Hmm...I believe the conference program does have a balance
between BFs policy, programs, and project/transactional sessions along with some
research and policy reform. However, it depends on the participants on the panel
and what you are looking for. Those interested in research should contact Sarah
Coughlin at Wash U in St. Louis and Peter Meyer
at Univ. of Louisville. She and several other
policy researchers have an informal research network of sorts
That being said, given the conference’s tenor and
size, there could be a few more sessions that integrate research to test the
work of public and private sector practitioners...not the pure academic
modeling...but research that can serve policy reform, programmatic challenges,
and transactional/project efficiency.
What I find interesting in the comments about the
conference thus far is the desire to make the conference something that it is
not. Yes, there is too much political fanfare and celebration, but it was necessary
to help stimulate the thinking and support for BFs redevelopment within
government and the private sector. 10, even 5 years ago, without this
conference, I'm convinced there would not have been a BFs 2002 Act and that
states such as NY would not have been motivated to pass their revised BFs
program two years ago. The Diffusion of Innovation (i.e., the tipping
point) for BFs was advanced at a much faster pace b/c of this conference.
That being said, perhaps it is time to reevaluate what a
more mature movement needs. I'm hoping that EPA or ICMA is using other outreach
approaches on this question (other than list serves and e-mail comments), maybe
consulting with media and outreach experts? Unlike the line from Jerry Maguire
(show me the $$), the BFs conference is about building trust and relationship and
not just saving money in the federal budget.
I would give EPA the same amount of funds that it
spends now and use it for regional conferences, outreach, and workshops every
year in order to ensue the movement sustains itself and grows. Odd years
it could hold the annual BFs Summit (the National Conference) and in even years
there could be a series of regional gatherings that can focus more on specific
types of issues, such as institutional controls (where everyone really needs some
serious assistance) or on the integration of BFs and Smart Growth. Maybe even
convene a symposium of BFs researchers from across the country to spend three
days with policymakers and practitioners to devise a research agenda. How
about an international, comparative BFs session one year?
I’ve been involved for the past three years with
the national vacant properties campaign (www.vacantproperties) and
I’m still amazed at how isolated the worlds of community
development/housing are from their Brownfields brethren and visa-versa. What
about environmental justice and regional equity? The BFs program and the
BFs movement is the only place where the current government can even talk about
these issues. Yes, the SG folks now focus on regional equity, but it
could better integrate the thoughts and interests of the EJ community.
So, my point is there is still much more work to be to
done to advance BFs redevelopment and that gatherings and conferences are more
valuable than perhaps what a government auditor's budgetary analysis will
capture. My vote is for a large gathering every other year to celebrate the successes,
measure its performance, and envision the next ten years of BFs redevelopment,
along with a series of regional gatherings that can help address some the
pending challenges and gaps mentioned above.
Joe Schilling, Assistant Research Professor
Virginia Tech's Metropolitan Institute www.mi.vt.edu
1021 Prince
Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
PH-703-706-8102 FAX-703-518-8009
e-mail: jms33@vt.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org
[mailto:brownfields-bounces@list.cpeo.org] On Behalf Of Lenny Siegel
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 8:36 PM
To: Brownfields Internet Forum
Subject: Re: [CPEO-BIF] How frequently should the NationalBrownfieldsConference
take place?
Submitted by Laura Solitare <lgsolitare@gmail.com>
While the agenda of the annual conference may have changed since I last
attended, I really wouldn't know because I haven't followed it in
several years since I found the conference to be practically irrelevant
to academics and professional planning -- I found it to be too oriented
(to the extreme) to the professional "services" (engineering)
issues. I
wish there was more of a mix of academic/research and
planning/services.
Can anyone tell me if it has changed in the past few years?
Laura Solitare
--
Lenny Siegel
Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight
c/o PSC, 278-A Hope St.,
Mountain View, CA
94041
Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545
Fax: 650/961-8918
<lsiegel@cpeo.org>
http://www.cpeo.org
_______________________________________________
Brownfields mailing list
Brownfields@list.cpeo.org
http://www.cpeo.org/mailman/listinfo/brownfields