Microsoft Word - Volume15.doc


Commonwealth: A Journal of Political Science  Volume 15, Number 2  September 2009

 2009 PPSA/LORL, PA House of Reps. ISSN 0890-2410

The “Greening” of Local Governments

Arthur M. Holst
Philadelphia Water Department

Local governments have taken the lead in “greening” in the
United States. Urban, suburban, and rural areas each green
themselves through practices specific to their own level of
development. While local communities do not enjoy equal amounts
of public support or funding for greening, they can choose to
contribute more or less to these efforts. In taking “direct” or
“indirect” actions internally or externally, the seemingly piecemeal
efforts of local governments to promote greening can lead to a
significantly greener nation as a whole.

nvironmental protection has become a major public policy concern
in the United States. The salience of this issue has varied over time,

however, as have approaches to dealing with it, particularly at the
national level of government. Now that environmental consciousness has
become part of mainstream political discourse, a long-term solution to
the problem of environmental health has arrived as well. This solution is
not some new technology but a new leader in addressing the problem:
local governments rather than the federal government. Local
governments have several unique capabilities that make them especially
adept at dealing with environmental problems and finding innovative and
sometimes even groundbreaking remedies.

Why Local Governments?

The growing recognition by scientists of adverse global climate
change has provoked a blizzard of opinions both for and against
governmental intervention to address the problem. Regrettably, the
federal government has been immobilized by these clashing viewpoints.
Ensuring a healthy environment while also meeting the nation’s
economic and energy needs is such a daunting and divisive task that the
federal government has effectively swept the problem under the
proverbial rug. Fortunately, municipalities have a growing interest in
achieving a more effective policy balance. In the absence of coherent
national policy, they are realizing that they can achieve their goals

E



90 THE “GREENING” OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

through many piecemeal local actions rather than wait for a
comprehensive federal plan that may never materialize (Verchick 2003,
1).

Politicians are the middlemen between citizens and polluters, but it is
local politicians who are achieving the most policy change. The National
Association of Counties (NACo) met in Washington D.C. in 2008 to
discuss environmental policy. Its conference “sought to provide answers
for counties looking to take the first steps to mitigating climate change
and adapting to it, and to show that counties have already taken a
leadership role in paving the way to a world in which ‘climate change’
does not spell ‘Doomsday’” (Sprow). Underscoring the new role that
local governments play at the forefront of the environmental movement,
NACo cited many inspiring examples of counties that have devised
policies for ameliorating a wide variety of environmental problems
(Sprow). Thus, when public school buses in Pennsylvania’s suburbs can
be re-engineered to run on bio-diesel fuel, no one runs to Congress with a
bill in hand. Instead, local officials are petitioned. “Local governments
have begun to see that thinking and acting locally not only improve local
conditions, but also contribute substantially to national and international
environmental goals” (Verchick 2003, 1).

American communities have certain advantages in trying to promote
more environmental responsibility, but they also face obstacles. For
instance, physical settings differ widely across the nation. Previously
“greened” or undeveloped regions require action much different from
what is appropriate for “brown” regions. Urban, suburban, and rural
areas each green themselves through practices specific to their own level
of development. Consequently, different approaches to greening are
needed. “The influence of local authority is particularly great in urban
areas, now home to nearly half the world's population,” but cities “are
often the main contributors to environmental damage” (Verchick 2003,
2). On this point, Bonnie Hulkower (2008), a biologist and
environmental planner for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, cites New
York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s effort to turn the Big Apple into the
“Green Apple” by reducing the size of its formidable environmental
footprint.

Yet, local communities do not enjoy equal amounts of public support
or funding for greening. As with higher levels of government, they can
choose to contribute more or less resources toward local greening.



Arthur M. Holst 91

Similarly, consumer advocates, environmental groups, labor unions,
political parties, lobbies, and other advocacy groups within the
immediate geographic area can generate varying amounts of public
pressure both for and against environmental action. Because local
politicians best understand local environmental problems and because
they are the officials closest and most accountable to their constituents,
they are naturally the ones most likely to affect the kind of change sought
by the local electorate. All these factors must be considered when local
communities develop and implement environmental protection policy.

