Measuring Our Nation's Natural Resources and Environmental
Sustainability: Highlights of a Forum Jointly Convened by the
Comptroller General of the United States and the National Academy
of Science (24-OCT-07, GAO-08-127SP).
One of the greatest challenges facing the United States in the
21st century is sustaining our natural resources and safeguarding
our environmental assets for future generations while promoting
economic growth and maintaining our quality of life. To manage
natural resources effectively and efficiently, policymakers need
information and methods to analyze the dynamic interplay between
the economy and the environment. Enhancing the information to
make sound decisions can be facilitated by developing national
environmental accounts. These accounts provide a framework for
organizing information on the status, use, and value of natural
resources and environmental assets, as well as on expenditures on
environmental protection and resource management. While many
countries have developed and are using environmental accounts,
the United States lags behind. GAO and the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) convened this forum to discuss developing accounts
in the United States. Participants included U.S. federal agency
officials and national and international statistical, energy,
environment, and natural resource experts. Comments expressed do
not necessarily represent the views of any one participant or the
organizations that these participants represent, including GAO
and NAS.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-08-127SP
ACCNO: A77550
TITLE: Measuring Our Nation's Natural Resources and
Environmental Sustainability: Highlights of a Forum Jointly
Convened by the Comptroller General of the United States and the
National Academy of Science
DATE: 10/24/2007
SUBJECT: Accounting standards
Data collection
Economic analysis
Economic development
Economic indicators
Economic policies
Economic research
Environmental policies
Environmental protection
International cooperation
Lessons learned
Natural resources
Strategic planning
CG Forum
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-08-127SP
* [1]Introduction from the Comptroller General of the United Stat
* [2]Introduction from the National Academy of Sciences
* [3]Criteria to Help in Developing Environmental Accounts in the
* [4]Criteria for Focusing U.S. Efforts to Develop Environmental
* [5]Relevance to the Objective
* [6]Data Availability and Quality
* [7]Ability to Provide Information on Current Natural Wealth
* [8]Timeliness
* [9]Most Critical Components of Environmental Accounting for the
* [10]Perspectives and Lessons Learned from the International Comm
* [11]International Perspectives on Environmental Accounting
* [12]International Efforts to Standardize Environmental
Accountin
* [13]Environmental Accounting as a Tool for Informing
Sustainable
* [14]U.S. Absence in International Environmental Accounting
Effor
* [15]Cautioning Against Adjusting GDP to Account for
Environmenta
* [16]Key Lessons Learned from Other Countries
* [17]Key Challenges and Strategies for Developing Environmental A
* [18]Key Challenges to Developing Environmental Accounts
* [19]Strategies for Developing Environmental Accounts
* [20]General Observations and Next Steps
* [21]Appendix I: Agenda
* [22]Appendix II: List of Participants
* [23]Moderators
* [24]Participants
* [25]Appendix III: Background on Components of Environmental Acco
* [26]Background
* [27]Appendix IV: Background on Selected Other Countries' Experie
* [28]Background
* [29]Canada
* [30]Australia
* [31]Netherlands
* [32]Appendix V: Background on Key Challenges
* [33]Background
* [34]Appendix VI: Presentation Given by the Comptroller General o
* [35]Appendix VII: Contacts and Acknowledgments
* [36]Contacts
* [37]Acknowledgments
* [38]Related Products
* [39]Related NAS Products
* [40]Related GAO Products
* [41]GAO's Mission
* [42]Order by Mail or Phone
* [43]PDF6-Ordering Information.pdf
* [44]Order by Mail or Phone
Contents
Letter 1
Introduction from the Comptroller General of the United States 1
Introduction from the National Academy of Sciences 5
Criteria to Help in Developing Environmental Accounts in the United States
6
Perspectives and Lessons Learned from the International Community 8
Key Challenges and Strategies for Developing Environmental Accounts 12
General Observations and Next Steps 15
Appendix I Agenda 17
Appendix II List of Participants 19
Appendix III Background on Components of Environmental Accounting 21
Appendix IV Background on Selected Other Countries' Experiences 23
Appendix V Background on Key Challenges 25
Appendix VI Presentation Given by the Comptroller General of the United
States 27
Appendix VII Contacts and Acknowledgments 32
Related Products 33
Related NAS Products 33
Related GAO Products 33
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. The published product may be reproduced
and distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO.
However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or other
material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you
wish to reproduce this material separately.
Abbreviations
EA Bureau of Economic Analysis
GDP gross domestic product
NAMEA National Accounting Matrix including Environmental Accounts
NAS National Academy of Sciences
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
SEEA 2003 Handbook of National Accounting: Integrated Environmental and
Economic Accounting 2003
UN United Nations
UNCEEA United Nations Committee of Experts on Environmental-Economic
Accounting
United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, DC 20548
Introduction from the Comptroller General of the United States
The United States faces a range of challenges to its continued security
and prosperity in the 21st century. Widely discussed examples of these
challenges include a growing fiscal imbalance driven by ballooning
entitlement expenditures for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and a
health care system that many experts believe is already in crisis. Another
important 21st century challenge is sustaining our natural resources and
safeguarding our environmental assets for future generations while
promoting economic growth and maintaining a high relative quality of life.
A critical first step to addressing this challenge is to ensure that
sufficient and reliable information exists to take stock of current
conditions, set goals, and measure progress. The United States faces a
range of challenges to its continued security and prosperity in the 21st
century. Widely discussed examples of these challenges include a growing
fiscal imbalance driven by ballooning entitlement expenditures for Social
Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and a health care system that many
experts believe is already in crisis. Another important 21st century
challenge is sustaining our natural resources and safeguarding our
environmental assets for future generations while promoting economic
growth and maintaining a high relative quality of life. A critical first
step to addressing this challenge is to ensure that sufficient and
reliable information exists to take stock of current conditions, set
goals, and measure progress.
Currently, policymakers lack the information needed to understand the
potential environmental impacts of their decisions and the economic
implications of changes to the environment and our natural resources. In
contrast, based on decades of development and refinement, a wealth of
information is available about production and income in the national
economic accounts. These accounts provide policymakers with key national
economic indicators, such as growth in health care spending and the change
in economic investment, that help policymakers understand the state of the
economy, monitor trends, and make projections that inform policy debates.
