EPA Proposes Replacement for Obama’s Signature Climate Initiative
The Environmental Protection Agency announced the Trump administration's proposed replacement for the Obama-era Clean Power Plan.
Publications
The GW Regulatory Studies Center scholars regularly conduct applied research to understand regulatory policy and practice from a public interest perspective. Our content often takes the form of public interest comments, formal testimony, working papers, policy insights, and short commentaries analyzing the most pressing issues in regulatory policy. View the rest of our material by the different types of publications listed on this page or our research areas.
What We Publish
Journal Articles & Working Papers
Long-form publications intended for academic audiences that take a deep dive into a particular aspect of regulatory policy.
Public Comments & Testimonies
Scholarly analysis of the potential effects of particular rulemakings from federal agencies, and advice to Congress on how to improve the rulemaking process.
Commentaries & Insights
Short-form publications intended for all audiences which provide easy to access analysis of regulatory policy.
Books & Reports
Formal publications, often completed with other leading organizations and individuals, providing a thorough understanding of regulations and the rulemaking process.
Newsletters
The weekly Regulation Digest contains everything you need to know about regulatory policy today, and our monthly Center Update gives you all of the latest from our team.
For accessible charts and supporting data that you can use in your own publications or presentations, visit the Reg Stats page.
Latest Publications
Council on Environmental Quality - Implementing NEPA
For the first time in 30 years, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is considering an update to its regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969.
Increasing Transparency in Considering Costs and Benefits in the Rulemaking Process -- Update
Attached is a comment that I filed in response to a recent EPA ANPRM to increase transparency in considering costs and benefits in the rulemaking process. I am filing this same comment in the CEQ docket as well, because of the parallels between CEQ’s efforts to bring consistency and transparency to the NEPA process and EPA’s efforts to pursue the same goals with respect to rulemaking.
EPA's ANPRM on Increasing Transparency in Benefit-Cost Analysis
In this Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Environmental Protection Agency sets a worthwhile goal of improving the consistency and transparency of the agency’s use of economic analyses to inform its rulemaking decisions.
EPA's Benefit-Cost Analysis in the Rulemaking Process
The EPA is “soliciting comment on whether and how EPA should promulgate regulations that provide a consistent and transparent interpretation relating to the consideration of weighing costs
Benefit-Cost Analysis as a Check on Administrative Discretion
Benefit-cost analysis (BCA) continues to be the principal tool used by American presidents to guide the discretionary decisions of regulatory agencies under their supervision, and increasingly it is viewed by the courts as an important consideration for agencies to take into account in justifying their regulatory decisions. This paper argues that BCA is properly viewed, not simply as a technocratic planning tool, but as a solution to a principal-agent problem.
Improving Regulatory Science: A Case Study of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
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.”
Trump Administration Picks up the Regulatory Pace in its Second Year
The first 6 months of the Trump administration’s second year reveal a quicker pace than its first, though still slower compared to the Obama administration.
FCC Process Reform Underscores Need for Economic Review at Independent Regulatory Agencies
At a June 2018 policy seminar, Chairman O’Rielly focused his remarks on the next steps in the FCC’s process reform efforts.