Greening Strategies

“Greening,” also known as “environmental stewardship,” is defined
by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (2009) as “the
responsibility for environmental quality shared by all those whose
actions affect the environment.” How can local governments take
responsibility for reducing the environmental impacts of its operations?
Local governments can create greener municipalities in two different
ways: directly and indirectly (see Diagram 1 on the following page).
Local governments can create greener municipalities in two different
ways: directly and indirectly. A local governing body takes direct action
when it reduces the environmental footprint of its own operations. It
might, for example, use environmentally friendly lighting in its office
buildings or makes the delivery of its water supply to constituents more
energy efficient. Such action is the most immediate and apparent form of
environmentalism practiced by municipalities because it involves the
local governments themselves physically changing how they operate.
This form of governmental action is direct in the sense that it directly
reduces the negative impact of the local government’s operations on the
surrounding environment, even though it may not necessarily affect
directly the local citizenry.

Indirect action includes governmental measures that do not directly
influence the impact a municipality has on its surrounding environment
but instead establish a context in which greener practices will take root in
the local community. Such action is normally manifested in regulatory
structures that promote or demand environmental awareness on the part
of individuals and organizations. Indirect action is largely influenced by
the opinions of those public and private sector actors most likely to be
affected by such measures. This kind of action is effective only to the



92 THE “GREENING” OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

extent that it affects agents not formally part of the local government
itself. Many local governments throughout the nation make both direct
and indirect environmental policies. This article will focus primarily
upon those municipalities regarded as leaders in developing policies for
protecting the local environment.

Diagram 1

Local Government Greening Strategies

To understand direct action more fully, a distinction must be drawn
between internal and external green actions (IGAs and EGAs). When
greening their own operations, local governments can do so in ways that
either involve direct interaction with constituents or support such
interactions. An IGA is a direct initiative whereby a government
establishes green practices or obtains capital for its own use in ways
consistent with green principles. An example would be a municipality
choosing to use the kind of environmentally friendly lighting technology
mentioned above rather than a less environmentally conscious
alternative. Such initiatives generally involve the operating costs of
governing. By contrast, an EGA occurs whenever a governing body



Arthur M. Holst 93

provides goods or services to the public in a way that adheres to green
principles. An example would be the greener water delivery system cited
above. These initiatives normally involve programs and infrastructure
with which citizens have contact.

Taking Direct Action

Florida’s Miami-Dade County has been implementing IGAs since
1992. A “Resource Conservation Committee” brings together
representatives from different government departments to identify ways
to use the county’s resources in a more environmentally protective
manner. The committee promotes environmentally friendly purchasing
and use policies, particularly for environmentally dangerous custodial
products such as solvents, wood preservatives, aerosol sprays, moth
repellants, air fresheners, and cleaners and disinfectants. County
buildings have been retrofitted with low-flow toilets and faucets, water-
efficient washers and leak repairs, and energy-efficient lighting, heating,
ventilation, and air conditioning. These improvements have saved the
county about 55 million gallons of water and 17 million kilowatt hours of
electricity per year, which equates to about 10,440 tons of carbon dioxide
gas that the county has avoided producing. Miami-Dade has also been
greening its motor vehicle fleet in recent years. A 2003 resolution called
for a 3% to 5% reduction in fleet carbon dioxide emissions annually,
with the goal of a 20% reduction in emissions over the course of five
years. The county has also reduced carbon dioxide emissions by
thousands of tons through the use of environmentally conscious
purchasing specifications, tighter departmental control of operations,
new technology, a moratorium on SUV use, and a doubling of the
number of “hybrid” vehicles in the fleet from 281 to 413 to (Hefty 2006).