Based in part on the data in the national economic accounts, policymakers
can choose whether and how to take action to influence economic
conditions. However, there are no comparable national environmental
accounts even though the environment and our natural assets influence our
economic condition and collective well-being. While environmental data are
collected at various national and subnational levels, limitations in the
data diminish its value to policymakers. The data are incomplete, vary in
quality, and often are not comparable, resulting in a lack of key national
environmental indicators to comprehensively understand the state of the
environment or how it is changing over time. Currently, policymakers lack
the information needed to understand the potential environmental impacts
of their decisions and the economic implications of changes to the
environment and our natural resources. In contrast, based on decades of
development and refinement, a wealth of information is available about
production and income in the national economic accounts. These accounts
provide policymakers with key national economic indicators, such as growth
in health care spending and the change in economic investment, that help
policymakers understand the state of the economy, monitor trends, and make
projections that inform policy debates. Based in part on the data in the
national economic accounts, policymakers can choose whether and how to
take action to influence economic conditions. However, there are no
comparable national environmental accounts even though the environment and
our natural assets influence our economic condition and collective
well-being. While environmental data are collected at various national and
subnational levels, limitations in the data diminish its value to
policymakers. The data are incomplete, vary in quality, and often are not
comparable, resulting in a lack of key national environmental indicators
to comprehensively understand the state of the environment or how it is
changing over time.
Consequently, decisions are made with inadequate information about
potential environmental impacts and economic or social consequences. For
example, Hurricane Katrina caused massive devastation, including the loss
of over 1,300 lives and billions of dollars in property damage, in part,
because the wetlands that would have served as natural buffers to the
storm had been lost to development. Better information on the wetlands'
value to the economy could potentially have resulted in decisions that
would have reduced the damage caused by the hurricane. Consequently,
decisions are made with inadequate information about potential
environmental impacts and economic or social consequences. For example,
Hurricane Katrina caused massive devastation, including the loss of over
1,300 lives and billions of dollars in property damage, in part, because
the wetlands that would have served as natural buffers to the storm had
been lost to development. Better information on the wetlands' value to the
economy could potentially have resulted in decisions that would have
reduced the damage caused by the hurricane.
The United Nations (UN), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD), and other international institutions have recommended
that countries develop environmental accounts. Environmental accounts
provide a framework for collecting and organizing information on the
status, use, and value of the nation's natural resources and environmental
assets, as well as on expenditures on environmental protection and
resource management. To support the development of such accounts, the UN,
European Commission, International Monetary Fund, OECD, and the World Bank
issued a handbook in 2003 for use by both national and international
agencies for compiling environmental accounts reflecting their information
needs and priorities.^1 This handbook describes the following four
components of environmental accounting:
o Natural resource asset accounts, which primarily include
information on stocks of natural resources.
o Pollution and material flow accounts, which provide information
at the industry level about the use of energy and materials and
the generation of pollutants and solid waste.
o Environmental protection and resource management expenditure
accounts, which identify expenditures made by industry,
government, and households to protect the environment or manage
resources.
o Environmentally adjusted macroeconomic aggregates, which include
indicators of sustainability, such as an environmentally adjusted
net domestic product.
Many industrialized countries, such as Australia, Canada, and
France, and some developing countries, including Namibia and the
Philippines, have developed some components of environmental
accounting and continue to refine their accounts. For example, to
better understand how to make the most of Australia's limited
water resources, the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the
National Water Commission have produced three water accounts since
2000 that track the supply and use of water in the Australian
economy. In addition, since the early 1990s, Canada has annually
produced environmental accounts, which have been used, among other
things, to develop environment-economy indicators such as
urban-rural land use change and annual stock estimates for timber,
energy, and mineral resources. The United States, however, lags
behind these and other countries.
^1United Nations, Handbook of National Accounting: Integrated
Environmental and Economic Accounting 2003 (New York, N.Y.: 2003).
In the United States, in 1992, the Department of Commerce's Bureau
of Economic Analysis (BEA) began developing a set of environmental
accounts called the Integrated Economic and Environmental
Satellite Accounts. BEA created prototype accounts for the mineral
resources sector and planned to continue its work by developing
accounts for other sectors. However, from fiscal year 1995 through
fiscal year 2002, congressional appropriations committees directed
BEA not to pursue this initiative. Although this restriction has
now been lifted, to date no funding has been appropriated for BEA
to resume its work.
In 1999 and again in 2005, two independent National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) panels, the first commissioned by the Department of
Commerce and the second by the Glaser Progress Foundation, found
that developing a set of comprehensive environmental accounts
should be a high priority for the nation. The panels concluded
that these accounts can have many benefits. Environmental accounts
can provide policymakers with ecological indicators and
descriptive statistics to monitor the environment's contribution
to the economy and the economy's impact on the environment. In
addition, environmental accounting can potentially serve as a tool
for strategic planning and policy analysis to identify the
implications of different regulations, taxes, and consumption
patterns on environmental sustainability and paths to sustainable
development of specific economic activities. For example, the
United States currently lacks reliable, comprehensive information
on fish stocks and the extent to which certain fish stocks are
being depleted. More comprehensive data could help federal fishery
managers better identify appropriate harvest limits and provide
policymakers with better information to use in negotiating
international fishing treaties.
BEA officials recently indicated that they will participate in any
cross-cutting Administration initiative to develop environmental
accounts as long as Congress supports the effort and the
initiative is led by the agencies that gather and analyze the
data. Initial steps toward developing environmental accounts
include raising awareness of the importance of such accounts,
obtaining support for such accounts, and prioritizing
developmental efforts by identifying features and characteristics
needed to make the accounts as useful as possible. Developing
environmental accounts will require a long-term commitment.
Despite some challenges, the effort could produce substantial
public benefits for the nation.
Building on a prior collaborative effort on key national indicator
systems,^2 GAO and NAS jointly convened a forum on June 19, 2007,
to discuss (1) criteria to help in developing environmental
accounts in the United States, (2) lessons learned from the
international community, and (3) strategies for overcoming
challenges to developing environmental accounts in the United
States. (See app. I for the agenda.) In addition, participants
spoke generally about some of the benefits of environmental
accounting and potential next steps to developing environmental
accounts in the United States. The forum brought together a
diverse array of experts, including representatives from
government, the international community, nonprofit organizations,
industry, and academia. (See app. II for a list of participants.)
