School of Public Policy

University of Maryland at College Park

PUAF 660 -- Policy Analysis Workshop

Environmental Section

Robert H. Nelson

Spring 2005

The policy workshop is a course based on the concept that policy analysis is a craft that must be learned by practice and experience. Book learning can help but in the end the successful practitioner must learn by doing. The learning process thus should involve frequent opportunities for trial and error. Learning policy analysis skills is similar to learning the skills of a good artist, a good writer, or a good athlete.

The policy analysis workshop offers students an opportunity to undertake a major project that involves the actual practice of policy analysis. For 2005, the environmental section will study the ongoing cleanup of Chesapeake Bay. Large volumes of nitrogen and phosphorus enter the Bay from various human sources and result in the fertilization of excess algae. These algae both reduce water clarity and, when they die and decompose, can significantly reduce the oxygen content of the Bay. Since 1987, the states of the Chesapeake Bay watershed have been engaged in a major effort to reduce substantially the levels of nitrogen and phosphorus entering the Bay. While there was considerable optimism during the 1990s about the progress, more recently there has been a recognition that existing efforts may be insufficient. There are now frequent calls for greater spending and more stringent regulation. As the policy workshop will examine, it may be necessary to rethink the basic strategy for Chesapeake Bay cleanup in the future.

The Chesapeake Bay is the most important estuary in the United States. Historically, it produced abundant harvests of oysters, shad, crabs, and other fish. Some of these harvests such as oysters and shad have virtually disappeared, and crab harvests have been falling more recently. Given its location in the heavily populated Middle Atlantic region, the Chesapeake Bay is also a leading source of recreational opportunity for the region. The history of the State of Maryland and the use and management of Chesapeake Bay are thoroughly interwoven. The cleanup of Chesapeake Bay is thus one of the most important environmental issues in the United States, and provides an excellent opportunity to study the workings of U.S. environmental policies in a practical setting.

Cleaning up the Bay poses many major difficulties and also serves to illustrate some of the weaknesses of the current U.S. framework of environmental management and policy. More than 25 percent of the nitrogen entering the Bay is believed to derive from airborne sources, and yet the administration of the Clean Air Act has not addressed problems of the impacts of air pollution on water quality. The watershed of the Chesapeake Bay extends over six states -- as far as upstate New York – and thus poses difficult problems of regional environmental coordination. Much of the nitrogen and phosphorus pollution is derived from agriculture and other non-point sources, and yet the authority of the EPA to regulate non-point sources is doubted by many legal commentators. Large additional funds may be necessary for Bay cleanup and yet it is uncertain where this money will come from.

The policy workshop will examine the engineering, administrative, economic, political, legal and other factors that enter into the cleanup of Chesapeake Bay. Recommendations may be made for both short run strategies and long run strategies. Possible sources of additional funding will be examined.

The overall result might be something like a “Review of the Cleanup Strategy for Chesapeake Bay: Proposals for New Directions.” Whatever the exact outcome, the final product of the environmental section of the policy workshop will be sent to the Maryland Department of Environment, the governments of Washington, D.C., Montgomery County and Prince Georges County; EPA; the Maryland Congressional delegation; and other appropriate parties. It will be distributed as well to leading newspapers in the region. The report may make specific proposals for changes in the existing basic management strategy and policies for cleaning up Chesapeake Bay.

This project will offer students an opportunity to study scientific, economic, political, administrative and other environmental issues in the context of an important real world decision facing the government today. The analysis developed by the policy workshop team will require blending in a practical setting of the various specific methods and skills taught in the School of Public Policy -- including microeconomic analysis, political analysis, statistics, financial and normative analysis.

Students will undertake activities both as individuals and as a team. Each student will prepare a major paper as an individual effort. The paper will examine a subject that has been identified by the full class as a significant contribution to the overall team production of a final class report. All students in the environmental section will work together to scope out the final project report, to define the necessary individual tasks, to produce the report, and to undertake other joint efforts as needed. The goal is to produce a final report that will command the attention and help to stimulate new policy thinking among regional opinion leaders.

Each student at the end of the course will write an op ed piece on some aspect of the study. Well written op eds may be submitted to an appropriate newspaper.

Grading will be according to the following criteria:

Individual major paper -- 50%

Class discussion and other contributions to group efforts – 25%

Team grade for overall project -- 20%

Op ed piece -- 5%

Schedule of Classes

This course is an example of “adaptive management.” It involves four broad phases: (1) understanding the problem and general orientation; (2) scoping out a set of project objectives and tasks, including individual paper assignments; (3) the writing of individual papers; and (4) integration of the papers into a well formed final report. It is difficult to specify an exact timetable in advance. However, each phase may require roughly one month – February for learning about the problem, March for scoping out papers, April for writing the papers, and May for pulling together the final document. There will be no examinations. Unless otherwise notified, the class will meet on Tuesday at the assigned time (9:15 A.M) to receive progress reports, to discuss the analytical issues involved, to go over the next steps in the project, and other team concerns. As matters work out, there may be significant departures from the schedule below. There will probably be several team visits to organizations in the Chesapeake Bay area that are studying the issue of Bay cleanup. There may be a field trip to possible Bay sites where cleanup issues could be seen first hand.

February 1 -- Organization of class, introduction to issue and project, distribution of supplemental readings, discuss possible assignments of students to particular areas of initial investigation.

February 8 – Team discussion to review readings and to “scope” the project

February 15 – Team discussion.

February 22 – Site visit to Maryland Sea Grant, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, or some other appropriate party.

February 24 – Site visit.

March 1 – Team discussion, individual papers proposed by each student.

March 8 – Site visit.

March 15 -- Finalize individual paper topics. Discuss further final report needs

March 22 -- No class, spring break.

March 29 – No class, students work on individual paper.

April 5 – First drafts of individual papers due. Discuss policy issues, status of report.

April 12 -- Student critiques of individual draft papers due (each student will read and annotate the paper of another student and prepare a one-page single spaced critique). One hour sessions will be scheduled this week with each paper writer to go over individual papers with the instructor and the student author of the paper critique present as well.

April 19 – No class, work on revision of papers.

April 26 – Individual final papers due. Organize team effort to integrate individual papers, to complete team report. Assign writing of final report sections, introductions, conclusions, transitions, other tasks needed for final overall report.

May 3 – Instructor will prepare and distribute first draft of “integrated report,” incorporating and blending individual papers. Discuss progress of overall project report.

May 10 – Discuss and comment on draft report. Rewriting and editing assignments for overall class report given out for each student. Individual op eds (800 words) due.

May 17 – Final rewrites due. Final assignments made.

May 20 – Final report completed.