Chicago, Illinois, (Cook County) also is greening internally through
its purchasing policies. Currently focused on purchasing recycled and
recyclable goods for the county, local officials intend to set minimum
standards for recycled content, thereby achieving the EPA “Energy Star”
certification as well as meeting the Federal Energy Management
Program’s “Product Energy Efficiency Recommendations” (Quigley
2005). They are also creating “Green Teams” to help facilitate
environmental initiatives across the county. In the course of examining
information flow between departments, these teams watch for
environmental problems and opportunities to go green (Quigley 2005).



94 THE “GREENING” OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

IGAs such as these not only lower pollution levels in general but also set
an example for the public and private sectors to promote a more
environmentally responsible community.

EGAs in Cook County are continuously being implemented in a
variety of government services. The county is seeking alternatives to
biologically harmful road salt while making the roads themselves greener
by reclaiming scrap tires for rubberized asphalt in highway paving
projects (Quigley 2005). Similarly, Cook County’s courts are saving
energy and resources by shifting toward paperless communication. They
are also considering whether to require that all court documents be
submitted on recycled, double-sided pages or, alternatively, that they be
filed electronically (Quigley 2005).

Public buses in Seattle, Washington (King County), are being run on
a bio-diesel fuel blend (Novey 2007). Seattle is also installing natural
drainage systems that account for an 11% reduction in the city’s
impervious street surface area (Sierra Club 2006). Iredell County, North
Carolina, requires natural lighting and ventilation in new school
construction. These systems not only reduce costs for lighting and air
conditioning but also decrease absentee rates by increasing air quality.
EGAs promote more community involvement than do IGAs because
EGAs encourage constituents to use green services offered by local
governments rather than just watch these governments green their own
organizations.

Taking Indirect Action

Municipalities increasingly use legal action to adopt and enforce
green-focused legislation. For example, local officials in Cook County,
Illinois, have enacted a “Green Buildings Ordinance” that requires all
future construction to meet Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED) certification standards. They are also considering raising
the requirements further to meet the more stringent Silver rating (Quigley
2005). Austin, Texas, has adopted a “climate change protection plan”
that will require all buildings in the city to run entirely on renewable
energy sources by 2012 (Guerrieri 2008). In Pennsylvania, the private
advocacy group PennFuture has offered free legal advice and
representation to individuals, organizations, and local governments
promoting environmental protection (PennFuture 2004). The group



Arthur M. Holst 95

joined with citizens and other organizations to prevent the mayor of
Pittsburgh from authorizing strip mining along the city’s largest area of
undeveloped land. It also filed suit when a power plant in Greene
County, Pennsylvania, violated state and national clean air standards.
Whether initiated by government or by the private sector, legal action is
the most authoritative kind of indirect action that local officials can take
because it demands action on the part of those being sued.

Although legal action is the only kind of indirect action local
governments can take that demands a formal response, economic action
can also be an effective force in promoting the greening of local
communities. Economic action involves providing both the private and
public sector with financial incentives for greening and disincentives for
polluting. It also includes funding private organizations that promote
greening. Groups such as PennFuture thus collect millions of dollars in
grants and assistance from governments, which they use to enable
citizens to do the greening themselves. Green building incentives are
appearing across the United States, especially in cities and particularly
with regard to green roof construction. Portland, Oregon, offers tax
credits for reduced energy consumption, green building, recycling,
renewable energy use, and cleaner fuel projects (Guerrieri 2008). The
municipality also offers density incentives as part of a “floor area ratio
bonus option” for developers who install environmentally friendly
roofing materials.

San Francisco provides a speedy application process for installing
solar power devices, and it offers help with design and installation
(Guerrieri 2008). Chicago provides $5,000 grants for planning and
installing green roofs (Guerrieri 2008). It is also pursuing innovative tax
policies that promote greening, such as a new property tax classification
for LEED buildings. Taxes on new vehicle purchases normally are based
upon the number of wheels a vehicle has rather than upon its weight.
Because weight is normally correlated with carbon emissions, however,
Chicago is planning to base the tax and vehicle registration fee on weight
alone (Quigley 2005). Municipalities prefer economic actions such as
those cited here because they use incentives rather than commands.
Economic action is also more affordable than direct investment in the
short-term.

