Detailed info from 2011 American State Litter Scorecard on 11 Northeastern states, covering an area from Maryland to Maine and all states in between, with case study comparison of Vermont, Delaware, and Pennsylvania policies/handling of litter removals and related topical procedures. Presented at the Northeastern Conference for Public Administration, New York City, October 2011.
11
The NECOPA Northeast States Litter Scorecard: Comparisons of 11 Northeastern States’ Litter Removal and Environmental Performances Steve Spacek [“The American State Litter Scorecard”] The 2 nd Annual Northeastern Conference on Public Administration John Jay College of Criminal Justice New York City, New York USA Saturday. October 29, 2011
Transcript
1. The NECOPA Northeast States Litter Scorecard:Comparisons of
11 Northeastern States Litter Removal and Environmental
Performances Steve Spacek [The American State Litter Scorecard] The
2nd Annual Northeastern Conference on Public Administration John
Jay College of Criminal Justice New York City, New York USA
Saturday. October 29, 2011
2. Litter Eradication/Abatement: A Source Reduction Activity
that provides a healthy, enjoyable Surface Environment for BOTH
humans and wildlife. Littering: Human throwing of small amounts of
trash/garbage in small, individualized portions. Dumping is
littering on a larger, voluminous scale. Both are environmental
crimes creating dangers to public health, safety and welfare. ***
Top Littered Items across NECoPA states: Cigarette Filter Butts,
Paper/Food Packaging by Motorists, Pedestrians (sources: 2010 New
England; 2008 KAB; 2004 NJ; 1990/1999 PA Litter Surveys) ***
Environmental Injustice! Litter/Source Reduction Activities Among
NECoPA States are UNEQUAL, UNJUST!! The 11 NECOPA States are:
Maryland, Maine, Delaware, New Hampshire, Vermont, Pennsylvania,
Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island,Connecticut and New York.*
Poor Litter Eradication has led to damaged scenic environments,
breeding grounds for diseases, insects and rodents, wildlife
devastation.In Good, Bad economic times, some states have
accomplished relatively little, typically piecemeal to biased,
almost non-existent approaches to litterprevention. Unremoved
litter has a negative impact on property values,
neighborhood/community attractiveness (sources: Forbes; Henning;
2008 KAB;Spacek).* In 2008, approximately 100 PERSONS within the 11
member NECOPA states died as result of traffic accidents caused by
movable debris/litteringalong public roadways; 46 deaths (one-half
of total) were in Pennsylvania alone! (source: NHTSA).* States Lack
Efforts to collect uniform litter abatement data for research and
public comparisons (i.e. volumes of waste collected by
mileage/location,budget funding sources/expenditures; number of
required annual/seasonal cleanups; performance standard surveys;
numbers of persons cited/prosecutedfor infractions). Northeast
jurisdictions often lack public performance measures already common
in economically/politically-competing Western andSouthern States
[sources: Bullard; Cochran, A.; Spacek].
3. Humans CAUSE Littering and Dumping!Reasons to Litter:Litter
Begets Litter; Apathy; Inconvenience; Community Attitudes;
Entitlement; Class Alienation, Greed/Ignorance (sources: Bisbort;
City Image; Henning;McAndrew; Ockles; U.S JusticeNational
Law).Governmental Neglect:Indifferent perceptions, unenforcement by
Public Officials, Police, Prosecutors, Courts. Citizens in some
NECoPA jurisdictions cause persistentdumping/littering problems,
disrespect for needed abatement expenditures and cleanup efforts
(sources: Ockles; Spacek, U.S. Justice-Environmental;
U.S.Justice-National-Law).State Political/Environmental
Cultures:Moralistic (Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island,
Connecticut): Public sector intervention to meet civilian
goals.Individualistic (New Jersey, Pennsylvania): Marketplace rules
but some public sector intervention as warranted.Mixed
Moralistic/Individualistic: (New York,
Massachusetts).Traditionalistic (Delaware, Maryland): Little or no
government intrusion. Elites (i.e. wealthy, propertied Democrats)
are political players--*Most+ non-reception in fostering ecological
improvements. Strongest support for environmental
maintenance/progress historically comes from New England
states(sources: Elazar; Koven and Mausloff; Neal; Spacek; Vig and
Kraft).USA Profiled Deliberate Litterer:16-24 year-old males, based
on findings from over 70 U.S. state litter surveys last 30+ years,
are most prone to litter (sources: 2008 KAB; 2010 New
England).
