Retrospective cost analyses of EPA regulations: a case study approach
-
Elizabeth Kopits
, Al McGartland , Cynthia Morgan , Carl Pasurka , Ron Shadbegian , Nathalie B. Simon, David Simpson
und Ann Wolverton
Abstract
EPA has conducted several ex post assessments of regulatory compliance costs, with the ultimate goal of identifying ways to improve ex ante cost estimation. The work to date has culminated in four case studies that examine five regulations using a common conceptual framework. The standardized framework provides a systematic way to investigate key drivers of compliance costs to see if judgments can be made about why and how ex ante and ex post estimates of costs differ. In addition to describing this conceptual framework, we describe the criteria used to select the rules to be analyzed, summarize the main hypotheses for why ex ante and ex post cost estimates may differ and discuss some of the challenges encountered in conducting these ex post analyses.
Acknowledgments
This report has benefited greatly from comments received from EPA’s Program Offices, members of EPA’s Science Advisory Board, and two anonymous reviewers. For the complete SAB Advisory report, see http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab%5Csabproduct.nsf/2596DA311EE5DBF385257B4A00691B3C/$File/EPA-SAB-13-002-unsigned.pdf.
References
Adler, Jonathan. (1996). Behind the green curtain. Regulation, 4, 26–34.Suche in Google Scholar
Anderson, J. F., & Sherwood, T. (2002). Comparison of EPA and other estimates of mobile source rule costs to actual price changes. Paper presented at the SAE Government Industry Meeting, Washington, DC, May 14, 2002.10.4271/2002-01-1980Suche in Google Scholar
Bailey, Peter D., Haq, Gary, & Goudson, Andy. (2002). Mind the gap! Comparing ex ante and ex post assessments of the costs of complying with environmental regulation. European Environment, 12(5), 245–256.10.1002/eet.303Suche in Google Scholar
Boardman, Anthony E., Mallery, Wendy L., & Vining, Aidan R. (1994). Learning from ex ante/ex post cost-benefit comparisons: The Coquihalla Highway example. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 28(2), 69–84.10.1016/0038-0121(94)90007-8Suche in Google Scholar
Burtraw, D., & Palmer, K. (2004). SO2 cap-and-trade program in the United States: A ‘living legend’ of market effectiveness. In Winston Harrington, Richard D. Morgenstern & Thomas Sterner (Eds.), Choosing environmental policy: Comparing instruments and outcomes in the United States and Europe. Washington D.C.: Resources for the Future.Suche in Google Scholar
Busse, Meghan R., & Keohane, Nathaniel O. (2007). Market effects of environmental regulation: Coal, railroads, and the 1990 Clean Air Act. RAND Journal of Economics, 38(4), 1159–1179.10.1111/j.0741-6261.2007.00130.xSuche in Google Scholar
Carlson, C., Burtraw, D., Cropper, M., & Palmer, K. (2000). SO2 control by electric utilities: What are the gains from trade? Journal of Political Economy, 108(6), 1292–1326.10.1086/317681Suche in Google Scholar
Chan, G., Stavins, R., Stowe, R., & Sweeney, R. (2012). The SO2 allowance trading system and the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990: Reflections on twenty years of policy innovation. White paper. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.10.3386/w17845Suche in Google Scholar
Dale, Larry, Antinori, Camille, McNeil, Michael, McMahon, James E., & Fujita, Sydny K. (2009). Retrospective evaluation of appliance price trends. Energy Policy, 37(2), 597–605.10.1016/j.enpol.2008.09.087Suche in Google Scholar
Dayton, Julia. (1998). World Bank HIV/AIDS interventions: Ex ante and ex post evaluations. World Bank Publication 389.10.1596/0-8213-4251-7Suche in Google Scholar
E.O. 13610. (2012) “Identifying and reducing regulatory burdens.” FR 77(93), May 14, 2012. Retrieved from: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/microsites/omb/eo_13610_identifying_and_reducing_regulatory_burdens.pdf).Suche in Google Scholar
Grosse, Scott D., Waitzman, Norman J., Romano, Patrick S., & Mulinare, Joseph. (2005). Reevaluating the benefits of folic acid fortification in the United States: Economic analysis, regulation, and public health. American Journal of Public Health, 95(11), 1917–1922.10.2105/AJPH.2004.058859Suche in Google Scholar
Hahn, Robert. (1996). Regulatory reform: What do the government’s numbers tell us?” In Robert Hahn (Ed.), Risks, Costs, and Lives Saved: Getting Better Results from Regulation (pp. 208–255). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Hammitt, J. (2000). Are the costs of proposed environmental regulations overestimated? Evidence from the CFC phaseout. Environmental and Resource Economics, 16(3), 281–302.10.1023/A:1008352022368Suche in Google Scholar
Harrington, W., Morgenstern, R. D., & Nelson, P. (2000). On the accuracy of regulatory cost estimates. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 19(2), 297–322.10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(200021)19:2<297::AID-PAM7>3.0.CO;2-XSuche in Google Scholar
Heinzerling, Lisa, & Ackerman, Richard. (2002). Pricing the priceless: Cost benefit analysis of environmental protection. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 150, 1553–1584.Suche in Google Scholar
Hodges, Hart. (1997). Falling prices: Cost of complying with environmental regulations almost always less than advertised. Economic Policy Institute Briefing Paper. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.Suche in Google Scholar
James, H. S. Jr. (1998). Estimating OSHA compliance costs. Policy Sciences-Special Issue onRegulatory Budgeting, 31, 321–324.Suche in Google Scholar
Jantzen, J. (1989). Costs of environmental management, 1988 – 2010, 3 policy scenarios. Report for the Ministry of VROM, The Hague, 25 May 1989.Suche in Google Scholar
Joskow, Paul. (1988). Asset specificity and the structure of vertical relationships: Empirical evidence. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 4(1), 95–117.10.1093/jleo/18.1.95Suche in Google Scholar