Social action involves the use of various communications media to
create awareness and promote action on environmental issues among



96 THE “GREENING” OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

citizens and businesses. Although these efforts are the least powerful of
the three types of indirect action, they can still be effective. For instance,
local school systems are increasingly becoming involved in stimulating
environmental consciousness. In Traverse City, Michigan, Glen Lake
High School participated in “Focus of the Nation,” a program that visits
schools across the country to teach students about global warming and to
promote green ideas (Foster 2008). Schools in Prince George County,
Maryland, have begun incorporating environmental education into their
curricula. Environmental concepts are being introduced into students’
classes by such methods as including environmentally relevant terms on
vocabulary lists and debating the severity of global warming in social
studies courses (Carter 2007). Local governments are also involved in
promoting environmental awareness. The LEED rating system is a
national code, but municipalities such as Chicago are using it to
showcase greening within their jurisdictions. Social action might be the
least authoritative means of indirect greening, but it creates effective
social incentives for encouraging people to be more environmentally
responsible rather than forcing them to that end.

Better Together

The seemingly piecemeal efforts of local governments to promote
greening can lead to a significantly greener nation as a whole. If local
governments start working together—forming a vast network of
knowledge and expertise in going green—a sustainable environment is
achievable. The municipalities discussed here have developed
remarkable strategies for dealing with environmental problems specific
to themselves. Because these strategies would not necessarily be as
effective if pursued by other municipalities, broad national plans likely
would not be effective. That does not mean, however, that none of the
IGAs and EGAs employed by one local government can not be used
effectively by another. While the tactics identified here are impressive,
they are generally viewed as solitary, isolated cases. By looking at
greening strategies only in this narrow way, we risk overlooking
possibilities for broader applications of them. Many localities face
similar environmental problems, even though they may be far apart from
one another geographically.

It is crucial that local governments capitalize on these kinds of
similarities. The speed of local government greening would increase



Arthur M. Holst 97

rapidly if municipalities adopted greening strategies that proved to be
effective in other jurisdictions facing similar problems. Fortunately,
organizations are emerging to address this need. ICLEI-Local
Governments for Sustainability is a network of local governments across
the globe that promotes sustainable development (ICLEI-Local
Governments for Sustainability 2008). Among the many resources that
this group offers to its members is a database that includes information
about model green programs. It also helps to coordinate programs that
advance environmental protection. By hosting an international
conference in May of 2008 in Santa Rosa, California, to identify and
discuss goals, the ICLEI has helped municipalities to develop their own
agendas and plans for action. More than a thousand municipalities
around the world are ICLEI members, including New York, Los
Angeles, Chicago, Denver, Atlanta, and Miami (ICLEI-Local
Governments for Sustainability 2008).

The National Environmental Training Center for Small Communities
offers resources geared toward local governments of communities with
small populations. It provides educational materials and training as well
as consulting services (Training Center for Small Communities 2007).
State and national agencies can also play this kind of role. The Bureau of
Recreation and Conservation of the Pennsylvania Department of
Conservation and Natural Resources (2008) offers support and
consultation for greening to local governments in Pennsylvania. The
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is probably the
largest body of this type. Clean Air Counts is a project of various local
governments in northeastern Illinois that have banded together in an
effort to save energy and reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Illinois Green
Fleets is another program that spans the private and governmental
sectors. It provides recognition and other marketing opportunities for
groups that use “clean, green, domestic, renewable American fuel
vehicles.” The Chicago Area Clean Cities Coalition is yet another multi-
sector group that promotes greening by coordinating local actors. Best
Workplaces for Commuters recognizes and supports employers in Cook
County who provide benefits for commuting employees. Cook County is
also actively developing environmentally conscious purchasing
agreements between local governments for the procurement of recycled
products and other goods. Similarly, Miami-Dade County is making
“Florida Green Local Government Certification” available to any local
government that can meet strict greening standards. Programs like these



98 THE “GREENING” OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

save money and foster cooperative working relationships among local
governments. They also make a significant contribution to environmental
protection.

