Need media, excitement. Use a demonstration on a high profile project to test principles. Has to be "winnable." Maybe not public lands. Should involve a Federal law or action
  • Need to move forward, but also need to incorporate all the work from this meeting. Governors are concerned about how to do this
  • If we try to make it happen overnight, it will fail. It will take time to implement properly.
  • Each Governor should pick (at least)

1. One example of a good project and write it up; disseminate it

2. A new project to serve as an example

  • Don't limit it. Have the Governors recognize all efforts. Recognition is critical, and dollars are nice too
  • Need info on the projects to be readily accessible (including contact points). National web site and data base
  • Need action items

- for Governors

- for all participants

  • Participants have special responsibilities to

- publicize [Enlibra]

- pat Governors on the back for taking risks

  • Universities also have a special role to play in educating folks about Enlibra
  • We are riding the bike as we're building it
  • WGA should form a speakers' pool to spread the word
  • Need to use network telecommunications to link efforts and publicize
  • Local efforts as "pilots"
  • Governors should make facilitators available to help local efforts. Bottom up is the best way. Lots of efforts rather than one big one
  • Outside facilitators are crucial especially for start-up. Governors could help fund this.
  • Need a coordinating agency in each state - a point of contact. Perhaps in Governor's office. Publicize who is the point of contact
  • WGA should seek PUBLIC [i.e., vocal] support by the Administration, federal agencies and Congress
  • Governors need to reach out to environmental organizations
  • Need a follow-up conference (like in 1 year) where projects are presented
  • Enviros need to talk to their national boards
  • Need state employees to participate (folks from the trenches), not just appointed officials because it folks from the trenches issue the permits and work directly with local folks
  • Governors could invite the national environmental groups to their meeting in February at NGA to open dialogue
  • Governors could encourage the incorporation of Enlibra into ICBEMP (Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Plan)
  • Encourage state agencies to use principles in land planning.
  • Winning is when standard are exceeded not just "met"

Breakout Group 6 (Yellow)

Notes and Comments

Governors: Bill Janklow

Facilitator: George Seperich

WGA Staff: John Leary

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4

General comments

Initially the group wondered about Enlibra what was it? Was it a doctrine, a philosophy or a process. Many felt that it was important to resolve this question before continuing the discussions. While the question was not resolved to everyone's satisfaction, most agreed that Enlibra needed a preamble that conveyed a strong sense of concern for the environment and a statement of purpose. The tide of discussion then turned to the individual points or tenets in Enlibra.

Discussion of principles

Enlibra tenet #1: The appropriateness of the words, national standards, was questioned. Suggestions to replace the words with national goals or principles were posited by the group. Similar questions arose about the word national and how all encompassing would be the constituency of this word? For example, some felt that in working with natural resource issues though the impact was national, especially on public lands, the neighborhood was able to respond better and more often than any national constituency. Furthermore, to some the word national implied federal agencies with overlapping jurisdictions and no mechanism to resolve these overlaps. Others felt that time constraints accompanying federal agency mandates served as real restrictions in issue discussion and potential conflict resolution.

Enlibra tenet #2: Some individuals felt that the word collaboration carried too many negative connotations. They suggested the substitution of the word cooperation. Several individuals provided examples of attitudinal changes within their federal agencies as well as the feeling that their agency would be comfortable with applying these principles if they lead to more productive and frequent dialogue. Others felt that the command and control mentality was too hard to relinquish by those possessing it.

Enlibra tenet #3: Some felt that process and programs take time and this could be good and bad. Good because relationships were established but bad because of the time and expense involved. To this end they wondered if some application of information technology would be possible to speed up the process. However, no concrete suggestions emanated from the discussion beyond the use of web pages or chat sites to encourage participation.

Enlibra tenet #4: Again the need to use technology to speed or advance the process was advocated to encourage action, results and decisions. This is essential, if national standards must be met at the neighborhood level. Perhaps this process would be established to encourage negotiation, rather than litigation.

