IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v21y2002i3p449-465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Responsive bureaus, equity, and regulatory negotiation: an empirical view

Author

Listed:
  • Laura I. Langbein

    (School of Public Affairs, American University, Washington, DC)

Abstract

Rulemaking agencies commonly delegate the implementation and enforcement of rules to affected parties, but they rarely delegate rulemaking authority. Regulatory negotiation is an example of this uncommon behavior. Compared to conventional rulemaking, regulatory negotiation is thought to be an attempt to make bureaucracy more responsive to affected stakeholders, especially when the rulemaking concerns politically complicated and technical issues. However, negotiation, while it may make bureaucrats more responsive, may also be less fair in that it is likely to result in relatively more responsiveness to interests supported by those with greater resources. This study presents empirical evidence that compares negotiated to conventional rulemaking processes at the Environmental Protection Agency in respect to both responsiveness and equality. The results uphold the expectation that negotiating rules appears more responsive than the conventional rule-writing process. Furthermore, the results show inequality in both processes; outcomes of negotiated rules may be more unequal than outcomes of conventionally written rules. © 2002 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura I. Langbein, 2002. "Responsive bureaus, equity, and regulatory negotiation: an empirical view," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 449-465.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:21:y:2002:i:3:p:449-465
    DOI: 10.1002/pam.10054
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/pam.10054
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/pam.10054?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buchanan, James M & Tullock, Gordon, 1975. "Polluters' Profits and Political Response: Direct Controls Versus Taxes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 139-147, March.
    2. Bartel, Ann P & Thomas, Lacy Glenn, 1987. "Predation through Regulation: The Wage and Profit Effects of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(2), pages 239-264, October.
    3. Bruno S. Frey & Felix Oberholzer-Gee, 1996. "Fair siting procedures: An empirical analysis of their importance and characteristics," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 353-376.
    4. Kunreuther, Howard & Easterling, Douglas, 1990. "Are Risk-Benefit Tradeoffs Possible in Siting Hazardous Facilities?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 252-256, May.
    5. McCubbins, Mathew D & Noll, Roger G & Weingast, Barry R, 1987. "Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 243-277, Fall.
    6. Pashigian, B Peter, 1984. "The Effect of Environmental Regulation on Optimal Plant Size and Factor Shares," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(1), pages 1-28, April.
    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. Magnus Söderberg, 2008. "Uncertainty and regulatory outcome in the Swedish electricity distribution sector," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 79-94, February.
    2. Tobias Wekhof & Sébastien Houde, 2023. "Using narratives to infer preferences in understanding the energy efficiency gap," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 8(9), pages 965-977, September.
    3. Bilby, David B. & Wilson, Paul N., 2013. "Regulatory Capture? Arizona’s BMP Water Conservation Program," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 12(2), pages 1-9.

    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. Romano, Eduardo & Orden, David, 1995. "The Political Economy of U.S. Import Restrictions on Nursery Stock and Ornamental Plants in Growing Media," 1995: Understanding Technical Barriers to Agricultural Trade Conference, December 1995, Tucson, Arizona 50707, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    2. Irja Vormedal & Lars H. Gulbrandsen & Jon Birger Skjærseth, 2020. "Big Oil and Climate Regulation: Business as Usual or a Changing Business?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(4), pages 143-166, Autumn.
    3. J.A. den Hertog, 2010. "Review of economic theories of regulation," Working Papers 10-18, Utrecht School of Economics.
    4. Roland Vaubel, 2008. "The political economy of labor market regulation by the European Union," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 435-465, December.
    5. Richard Benjamin & Jeffrey Wagner, 2006. "Reconsidering the law and economics of low-level radioactive waste management," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, December.
    6. Ursprung, Heinrich W., 1992. "The political economy of environmental decision making," Discussion Papers, Series II 176, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
    7. Richard Benjamin & Jeffrey Wagner, 2006. "Reconsidering the law and economics of low-level radioactive waste management," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, December.
    8. Dolar, Burak & Shughart II, William F., 2011. "Enforcement of the USA Patriot Act's anti-money laundering provisions: Have regulators followed a risk-based approach?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 19-31.
    9. Jean O. Lanjouw & Josh Lerner, 1996. "Preliminary Injunctive Relief: Theory and Evidence from Patent Litigation," NBER Working Papers 5689, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Eli Berman & Linda T. Bui, 1997. "band Labor Demand: Evidence from the South Coast Air Basin," NBER Working Papers 6299, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Dean, Thomas J. & Brown, Robert L. & Stango, Victor, 2000. "Environmental Regulation as a Barrier to the Formation of Small Manufacturing Establishments: A Longitudinal Examination," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 56-75, July.
    12. Pham, Huy & Ha, Van & Le, Hanh-Hong & Ramiah, Vikash & Frino, Alex, 2024. "The effects of polluting behaviour, dirty energy and electricity consumption on firm performance: Evidence from the recent crises," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    13. Frey, Bruno S & Oberholzer-Gee, Felix & Eichenberger, Reiner, 1996. "The Old Lady Visits Your Backyard: A Tale of Morals and Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(6), pages 1297-1313, December.
    14. Fredriksson, Per G. & Gaston, Noel, 1999. "The "greening" of trade unions and the demand for eco-taxes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 663-686, November.
    15. Michael Ollinger & Danna Moore, 2009. "The Direct and Indirect Costs of Food-Safety Regulation," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 247-265.
    16. Lea Kosnik, 2010. "Balancing Environmental Protection and Energy Production in the Federal Hydropower Licensing Process," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(3).
    17. Ollinger, Michael & Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge, 1995. "Regulation, Innovation, and Market Structure in the U.S. Pesticide Industry," Agricultural Economic Reports 308425, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    18. Keith A. Houghton & Michael Kend & Christine Jubb, 2013. "The CLERP 9 Audit Reforms: Benefits and Costs Through the Eyes of Regulators, Standard Setters and Audit Service Suppliers," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 49(2), pages 139-160, June.
    19. Stavins, Robert & Keohane, Nathaniel & Revesz, Richard, 1997. "The Positive Political Economy of Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," RFF Working Paper Series dp-97-25, Resources for the Future.
    20. Burak Dolar & Ben Dale, 2020. "The Dodd–Frank Act’s non-uniform regulatory impact on the banking industry," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(2), pages 188-195, June.

    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:wly:jpamgt:v:21:y:2002:i:3:p:449-465. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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.