Conclusion

Local municipalities no longer can rely solely on the federal and
state governments for promoting green initiatives. The environmental
movement is now knocking on the doors of local governments and it is
up to local officials to answer the call for protecting the environment.
Local government is well-equipped to grapple effectively with
environmental problems because “local government resides closest to
ecological effects, it holds the greatest potential for democracy, it is
capable of flexible and innovative implementation, and it has the
potential to protect local constituents from distributional imbalances on
the regional scale” (Verchick 2003, 2). The strategies identified in this
article are just a few of the many actions taken by localities to green
themselves from the ground up. From directly making their own
operations more environmentally friendly to indirectly stimulating their
constituents to be more environmentally responsible, local governments
have been given the “green light.” As a result, they are traveling full
speed ahead on the road to a greener America.

References

Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. 2008.
http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/info/ataglance/fsbrc.aspx.

Carter, Dennis. 2007. “High point students bring shades of ‘green’ to county schools.”
http://www.gazette.net/stories/020708/prinsch 170052_32358.shtml.

Foster, Cymbre. 2008. “Focus on global warming: High school students lead the way.”
Traverse City (MI) Record-Eagle. http://www.record-eagle.com/features/local_
story_029100038.html.

Guerrieri, Tony. 2008. “More cities offer incentives to build ‘green’.” Environmental
Synopsis, 9(1): 3.

Hefty, Nichole. 2006. “Greening Local Government: The Miami-Dade Experience.”
Presented at the annual meeting of the American Society for Public Administration,
Denver.

Hulkower, Bonnie. 2008. “5 U.S. Local & State Government Officials Putting the
Environment First.” http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/11/top-us-green-govern
ment-leaders.php.

http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/info/ataglance/fsbrc.aspx
http://www.gazette.net/stories/020708/prinsch 170052_32358.shtml
http://www.record-eagle.com/features/local_ story_029100038.html
http://www.record-eagle.com/features/local_ story_029100038.html
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/11/top-us-green-govern ment-leaders.php
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/11/top-us-green-govern ment-leaders.php


Arthur M. Holst 99

ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability. 2008. http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=
global-about-iclei.

Novey, Joelle. 2007. “Greening local fleets.” http://www.coopamerica.org/pubs/caq/
articles/summer2007GreeningLocalFleets.cfm.

PennFuture. 2004. Greening Pennsylvania's Economy: Annual Report 2003–04.

Quigley, Mike. 2005. “Greening Cook County.” www.csu.edu/cercldocuments/Greening
CookCounty.

Sierra Club. 2006. Building better ii: A guide to America’s best new development projects
[Brochure]. San Francisco, California.

Sprow, Maria. 2009. “Local Government Turns Green.” http://www.county.org/
resources/library/county_mag/ county/196/2.html.

Training Center for Small Communities. 2007. http://www.nesc.wvu.edu/netcsc/.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. “Environmental Stewardship.”
www.epa.gov/stewardship/.

Verchick, Robert R.M. 2003. “Why the Global Environment Needs Local Government:
Lessons from the Johannesburg Summit.” Urban Lawyer. 35(3): 1-19.
http://ssrn.com/abstract=483202.

http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id= global-about-iclei
http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id= global-about-iclei
http://www.coopamerica.org/pubs/caq/
http://www.coopamerica.org/pubs/caq/articles/Summer2007GreeningLocalFleets.cfm
http://www.csu.edu/cercldocuments/Greening CookCounty
http://www.csu.edu/cercldocuments/Greening CookCounty
http://www.county.org/ resources/library/county_mag/ county/196/2.html
http://www.county.org/ resources/library/county_mag/ county/196/2.html
http://www.nesc.wvu.edu/netcsc/