Enlibra tenet #7: Command and control has carried the environmental problem resolution process as far as it can go. Progress has been made, probably because of national standards, but a new approach is needed. Enlibra could be the answer to applying cost/benefit milestones or goals. It certainly encourages decision making and problem resolution at levels below the federal government. As states become more sophisticated and prepared to deal with complex environmental issues, they may also be ready to work out solutions without putting some constituencies out-of-business or pass the problem on to a neighboring state. This is especially true for the public lands issue. Regardless of who does the decision making, long-term effects on the environment and public health need to be considered also.

Enlibra tenet #8: Many felt that boundaries were not always geographic. We need to consider cultural boundaries, i.e., the Indian communities and other minorities, in the decision making process. Other boundaries exist in the federal government among multiple agency disputes. There is no extant mechanism to encourage common decision-making between multiple agency participants. This means the Federal Advisory Committee Act may be a significant deterrent to federal participation in putting into place the Enlibra principles regardless of the dedication and determination its employees. More grass root and partnering efforts need to be encouraged. Seek out, identify, apply and promulgate successful applications of Enlibra or Enlibra-like like projects. We were reminded to never forget the stakeholders. They must be at the table before successful partnering will occur.

Wrap up comments, day one

Finally, the group returned the general meaning of Enlibra. They like the thoughts it expressed, though, if asked, they might have chosen different words. It is apparent almost all agreed -- that something needs to be done. A breakout session straw poll revealed that perhaps 90% of the participants would use Enlibra. But the big question remained how would Enlibra be implemented?

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5

Issues

A strong issue that arose early, probably as a consequence of the morning Plenary session, was the issue of public land production rights and private property rights. In the spirit of the previous days discussion it was felt that the issue should be raised, but rather than debate whether rights or privileges were involved, it was agreed that the application of Enlibra principles would help. All agreed that a definite need for balance was necessary balance between management and utilization. However, balance needs to be defined before discussion or application could proceed. The group was not sure if truth was in the middle between extremes and resorted to science and economics to help define balance for another day.

Implementation of Enlibra

Implementation of Enlibra: begins with who. The group felt that all or as many possible stakeholders as possible should be involved in the implementation processes advocated by Enlibra. However, because of the demand to be everywhere technology should be employed, such as Web sites, etc, to garner the fullest possible dialogue.

In addition, incentives to participate in the entire process, rather than just litigation, should be implemented. Incentives should be greater than the gain to be derived from no action at all or to seek recourse in the courts. They should encourage all to participate and recognize that public money may have to be used to compensate some for their lost rights. But public money should not be used to simply prolong the problem depending on attrition to solve the problem through withering participation. At present, there is more to be gained by going to court and winning a case against a federal agency than to be gained by negotiating in good faith. Incentives should be balanced. If you do not polarize some of the constituents, such as industries, they may be willing to provide resources or to pay to participate.

Everyone should commit to Enlibra's principles, but the group felt that it was essential for the governors to assume a lead role. Certainly, we need federal agency buy in, along with individuals, but it is important for someone to start.

The governors should appoint a particular Enlibra person on their staffs; or initiate an executive order to implement Enlibra in their states; or convene a state meeting similar to this assembly to promulgate, refine and hopefully, implement Enlibra. Regardless of the approach, at least identify successful applications of Enlibra or Enlibra-like principles and share with all within and without their states. It was agreed that all must work to make Enlibra work.

Finally, Enlibra is a doctrine whose tenets are worth supporting.

Breakout Group 7 (Green)

Notes and Comments

Governor: Gary Johnson

Facilitator: Jim Kunde

WGA Staff: Paul Orbuch

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4

Principle #1 - National Standards - Neighborhood Solutions

  • The term "standard" is questionable, how about "national objectives."
  • The national standards are not the problem, the problem comes in applying them.
  • Add to the principle "regional sensitivity."
  • Local involvement in the decision making is especially important, since they end up "paying for it".
  • National standards should be incentive based.
  • Accountability of locals in the process needs to be defined.
  • Standards and guidelines need to be tailored to the Western States.
  • National standards can have an "Eastern bias," and may not account for peculiar local conditions.
  • National standards can be the floor, but locals can go beyond them. When this happens, it's important to balance collaboration efforts with "neighbors."
  • Need clarity on "resources at risk," need to customize approach with federal standards and benchmarks.
  • There needs to be a commitment of resources "downstream" to provide for monitoring and measuring.
  • National standards can dictate solutions and limit possibilities.
  • States must maintain a primacy for local solutions to come about (state funding needed for support).

