I'd love to hear how others feel about the National Parks Service. Have you spent any time in national parks? What did you think of the way they are run?
Thanks for this article. You look so happy and relaxed in the photo and I understand why because I had a chance to visit several parks a few years back. Our parks are a treasure and a visit both humbles and inspires a person to be a better steward of our land. I understand the need for selling trinkets and food at the parks which help fund them, but if I had one wish it would be to offer healthier food at these places. It's junk and does not educate on how we can connect our food to the land. I'd also like to see composting toilets (using bio-digesting organisms) in place of traditional restrooms. Here's to more money for parks, less for weapons programs.
Thanks Tina! I agree with everything you said. I will say, I have found the Parks to be growing more environmentally and health conscious in recent years. I have no data to support this, just my observation, but I have seen them step up the healthier foods and accessibility options. Hopefully, they keep on in that direction!
I enjoyed this thoughtful piece and tribute to our great national parks -- I assume you've seen the Ken Burns documentary series, seek it out if you haven't! While you did a great job demonstrating how the NPS defies stereotypes about the efficacy of federal bureaucracies, I don't think that proves that the stereotypes are not grounded in reality in various other contexts -- especially those lacking the sort of "clear mission" that you note is so important. As complex as park promotion, protection, and management are, they are relatively straightforward compared to working with the "crooked timber" of human beings when it comes to social and economic policies, where organizational incentives and plain old wishful thinking can lead the best-intentioned people awfully far astray. NPS is an important data point but less representative of many of the challenges of public policy than, say, social services.
I appreciate your kind words! But I disagree with the idea that parks are an outlier in the broad scheme of social services. What the NPS has done is shown that with a clear mission, sufficient funding, and public support, government programs can efficiently distribute resources for the public good.
While I agree something like healthcare will require MUCH more complexity, things like education, public transportation, postal services, and cellular communication are all facets of American life that could be easily handled by a government program. In fact, the NPS provides many of these goods IN the parks - why couldn't we use the same blueprint outside of parks?
I grew up a bigger believer in expansive federal programs than I later became studying public policy and working with some of the academics/bureaucrats who design and run those kinds of programs. A lot of the problem is that bureaucracies and agencies tend to quickly start working for their leadership's interests rather than whatever the original mission was, and also that a lot of people attracted to idealistic policy in the abstract lack real world experience and "don't know what they don't know." Once a program is set up it has a budget to defend and grow itself to preserve the status quo, so they tend to become very resistant to feedback and reform. Policy can do tremendous good, but it can also do tremendous harm if we're not very careful, and in my experience there's not nearly enough of a critical mass of very careful people in the field.
I definitely agree that anything (government programs especially) can be misguided, susceptible to human incompetence, and become self-interested. But I also believe that's a reason to improve government programs, not move away from them.
The NPS is a good example in the US, but there are thousands of government programs around the world (social wealth funds, health services, etc.) that run relatively well. We should use those, and the NPS as a model for bigger plans, IMO.
Rather than abandon those ambitions of what government programs can achieve, I'd say the most important thing is to build in robust layers of accountability and avenues for reform. Something like the NPS really needs to be on a national level, which is unfortunately inherently insulated from voters, but a lot of other things can be approached flexibly on a state, local, or regional level that allows citizens to "throw out the bums" if/when they're not performing up to standard.
Thank you so much for this! Our National Park System is a miracle, considering the pushback from everyone who slobbers over the profits lost as long as they're in government hands.
I have a lifetime pass and I cherish it. I don't know how many national parks and seashores and recreation areas I've been to--I've lost count--but I've never visited any of them without being thankful for the foresightedness it took to protect those wild places. And for weathering the challenges I know must exist to keep them going.
I routinely binge-watch Ken Burns' wonderful series on the National Parks and get my 'fix' all over again. The government did this. That same government so many cavalierly want to replace with commerce and big business.
We can't ever let that happen.
Our National Parks are our monuments to the promise that is America.
Perfectly said, Ramona! You're right that we're very fortunate earlier Americans had the foresight to preserve these spaces. I fear that nowadays, such a move would be considered "political" and would never get done.
I'd love to hear how others feel about the National Parks Service. Have you spent any time in national parks? What did you think of the way they are run?
