United Nations Environment Programme

environment for development

 
Division of Environmental Law and Conventions
Manual on Compliance with and Enforcement of Multilateral Environmental Agreements
Alert someone to this resource Leave Feedback Home > Enforcement > Institutional Frameworks > Coordination Among Relevant Authorities > Case Study
National/Sub-national Relationships in Federal Systems: State/Environmental Protection Agency Enforcement Agreements in the United States

In the United States of America, environmental management policy is based on the premise that those closest to the environmental problems are most familiar with them and best able to provide an effective enforcement presence in the field. At the same time, there is a natural human tendency to protect local jobs and investment that should not be allowed to occur by environmentally unsustainable practices. To implement the nationwide pollution-control program, most national laws provide for the national U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to delegate its authority to programmes of the 50 States that comprise the United States, provided that they are operating at or equivalent to USEPA’s national standards. While most day-to-day enforcement and compliance assurance activities are decentralised, USEPA maintains a parallel, national enforcement presence to ensure a fair and level competitive playing field throughout the country. [For a more complete description of environmental federalism in the United States, see the case study on “Vertical Designation of Enforcement Responsibilities for Enforcing Pollution-Control Laws in the United States”, following Guideline 41(a)(i)].

Because of parallel national and sub-national enforcement authorities, a high level of coordination has been institutionalised by USEPA with state pollution-control programmes. The framework for coordinating national oversight of state programs and assessing state performance was formalised in the 1986 “Revised Policy Framework for State/EPA Enforcement Agreements.” The 10 USEPA Regional Offices and most of the 50 States enter into annual agreements that establish roles, responsibilities, and commitments for state enforcement and assistance to achieve compliance with the pollution-control laws. Criteria for good state performance are set, and USEPA uses these criteria to make the decision as to when to take national enforcement action within a State. The principle of “no surprises” obliges USEPA to consult with States on their activities and to work cooperatively with them. The annual agreements typically become part of national programme grants of funds to States. (USEPA’s national grants are an important financial incentive to ensure that States have the capacity to effectively implement State pollution-control programmes.)

Recognising the importance of States in environmental planning and implementation, USEPA began a new effort in the early 2000s to align national and state planning. Based on USEPA’s Strategic Plan, now each USEPA national programme office must prepare National Program Guidance with national priorities and measures of performance. Then, USEPA headquarters and the 10 Regional offices in consultation with the States prepare a biennial set of commitments for accomplishing the national plan and guidance at the sub-national level. Regions and States negotiate these commitments and express them in environmental grant or performance agreements, with precise outcome and output measures of state performance. These include measures for state enforcement and compliance if they are not already expressed in a separate State-USEPA Enforcement Agreement. EPA conducts national oversight of state environmental enforcement and compliance programmes, also based on the principles of the original Policy Framework and the controlling EPA-State agreements.

To facilitate coordination between national and sub-national authorities, it can be useful to establish task forces that include personnel from relevant federal agencies and state and local agencies. This can help to ensure more efficient and effective use of enforcement resources.

A A Print this page
Search the Manual
Guidelines Search
Case Studies Search
» More Search Tools
Resources for
Guideline 42
Case Studies
Nigeria’s Institutional Response to the CCD
Burkina Faso’s Conference of the National Council on Environment and Sustainable Development
DRC’s Inter-Ministerial Committee on Environment, Nature Conservation, and Tourism
Coordination to Develop Brazil’s National Program to Combat Desertification
Institutional Coordination and Capacity Building in Morocco to Implement the Rio Conventions
The Gambia’s Network of Enforcement Personnel
Mauritius’ Environment Coordination Committee
Improving Institutional Coordination in Cameroon, Especially Relating to MEAs
Institutional Coordination of Brazilian Ministries in Implementing the Antarctic Treaty
National/Sub-national Relationships in Federal Systems: State/Environmental Protection Agency Enforcement Agreements in the United States
Capacity Building for District By-Law Formulation and Enforcement in Uganda
Implementing MEAs in the Decentralized Context of Benin
Community-Based Trophy Hunting Programme in Pakistan
Public Involvement in Malawi’s National Council for the Environment
Ensuring Implementation through Compensation, Retraining, and Reinstallation in Seychelles
Cooperative Efforts in Environmental Management in the Philippines
Coordination with the Private Sector to Develop Projects in Georgia
Public Coordination Council in Belarus
Participatory Mapping and Indigenous Communities
Public-Private Management of the Gola Rainforest Conservation Concession Project in Sierra Leone
A Public-Private Partnership to Develop Seychelles’s National Plant Conservation Strategy
Coordination through Environmental Cells in Burkina Faso
Ecotourism Concessions in Ivory Coast
Public-Private Dialogues in Brazil
H.M. Revenue and Customs of the United Kingdom
Environmental Technical Assistance for Zambian Customs Officials
Providing Assistance to the Customs Administration in Lebanon
Strengthening the Capacity of Customs Officers and Inspectors in Cameroon
Additional Resources
Additional Resources on Coordinating with NGOs and the Private Sector
© UNEP | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Site Map