This forum was designed so participants could comment on these
issues openly, without individual attribution, in order to
facilitate a rich, frank, and substantive discussion.
This report summarizes the ideas and themes that emerged at the
forum, the collective discussion of participants, and comments
received from participants based on a draft of this report. The
highlights summarized in this report do not necessarily represent
the views of any individual participant or the organizations that
these participants represent, including GAO and NAS.
We want to thank all the forum participants for taking the time to
share their knowledge, insights, and perspectives. We will benefit
from these insights as we carry out our work, and we look forward
to working with the forum's participants on this and other issues
of mutual interest and concern in the future.
David M. Walker
Comptroller General of the United States
^2GAO, Forum on Key National Indicators: Assessing the Nation's Position
and Progress, [56]GAO-03-672SP (Washington, D.C.: May 1, 2003).
Introduction from the National Academy of Sciences
The National Academy of Sciences appreciated the opportunity to
jointly convene the GAO/NAS Forum on Measuring Our Nation's
Natural Wealth and Environmental Sustainability. The NAS
recognizes the importance of the topic, and, indeed, issues in
environmental accounting have been the subject of major reports by
panels convened under NAS's Committee on National Statistics (see
the 1999 report Nature's Numbers--Expanding the National Economic
Accounts to Include the Environment and the 2005 report Beyond the
Market--Designing Nonmarket Accounts for the United States).
I and the other NAS staff who worked with GAO staff to convene the
forum valued the collegial relationship that characterized every
aspect of the project. The discussions at the forum were
illuminating of issues and concerns that merit attention in the
development of environmental accounts. The NAS is pleased to have
contributed to this effort.
Constance F. Citro
Director, Committee on National Statistics
National Academy of Sciences
October 24, 2007
Criteria to Help in Developing Environmental Accounts in the United States
Participants suggested several criteria for the United States to
use in determining what components of environmental accounting to
develop. In addition, participants identified which components are
most critical to develop first. To ensure a common framework from
which to discuss environmental accounting, we provided
participants with background information on the four components of
environmental accounting prior to the forum (see app. III).
Criteria for Focusing U.S. Efforts to Develop Environmental Accounts
Participants suggested four broad criteria to use in focusing U.S.
efforts to develop environmental accounts. These criteria included
relevance to the main policy objective, availability and quality
of data, ability to provide information on both current and future
natural wealth, and timeliness.
Relevance to the Objective
Participants generally agreed that the first step in identifying
what components of environmental accounting to develop is
determining the overall policy objective for the accounts.
Participants made the following suggestions in this regard:
o Identify all possible objectives and then prioritize the
objectives to determine what components of environmental
accounting to develop.
o Determine which policy questions are most pressing and design
accounts to answer those questions. History has shown that
progress is made more easily when problems are more urgent in
nature. Some participants cited climate change as a pressing
concern, and suggested environmental accounts as a way to help
inform decision making as climate change policies are developed.
o Focus on areas where environmental accounts will provide new
information to enhance policy decision making. The most useful
accounts will provide data that policymakers need but would
otherwise lack to inform their actions.
o Do not dedicate funds to developing environmental accounts until
a clear objective is established. To emphasize this point, one
participant explained that because Norway and Sweden did not
sufficiently develop their accounts to inform policy, the accounts
have ultimately been underutilized. Additionally, one participant
explained that, at times, agencies start initiatives by doing
whatever is easiest instead of identifying and beginning work on
the most critical or beneficial areas. This participant warned to
resist such a tendency when developing environmental accounts.
Data Availability and Quality
Participants generally agreed that data availability, gaps, and
quality need to be considered when determining what components of
environmental accounting to develop. Participants made the
following suggestions in this regard:
o Identify sources of available, reliable, and consistent data.
Data used in environmental accounts must be of good quality.
o Ensure, to the extent possible, that the data collected at the
national level are useful at the regional and state levels so that
local managers can also use the information for decision making.
o Pursue data consistency for comparability purposes across
jurisdictional boundaries, both within the United States and
internationally. Consistent measures will allow analysts to value
resources and assess sustainability throughout political and
environmental systems and at varying levels within those systems.
Ability to Provide Information on Current Natural Wealth
Participants generally agreed that environmental accounts
developed by the United States should provide information on the
nation's current natural wealth. In addition, this data could be
collected in such a way to allow analysts to make projections of
future natural wealth. These projections would enable policymakers
to better understand the implications of current consumption on
future natural wealth. Participants made the following comments in
this regard:
o Our nation has an obligation not to unfairly disadvantage future
generations by overconsumption of resources today. Environmental
accounting can provide data needed to ensure sustainable patterns
of natural resource use.
o To determine natural wealth, it is important to include monetary
values for the natural resources and environmental assets that are
included in our nation's environmental accounts. Some participants
noted that, while it is difficult, appropriate and accepted
methodologies need to be developed to value our natural resources
and environmental assets.
Timeliness
Some participants noted that accounts produced on a regular basis
are generally more useful than irregularly or occasionally
published accounts. Several participants explained that
identifying an appropriate time period for updating accounts is
important for obtaining trend data. The trend data derived from
accounts over time can be used to predict the status of the
nation's natural resources and environmental assets, understand
how changes in the quality and quantity of these resources and
assets will affect the economy, and evaluate trade-offs of policy
options.
Most Critical Components of Environmental Accounting for the United States
Participants generally agreed that pollution and material flow
accounts, which provide information at the industry level about
the generation of pollutants and solid waste and the use of energy
and materials, are the most critical accounts for the United
States to develop first. In addition to pollution and material
flow accounts, participants identified natural resource asset
accounts and environmental protection and resource management
expenditure accounts as high priorities for the nation. Some
participants noted that the United States does not have nationwide
inventories of natural resources. One participant cited the lack
of data on mineral reserves as a prominent example.
As a long-term goal, one participant noted that, in 1999, NAS
recommended a comprehensive set of environmental accounts for the
nation.^3 Participants generally agreed that building a
comprehensive set of accounts will be technically challenging and
will take place incrementally over a long period of time. One
participant likened the building of a comprehensive set of
environmental accounts to the slow and gradual development of the
national income and product accounts that took place during the
1920s and 1930s.
