Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Evaluating the benefits and costs of regulatory reforms: What questions need to be asked?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Shapiro, Stuart
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    In 1984, Portney argued that "[w]e should scrutinize proposed reforms of the rulemaking process every bit as carefully as the regulations that process produces." In the 23 years since then, the regulatory process on the federal level has been continuously reformed by statute, by executive order, and by directives from the OMB. Despite the extensive debate on the need for these reforms, there has been very little analysis of the reforms themselves. This paper updates Portney's work on analyzing cost-benefit analysis and expands it to evaluate reforms of the regulatory process. I use as my primary example the recent peer-review guidelines issued by OMB. I argue that we may have reached a point of diminishing returns in regulatory reforms, that the peer-review guidelines likely have costs that exceed their benefits, and that further regulatory reforms merit closer evaluation.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V7V-4S80XH9-1/1/12945d9322694b02c8cb5ec20d1d41fe
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Evaluation and Program Planning.

    Volume (Year): 31 (2008)
    Issue (Month): 3 (August)
    Pages: 223-230

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:31:y:2008:i:3:p:223-230

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan

    Related research

    Keywords:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Hahn, Robert W., 2004. "The Economic Analysis of Regulation: A Response to the Critics," Working paper 172, Regulation2point0.
    2. Sunstein,Cass R., 2002. "Risk and Reason," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521791991, October.
    3. Burnett, Jason K. & Chan, Yee-Ho I. & Hahn, Robert W. & Mader, Elizabeth A. & Moyle, Petrea R., 2000. "Assessing Regulatory Impact Analyses: The Failure of Agencies to Comply With Executive Order 12,866," Working paper 322, Regulation2point0.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:31:y:2008:i:3:p:223-230. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.