Principle #2 - Collaboration, not Polarization

  • Need the agreement of the institutions for collaboration - not just the ones at the table, or, at least, ones at the table have to be able to deliver.
  • Take out the term "polarization" - keep positive - but don't have unrealistic expectations.
  • Collaboration can be successful when resources are available for all groups to participate.
  • The term collaboration needs to be defined.
  • Collaboration is not necessarily a panacea - doesn't always produce a solution.
  • We need to continue to learn and refine our understanding of how to achieve collaboration.
  • Need to develop incentives to encourage collaboration.
  • Collaboration builds community - but must be kept continuous to build trust and success.
  • Can have collaboration and still a lawsuit on a particular issue.
  • The private property concern should be included with other concerns when collaborating.

Principles #3 and #5 - Reward Results, Not Programs; Markets Before Mandates

  • Need to create incentives for the "right things".
  • Voluntary actions won't always occur, we need to recognize the value of mandates.
  • Incentives have and can work.

Principle #4 - Science for Facts, Process for Priorities

  • What is "science"?
  • There should be more support verbiage for "process to set priorities" in the statement.
  • We need to find ways to get science out and known.
  • The document needs to acknowledge the element of "interpretation and valuing." The process needs to be open and fair to assure this.
  • Science can lead to solutions - good science is "facts."
  • Need to set priorities first, then use science for solutions.
  • There needs to be a recognition that there are minority science opinion groups.
  • There needs to be a commitment of resources to improve science where needed.
  • Science is best for measurement (not facts). Values are for decision-making.
  • Ideal is a locally driven scientifically bases consensus process.

Principle #6 - Change a Heart, Change a Nation

  • We need to build the environmental ethic.
  • We need to provide an integrated good environmental education about the West.

Principle #7 - Recognition of Costs and Benefits

  • Use the term "full understanding" instead of "recognition."
  • Unmeasureable costs and benefits must also be included.
  • Some of the concept can be overly manipulated.
  • There needs to be a recognition that the benefit to some is not the same for others - the concept needs to include a "wide range."
  • Take out the word "politics"/leave it in. Agreement that the word "values" is needed.
  • There also needs to be a "non-economic" analysis, one which assesses ecological benefits and determines who should pay.
  • A better standard definition would help regarding "costs-benefits."
  • The statement could include more about value of communities.

Principle #8 - Solutions Transcend Political Boundaries

  • Federal standards need to account for naturally occurring phenomena.
  • Let local folks generate solutions.
  • Standards must be set at the "appropriate" level, (e.g., Natural resources - local areas set standards; Public health - national standards apply.)
  • Need to distinguish the geography for local solutions and then be able to exceed national standards.

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5

Suggested Additional Principles

  • Increase the velocity of environmental progress (make commitment "up front").
  • Understand the ethnic and cultural diversity of the West, e.g. tribes.
  • Apply environmental justice.
  • Recognize property rights (in the context of other recognitions).
  • Seek common ground.
  • Some risk is necessary for learning.
  • Learn from our history.

Some Reflections on Implementation

  • The governors should reflect on this event and discuss it again before implementation.
  • The attraction that brought in so many interests to this event was that the Western Governors were proposing it. It has great potential for impact.
  • The key to success is the ability - or lack of ability - to circumvent the process.
  • "Political" sustainability is crucial.
  • The program should have a statement of goals.
  • The work needs to include some prototypes or models.
  • It would be wise to reach out early and include Western Congressional delegations. Once the act is together, support could be garnered from other regions.
  • A good place for trial prototypes might be state management of federally owned lands.
  • It would be wise to form an active network of those already applying "enlibra" and develop relationships through sharing lessons and dissemination.
  • A good plan would be to develop some high profile demonstrations that pick up from already existing demonstrations.
  • An action that would help would be to develop a shared demographic information base.
  • Try to pull some industries into the demonstrations.
  • In producing explanatory materials, focus on goals and recognize that which is already out there, so people will "read" the information instead of "eating" it.
  • Start implementation with the folks who are here (at this event).
  • Provide recognition (awards) for current outstanding examples, and market them. Get them to the media.
  • Use technology to build a clearinghouse.
  • Take advantage of examples like mining and wildlife working together (like N. Dakota).
  • Carefully define "success" by establishing good criteria like, "reconciling competing land uses."
  • The governors themselves need to take the outcome (of this preparation) and apply it. Otherwise it will go "nowhere."
  • Seek out the local watershed groups and see how they can be helped.
  • Be careful how one uses "loaded metaphors" - like "property rights."
  • Develop an Enlibra "pool" of talent and expertise.
  • Consider statewide implementation conferences.
  • Keep in mind collaboration is not the only way, so also recognize and reward individual stewardship of "loners."
  • Pursue access to local leadership and bring it down to local level.
  • Examine and review potential barriers to state officials -- e.g. travel restrictions that keep them from working with locals in the field.
  • Seek to bring rural and urban interests together.
  • Work with the legislature if possible.
  • Have each of the governors issue an executive order to apply.
  • Enlibra as the preferred approach to environmental and other controversial issues. Have the governors issue the orders on the same day to attract national attention.