Perspectives and Lessons Learned from the International Community
Participants from the international community described their
perspectives on environmental accounting and some key lessons
learned from other countries' experiences. We provided
participants with general information about select foreign
countries' experiences prior to the forum (see app. IV).
International Perspectives on Environmental Accounting
Common themes expressed by participants from the international
community included the need to standardize environmental
accounting concepts and practices internationally, the potential
for environmental accounting to inform sustainable development,
and the noticeable absence of the United States in the
international advancement of environmental accounting. Some
participants also expressed concern about using environmental
accounts to produce official measures of gross domestic product
(GDP) adjusted to account for environmental goods and
services--also known as "green" GDP--because this approach faces
significant methodological challenges.
^3National Academy of Sciences, Nature's Numbers: Expanding the National
Economic Accounts to Include the Environment (Washington, D.C.: 1999).
International Efforts to Standardize Environmental Accounting
Concepts and Practices
Several participants described efforts by the United Nations,
Eurostat, and other international organizations to standardize
environmental accounting concepts and practices, such as water
accounting practices. According to these participants,
standardizing environmental accounting concepts and practices can
yield important benefits. For example, standardization would allow
for comparability across different nations' environmental
accounting data, such as for energy and water. According to one
participant, standardization and comparability of environmental
accounting data would enhance efforts to mitigate climate change,
as well as other leading environmental and natural resources
challenges facing the international community.
One participant sketched the development of environmental
accounting at the UN, focusing on the following two salient
events: (1) joint publication of the Handbook of National
Accounting: Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting 2003
(SEEA 2003) and (2) formation of the United Nations Committee of
Experts on Environmental-Economic Accounting (UNCEEA). According
to this participant, a major objective of the UN and UNCEEA is to
further elaborate and refine the SEEA 2003 and elevate it to an
internationally recognized formal accounting standard, with
standardized and formalized reporting requirements. Another
participant questioned this publication's suitability as a
universal standard for environmental accounting. According to this
participant, SEEA 2003 has too much of a "green tilt," is not
sufficiently grounded in rigorous economic principles, and has not
generated professional consensus. Another participant pointed out
that SEEA 2003 is a starting point for developing consensus among
all stakeholders and suggested that achieving consensus on the
concepts and practices will require more time.
Another participant explained that 36 countries have already
standardized their water accounting practices per SEEA 2003, and
approximately 36 additional countries are currently in the process
of standardizing theirs. According to this participant, the
international environmental accounting community could continue to
gradually standardize concepts and practices for natural resource
categories, eventually constructing a comprehensive environmental
accounting system. One participant also noted that, for countries
to adopt meaningful environmental accounting practices, there
needs to be a credible, unified voice that articulates standard
concepts and practices. Another participant cited an example of
varying definitions of what constitutes a natural resource "stock"
and noted that a commonly agreed upon definition would increase
consistency among countries.
Environmental Accounting as a Tool for Informing Sustainable
Development
Several participants stated that environmental accounting could
serve as a tool for informing policies attempting to foster
sustainable development in both developed and developing
countries. One participant noted that the European Union's
explicit environmental policy goal is sustainable
development--characterized by the participant as development that
breaks the link between economic growth and environmental
degradation. Under the goal of sustainable development,
environmental accounting is a useful analytical tool for gathering
and organizing relevant data, the participant explained.
Another participant observed that development agencies often lack
a common metric and even a common language for describing the
environmental ramifications of development projects. To ameliorate
this situation, the participant suggested that environmental
accounting--because it ascribes values to environmental goods and
services, tracks those values across time, and provides
information on the relative costs and benefits of economic
development and environmental trade-offs--could serve as a
valuable common language for communicating about environmental
issues with constituents in developing countries.
U.S. Absence in International Environmental Accounting Efforts
Several participants indicated that, although the United States
discontinued its environmental accounting work in the mid-1990s,
many other countries and major international organizations have
continued to develop environmental accounting. Several
participants noted the conspicuous absence of the United States
from international efforts to develop a standardized framework for
environmental accounting. Participants pointed out that, given its
global economic significance, U.S. involvement is essential for
further elaboration and eventual standardization of environmental
accounting concepts and practices. One participant noted that the
lack of a role by the United States in developing internationally
comparable databases of common environmental information is
glaring because the country produces and consumes natural
resources and generates pollution in proportionally large
quantities compared with other countries.
Another participant acknowledged that while there is no consensus
on the concepts and practices used by countries to develop
environmental accounts, those countries are nonetheless actively
collaborating in developing accounts through international
organizations like the UN, Eurostat, and OECD. Continued U.S.
absence in international environmental accounting efforts only
delays this process and hinders international efforts to develop
more informed environmental and natural resource policies.
Cautioning Against Adjusting GDP to Account for Environmental
Goods and Services
Some participants warned against developing a "green" GDP that
would incorporate the costs to and contributions of the
environment within traditional national economic accounts. One
participant characterized developing a green GDP as a risky
endeavor because of significant methodological uncertainties. This
participant described a foreign government's 2-year effort to
calculate such a measure and noted that, in the end, the national
statistical agency determined that it was not able to produce such
a measure. One participant asserted that some types of
environmentally adjusted macroeconomic aggregates are biased
toward including environmental costs and ignoring some
environmental benefits, and for this reason should not be pursued
by countries developing environmental accounts. Instead of such a
measure, some participants advised an environmental accounting
approach focused on natural wealth.
One participant defended the practice of calculating a green GDP.
According to this participant, developing a green GDP is a
worthwhile endeavor for countries to undertake in order to better
understand, at an aggregate level and in proportion to economic
activity, the influence of economic decisions on the environment
and vice versa.