4. Litter/Dumping Source Reduction Activities: Physical-Actual
Litter/Debris Removals on public spaces by DOT employees, hired
contractors, mandated correctional crews or community service,
drunk drivers,work furloughs, juveniles/youth litter corps,
volunteers, non-profit
organizations-Adopt-a-Highway/Road/Street/Trails Programs (NONE in:
Vermont)-Statewide Anti-litter Slogans/Campaigns (NONE in:
Connecticut, Maine, New Jersey, Vermont)-Environmental
Organizations: Keep America Beautiful, Adopta-Highway found in most
NECOPA states-Beverage Container Deposits (NONE in: Maryland,
Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New
Hampshire)-Comprehensive Recycling (NONE in: New York,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont) Legal-Litter
Laws/Statutes-All NECOPA states have anti-litter Laws-Litter
Taxation (New Jersey, Rhode Island)-Litter Reporting
Hotlines/Websites (Pennsylvania has Litter Bug Hotline;
Litterbutt.com; Litter-butt.org)-Citation Writing: History of
Inopportunity and Weak/No Enforcement by Police-Court
ProsecutionsLargest Violators Taken Down!-Punishment: Often Settled
Out of Court but STILL no real Jail Time!!!
5. The American State Litter Scorecard: Methodology
Policymakers, administrators, organizations, citizens alike
interested in effectual public outcomes. The SCORECARD measures 50
states, including the 11 NECoPA jurisdictions, for their overall
environmental quality through public spaces cleanliness efforts and
related environmental performances. Unit of Analysis: Fifty
American States (District of Columbia and Territories/Possessions
are NOT states) Data Source Providers: Governments; Academicians;
Trade Organizations; Think Tanks; Associations regularly used in
competent scholarly research Scoring Rubric:Created to score each
objective, subjective indicator. Aggregated by state, then
summative calculations to derive a total score. Top (BEST) to
Bottom (WORST) Hierarchal rankings, National Designations derived
from computations
6. The American State Litter Scorecard: Indicators Objective: *
States with Litter Taxation * States with Container Deposit
Rules/Legislation * States with Comprehensive Recycling
Rules/Legislation * States with Litter Prevention Slogans * Per
Person Overall State Environmental Expenditure * Per Person Daily
Waste Disposal by State* States with Highest Chance for
Debris-related Fatal Vehicle Collision * Integrity of State
Thoroughfare Maintenance Disbursement Costs * State Public
Corruption Convictions per Population Proportion Subjective: *
Environmental Responsibility Reputation of State Governors* State
Licensed Drivers Knowledge of Littering and other Road Laws
7. Scorecard Summary: NECOPA, Nearby and Selected States State
Total Score Natl Designation Negative Performance Remarks DE +8.5
BELOW AVERAGE 1, 2, 3, 9 PA +12.0 AVERAGE Philadelphia: #2 DIRTIEST
CITY; 2, 3, 4 NJ + 15.0 ABOVE AVERAGE Severe Urban Littering; 4, 5,
6, 7, 9 MA +15.0 ABOVE AVERAGE 6, 7, 8 MD +15.5 ABOVE AVERAGE
Baltimore: #6 DIRTIEST CITY; 4, 6, 7 NY +16.5 BEST New York: #5
DIRTIEST CITY; 6, 7, 8 NH +17.0 BEST 4, 6, 8 VT +18.5 BEST 5, 8 RI
+19.0 BEST 4, 6, 7 CT +19.5 BEST Severe Urban Littering; 5, 6, 7 ME
+20.5 BEST 5, 6 VA +12.5 AVERAGE OH +12.0 AVERAGE FL +14.5 ABOVE
AVERAGE IL +6.5 WORST TX +7.5 WORST CA +23.0 BEST NV +5.0 WORST WA
+26.0 BEST KY +0.0 WORST(NECoPA States in Bold)Remarks:1-High Per
Capita Waste Disposals 2- High Litter/Debris Crash Deaths 3- High
Public Servant Corruption Convictions 4-No Container Deposits5-No
Anti-Litter Slogan 6-Poor Highway Maintenance Integrity 7-Poor
Driver Knowledge Litter Laws 8-No Comprehensive
Recycling9-Designation Decline From 2008 (sources: Spacek, 2011
TRAVEL+LEISURE).
