IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jbcacn/v4y2013i1p17-38n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory policy: what role for retrospective analysis and review?

Author

Listed:
  • Lutter Randall

    (Resources for the Future, 1616 P St., NW Washington, District of Columbia 20036, USA)

Abstract

Given that President Obama’s Executive Orders on regulation have emphasized the importance of retrospective analysis and review of existing federal rules, I survey the state of retrospective analysis and review of federal regulations. I first ask how much is known about the economic merit of past federal regulatory decisions, based on retrospective economic analyses of their effects. I review reports of the Office of Management and Budget and related literature, but unlike those reports I find only five rules, issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), for which retrospective analyses provide estimates of both costs and reasonably good proxies for benefits (e.g., adverse health effects avoided). Other retrospective studies of federal rules estimate are incomplete, estimating only the compliance costs, or only the benefits, or only costs and measures of effectiveness, like emissions reductions, which do not closely relate to people’s welfare.I also seek to explain differences in the practice of retrospective analysis and review between NHTSA, which appears to have the best record of retrospective analyses among federal agencies, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an important regulatory agency. I find that NHTSA regularly conducts such analyses and reviews, while EPA rarely does retrospective analysis and presents rulemakings that look like business as usual as being the result of a retrospective review. I analyze the role of data limitations, statutory authority, and institutional incentives in influencing the different behaviors of these two agencies. I conclude that differences in data availability and in particular the lack of relevant control groups, are an important barrier to retrospective analysis at EPA. This data deficiency, combined with important restrictions on EPA’s ability to consider information on net benefits or cost-effectiveness in its rule-making, are together the biggest hindrance to generating better information about the effects of its rules. I conclude with recommendations intended to generate more measurement of the actual effects of regulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutter Randall, 2013. "Regulatory policy: what role for retrospective analysis and review?," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 17-38, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jbcacn:v:4:y:2013:i:1:p:17-38:n:4
    DOI: 10.1515/jbca-2012-0012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/jbca-2012-0012
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/jbca-2012-0012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert W. Hahn & Robert E. Litan, 1997. "Improving Regulatory Accountability," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 52026, September.
    2. Harrington, Winston, 2006. "Grading Estimates of the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulation," RFF Working Paper Series dp-06-39, Resources for the Future.
    3. repec:reg:rpubli:62 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Fraas, Arthur G. & Munley, Vincent G., 1989. "Economic objectives within a bureaucratic decision process: Setting pollution control requirements under the clean water act," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 35-53, July.
    5. repec:reg:rpubli:98 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Michael Greenstone, 2002. "The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on Industrial Activity: Evidence from the 1970 and 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments and the Census of Manufactures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(6), pages 1175-1219, December.
    7. Oecd, 2013. "Broadband Networks and Open Access," OECD Digital Economy Papers 218, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mercy B. DeMenno, 2019. "Technocracy, democracy, and public policy: An evaluation of public participation in retrospective regulatory review," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 362-383, September.
    2. Mercy B. DeMenno, 2020. "Banking on burden reduction: how the global financial crisis shaped the political economy of banking regulation," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(4), pages 315-342, December.
    3. Lutter, Randall, 2015. "How Effective Are Federal Food Safety Regulations? The Case of Eggs and Salmonella Enteritidis," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-24, Resources for the Future.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. LaPlue, Lawrence D., 2022. "Environmental consequences of natural gas wellhead pricing deregulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    2. Daron Acemoglu & Amy Finkelstein, 2008. "Input and Technology Choices in Regulated Industries: Evidence from the Health Care Sector," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 837-880, October.
    3. McLaughlin, Patrick & Potts, Jason, 2019. "RegData: Australia," Working Papers 10062, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    4. Jonathan M. Lee, 2015. "The Impact of Heterogeneous NOx Regulations on Distributed Electricity Generation in U.S. Manufacturing," Working Papers 15-12, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    5. Jonathan Colmer & Ralf Martin & Mirabelle Muûls & Ulrich J. Wagner, 2020. "Does pricing carbon mitigate climate change? Firm-level evidence from the European Union emissions trading scheme," CEP Discussion Papers dp1728, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    6. Cui, Jingbo & Lapan, Harvey E. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2012. "Are exporters more environmentally friendly than non-exporters? Theory and evidence," ISU General Staff Papers 201210040700001076, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Francesco Vona & Giovanni Marin & Davide Consoli, 2019. "Measures, drivers and effects of green employment: evidence from US local labor markets, 2006–2014," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(5), pages 1021-1048.
    8. Copeland, Brian R., 2005. "Policy Endogeneity and the Effects of Trade on the Environment," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 1-15, April.
    9. Zhong, Tao & Young, Rhonda, 2010. "Multiple Choice Knapsack Problem: Example of planning choice in transportation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 128-137, May.
    10. Wang, Huaxing & Li, Tianzi & Zhu, Junfan & Jian, Youting & Wang, Zeyu & Wang, Zengwen, 2023. "China's new environmental protection law: Implications for mineral resource policy, environmental precaution and green finance," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PB).
    11. Sun, Chuanwang & Tie, Ying & Yu, Lili, 2024. "How to achieve both environmental protection and firm performance improvement: Based on China's carbon emissions trading (CET) policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    12. Fredriksson, Per G. & List, John A. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2003. "Bureaucratic corruption, environmental policy and inbound US FDI: theory and evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(7-8), pages 1407-1430, August.
    13. Ross Levine & Chen Lin & Zigan Wang, 2018. "Pollution and Human Capital Migration: Evidence from Corporate Executives," NBER Working Papers 24389, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Federico Boffa & Amedeo Piolatto & Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto, 2016. "Political Centralization and Government Accountability," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(1), pages 381-422.
    15. Wang, Mei Ling, 2023. "Effects of the green finance policy on the green innovation efficiency of the manufacturing industry: A difference-in-difference model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. Seth Morgan & Alexander Pfaff & Julien Wolfersberger, 2022. "Environmental Policies Benefit Economic Development: Implications of Economic Geography," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 427-446, October.
    17. Cui, Jingbo & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2020. "Firm internal network, environmental regulation, and plant death," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    18. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/2vteelu0n785l82j764n6ul273 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Fernando Broner & Paula Bustos & Vasco Carvalho, 2011. "Sources of comparative advantage in polluting industries," Economics Working Papers 1331, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Dec 2019.
    20. Joseph S. Shapiro & Reed Walker, 2018. "Why Is Pollution from US Manufacturing Declining? The Roles of Environmental Regulation, Productivity, and Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3814-3854, December.

    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:bpj:jbcacn:v:4:y:2013:i:1:p:17-38:n:4. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.