IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lvl/laeccr/9717.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

2-Stage Enforcement and Regulatory Polarisation: a Simple Model with Application to the USEPA

Author

Listed:
  • Heyes, Anthony
  • Doucet, Joseph

Abstract

We present a simple, positive model in which regulatory enforcement is a 2-stage process. In the first stage firms are subject to random inspection. The inspection yields a noisy signal of the firm's true performance. Only if the signal exceeds some critical or "trigger" value is the firm subject to the second stage of enforcement, the audit. Analysis of the 2-stage process reveals some surprising comparative static results. The key result, referred to as regulatory polarisation, is the divergence of response to a tightening of the trigger. Specifically, while non-serious violators improve their performance as a result of a tighter trigger, the performance of serious violators degrades: The good get better whilst the bad get worse. The impact on total system performance is ambiguous and depends upon the initial distribution of firm types. We also analyse the implications of improvements in the accuracy of the inspection technology in such a model, arriving at some unconventional results. Whilst the model is motivated by institutional analysis of the USEPA it is argued to be applicable in a variety of other enforcement contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Heyes, Anthony & Doucet, Joseph, 1997. "2-Stage Enforcement and Regulatory Polarisation: a Simple Model with Application to the USEPA," Cahiers de recherche 9717, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    • Handle: RePEc:lvl:laeccr:9717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ecn.ulaval.ca/w3/recherche/cahiers/1997/97-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shaffer, Sherrill, 1990. "Regulatory Compliance with Nonlinear Penalties," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 99-103, March.
    2. Garvie, Devon & Keeler, Andrew, 1993. "Incomplete Enforcement with Endogenous Regulatory Choice," Queen's Institute for Economic Research Discussion Papers 275224, Queen's University - Department of Economics.
    3. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Heyes, Anthony G., 1996. "Cutting environmental penalties to protect the environment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 251-265, May.
    5. Badrinath, S G & Bolster, Paul J, 1996. "The Role of Market Forces in EPA Enforcement Activity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 165-181, September.
    6. Bebchuk, Lucian Arye & Kaplow, Louis, 1992. "Optimal Sanctions When Individuals Are Imperfectly Informed about the Probability of Apprehension," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(2), pages 365-370, June.
    7. Magat, Wesley A & Viscusi, W Kip, 1990. "Effectiveness of the EPA's Regulatory Enforcement: The Case of Industrial Effluent Standards," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 331-360, October.
    8. Heyes, Anthony G., 1997. "Environmental Regulation by Private Contest," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 407-428, February.
    9. Harrington, Winston, 1988. "Enforcement leverage when penalties are restricted," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 29-53, October.
    10. Kambhu, John, 1989. "Regulatory Standards, Noncompliance and Enforcement," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 103-114, June.
    11. John Kambhu, 1989. "Regulatory standards, noncompliance and enforcement," Research Paper 8902, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    12. Boyd, James & Kunreuther, Howard, 1997. "Retroactive Liability or the Public Purse?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 79-90, January.
    13. Anthony Heyes, 1994. "Environmental enforcement when ‘inspectability’ is endogenous: A model with overshooting properties," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(5), pages 479-494, October.
    14. Barrett, James & Segerson, Kathleen, 1997. "Prevention and Treatment in Environmental Policy Design," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 196-213, June.
    15. Garvie, Devon & Keeler, Andrew, 1994. "Incomplete enforcement with endogenous regulatory choice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 141-162, September.
    16. Karpoff, Jonathan M & Lott, John R, Jr, 1993. "The Reputational Penalty Firms Bear from Committing Criminal Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(2), pages 757-802, October.
    17. Pitchford, Rohan, 1995. "How Liable Should a Lender Be? The Case of Judgment-Proof Firms and Environmental Risk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1171-1186, December.
    18. Davis, Michael L, 1994. "The Value of Truth and the Optimal Standard of Proof in Legal Disputes," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 343-359, October.
    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. Carmen Arguedas, 2008. "To Comply or Not To Comply? Pollution Standard Setting Under Costly Monitoring and Sanctioning," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 155-168, October.
    2. André, Francisco J. & Sokri, Abderrahmane & Zaccour, Georges, 2011. "Public Disclosure Programs vs. traditional approaches for environmental regulation: Green goodwill and the policies of the firm," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(1), pages 199-212, July.
    3. Gonzalez, Fidel & Leipnik, Mark & Mazumder, Diya, 2013. "How much are urban residents in Mexico willing to pay for cleaner air?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(3), pages 354-379, June.
    4. Ya-Po Yang & Jin-Li Hu, 2012. "Gresham’s law in environmental protection," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(2), pages 103-122, April.
    5. Cheng, Chu-Chuan & Lai, Yu-Bong, 2012. "Does a stricter enforcement policy protect the environment? A political economy perspective," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 431-441.
    6. Telle, Kjetil, 2013. "Monitoring and enforcement of environmental regulations," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 24-34.
    7. Anthony Heyes & Andreas Marcel Oestreich, 2018. "A theory of social license when regulatory pressure is jointly produced by an EPA and an NGO," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 219-243, December.
    8. Kjetil Telle, 2004. "Effects of inspections on plants' regulatory and environmental performance - evidence from Norwegian manufacturing industries," Discussion Papers 381, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    9. Gerigk, Joschka, 2016. "Emission taxes, lobbying, and incomplete enforcement," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145920, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    10. Suurmond, Guido, 2007. "The effects of the enforcement strategy," MPRA Paper 21142, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Christian Langpap, 2007. "Pollution abatement with limited enforcement power and citizen suits," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 57-81, February.
    12. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson & Dietrich Earnhart, 2022. "The role of experience in deterring crime: A theory of specific versus general deterrence," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(4), pages 1833-1853, October.
    13. Karpoff, Jonathan M & Lott, John R, Jr & Wehrly, Eric W, 2005. "The Reputational Penalties for Environmental Violations: Empirical Evidence," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(2), pages 653-675, October.
    14. Garvie, Devon & Keeler, Andrew, 1993. "Incomplete Enforcement with Endogenous Regulatory Choice," Queen's Institute for Economic Research Discussion Papers 275224, Queen's University - Department of Economics.
    15. Carmen Arguedas, 2013. "Pollution standards, technology investment and fines for non-compliance," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 156-176, October.
    16. Tihitina Andarge & Erik Lichtenberg, 2020. "Regulatory compliance under enforcement gaps," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 181-202, June.
    17. Andrew Keeler, 1995. "Regulatory objectives and enforcement behavior," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 73-85, July.
    18. Seroa da Motta, Ronaldo, 2006. "Analyzing the environmental performance of the Brazilian industrial sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 269-281, May.
    19. Nyborg, Karine & Telle, Kjetil, 2004. "A dissolving paradox: Firms’ compliance to environmental regulation," Memorandum 02/2004, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    20. Vicki M. Bier & Shi‐Woei Lin, 2013. "Should the Model for Risk‐Informed Regulation be Game Theory Rather than Decision Theory?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 281-291, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Enforcement - regulatory institutions - pollution control - USEPA;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:lvl:laeccr:9717. 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: Manuel Paradis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/delvlca.html .

    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.