IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/v29y2000i2p873-912.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

State and Federal Regulatory Reform: A Comparative Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Hahn, Robert W

Abstract

This paper provides a comprehensive assessment of state efforts to eliminate or change burdensome regulations and to use economic analysis to produce more sensible results. More than half the states have undertaken initiatives of some kind to improve regulation, including oversight mechanisms and the use of cost-benefit analysis. However, the effectiveness of oversight and enforcement of regulatory reform initiatives in the day-to-day world of rule making is often doubtful. As in the case of the federal government, state agencies have devised ways to avoid doing what they do not want to do. Generally, regulatory reform initiatives are most effective when they have active political support, a strong, well-funded oversight mechanism, and states provide clear, specific guidelines to implementing agencies. While several states have sought to establish such a structure, most states have not. Until significant resources and political support are devoted to reform efforts, real-world progress in regulatory reform is not likely to be great. Copyright 2000 by the University of Chicago.

Suggested Citation

  • Hahn, Robert W, 2000. "State and Federal Regulatory Reform: A Comparative Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 873-912, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:29:y:2000:i:2:p:873-912
    DOI: 10.1086/468098
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/468098
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/468098?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 search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Neal D. Woods, 2018. "Regulatory Analysis Procedures and Political Influence on Bureaucratic Policymaking," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(2), pages 299-313, June.
    2. Soonae Park & Don S. Lee & Jieun Son, 2021. "Regulatory reform in the era of new technological development: The role of organizational factors in the public sector," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 894-908, July.
    3. E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    4. Broughel, James & Bose, Feler & Baugus, Brian, 2022. "A 50-State Review of Regulatory Procedures," Working Papers 10277, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    5. Fleck, Robert K. & Hanssen, F. Andrew, 2010. "Repeated adjustment of delegated powers and the history of eminent domain," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 99-112, June.
    6. Russell S. Sobel & John A. Dove, 2016. "Analyzing the Effectiveness of State Regulatory Review," Public Finance Review, , vol. 44(4), pages 446-477, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ucp:jlstud:v:29:y:2000:i:2:p:873-912. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    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.