Breakout Group 8 (Red)

Notes and Comments

Governor: Ben Nelson

Facilitator: Dick Gross

WGA Staff: Sylvia Gillen

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 4

General Reactions to Enlibra

  • What are different incentives?
  • What is the purpose of enlibra?
  • Trying to change a culture to work together.
  • What many do now.
  • No. 1 is the crux -- on the ground implementation.
  • How sincere is No. 1?
  • What is "neighborhood" -- should be "community" or "interest."
  • Careful as we set standards -- need goals and flexibility.
  • We are moving toward collaboration, but have a long way to go.
  • Remember that tribes are full stakeholders.
  • Remove adversarial nature -- everyone can win.
  • Who does what best and at what level -- need to recognize "system."
  • Create a set of processes of implementation of these principles and implement in states.
  • Elected officials need to be recognized -- as representative not to substitute for them.
  • Need a collective set of goals.
  • Need to create room for non-legislative/governmental solutions.
  • Set of "tools" to help implement solutions.
  • Sets a tone but doesn't get to implementation.
  • Need to "get to" the people to help them understand.
  • Public trusts "state government."
  • Won't always work.

Comments on Each Principle of Enlibra

1. National Standards

  • More rigid/too rigid, needs flexibility.
  • "Use community."
  • Standards are floor, not ceiling.
  • Incorporate "cost-benefit."
  • Allow local solution sets.
  • Need to consider other than laws.
  • Balance need for uniformity.
  • Can't just mean local geographical area.
  • Standards must be attainable.
  • Must be geographically local.

2. Collaboration

  • Include legislative process.
  • Define "collaboration" with specific goals.
  • Depends on equal balance of power -- recognize burdens on small organizations.
  • Need a governor on the process -- e.g. precautionary core values.
  • Who are "stakeholders?"
  • Define "the middle."
  • Equalize access to information.
  • Needs to be inclusive.
  • Needs to be flexible and self-designed.
  • Smaller groups may need support to participate.
  • Need ground rules.
  • Need to agree on "real issues/problems."
  • See "Planet Texas."
  • Collaborators must be empowered to implement.

3. Reward Results

  • What does this mean?
  • Incentives for doing it right -- can be revenue neutral.
  • Performance versus prescriptive.
  • Reward collaborators.
  • Local empowerment is a reward in itself.
  • Know what you're rewarding -- define and measure.
  • Key is "results."

4. Science for Facts

  • Great idea!
  • Difficult to understand.
  • Peer review builds trust.
  • Rigor needs to be applied.
  • Recognize "precautionary principle."
  • Acknowledge uncertainty.
  • Which "sciences?"
  • Create a "civic science."
  • Humility -- lot we don't know.
  • Values cause problem, not science.
  • Science is infused with values.

5. Markets Before Mandates

  • We love it!!
  • Must do accounting differently -- life cycle costing; full cost analysis.
  • Markets don't fulfill -- don't substitute for values.
  • Incentives help markets grow with mandates unnecessary.
  • Focus on correcting market failures.
  • Eliminate destructive subsidies (what is a subsidy vs. cost efficiency/inefficiency?).
  • Need healthy economies to enable environment protection.
  • Some incentives are free.
  • Make sure you're valuing the right thing in the markets.
  • Public drives market/demands.
  • Expose perverse incentives.