Key Lessons Learned from Other Countries
Participants shared the following lessons learned from other
countries' experiences in developing environmental accounts:
o Provide data in a timely manner. Two participants stressed the
importance of providing environmental accounting information to
policymakers in a timely manner. They illustrated this point with
examples of information derived from environmental accounts that
reached decision makers and policy analysts too late to be of any
influence. To prevent such situations, one participant recommended
that certain aspects of environmental accounts--depending upon a
country's most pressing environmental-economic concerns--be made
available to decision makers on a quarterly basis. The participant
explained that quarterly reporting would ensure that relevant
information about interactions between the economy and the
environment reach decision makers within a reasonable time frame
for action.
o Political interest can wax and wane. Another participant pointed
out that interest in environmental accounting among a country's
political leadership waxes and wanes according to shifting
political agendas. In light of the varying receptivity to
environmental accounting information, the participant warned that
practitioners should be cognizant of differing attitudes toward
information derived from environmental accounts.
o Environmental accounting is a long-term investment. One
participant noted that developing environmental accounts is a
long-term, gradual process. It must be acceptable to gradually
develop a system of environmental accounts, rather than
implementing a comprehensive environmental accounting system all
at once. The participant also noted, however, that while the
ultimate benefits of environmental accounting can only be realized
in the long-term, short-term benefits can also be achieved,
including improved data collection across a range of government
statistics and more rigorous, contextually sophisticated
environmental indicators.
Key Challenges and Strategies for Developing Environmental Accounts
Participants discussed several key challenges to developing
environmental accounts in the United States. Participants also
suggested numerous strategies, a number of which were applicable
to several of the challenges. To ensure a common framework from
which to discuss the key challenges, we provided participants with
a list of challenges prior to the forum (see app. V). These
challenges included institutional differences based on agencies'
varying missions, a need for support from policymakers and others,
a need for financial resources, methodological uncertainty, and
data availability, compatibility, and reliability.
Key Challenges to Developing Environmental Accounts
Participants broadly agreed that the greatest challenge to
developing environmental accounts in the United States is the need
to generate support from policymakers and others. Some
participants expressed concern that Congress might halt any new
efforts to develop accounts, as happened with BEA's previous
effort in the 1990s when congressional members from coal-producing
states raised methodological and other concerns. Therefore,
participants emphasized the need for building and sustaining
support among policymakers and the public to develop environmental
accounts.
After the need for political support, participants generally
agreed that institutional differences were the next greatest
challenge to developing environmental accounts in the United
States. Some participants explained that differences in agencies'
individual missions can hinder collaborative efforts because data
are collected specifically to meet the agencies' needs, and there
is resistance to change the way the data has been collected over
time. In addition, agencies are under pressure to reduce costs and
produce only the most pertinent high-priority information that
programs require. One participant pointed out that the National
Academy of Public Administration is currently working on
identifying ways to improve institutional capabilities and is
developing a set of options for improving coordination of data
collection. The results of this effort might help inform
appropriate institutional arrangements for developing
environmental accounts.
Participants found the other key challenges--the need for funding;
data availability, compatibility, and reliability; and
methodological uncertainty--to be considerable and noted that they
must be confronted in any attempt to develop environmental
accounts. Some participants emphasized the need for appropriate
and accepted methodologies for valuing our natural resources and
environmental assets. One participant explained, for example, that
some natural resource goods and services, such as clean air and
water, are not traded in the market and are, therefore,
methodologically difficult to value. Estimating nonmarket value is
inherently uncertain, raising concerns that including such
estimates in environmental accounts would diminish the usefulness
of existing GDP measures.
Strategies for Developing Environmental Accounts
Participants generally agreed that, while it is important for the
United States to develop environmental accounts, the key
challenges make it a difficult endeavor. Participants also
generally agreed that if developing environmental accounts was
simple, the United States would most likely already have done so,
noting that a general consensus on the need for environmental
accounts dates back to the 1930s. At the same time, one
participant stated that success in developing environmental
accounts is inevitable, although it will be measured in decades
rather than years.
Participants generally agreed that it is possible for the U.S. to
overcome its key challenges to environmental accounting.
Participants provided the following strategies, some of which cut
across several of the identified challenges, to policymakers and
other individuals who seek to develop environmental accounts:
o Understand other countries' experiences with developing
environmental accounts in more depth. Participants broadly agreed
that a GAO report that details other countries' experiences with
establishing environmental accounts would be useful for informing
a U.S. effort to develop accounts.
o Develop an economic case for environmental accounting.
Participants generally agreed that the economic case for
environmental accounting needs to be intergenerational because
environmental accounting is about ensuring that our children and
grandchildren experience a comparable standard of living. One
participant explained that the United States is a wealthy nation
in part because it has a healthy environment. The participant
suggested that it would be helpful for advocates of environmental
accounting to develop narratives that explain how the health of
the environment is changing and reveal the potential economic and
social consequences that can result from those changes.
Participants generally advised against using the concept of
sustainability to justify developing environmental accounts
because the term is sometimes viewed negatively. Instead,
participants suggested possible alternatives, such as using
natural capital and natural resource stewardship as the principal
rationale behind developing environmental accounts.
o Focus on accountability and performance. One participant
suggested that when making the case for environmental accounting,
advocates should move from discussing "accounting" to emphasizing
"accountability and performance." This participant noted that such
a change in language would help focus attention on the federal
government's poor job of assessing the performance of
environmental programs and help inform the public that while the
United States has well-established environmental laws, it does not
have effective ways of measuring their performance. Another
participant disagreed with the notion that the government does not
measure the performance of environmental programs. The participant
speculated that most programs have metrics for measuring
performance, while also acknowledging that those metrics may not
be the best quality.
o Identify policymakers, technical experts, and others who support
the effort. Participants noted that continued support is critical
for initiating and sustaining efforts to develop environmental
accounts.
o Identify and solicit the help of environmental experts.
Specialists in environmental accounting and related technical
fields can be instrumental in assisting these efforts.
o Use an incremental approach. Participants generally agreed that
an incremental approach must be used because the combination of
challenges--questions about how the data will be used, broad
apathy from policymakers and others, and technical
difficulties--can appear insurmountable and thereby derail the
effort. Interim measures must be developed if the United States is
to successfully implement national environmental accounting.
o Take the time necessary to develop quality accounts. One
participant compared the effort to develop environmental accounts
with the effort to create national economic accounts that started
in the 1920s. The effort to establish our national economic
accounts took decades to complete, while the data improved over
time. Participants generally agreed that creating environmental
accounts should be taken seriously but slowly.
