What's New from the GW Regulatory Studies Center

10/19/17 - GW TodayGW Regulatory Studies Center Hosts Latin American Officials, by Sydney E. Allen

10/19/17 - Susan Dudley presented at ABA Administrative Law Conference

10/19/17 - Regulatory Transparency Project, Can Regulations Come With Unintended Costs?, with Susan Dudley (VIDEO)

10/18/17 - Regulation Digest, Vol. 6, No. 40

10/16/17 - NBC NewsTrump Wants to Deconstruct the Administrative State. Can He?, by Susan E. Dudley

10/12/17 - GW RSC Research Update

10/12/17 - Water Pollution from Agriculture: Transatlantic Agriculture & Regulation Working Paper Series: No. 4, by Peter Linquiti & Zhoudan Xie

10/12/17 - Washington Post, Fact checker: Has Trump cut more regulations than any president in history? citing Susan Dudley

10/11/17 - ForbesRed Tape In Retreat? by Susan E. Dudley and Brian Mannix

10/11/17 - Regulation Digest, Vol. 6, No. 39

@RegStudies

New Commentaries from the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center

Latest Research from the GW Regulatory Studies Center

Recent working papers and published articles from Center scholars
pesticides spray

Water Pollution from Agriculture: Transatlantic Agriculture & Regulation Working Paper Series: No. 4

October 12, 2017

By Peter Linquiti & Zhoudan Xie
Part four of the five part series with the USDA and the GW Regulatory Studies Center analyzes how the U.S. and EU regulate water pollution from agriculture. Linquiti and Xie first review the core environmental problem—the process by which nutrient pollution occurs and the adverse environmental and human health consequences it causes. It also provides an overview of the institutions and policy frameworks that shape water quality polices and proceeds by characterizing the specific policy instruments used in the U.S. and the EU to implement these policy frameworks.

US and EU trade

Transatlantic Approaches to Agriculture Policy: Transatlantic Agriculture & Regulation Working Paper Series: No. 3

October 04, 2017

By Susan E. Dudley, Lydia Holmes, Daniel R. Pérez, Aryamala Prasad, & Zhoudan Xie
Part three of the five part series with the USDA and the GW Regulatory Studies Center presents several notable differences in policy approaches towards agriculture between the U.S. and EU. It first provides an overview of the U.S. and EU procedures for developing and implementing regulation and how they differ. It then describes how the jurisdictions approach regulation affecting the agricultural sector. Finally, it discusses and compares five areas of agricultural policy in each jurisdiction: (i) agri-environmental regulations, (ii) organic farming, (iii) genetically modified organisms, (iv) pesticides, and (v) fertilizers.

Agriculture trade

Agricultural Productivity and the Impact of Regulation: Transatlantic Agriculture & Regulation Working Paper Series: No. 2

September 26, 2017

By Aryamala Prasad & Zhoudan Xie
Part two of the five part series with the USDA and the GW Regulatory Studies Center focuses on the impact of agricultural policy, specifically regulation, in influencing agricultural productivity across jurisdictions. It begins by tracing agricultural growth in the EU and U.S. to illustrate their respective trends for agricultural productivity. Then, drawing from the literature, it identifies measures and methodologies used to estimate the impact of regulation on productivity. Finally, it outlines important differences regarding how regulations can affect agricultural productivity and other measures of agricultural performance such as output and production costs in the EU and the U.S.

US and EU

Agricultural Statistics: Transatlantic Agriculture & Regulation Working Paper Series: No. 1

September 20, 2017

By S. Dudley, L. Holmes, P. Linquiti, B. Mannix, D. Pérez, A. Prasad & Z. Xie
As part of a cooperative agreement with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center produced a five-chapter report on regulatory differences between the United States (U.S.) and the European Union (EU) and their effects on agricultural productivity. This chapter provides an overview of key statistical comparisons between the agricultural sectors of the U.S. and the EU. It highlights key economic indicators, describes the role that agriculture plays in each economy, and illustrates differences in each jurisdiction’s respective factor endowments and trade patterns.

CPSC Logo

CPSC Hearing on Safety Standard Addressing Blade-Contact Injuries on Table Saws

August 14, 2017

By Sofie E. Miller & Jacob Yarborough
In a testimony before the Consumer Product Safety Commission, Miller and Yarborough discuss three components of the Commission's proposed performance standard for table saws: 1) there is not a clear market failure to justify the rulemaking, 2) the rule will have negative effects on competition by creating a legal monopoly, and 3) the benefits that the Commission expects to result from its standard are uncertain.

JBCA cover

Consumer’s Guide to Regulatory Impact Analysis: Ten Tips for Being an Informed Policymaker

August 02, 2017

By S. Dudley, R. Belzer, G. Blomquist, T. Brennan, C. Carrigan, J. Cordes, L. Cox, A. Fraas, J. Graham, G. Gray, J. Hammitt, K. Krutilla, P. Linquiti, R. Lutter, B. Mannix, S. Shapiro, A. Smith, W. .Viscusi & R. Zerbe in the Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis
Regulatory impact analyses (RIAs) weigh the benefits of regulations against the burdens they impose and are invaluable tools for informing decision makers. We offer 10 tips for nonspecialist policymakers and interested stakeholders who will be reading RIAs as consumers.