6. Change a Heart

  • Careful what we teach children.
  • Need patience, persistence and resources.
  • Private sector needs to share responsibility -- e.g. promote multi-sector efforts.
  • Information needs to be science/fact based -- trustworthy.

7. Cost Benefit

  • Concerned regarding "formal" analysis which are problematic.
  • "Fallacy of misplaced concreteness" -- zero for what you can't quantify.
  • Don't assume diminishing returns.
  • Natural resources should not be discounted over time.
  • Change economic models.
  • Process of discussing may be more beneficial -- collaboration to define social cost-benefit.
  • Goal is not just economics -- quality of life.
  • Would support removing this principle.
  • Most advanced countries take better care of environment.

8. Transcending Political Boundaries

  • Great!
  • Who owns the problems?
  • What are costs versus what you can gain?
  • United States Constitution -- "No state shall enter into compacts with other states without Congress' consent."
  • Not dissolution.
  • Remember/recognize international boundaries/tribal government.
  • Don't push "solutions" to other states/countries.
  • We are not disenfranchising anyone.

SATURDAY, DECEMBER 5

Feedback on Results of First Breakout Groups

  • Performance versus prescriptive standards -- see Principle 3 -- focus on results.
  • Aim to make environment regulation unnecessary by aligning sustainability with profitability.
  • Hard to embrace "balance" when current status is unbalanced.
  • Governors need processes which eliminate extremists.
  • We need extremists on both sides.
  • Commitment to environmental laws, standards -- continuous improvement.
  • Reason/purpose is to more quickly resolve environmental disputes -- currently using national standards. Reordering according to Madisonian philosophy (democracy works at the local level).
  • Enlibra is principles of intent and process -- should be recognized.
  • Must develop a strategy with Congress that empowers states/localities to achieve Enlibra.
  • Jeffersonian principles ought to be embodied in Enlibra.
  • Change word from "environment" to "natural capital."
  • Don't lose sense of values that are Enlibra.
  • Need to look past political boundaries to make Enlibra happen.
  • Not equivalent to dissolution of concept of place.

Implementation Ideas

  • Won't happen until everything gets so bad it has to.
  • Needs to happen at the community level through dialogue -- start with issues at the community levels, take one small bit at a time.
  • Need to build bridges between participants here -- need to fix old problems as we begin to work together for the future.
  • Need to articulate what the environmental concern is at community level then empower community to act.
  • Need to re-energize/educate public to act, then others to accept.
  • New style of leadership for conflict resolution -- Governors need to articulate and communicate that new style. Governors own personal styles need to reflect this philosophy. (Next step -- Bully Pulpit)
  • Case studies -- walking through a process, see how it works. Success stories needed.
  • Need to detail a model collaborative process.
  • People are willing if they have the opportunity.
  • Enlibra needs to be conditioned on ends, not just process -- e.g. environmental protection.
  • Are groups that apply these principles now -- governors need to look at them, legitimize and empower them.
  • Asking "why" is a key to implementation.
  • Compile information/models/etc., and make available.
  • Does this project, law, etc. embrace Enlibra -- determines governor, legislative support.
  • Don't lock into a specific model -- e.g. watershed. Get concerns articulated, empower, support at local level.
  • Introduce resolutions in each state legislature. Coordinate with all states. Broaden base.
  • Governors focus on 1-2-3 main environmental issues.
  • Recognize that "subjective values" are involved and work out separately.
  • Public education, particularly at elementary level.
  • Model is to send goals, ask locals to develop solutions.
  • Account for cultural diversity in West.
  • What is enabling mechanism?
  • Does Enlibra work at all levels -- local, national, international, etc.?
  • We need to begin to do this. Public participation is critical.
  • Technical assistance as important as financial assistance and motivate people, help them focus -- e.g. facilitation.
  • Academics need to make information available in useful form. Governors can provide incentives.
  • Recognition by governors of successful use of Enlibra.
  • Recognition by governors of purpose of Enlibra -- a purpose to resolve environmental differences.
  • MOUs especially with other levels of government.
  • Market incentives. Regulations should facilitate instead of getting in the way.
  • Make successes available to other states -- on Web site.<