General Observations and Next Steps
Participants provided general observations on the overall value of
environmental accounting to the United States and sustaining an
effort to develop environmental accounts. Participants broadly
agreed that the United States should develop environmental
accounts and that environmental accounting can serve as a valuable
tool to better account for the nation's natural resources and
environmental assets. In addition, participants generally agreed
that developing environmental accounts is important for both U.S.
environmental and economic sustainability.
Some participants discussed comparisons between environmental
accounting and environmental indicators, noting that, unlike
indicators, environmental accounts can help evaluate trade-offs
between policy options, and thereby help inform policymakers'
decisions. They noted that data in environmental accounts can also
be used to develop environmental indicators. Some participants
noted that indicators that are based in environmental accounts are
higher quality indicators.
Several participants offered to be partners in an effort to
develop environmental accounts in the United States but also noted
that they would need support and a designated lead agency to
spearhead the effort. Participants disagreed about which agency
should lead a national effort to develop environmental accounts
but agreed that it will need to be directed and supported by the
Administration and Congress. Some participants believed that BEA
should lead the effort to develop environmental accounts. Other
participants thought that the three agencies that spend the
greatest amount of funding to collect environmental
data--specifically the Departments of Agriculture and the
Interior, and the Environmental Protection Agency--should play
leading roles in the effort. In this regard, one participant noted
the NAS recommendation for cross-agency collaboration with a
policy agency leading the effort. Other participants thought that
a separate entity to collect and analyze data, establish
environmental accounts, and disseminate environmental information
would be a better vehicle than interagency cooperation within the
current federal structure. One participant observed that much work
can be done in the interim, before getting everyone's cooperation.
Finally, participants suggested continuing the discussion on
environmental accounting to build momentum for the effort. Several
participants observed that this forum was a good venue in which to
further the discussion on environmental accounting and noted the
importance of continuing the dialogue among key experts.
Appendix I: Agenda
8:00 a.m. Check-in
8:30 a.m. Opening session
Welcome and introductions
Setting the stage--presentation by the Comptroller General
9:00 a.m. Session I: What components of national environmental
accounts should the United States develop and why?
Presentation on history of environmental accounting in the United
States and components of national environmental accounts
Presenter: Steve Landefeld, Bureau of Economic Analysis
9:15 a.m. Group discussion
o What criteria should be used to determine which
components of environmental accounts should be
developed?
o What specific components of environmental accounts
should the United States develop in the short and
long term?
10:15 a.m. Coffee break
10:30 a.m. Session II: What are the lessons learned from other
countries' experiences in developing environmental accounts?
Presentation on other countries' experiences Presenter:
Glenn-Marie Lange, Columbia University
10:45 a.m. International perspective from select participants
Featured speakers: Ivo Havinga--U.N. Statistical Division Brennan
Van Dyke--U.N. Environment Programme Enrico
Giovannini--Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Pieter Everaers--Eurostat Walter Radermacher--German Federal
Statistical Office Rob Smith--Statistics Canada
11:15 a.m. Group discussion
11:45 a.m. Lunch is distributed
12:00 p.m. Session III: How should the United States address key
challenges in developing environmental accounts?
Presentation on key challenges Presenter: Ted Heintz, White House
Council on Environmental Quality
12:15 p.m. Group discussion
1:15 p.m. Wrap-up
2:00 p.m. Adjournment
Appendix II: List of Participants
Moderators
David M. Walker Comptroller General of the United States U.S.
Government Accountability Office
Glenn-Marie Lange Senior Research Scholar, The Center for Economy,
Environment, and Society Columbia University
Participants
James Boyd Senior Fellow and Director, Energy and Natural
Resources Resources for the Future
Pieter Everaers Director, Agriculture and Environment Statistics
and International Cooperation Eurostat
Ronald S. Fecso Chief Statistician U.S. Government Accountability
Office
John Felmy Chief Economist American Petroleum Institute
Enrico Giovannini Director of Statistics and Chief Statistician
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Howard Gruenspecht Deputy Administrator Energy Information
Administration
Ivo C. Havinga Chief of Branch, Economic Statistics Branch United
Nations Statistics Division
H. Theodore Heintz, Jr. Indicator Coordinator White House Council
on Environmental Quality
Christopher Hoenig Chair, Executive Committee Key National
Indicators Initiative
Christopher B. Kearney Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and
International Affairs U.S. Department of the Interior
Steve Landefeld Director U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
William J. Mates Economist/Research Scientist New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection
Gary W. Mast Deputy Undersecretary for Natural Resources and the
Environment U.S. Department of Agriculture
Steven Murawski Director of Scientific Programs National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration
Susan E. Offutt Chief Economist U.S. Government Accountability
Office
Marcus C. Peacock Deputy Administrator U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Walter Radermacher President German Federal Statistical Office
Carol Raulston Senior Vice President, Communications National
Mining Association
Robert Repetto Professor Yale School of Forestry and Environmental
Studies
Robert A. Robinson Managing Director, Natural Resources and
Environment U.S. Government Accountability Office
Robert Smith Division Director, Environment Accounts and
Statistics Statistics Canada
Brennan Van Dyke Director, Regional Office for North America
United Nations Environment Programme
Appendix III: Background on Components of Environmental Accounting
To ensure a common framework from which to discuss environmental
accounting, we provided participants with information on the four
components of environmental accounting prior to the forum. We
identified these components through literature reviews and
discussions with a range of subject matter experts. The
information provided to forum participants is reproduced below.
Background
As described below, there are four primary components of
environmental accounts. These accounts provide data for varying
purposes and include physical information on resources and
pollution, as well as monetary values.
1. Natural resource asset accounts primarily deal
with stocks of natural resources. These accounts
provide indicators that help monitor the
sustainability of a resource.
a. Physical asset accounts help monitor ecological
sustainability by tracking the physical amount of a
resource.
b. Monetary asset accounts establish a monetary value
for the total national wealth of a resource.
Examples of natural resource accounts include land accounts that
track the conversion of agricultural land to urban settlements and
the value of native forests.
2. Pollution and material flow accounts provide
information at the industry level about the use of
energy and materials and the generation of pollutants
and solid waste. These accounts provide indicators of
sustainability, information on the sources of
environmental pressure, and options for change.
a. Physical flow accounts help set priorities for
policy based on the volume of material use and
pollution.
b. Monetary flow accounts identify relative costs and
benefits of reducing pollution.
