s the editorial board was reviewing the articles appearing in this issue of Public Policy & Practice, someone quipped that -- at first glance -- this looked like the “doom and gloom” issue. Indeed, a quick scan of the articles’ contents reveals how a reader could easily get this impression. Look at the topics: environmental degradation (the subject of Ray Anderson’s piece, originally presented as the Keynote Address at the 2001 Environmental Symposium); cutback management (an all too unwelcome reality for many in today’s economy as described in the article by Ed Thomas); end-of-life care issues (which many South Carolinians would prefer not to address, as demonstrated in the data presented by Bob Oldendick); and the death penalty (as discussed in Richard Young’s review of When the State Kills, by Austin Sarat). When South Carolina’s local government funding system (the subject of Jon Pierce’s article) appears to be the most “upbeat” topic, the initial perception of “gloom and doom” is readily understandable.

A closer reading of the articles, however, dispels this impression. While the topics deal with subject matter that is potentially discouraging, each of the articles provides insights and ideas on how these issues might be addressed. Rather than simply identifying the scope of these various problems, the articles suggest some potential methods for dealing with them. We hope that they encourage readers to think about these issues and the ways in which they can be approached. As a matter of fact, that is what Public Policy & Practice is all about.

As mentioned in the first issue, the intent of Public Policy & Practice is to foster governmental effectiveness at both the state and local levels, increase public awareness, and promote discussion on important policy issues facing the state. As such, we hope that you will find this issue of interest, and welcome any reactions to this issue or suggestions concerning future issues. Please e-mail any comments to Young-Richard@sc.edu.