8. Scorecards National Designations: NECOPA StatesORANGE-Below
Average; YELLOW-Average; LIGHT GREEN-Above Average; DARK GREEN-Best
[Pictured left to right, from Northernmost Maine () to Southernmost
Delaware/Maryland]
9. NECOPA States Urban Littering/Dumping Belt Hartford County,
Connecticut to Prince Georges County, MarylandNotable Affected
Governments (in Red): Philadelphia County, New York Citys 5
Counties, Baltimore City. Additional Problem Counties (in Yellow)
(sources: Reports/Observations; Spacek; 2011 Travel+Leisure)
10. Case Study: Three NECOPA States Approaches to Litter Source
Reduction--Delaware vs. Pennsylvania vs. Vermont DE PA VTPOPULATION
(2010) 891, 495 12, 702, 379
625,741ANTI-LITTER/ENVIRONMENTALAGENCIES DELDOT PENNDOT VTRANS
DDNREC PENN DEP VANRLITTER REMOVAL EXPENDITURES,MOST RECENT ANNUAL
PERIOD n/a $8.729 Million $625,000TOTAL VOLUMES COLLECTED,MOST
RECENT ANNUAL PERIOD 50,821 Bags (30-gal) n/a 220 tonsPROMINENT
PROGRAMS Adopt a- Highway Adopt-a Highway NO Adopt-a Highway
Imagine Litter-Free Delaware Clean-Up Day PA Cleanways Others: n/a
Litter BrigadesTIMES PUBLIC PROPERTIESCLEANED ANNUALLY Daily,
Monday-Friday As needed, when available Once yearly (Spring); large
items:constantly No Official Cleanliness Measure Standard No
Official Cleanliness Measure Standard No Official Cleanliness
MeasureStandard An alternate activity when other scheduled projects
delayedNUMBER SPECIFICANTI-LITTER STATUTES 1 6 1MAX FINANCIAL
FINEPER VIOLATION $287.50 $900 $500DEBRIS/LITTER VEHICLECRASH
DEATHS (2008) 4 46 1SCORECARD NATIONALDESIGNATION (2011) Below
Average Average Best(sources: Confidential Officials
Communications; Spacek; State Agencies and respective websites;
U.S. Census-2010)
11. Conclusion Budget shortfalls ARE hampering short term
litter abatements procedures in all eleven NECoPA States. Last 20+
years, polls (Gallup) show majority of American feel public sector
not working enough to protect the environment. Littering/Dumping
still remains danger to public safety, health and welfare, while
hurting economic development and corporate job relocations. Some
NECOPA states choose to engage in poor litter abatements, in good
OR and bad economic times; some doing double standard litter
removal procedures based on population density (and political
preferences/accommodations) to a preferred local jurisdiction
(rural areas appear cleaner than urban ones). Recommendations for
NECOPA States--More waste receptacles/bins along sidewalks in
Philadelphia, New York, Baltimore and high-littered urban
jurisdictions.--Stronger, increased police/sheriff enforcement and
prosecution with existing litter-dumping laws. Crack down on urban
male gang littering inprominent cities .--Implement more
state/local litter reporting hotlines--Summarize state
litter/dumping laws and fines inside Licensed Drivers handbooks in
New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland,Connecticut and Rhode
Island.--Vastly improve state highway maintenance routines in New
Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland, Connecticut, Maine and Rhode
Island.--Adopt Container Deposits legislation in PA, NJ, MD, NH and
RI; Comprehensive Recycling in NY, MA, NH and VT.--Reduce HIGH
litter/debris accident fatalities across the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.--Adopt proven, litter reducing Litter Slogan
Campaigns in the States of New Jersey and Connecticut.--Increase
access to reliable, uniform government litter abatement data and
true outcome measures for facilitating research comparisons.--Six
member states are prime candidates for a comprehensive litter
study: Delaware, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Connecticut,
andIn Rhode Island. See The American State Litter Scorecard website
by Bellstrike, for more details