Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:35:21.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Environmental Regulatory Reform and the Unholy Trinity: Unfunded Mandates, Risk Assessment, and Property Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Craig L. Infanger
Craig L. Infanger*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky
Get access

Abstract

Major regulatory reform issues which involve environmental policy include issues of unfunded mandates, risk assessment, and property rights. Each of these proposed reforms involves major changes in environmental policies with impacts on different groups. Property rights is the core issue in Congress and state legislatures, with both regulatory takings and just compensation being the major parameters. Economists can participate effectively in this policy debate with successful research and education programs addressing the divisive issues.

Keywords

environmental regulatory reformproperty rightsrisk assessment
Type
Invited Paper Sessions
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , July 1996 , pp. 108 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Corn, M. L. “Endangered Species: Continuing Controversy.” CRS Issue Brief No. IB 95003, Library of Congress, Washington DC, 26 October 1995.Google Scholar
Davies, T. “Congress Discovers Risk Analysis.” Resources (Winter 1995):5–8.Google Scholar
Dowd, A. R. “Environmentalists Are on the Run.” Fortune (19 September 1994):91–105.Google Scholar
Dunlap, R. “Public Opinion and Environmental Policy.” In Environmental Politics and Policy: Theories and Evidence, ed., Lester, J. P., Chap. 4. Durham NC: Duke University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
Environmental Quality Commission. The State of Kentucky's Environment: 1994 Status Report. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 1994.Google Scholar
Freeman, A. M. “Clean Water Act Reauthorization: How Far Have We Come?” Water Resour. Bull. 30,5(1994):793–98.Google Scholar
General Accounting Office. “Superfund: Improved Reviews and Guidance Could Reduce Inconsistencies in Risk Assessments.” Pub. No. GAO/RCED-94-220, Washington DC, August 1994.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J. H., and Watson, W. D.. “Property Rights, Regulatory Taking, and Compensation—Implications for Environmental Protection.” Unpublished manu., U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington DC, 4 October 1995.Google Scholar
Hall, M. “For Cities, Mandates Hit Home.” USA Today (13 January 1995): 6A.Google Scholar
Howard, P. K. The Death of Common Sense: How Law Is Suffocating America. New York: Random House, 1994.Google Scholar
Mann, C. C., and Plummer, M. L.. Noah's Choice—The Future of Endangered Species. New York: Knopf, 1995.Google Scholar
Meltz, R. “The Property Rights Issue.” CRS Report for Congress, No. 95-200 A, Library of Congress, Washington DC, 20 January 1995.Google Scholar
Miniter, R. “You Just Can't Take It Anymore: America's Property Rights Revolt.” Policy Rev. (Fall 1994): 40–46.Google Scholar
Moore, J. L. “Cost-Benefit Analysis: Issues in Its Use in Regulation.” CRS Report for Congress, No. 95-760 ENR, Library of Congress, Washington DC, 28 June 1995.Google Scholar
Morandi, L. “Environmental Risk Assessment Politics and Policymaking.” Paper presented at the National Conference of State Legislatures, Denver CO, 1995a.Google Scholar
Morandi, L. “Takings for Granted.” State Legislatures (June 1995b): 22–27.Google Scholar
Patton, D. E. “The ABCs of Risk Assessment.” EPA Journal (January/February/March 1993): 10–15.Google Scholar
Portney, P. R. “Cartoon Caricatures of Regulatory Reform.” Resources (Fall 1995):21–24.Google Scholar
Price Waterhouse. “Impact of Unfunded Federal Mandates on U.S. Cities: A 314-City Survey.” Analysis prepared for and published by U.S. Conference of Mayors, Washington DC, 1993.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, W. A. “The Bureaucracy and Environmental Policy.” In Environmental Politics and Policy, ed, Lester, J. P.. Durham NC: Duke University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
Schierow, L.-J. “Risk and Cost-Benefit Provisions in House and Senate Bill—Update.” CRS Report for Congress, No. 95-576 ENR, Library of Congress, Washington DC, 8 May 1995a.Google Scholar
Schierow, L.-J. “The Role of Risk Analysis and Risk Management in Environmental Protection.” CRS Issue Brief No. IB 94036, Library of Congress, Washington DC, 5 September 1995b.Google Scholar
Task Force on Public Issues Education Materials. Increasing Competence in Resolving Public Issues. Coop. Ext. Ser., University of Wisconsin, 1994.Google Scholar
Tiemann, M. E. “Safe Drinking Water Act: Implementing the 1986 Amendments.” CRS Issue Brief No. IB 91041, Library of Congress, Washington DC, 29 December 1994.Google Scholar
Tietenberg, T. Environmental and Natural Resource Economics. New York: Harper Collins, 1992.Google Scholar
“Voodoo Regulation.” Business Week (13 March 1995): 96, 98.Google Scholar
Zinn, J. A., and Copeland, C.. “Wetland Issues in the 104th Congress.” CRS Issue Brief No. IB 95028, Library of Congress, Washington DC, 9 October 1995.Google Scholar