Author
Abstract
Environmental remediation and infrastructure spending have a significant potential role in reducing pollution and supporting workers and communities affected by a transition to clean energy. This review examines major federal policies related to these two areas, highlighting the existing evidence on program effectiveness across multiple metrics.Environmental remediation programs can provide near-term job opportunities and restore sites to economic use in regions with a history of pollution, including pollution from energy extraction and consumption. The evidence is strong that remediation increases nearby property values and provides job opportunities during cleanup. Depending on their design and implementation, increased efforts in this area could benefit energy communities and communities affected by the legacy of environmental injustice.Recent research suggests that some of these programs, including remediating abandoned oil and gas wells, can provide direct jobs at relatively low cost, but evidence on the cost-effectiveness of job creation for the Superfund and Brownfields programs is mixed. Important questions regarding employment effects of remediation are whether they persist over time, and which workers and communities benefit most from these job opportunities.Infrastructure programs for highways, public transport, and clean water also have the potential to support employment and economic growth in communities heavily dependent on fossil energy. Although economists have debated whether transportation infrastructure investment increases overall economic activity or merely redistributes it, the latter outcome may be valuable in the context of an energy transition, particularly if new infrastructure serves communities negatively affected by a shift away from fossil energy.Some infrastructure projects, particularly those providing clean water, can address the legacy of surface and groundwater pollution in some fossil energy producing and consuming communities. In addition, infrastructure investment—depending on its design and implementation—has the potential to reduce a legacy of environmental injustice.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rff:report:rp-20-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Resources for the Future (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffffus.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.