Table saw

Public Comment on the CPSC’s Proposed Rule: Safety Standard Addressing Blade-Contact Injuries on Table Saws

July 27, 2017

By Sofie E. Miller and Jacob Yarborough
The CPSC’s proposed rule mandates that all table saws sold in the U.S. be equipped with Active Injury Mitigation (AIM) technology. Miller and Yarborough argue that this rule would lead to a monopoly of the table saw market. This monopoly would reduce consumer choice, dramatically raise costs, and stifle innovation. In addition, they question the underlying assumptions and models that the CPSC uses to conduct their benefit-cost analysis and argue that the benefits may be overstated and the costs understated.

Reg budget cover

Regulators’ Budget Reflects President Trump’s Priorities

July 18, 2017

By Susan E. Dudley & Melinda Warren
This year's annual report finds that although President Trump has made reducing regulatory burdens a priority, he proposes to increase the regulators' budget in FY 2018. Some agencies are budgeted for significant increases in both expenditures and staff, while others face dramatic cuts. In addition, this report finds that while spending and staffing at federal agencies has generally increased over the 59-year period covered by this report, the focus of those resources and the rate of increase have varied with the perceptions of public policy issues and the philosophies of elected officials in the executive and legislative branches.

FCC seal

Public Comment on The Federal Communications Commission’s Proposed Rule: Restoring Internet Freedom

July 11, 2017

By Gerald Brock, Ph.D, Co-Director
As an independent regulatory agency, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is not required to perform a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) of major regulations. In this public interest comment on the FCC’s “net neutrality” rule, Brock argues that it is desirable to conduct RIA voluntarily because they have become the standard method of ensuring careful analysis of proposed regulations in the U.S. and other major countries.

rick perry

Public Comment on DOE’s Request for Information on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs

July 07, 2017

By Sofie E. Miller
This comment provides the Department of Energy with recommendations on how to reduce regulatory burdens pursuant to Executive Orders 13771 and 13777. Miller recommends that DOE establish consistent internal standards for determining whether a rule is "economically justified," including using a threshold to limit the proportion of consumers who bear net costs. DOE should also review each rule before increasing the stringency of its standards, and consider surveys or other measures of actual consumer behavior to ensure that its assumptions about household appliance energy use are accurate.

Primer in Korean

Regulation: A Primer (Korean edition)

July 06, 2017

Susan Dudley and Jerry Brito's book, "Regulation: A Primer" has been translated in Korean. This primer provides an accessible overview of regulatory theory, analysis, and practice. It examines the constitutional underpinnings of federal regulation and discusses who writes and enforces regulation and how they do it. It also provides insights into the different varieties of regulation and how to analyze whether a regulatory proposal makes citizens better or worse off.

structured to fail

Structured to Fail? Regulatory Performance under Competing Mandates

July 03, 2017

By Christopher Carrigan, Ph.D, Senior Scholar
Commentators often point to the structure of regulatory agencies charged with overseeing the associated industries in the wake of a national crisis, noting that the need to balance competing regulatory and non-regulatory missions undermined each agency's ability to be an effective regulator. Carrigan challenges this critique by employing a diverse set of research methods, including an in-depth case study of US regulatory oversight of offshore oil and gas development leading up to the Gulf oil spill, to systematically evaluate the benefits and concerns associated with either combining or separating regulatory and non-regulatory missions. His analysis shows why assigning competing non-regulatory missions to regulatory agencies can still be better than separating them in some cases.

Policy scrabble tiles

Improving Regulatory Science: A Case Study of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards

June 30, 2017

By Susan E. Dudley & Marcus Peacock
This paper explores the motivations and institutional incentives of participants involved in the development of regulation aimed at reducing health risks, with a goal of understanding and identifying solutions to what the Bipartisan Policy Center has characterized as “a tendency to frame regulatory issues as debates solely about science, regardless of the actual subject in dispute, [that] is at the root of the stalemate and acrimony all too present in the regulatory system today.” This analysis is focused on a case study of the procedures for developing National Ambient Air Quality Standards under the Clean Air Act, and attempts to identify procedural approaches that bring greater diversity into the decision process.

ABA

Putting a Cap on Regulation

June 30, 2017

By Susan E. Dudley
In this Administrative & Regulatory Law News article, Dudley provides a rundown of what President Trump’s two cross-cutting regulatory executive orders do, and how far they might go towards “deconstruction of the administrative state.” She concludes that while regulations cannot be overturned as quickly as the president might like, his orders have the potential to impose some discipline on regulatory agencies, generate a constructive debate on the real impacts of regulations, and ultimately lead to more cost-effective achievement of public priorities.

Kitchen appliances

Reforming the Energy Policy and Conservation Act: Learning from Experience on Energy Efficiency

June 27, 2017

By Sofie E. Miller
The Energy Policy Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA) grants the Department of Energy the authority to regulate the energy efficiency of everyday consumer appliances like dishwashers and refrigerators. Because these standards affect almost all households and incur such large potential benefits and costs, the underlying statute merits close inspection. This working paper provides seven recommendations for reforming EPCA to ensure that consumers do not bear disproportionate burdens as a result of energy efficiency rules.