Suchergebnisse

Retrospective, or ex post, analysis of U.S. federal regulation aims to rigorously document regulatory outcomes using cost, benefit, and distributional metrics. This paper presents nine new case studies involving a total of 34 comparisons of ex ante and ex post estimates from a diverse group of environmentally oriented rules. Despite the potential for selection bias and other limitations of the case study approach, the results suggest a slight tendency to overestimate both costs and benefits (or effectiveness) of regulation. This paper considers various analytic issues relevant to developing credible baselines for comparison, and offers policy lessons regarding the design of emissions trading programs along with approaches for incorporating uncertainty into both preregulatory studies and policy designs. Recommendations to facilitate and support future retrospective analyses are also presented.

1. Introduction to economic analyses at EPA / Richard D. Morgenstern -- 2. The legal and institutional setting for economic analysis at EPA / Richard D. Morgenstern -- 3. Conducting an economic analysis : rationale, issues, and requirements / Richard D. Morgenstern -- 4. Lead in gasoline / Albert L. Nichols -- 5. Water pollution and the organic chemicals industry / Peter Caulkins and Stuart Sessions -- 6. Stratospheric-ozone depletion / James K. Hammitt -- 7. Asbestos / Christine M. Augustyniak -- 8. Lead in drinking water / Ronnie Levin -- 9. Municipal landfill management / Sara Rasmussen -- 10. Visibility at the Grand Canyon and the Navajo generating station / Leland Deck -- 11. Agricultural pesticides and worker protection / Louis P. True Jr. -- 12. Vehicle inspection/maintenance / Todd Ramsden -- 13. Municipal sewage sludge management / Mahesh Podar, Susan Burris, and Robert S. Raucher -- 14. Reformulated gasoline / Robert C. Anderson and Richard A. Rykowski -- 15. Great lakes water quality guidance / Eloise Trabka Castillo, Mark L. Morris, and Robert S. Raucher -- 16. Economic analysis : benefits, costs, implications / Richard D. Morgenstern and Marc K. Landy.

Abstract:The core analytical elements of Executive Order 12291 are widely seen as having been embraced by both Democratic and Republican administrations. Some critics argue, however, that this embrace is superficial and serves more as a cover for political decisions. To address this question, this paper examines the analytical priorities presented in the annual Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations over the period from 1997 to 2012. While there is general agreement across administrations on such broad issues as the importance of benefit-cost analysis in providing a shared framework and discipline to the analytic process, we identify important differences in five areas: monetization of benefits, scope of costs considered, behavioral economics, intergenerational benefits, and the general equilibrium impacts of regulation. All are active and exciting issues in the current scholarly work on regulation. These cross-administration differences appear to reflect a relatively modest shifting across political parties on issues where reasonable people might disagree, rather than major ideological swings in approach.