Examples of pollution and material flow accounts include time
series accounts for pollution emissions and energy use and an
index of water use, gross domestic product growth, and population
growth.
Appendix IV: Background on Selected Other Countries' Experiences
Prior to the forum, we provided participants with information
about select foreign countries' experiences. We identified key
research and programs through literature reviews and discussions
with international experts and country representatives. The
information provided to forum participants is reproduced below.
Background
Up until the mid-1990s, the United States was on par with other
industrialized nations in developing environmental accounts.
However, since Congress prohibited BEA's work in this area in
fiscal year 1995, many nations' statistical offices and ministries
of environment have developed and implemented sophisticated
natural resource and environmental accounts. In doing so, they
have experienced important lessons that could benefit the U.S.
federal government's implementation of environmental accounting.
Three such countries are Canada, Australia, and the Netherlands.
Canada
Since the early 1990s, Statistics Canada has annually produced
asset, material and energy flow, and environmental protection
expenditure accounts, which together comprise the Canadian System
of Environmental & Resource Accounts. A set of 10
environment-economy indicators has twice been published based on
these accounts. As Canada is perhaps closest to the United States
in size, resource composition, and environmental policies, it
could serve as a useful study in how the United States might
develop a comprehensive system of environmental accounts.
Australia
Much of Australia is arid, and there is extreme year-to-year
variation in the amount of rainfall. To better understand how to
make the most of Australia's limited water resources, the
Australian Bureau of Statistics and the National Water Commission
have tracked and documented the supply and use of water in the
Australian economy since 2000. So far, three water accounts have
been produced. Australia's experience with water accounting could
be particularly relevant for regional water management in the arid
U.S. Southwest and other areas with competing water needs. In
addition to water accounts, Australia produces annual
environmental accounts for subsoil, timber, and land assets.
Australia also produces occasional accounts for energy flows,
greenhouse gas emissions, fish assets, waste flows, and
environmental protection expenditures.
Netherlands
Although the Netherlands is a geographically small, homogenous,
and natural resource-poor country, Statistics Netherlands compiles
rigorous accounts on pollution and material flows. Indeed,
statisticians from the Netherlands developed a widely influential
material flows accounting system--the NAMEA, National Accounting
Matrix including Environmental Accounts. NAMEA functions as an
instrument for a variety of analyses, including the identification
of the economic and environmental effects of consumption of
certain products. In addition, Statistics Netherlands and the
Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency have developed an
Environmental Data Compendium, based in large measure upon these
accounts. The Netherlands' overall experience with the NAMEA
approach may be useful to any country contemplating environmental
accounting.
Appendix V: Background on Key Challenges
To ensure a common framework from which to discuss the key
challenges, we provided participants with a list of challenges
prior to the forum. We identified these challenges through
literature reviews and discussions with experts. The information
provided to forum participants is reproduced below.
Background
The Bureau of Economic Analysis's (BEA) effort to develop
environmental accounts in the early 1990s--as well as other
multilateral and mulitstakeholder efforts such as environmental
indicators--provides policymakers with insight into challenges
that the United States will face in developing national
environmental accounts. To be successful, the U.S. approach will
need to strategically address the following five challenges:
3. Environmental protection and resource management
expenditure accounts identify expenditures made by
industry, government, and households to protect the
environment or manage resources. These accounts help
address questions about regulation, i.e., the cost of
environmental regulation over time; the effectiveness
of environmental protection expenditures and
eco-taxes; and the impact of such expenditures on
prices, productivity, and international
competitiveness. Examples of environmental protection
and resource management expenditure accounts include
fees collected by government for resource use, such
as levies on minerals, forestry, or fisheries, and
funds spent on water treatment and solid waste
management.
4. Environmentally adjusted macroeconomic aggregates
include indicators of sustainability such as an
environmentally adjusted net domestic product. These
aggregates can be physical or monetary and help
assess overall environmental health and economic
progress. Examples of environmentally adjusted
macroeconomic aggregates include theme indicators for
greenhouse gas emissions, acidification, and solid
waste and environmentally adjusted product and income
accounts.
1. Institutional differences--What agencies should be
involved in developing and producing these accounts
and how should their work be coordinated? What new
institutional capabilities or arrangements are
needed?
BEA was the lead agency in past efforts, but
developing environmental accounts will draw upon
expertise, resources, and data held by a diverse
range of federal agencies. For example, to develop a
national forest account, the BEA would need to
aggregate data from the Forest Service, Park Service,
Bureau of Land Management, state forestry agencies,
and others.
2. Need for support--Will agencies have the broad
support needed to devote time and resources to
designing environmental accounts?
The federal government's previous effort to develop
environmental accounts was halted by Congress.
Renewed efforts need the support of the
administration, Congress, and the public.
3. Need for resources--How will the United States
fund the development of environmental accounts?
A new institutional arrangement designed to allow
disparate agencies to collaboratively develop
environmental accounts would require additional
funding. Securing such funding in the present era of
tightly constrained budgets could pose a significant
challenge.
4. Methodological uncertainty--How should the United
States address uncertainties, for example in
measuring and valuing our natural resources and
environmental assets?
In the past, resistance to environmental accounting has stemmed
from questions about the methodological soundness for measuring
stocks and flows of natural resources and quantities of
environmental services and procedures for valuing nonmarket goods
and services. Developing national environmental accounts requires
consensus on methodological approach and implementation
techniques.
5. Data availability, compatibility, and
reliability--What actions are needed to ensure that
the essential data are produced?
Sufficient, compatible, and reliable data must be
available to develop and populate environmental
accounts. While many entities collect relevant data,
it may or may not be available, compatible, and/or
reliable.
Appendix VI: Presentation Given by the Comptroller General of the
United States
Appendix VII: Contacts and Acknowledgments
Contacts
Robert A. Robinson, (202) 512-3841, [45][email protected]
Constance F. Citro, (202) 334-2000, [46][email protected]
Acknowledgments
In addition to the contacts above, James Cosgrove, Acting
Director; Jose Alfredo Gomez, Assistant Director; Richard
Bakewell; John Delicath; and Barbara Patterson, all of GAO; and
Jane Ross, Director, and Christopher Mackie, Study Director, both
of NAS; managed all aspects of the work.
