Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Orchard System (BIOS) and BIFS. Jean Marie Peltier used the discursive
image of “public/private partnerships” at the DPR to secure funding for
the PMA program. Chris Feise and Seattle office USEPA (Region X) staff
argued successfully to their supervisors that the Columbia Plateau
Agricultural Initiative proposal would fulfill the integrated environmen-
tal goals (i.e., air and water) of the USEPA Regional Geographic
Initiative program.
37
These emerged as agency personnel recognized the
limitations of the “command and control” approach to environmental
regulations and sought more community-based, multi-disciplinary, and
integrated approaches.
The conflictual relationship between the USEPA and the industries it
regulates can be traced back to its inception and first administrator,
William Ruckelshaus. He was a prosecutor who had been quite success-
ful in addressing water and air pollution through the courts in Indiana,
and his experience convinced him of the merit of unambiguous standard
setting and aggressive law enforcement. Negotiation and assistance were
not in the USEPA's policy tool kit for its first 20 years of existence.
Ruckelshaus understood the USEPA as a “gorilla in the closet,” a potent
legal force that could be brought forth to inflict legal and financial pain
on an industry if it was not cooperative with local regulators.
38
The DPR and the USEPA are chiefly regulatory agencies, but they
developed new roles in agriculture by participating in partnerships. The
entry of regulatory agencies into extension activities provokes ambiva-
lent feelings among agency personnel and in the agricultural community.
Agency personnel have asserted the primary function of their agency is
to enforce environmental laws, even as they provide to some organiza-
tions of growers who are in violation of the Clean Water Act.
Agricultural organizations welcome the funding regulatory agencies' dol-
lars, but have had to reassure growers that they are not “negotiating
with the enemy.” Agency personnel welcome the opportunity to be seen
as playing a constructive role in the agricultural community, and agricul-
tural organizations represent themselves to regulatory agencies as being
environmentally responsible. Eight other public funding institutions have
participated in partnerships, mostly by providing small grants.
39
Despite feelings of ambivalence held by agroecological partnership
participants, a recent analysis of the CPAI initiative determined that
growers, the USEPA, and other public sector participants believe it was
