Search USGSSearch

Geology topics

Robert Merideth

Publications and source records attributed to Robert Merideth.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Quantifying the substantive influence of public comment on United States federal environmental decisions under NEPA

A citizen’s right to comment on, and criticize, government decisions makes a difference. The U.S. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) institutionalized public engagement in environmental review in the belief it would lead to better decisions and more sustainable outcomes. But, 50 years later, NEPA’s public comment process has been criticized as costly and slow, while doing little to change outcomes. Data science now makes it possible to track progress and evaluate the influence of public participation. We examined 108 environmental impact statement (EIS) processes spanning 22 years. Our analysis revealed that public comments resulted in substantive decision alterations in 62% of cases, with 64% showing modifications to alternatives, 42% showing modifications to mitigation plans and 11% leading to the selection of an entirely new preferred alternative. When federal agencies changed project alternatives (78 EISs), 88% of the time (69 of the 78 EISs) they credited public comments as the reason. In 45 of the 108 EISs, agencies modified mitigation plans and credited public comments as the reason 100% of the time. Agencies only occasionally selected a new preferred alternative (21 out of 104 EISs), but when they did, they credited public comments as the reason 100% of the time. As the United States and the 190+ states and countries that have adopted NEPA’s example consider how to address environmental change, it is important to assess the role of public participation in environmental decision making. Our data say public comments matter.

Environmental Research Letters

Do economic values and expenditures for viewing waterfowl in the U.S. differ among species?

Many economic studies value birdwatching in general and often do not account for potential differences in viewers’ benefits from observing different species. But, how different are economic values of viewing various bird species? To answer that question, we surveyed Ducks Unlimited (DU) members using an online questionnaire to estimate trip expenditures and consumer surplus per trip for viewing pintail ducks, waterfowl in general, and other species of waterfowl. Expenditures per trip were USD $ 231, $ 199, and $ 182, respectively. Consumer surpluses per trip, estimated using the contingent valuation method, were $ 28, $ 32, and $ 29, respectively. Neither expenditures nor consumer surplus were statistically different among species for DU members who are adept at species differentiation. Our results suggest that it may be reasonable to use a general economic value for waterfowl viewing when formulating management alternatives for a variety of waterfowl.

Human Dimensions of Wildlife