Thanks for this article. You look so happy and relaxed in the photo and I understand why because I had a chance to visit several parks a few years back. Our parks are a treasure and a visit both humbles and inspires a person to be a better steward of our land. I understand the need for selling trinkets and food at the parks which help fund them, but if I had one wish it would be to offer healthier food at these places. It's junk and does not educate on how we can connect our food to the land. I'd also like to see composting toilets (using bio-digesting organisms) in place of traditional restrooms. Here's to more money for parks, less for weapons programs.
Thanks Tina! I agree with everything you said. I will say, I have found the Parks to be growing more environmentally and health conscious in recent years. I have no data to support this, just my observation, but I have seen them step up the healthier foods and accessibility options. Hopefully, they keep on in that direction!
I enjoyed this thoughtful piece and tribute to our great national parks -- I assume you've seen the Ken Burns documentary series, seek it out if you haven't! While you did a great job demonstrating how the NPS defies stereotypes about the efficacy of federal bureaucracies, I don't think that proves that the stereotypes are not grounded in reality in various other contexts -- especially those lacking the sort of "clear mission" that you note is so important. As complex as park promotion, protection, and management are, they are relatively straightforward compared to working with the "crooked timber" of human beings when it comes to social and economic policies, where organizational incentives and plain old wishful thinking can lead the best-intentioned people awfully far astray. NPS is an important data point but less representative of many of the challenges of public policy than, say, social services.
I appreciate your kind words! But I disagree with the idea that parks are an outlier in the broad scheme of social services. What the NPS has done is shown that with a clear mission, sufficient funding, and public support, government programs can efficiently distribute resources for the public good.
While I agree something like healthcare will require MUCH more complexity, things like education, public transportation, postal services, and cellular communication are all facets of American life that could be easily handled by a government program. In fact, the NPS provides many of these goods IN the parks - why couldn't we use the same blueprint outside of parks?
I grew up a bigger believer in expansive federal programs than I later became studying public policy and working with some of the academics/bureaucrats who design and run those kinds of programs. A lot of the problem is that bureaucracies and agencies tend to quickly start working for their leadership's interests rather than whatever the original mission was, and also that a lot of people attracted to idealistic policy in the abstract lack real world experience and "don't know what they don't know." Once a program is set up it has a budget to defend and grow itself to preserve the status quo, so they tend to become very resistant to feedback and reform. Policy can do tremendous good, but it can also do tremendous harm if we're not very careful, and in my experience there's not nearly enough of a critical mass of very careful people in the field.
I definitely agree that anything (government programs especially) can be misguided, susceptible to human incompetence, and become self-interested. But I also believe that's a reason to improve government programs, not move away from them.
The NPS is a good example in the US, but there are thousands of government programs around the world (social wealth funds, health services, etc.) that run relatively well. We should use those, and the NPS as a model for bigger plans, IMO.
Rather than abandon those ambitions of what government programs can achieve, I'd say the most important thing is to build in robust layers of accountability and avenues for reform. Something like the NPS really needs to be on a national level, which is unfortunately inherently insulated from voters, but a lot of other things can be approached flexibly on a state, local, or regional level that allows citizens to "throw out the bums" if/when they're not performing up to standard.
For sure. I find the more direct democracy we have, the more accountable and healthy our programs tend to be.
100% agree! We are beyond fortunate to have the NPS in this country. I am forever grateful for this.
Thank you so much for this! Our National Park System is a miracle, considering the pushback from everyone who slobbers over the profits lost as long as they're in government hands.
I have a lifetime pass and I cherish it. I don't know how many national parks and seashores and recreation areas I've been to--I've lost count--but I've never visited any of them without being thankful for the foresightedness it took to protect those wild places. And for weathering the challenges I know must exist to keep them going.
I routinely binge-watch Ken Burns' wonderful series on the National Parks and get my 'fix' all over again. The government did this. That same government so many cavalierly want to replace with commerce and big business.
We can't ever let that happen.
Our National Parks are our monuments to the promise that is America.
Perfectly said, Ramona! You're right that we're very fortunate earlier Americans had the foresight to preserve these spaces. I fear that nowadays, such a move would be considered "political" and would never get done.
I agree! The National Parks are some of the best things the U.S. has ever done. Regardless of politics this is the truth!
They're awesome! I literally have never heard someone say something bad about them.