IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v34y2016i7p1222-1240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental rulemaking across states: Process, procedural access, and regulatory influence

Author

Listed:
  • Deserai A Crow
  • Elizabeth A Albright
  • Elizabeth Koebele

Abstract

Rulemaking is central to policymaking in the United States. Additionally, regulatory authority is devolved to the states in many instances. However, our knowledge of state-level rulemaking is not as advanced as that related to federal rulemaking. To advance the scholarship on state rulemaking, this study compares environmental rulemaking across three environmental issues (renewable portfolio standards, concentrated animal feeding operation regulations, and hydraulic fracturing disclosure rules) in five states (California, Colorado, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania) to understand procedural and stakeholder participation commonalities among the cases. Using data from public rulemaking documents, stakeholder comment during rulemaking, and in-depth interviews with agency staff and stakeholders, the findings suggest that there are common patterns of pre-process informal stakeholder consultation, public comment and outreach mechanisms, and corollary issues related to stakeholder access across these cases. These findings advance our knowledge of state-level rulemaking as it relates to public input and procedural equity for stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Deserai A Crow & Elizabeth A Albright & Elizabeth Koebele, 2016. "Environmental rulemaking across states: Process, procedural access, and regulatory influence," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(7), pages 1222-1240, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:34:y:2016:i:7:p:1222-1240
    DOI: 10.1177/0263774X15606922
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0263774X15606922
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0263774X15606922?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. Lynn A. Maguire & E. Allan Lind, 2003. "Public participation in environmental decisions: stakeholders, authorities and procedural justice," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(2), pages 133-148.
    2. Barry G. Rabe & Christopher Borick, 2013. "Conventional Politics for Unconventional Drilling? Lessons from Pennsylvania's Early Move into Fracking Policy Development," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 30(3), pages 321-340, May.
    3. L. J. Bourgeois, III & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 1988. "Strategic Decision Processes in High Velocity Environments: Four Cases in the Microcomputer Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(7), pages 816-835, July.
    4. Robin Gregory & Ralph L. Keeney, 1994. "Creating Policy Alternatives Using Stakeholder Values," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(8), pages 1035-1048, August.
    5. Cropper, Maureen L. & William N. Evans & Stephen J. Berard & Maria M. Ducla-Soares & Paul R. Portney, 1992. "The Determinants of Pesticide Regulation: A Statistical Analysis of EPA Decision Making," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(1), pages 175-197, February.
    6. Charles Davis, 2012. "The Politics of “Fracking”: Regulating Natural Gas Drilling Practices in Colorado and Texas," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(2), pages 177-191, March.
    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. Steven Nelson & Jonathan M. Fisk, 2021. "End of the (Pipe)Line? Understanding how States Manage the Risks of Oil and Gas Wells," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(2), pages 203-221, March.
    2. Zilliox, Skylar & Smith, Jessica M., 2017. "Memorandums of understanding and public trust in local government for Colorado's unconventional energy industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 72-81.
    3. Yasminah Beebeejaun, 2017. "Exploring the intersections between local knowledge and environmental regulation: A study of shale gas extraction in Texas and Lancashire," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(3), pages 417-433, May.
    4. Pierce, Jonathan J. & Boudet, Hilary & Zanocco, Chad & Hillyard, Megan, 2018. "Analyzing the factors that influence U.S. public support for exporting natural gas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 666-674.
    5. Bugden, Dylan & Kay, David & Glynn, Russell & Stedman, Richard, 2016. "The bundle below: Understanding unconventional oil and gas development through analysis of lease agreements," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 214-219.
    6. Heather Millar, 2020. "Problem Uncertainty, Institutional Insularity, and Modes of Learning in Canadian Provincial Hydraulic Fracturing Regulation," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(6), pages 765-796, November.
    7. Christenson, Dino P. & Goldfarb, Jillian L. & Kriner, Douglas L., 2017. "Costs, benefits, and the malleability of public support for “Fracking”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 407-417.
    8. Fisk, Jonathan M. & Good, A.J., 2019. "Information booms and busts: Examining oil and gas disclosure policies across the states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 374-381.
    9. van Riel, A.C.R. & Lievens, A., 2003. "New service development in high tech sectors: a decision making perspective," Research Memorandum 013, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    10. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    11. Nigel Martin & John Rice, 2010. "Analysing emission intensive firms as regulatory stakeholders: a role for adaptable business strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 64-75, January.
    12. Baker, Erin & Bosetti, Valentina & Salo, Ahti, 2016. "Finding Common Ground when Experts Disagree: Belief Dominance over Portfolios of Alternatives," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 243147, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    13. Szabó, Katalin & Kocsis, Éva, 2001. "Modularitás és változatossági hozadék [Modularity and the benefits of diversity]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 745-765.
    14. Ando, Amy, 1998. "Delay on the Path to the Endangered Species List: Do Costs and Benefits Matter," RFF Working Paper Series dp-97-43-rev, Resources for the Future.
    15. Gastaldi, Luca & Pietrosi, Astrid & Lessanibahri, Sina & Paparella, Marco & Scaccianoce, Antonio & Provenzale, Giuseppe & Corso, Mariano & Gridelli, Bruno, 2018. "Measuring the maturity of business intelligence in healthcare: Supporting the development of a roadmap toward precision medicine within ISMETT hospital," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 84-103.
    16. Karen Maguire, 2013. "Drill Baby Drill? Political and Market Influences on Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing in the Western United States," Economics Working Paper Series 1401, Oklahoma State University, Department of Economics and Legal Studies in Business, revised Apr 2013.
    17. Tanya Heikkila & Christopher M. Weible, 2017. "Unpacking the intensity of policy conflict: a study of Colorado’s oil and gas subsystem," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 179-193, June.
    18. Krohmer, Harley & Homburg, Christian & Workman, John P., 2002. "Should marketing be cross-functional? Conceptual development and international empirical evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 451-465, June.
    19. D’Angelo, Alfredo & Presutti, Manuela, 2019. "SMEs international growth: The moderating role of experience on entrepreneurial and learning orientations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 613-624.
    20. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert & Cavanagh, Sheila, 2001. "National Environmental Policy During the Clinton Years," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-38, Resources for the Future.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environment; governance;

    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:sae:envirc:v:34:y:2016:i:7:p:1222-1240. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.