IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v32y2012i5p855-880.html

The Quality and Use of Regulatory Analysis in 2008

Author

Listed:
  • Jerry Ellig
  • Patrick A. McLaughlin

Abstract

This article assesses the quality and apparent use of regulatory analysis for economically significant regulations proposed by federal agencies in 2008. A nine‐member research team used a six‐point (0–5) scale to evaluate regulatory analyses according to criteria drawn from Executive Order 12866 and Office of Management and Budget Circular A‐4. Principal findings include: (1) the average quality of regulatory analysis, though not high, is somewhat better than previous regulatory scorecards have shown; (2) quality varies widely; (3) biggest strengths are accessibility and clarity; (4) biggest weaknesses are analysis of the systemic problem and retrospective analysis; (5) budget or “transfer” regulations usually receive low‐quality analysis; (6) a minority of the regulations contain evidence that the agency used the analysis in significant decisions; (7) quality of analysis is positively correlated with the apparent use of the analysis in regulatory decisions; and (8) greater diffusion of best practices could significantly improve the overall quality of regulatory analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Jerry Ellig & Patrick A. McLaughlin, 2012. "The Quality and Use of Regulatory Analysis in 2008," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 855-880, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:5:p:855-880
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01715.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01715.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01715.x?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. Revesz, Richard & Livermore, Michael, 2008. "Retaking Rationality: How Cost Benefit Analysis Can Better Protect the Environment and Our Health," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195368574.
    2. Patrick McLaughlin, 2011. "The consequences of midnight regulations and other surges in regulatory activity," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 395-412, June.
    3. Winston Harrington & Richard D. Morgenstern & Peter Nelson, 2000. "On the accuracy of regulatory cost estimates," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 297-322.
    4. repec:reg:rpubli:299 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Robert W. Hahn & Robert E. Litan, 2005. "Counting Regulatory Benefits and Costs: Lessons for the US and Europe," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 473-508, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jerry Ellig & Patrick A. McLaughlin & John F. Morrall III, 2013. "Continuity, change, and priorities: The quality and use of regulatory analysis across US administrations," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 153-173, June.
    2. Ellig, Jerry, 2016. "Evaluating the Quality and Use of Regulatory Impact Analysis: The Mercatus Center’s Regulatory Report Card, 2008–2013," Working Papers 06878, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    3. Dustin Chambers & Patrick A. McLaughlin & Laura Stanley, 2019. "Barriers to prosperity: the harmful impact of entry regulations on income inequality," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 165-190, July.
    4. Oliver Fritsch & Jonathan C. Kamkhaji & Claudio M. Radaelli, 2017. "Explaining the content of impact assessment in the United Kingdom: Learning across time, sectors, and departments," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 325-342, December.
    5. McLaughlin, Patrick & Stanley, Laura, 2016. "Regulation and Income Inequality: The Regressive Effects of Entry Regulations," Working Papers 05145, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    6. Broughel, James & Bose, Feler & Baugus, Brian, 2022. "A 50-State Review of Regulatory Procedures," Working Papers 10277, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    7. McLaughlin, Patrick & Febrizio, Mark & Sherouse, Oliver & King, Scott, 2020. "Is Dodd-Frank the Biggest Law Ever?," Working Papers 09585, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    8. Ellig, Jerry & Horney, Michael, 2016. "Preventing a Regulatory Train Wreck: Mandated Regulation and the Cautionary Tale of Positive Train Control," Working Papers 06865, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    9. Ellig, Jerry, 2016. "Improvements in SEC Economic Analysis since Business Roundtable: A Structured Assessment," Working Papers 07002, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    10. Jerry Ellig, 2021. "Coproduction of regulations under the administrative procedure act: How close is the US to a classical Liberal regulatory system?," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 34(3), pages 373-391, September.

    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. Jerry Ellig & Patrick A. McLaughlin & John F. Morrall III, 2013. "Continuity, change, and priorities: The quality and use of regulatory analysis across US administrations," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 153-173, June.
    2. Ellig, Jerry, 2016. "Evaluating the Quality and Use of Regulatory Impact Analysis: The Mercatus Center’s Regulatory Report Card, 2008–2013," Working Papers 06878, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.
    3. Burtraw, Dallas & Woerman, Matt & Paul, Anthony, 2012. "Retail electricity price savings from compliance flexibility in GHG standards for stationary sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 67-77.
    4. Norman, Catherine S. & DECANIO, STEPHEN J & Fan, Lin, 2007. "Opportunities and Challenges for the 20th Anniversary of the Montréal Protocol," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt3t90g0gr, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    5. Managi, Shunsuke & Opaluch, James J. & Jin, Di & Grigalunas, Thomas A., 2006. "Stochastic frontier analysis of total factor productivity in the offshore oil and gas industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 204-215, November.
    6. Frank Ackerman, "undated". "The Unbearable Lightness of Regulatory Costs," GDAE Working Papers 06-02, GDAE, Tufts University.
    7. Johannes Urpelainen, 2011. "Frontrunners and Laggards: The Strategy of Environmental Regulation under Uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(3), pages 325-346, November.
    8. John Loomis & Bryon Allen, 2008. "Using Non Market Valuation to Inform the Choice Between Permits and Fees in Environmental Regulation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 329-337, July.
    9. 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.
    10. Shobe, William & Palmer, Karen L. & Myers, Erica & Holt, Charles & Goeree, Jacob K. & Burtraw, Dallas, 2010. "An Experimental Analysis of Auctioning Emission Allowances Under a Loose Cap," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 39(2), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Shreekar Pradhan & J. Scott Holladay & Mohammed Mohsin & Shreekar Pradhan, 2015. "Environmental Policy Instruments and Uncertainties Under Free Trade and Capital Mobility," EcoMod2015 8102, EcoMod.
    12. Camilla Adelle & Andrew Jordan & John Turnpenny, 2012. "Proceeding in Parallel or Drifting Apart? A Systematic Review of Policy Appraisal Research and Practices," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 30(3), pages 401-415, June.
    13. Haoran He & Yefeng Chen, 2021. "Auction mechanisms for allocating subsidies for carbon emissions reduction: an experimental investigation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(2), pages 387-430, August.
    14. Claire A. Dunlop & Martino Maggetti & Claudio M. Radaelli & Duncan Russel, 2012. "The many uses of regulatory impact assessment: A meta‐analysis of EU and UK cases," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 23-45, March.
    15. Stephen C. Newbold, 2011. "Valuing Health Risk Changes Using a Life-Cycle Consumption Framework," NCEE Working Paper Series 201103, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Apr 2011.
    16. Gregor Schwerhoff, 2016. "The economics of leadership in climate change mitigation," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 196-214, March.
    17. Robert W. Hahn & Katrina Kosec & Peter J. Neumann & Scott Wallsten, 2006. "What Affects the Quality of Economic Analysis for Life‐Saving Investments?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 641-655, June.
    18. David Newbery, 2017. "The economics of air pollution from fossil fuels," Working Papers EPRG 1708, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    19. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:48:y:2010:i::p:1065-1081 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Curtis Carlson & Dallas Burtraw & Maureen Cropper & Karen L. Palmer, 2000. "Sulfur Dioxide Control by Electric Utilities: What Are the Gains from Trade?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(6), pages 1292-1326, December.
    21. Cave, Jonathan & Gibson, Stephen, 2023. "Primary and secondary legislation – assessing the impacts of rules for making rules," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1486, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.

    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:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:5:p:855-880. 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)1539-6924 .

    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.