IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v16y2022i4p1160-1173.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Politics of preemption: American federalism and risk regulation

Author

Listed:
  • David Vogel

Abstract

This article discusses four examples of risk regulations in the United States, namely vehicle emissions, appliance efficiency, chemical safety, and the labeling of genetically modified food. In each example, consumer or environmental regulations were initiated at the state level despite business opposition. But when faced with a multiplicity of state product regulations, the affected firms decided to support the expansion of federal regulations. They were willing to accept stronger federal standards in order to preempt individual states from enacting more stringent standards than the federal government. This, in turn, led to a conflict between firms who wanted federal preemption of state restrictions and states who wanted to be able to enact regulations more stringent than those of the federal government. The outcomes of each of these conflicts over the scope of federal preemption had important impacts on each multilevel governance regulatory regime. The ability of both levels of the American government to enact more innovative risk regulations – often referred to as dynamic federalism – has made it more likely that they will be strengthened.

Suggested Citation

  • David Vogel, 2022. "The Politics of preemption: American federalism and risk regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1160-1173, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:16:y:2022:i:4:p:1160-1173
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12414
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12414
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12414?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. Sheldon Krimsky, 2017. "The unsteady state and inertia of chemical regulation under the US Toxic Substances Control Act," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-10, December.
    2. R Kent Weaver, 2020. "Policy Dynamics in Federal Systems: A Framework for Analysis," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 50(2), pages 157-187.
    3. Jeff Tollefson, 2016. "Why the historic deal to expand US chemical regulation matters," Nature, Nature, vol. 534(7605), pages 18-19, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kristi Pullen Fedinick & Ilch Yiliqi & Yukyan Lam & David Lennett & Veena Singla & Miriam Rotkin-Ellman & Jennifer Sass, 2021. "A Cumulative Framework for Identifying Overburdened Populations under the Toxic Substances Control Act: Formaldehyde Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Robert G. Poston & Ramendra N. Saha, 2019. "Epigenetic Effects of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers on Human Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-13, July.
    3. Arlene Gabriela & Sarah Leong & Philip S. W. Ong & Derek Weinert & Joe Hlubucek & Peter W. Tait, 2022. "Strengthening Australia’s Chemical Regulation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-24, May.

    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:reggov:v:16:y:2022:i:4:p:1160-1173. 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: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    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.