Related Products
Related NAS Products
Beyond the Market: Designing Nonmarket Accounts for the United
States. Washington, D.C.: National Research Council, 2005.
Nature's Numbers: Expanding the National Economic Accounts to
Include the Environment. Washington, D.C.: National Research
Council, 1999.
Related GAO Products
Environmental Information: Status of Federal Data Programs That
Support Ecological Indicators. [47]GAO-05-376 . Washington, D.C.:
September 2, 2005.
Environmental Indicators: Better Coordination Is Needed to Develop
Environmental Indicator Sets That Inform Decisions. [48]GAO-05-52
. Washington, D.C.: November 17, 2004.
Watershed Management: Better Coordination of Data Collection
Efforts Needed to Support Key Decisions. [49]GAO-04-382 .
Washington, D.C.: June 7, 2004.
Geographic Information Systems: Challenges to Effective Data
Sharing. [50]GAO-03-874T . Washington, D.C.: June 10, 2003.
Forum on Key National Indicators: Assessing the Nation's Position
and Progress. [51]GAO-03-672SP . Washington, D.C.: May 1, 2003.
Great Lakes: An Overall Strategy and Indicators for Measuring
Progress Are Needed to Better Achieve Restoration Goals.
[52]GAO-03-515 . Washington, D.C.: April 30, 2003.
Major Management Challenges and Program Risks: Environmental
Protection Agency. [53]GAO-03-112 . Washington, D.C.: January 1,
2003.
Results-Oriented Management: Agency Crosscutting Actions and Plans
in Border Control, Flood Mitigation and Insurance, Wetlands, and
Wildland Fire Management. [54]GAO-03-321 . Washington, D.C.:
December 20, 2002.
Environmental Protection: Observations on Elevating the
Environmental Protection Agency to Cabinet Status. [55]GAO-02-552T
. Washington, D.C.: March 21, 2002.
(360872)
United States Government Accountability Office
Washington, D.C. 20548-0001
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
Address Service Requested
MEASURING OUR NATION'S NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
October 2007
GAO-08-127SP
[57]www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-127SP .
To view the full product, including the scope
and methodology, click on the link above.
For more information, contact Robert Robinson at (202) 512-3841 or
[email protected].
Highlights of [58]GAO-08-127SP , a GAO and NAS forum
October 2007
HIGHLIGHTS OF A GAO/NAS FORUM
Measuring Our Nation's Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability
One of the greatest challenges facing the United States in the 21^st
century is sustaining our natural resources and safeguarding our
environmental assets for future generations while promoting economic
growth and maintaining our quality of life. To manage natural resources
effectively and efficiently, policymakers need information and methods to
analyze the dynamic interplay between the economy and the environment.
Enhancing the information to make sound decisions can be facilitated by
developing national environmental accounts. These accounts provide a
framework for organizing information on the status, use, and value of
natural resources and environmental assets, as well as on expenditures on
environmental protection and resource management. While many countries
have developed and are using environmental accounts, the United States
lags behind.
GAO and the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) convened this forum to
discuss developing accounts in the United States. Participants included
U.S. federal agency officials and national and international statistical,
energy, environment, and natural resource experts. Comments expressed do
not necessarily represent the views of any one participant or the
organizations that these participants represent, including GAO and NAS.
Forum participants discussed potential criteria to help in developing
environmental accounts, lessons learned from the international community,
and strategies for overcoming challenges. Participants also made general
observations about developing these accounts and discussed next steps.
Suggested Criteria to Help in Developing Environmental Accounts
Participants suggested four broad criteria to use in determining what
components of environmental accounting should be developed. These criteria
were identifying the objective of the accounts, considering the
availability and quality of data, ensuring that accounts provide
information on current natural wealth, and considering the timeliness and
regularity with which accounts can be produced. Participants generally
agreed that pollution and material flow accounts, which provide
industry-level information about the generation of pollutants and solid
waste and energy and material use, are most critical for the United States
to develop first.
Lessons Learned from the International Community
Participants shared the following lessons learned from other countries'
experiences in developing environmental accounts:
o Provide data in a timely manner. To be useful to decision
makers, environmental accounting data must be timely.
o Political interest can wax and wane. Shifting political agendas
can affect policymakers' interest in environmental accounting.
o Environmental accounting is a long-term investment. Developing
accounts requires a sustained effort over an extended period.
Strategies for Overcoming Key Challenges
Participants broadly agreed that the greatest challenge to developing
environmental accounts in the United States is the need for support from
policymakers and others. Other key challenges include institutional
differences based on agencies' varying missions; the need for funding;
data availability, compatibility, and reliability; and methodological
uncertainty. Participants suggested the following strategies, among
others, for overcoming these challenges:
o Identify policymakers, experts, and others who support the
effort.
o Build an economic business case for environmental accounting.
o Use an incremental approach.
o Take the time necessary to develop high quality accounts.
General Observations and Next Steps
Participants generally agreed that developing environmental accounts is
important for both our nation's environmental and economic sustainability.
Several participants offered to be partners in an effort to develop U.S.
environmental accounts but noted that they would need congressional
support and a designated lead agency to spearhead the effort.
GAO's Mission
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site ( [59]www.gao.gov ). Each weekday, GAO posts
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To
have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to
[60]www.gao.gov and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
DC 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000
TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202) 512-6061
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
Contact:
Web site: [61]www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [62][email protected]
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Congressional Relations
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [63][email protected] , (202) 512-4400
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Washington, DC 20548
Public Affairs
Susan Becker, Acting Manager, [64][email protected] , (202) 512-4800 U.S.
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington,
DC 20548
References
Visible links
45.mailto:[email protected]
46.mailto:[email protected]
47. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-376
48. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-52
49. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-382
50. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-874T
51. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-672SP
52. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-515
53. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-112
54. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-321
55. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-02-552T
56. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-672SP
57. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-127SP
58. http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-127SP
59. http://www.gao.gov/
60. http://www.gao.gov/
61. http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
62.mailto:[email protected]
63.mailto:[email protected]
64.mailto:[email protected]
*** End of document. ***