Kerwin, C. M., & Furlong, S. (1992). Time and rulemaking: An empirical test of theory. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2(2), 113–138.Suche in Google Scholar
LaFrance, Jeffrey T., & de Gorter, Harry. (1985). Regulation in a dynamic market: The U.S. dairy industry. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(4), 821–832.10.2307/1241822Suche in Google Scholar
Lindner, R. K., & Jarrett, F. G. (1978). Supply shifts and the size of research benefits. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 60(1), 48–58.10.2307/1240160Suche in Google Scholar
MacLeod, Michael, Moran, Dominic, Aresti, Manuel Lago, Harrington, Winston, & Morgenstern, Richard. (2006). Comparing the ex ante and ex post costs of complying with regulatory change. Final Report to DEFRA. London: Department for Environment, Farms, and Rural Affairs.Suche in Google Scholar
Maloney, Michael T., & McCormick, Robert E. (1982). A positive theory of environmental quality regulation. Journal of Law and Economics, 25(1), 99–123.10.1086/467009Suche in Google Scholar
Morgenstern, Richard D., & Landy, Mark K. (1997). Economic analysis: Benefits, costs, implications. In Richard D. Morgenstern (Ed.), Economic Analyses at EPA: Assessing Regulatory Impact, Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future.Suche in Google Scholar
NRC (National Research Council). (2012). Review of the EPA’s economic analysis of final water quality standards for lakes and flowing waters in Florida. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). (1995). Gauging control technology and regulatory impacts in occupational safety and health: An appraisal of OSHA’s analytic approach. OTA-ENV-635. Washington DC: Government Printing Office.Suche in Google Scholar
Oosterhuis, F., des Abbayes, C., Görlach, B., Huybrechts, D., Jarvis, A., Kuik, O., Medhursi, J., Meynaerts, E., Monier, V., Ekins, P., Jantzen, J., Vanner, R., Vercaemst, P., & van der Woerd, H. (2006). Ex post estimates of costs to business of EU environmental legislation: Final report. Amsterdam: Institute for Environmental Studies. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/ex_post/pdf/costs.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar
Porter, Michael. (1991). America’s green strategy. Scientific American, 264(4), 96.Suche in Google Scholar
Popp, D. (2003). Pollution control innovations and the Clean Air Act of 1990. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22(4), 641–660.10.1002/pam.10159Suche in Google Scholar
Popp, David, Richard G. Newell, & Adam B. Jaffe. (2010). Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change, In Bronwyn H. Halland and Nathan Rosenberg: Handbook of the Economics of Innovation- Vol-II, Burlington: Academic Press, pp. 873–938.Suche in Google Scholar
Putnam, Hayes, & Bartlett, Inc. (1980). Comparisons of estimated and actual pollution capitalexpenditures for selected industries. Report Prepared for the Office of Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cambridge, MA. (mimeo).Suche in Google Scholar
Rideout, Douglas B., & Omi, Philip N. (1995). Estimating the cost of fuels treatment. Forest Science, 41(4), 664–674.Suche in Google Scholar
RIVM. (2000). Techno 2000; “Modellering van de daling van eenheidskosten van technologieën in de tijd”. Rapportnummer 773008003, Bilthoven, April 2000.Suche in Google Scholar
Sappington, David E. M., & Stiglitz, Joseph E. (1987). Privatization, information and incentives. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 6(4), 567–585.10.2307/3323510Suche in Google Scholar
Thompson, Kimberley M., Sequi-Gomez, Maria, & Graham, John D. (2002). Validating benefit and cost estimates: The case of airbag regulation. Risk Analysis, 22(4), 803–811.10.1111/0272-4332.00070Suche in Google Scholar
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2010). Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses. EPA 240-R-10-001. December 2010. Retrieved from http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/pages/guidelines.html.Suche in Google Scholar
U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). (1998). Report to Congress on costs and benefits of federal regulations: Appendix. Washington, DC: GPO.Suche in Google Scholar
U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OMB). (2005). Validating Regulatory Analysis: 2005 Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations and Unfunded Mandates on State, Local, and Tribal Entities.Suche in Google Scholar
U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). (2014). Draft Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations and Unfunded Mandates on State, Local, and Tribal Entities.Suche in Google Scholar
Article note
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
©2014 by De Gruyter
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Retrospective cost analyses of EPA regulations: a case study approach
- Ex ante and ex post cost estimates of the Cluster Rule and MACT II Rule
- Retrospective evaluation of costs associated with methyl bromide critical use exemptions for open field strawberries in California
- National primary drinking water regulation for arsenic: A retrospective assessment of costs
- A retrospective assessment of the costs of EPA’s 1998 Locomotive Emission Standards
- Do regulators overestimate the costs of regulation?
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Retrospective cost analyses of EPA regulations: a case study approach
- Ex ante and ex post cost estimates of the Cluster Rule and MACT II Rule
- Retrospective evaluation of costs associated with methyl bromide critical use exemptions for open field strawberries in California
- National primary drinking water regulation for arsenic: A retrospective assessment of costs
- A retrospective assessment of the costs of EPA’s 1998 Locomotive Emission Standards
- Do regulators overestimate the costs of regulation?