Choices in Regulatory Program Design and Enforcement
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
Regulatory organizations can be structured in different ways, and choices about their organizational structure can impact regulators’ behavior and performance, both overall as well as at the level of individual employees. This paper analyzes structural decisions about regulatory organizations along two dimensions: vertical structure and horizontal structure.
Regulatory Action Holding Steady in Spring 2015 Unified Agenda
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs released its semiannual Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions for Spring 2015.
Regulators' Budget Increases Consistent with Growth in Fiscal Budget
This year’s “regulators’ budget” presents the President’s requested budget outlays and staffing in fiscal year (FY) 2016.
The Limits of Irrationality as a Rationale for Regulation
James Madison was speaking of the structural checks on governmental power when he wrote those words, but it is worth recalling his advice when we contemplate the role of benefit-cost analysis as a check on the unconstrained exercise of the government's regulatory powers, and the implications of the reality that people's behavior, both in and out of government, sometimes falls short of what we might incorporate into an economic model or hope for in a perfect world.
Point/Counterpoint: Valuing Internalities in Regulatory Impact Analysis
In this Point/Counterpoint series of 4 articles in the new issue of the Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, Brian Mannix & Susan Dudley engage in a back-and-forth with Hunt Allcott & Cass Sunstein on the advisability of regulatory interventions based solely on "internalities," which Allcott & Sunstein define as "costs we impose on ourselves by taking actions that are not in our own best interest."
State Funeral Regulations: Inside the Black Box
This study estimates the effects of state regulations affecting funeral markets. It accounts for multiple major categories of regulations and demand inducement as well as direct price effects. While concurring with prior studies that find ready-to-embalm regulations increase funeral costs and decrease the percentage of cremations, this study finds that several other state regulations are associated with significantly higher receipts per death.
Recommendations for Improving the Regulatory Process
The George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center is pleased to respond to the request by Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Carper, Subcommittee Chairman Lankford, and Ranking Member Heitkamp for recommendations for improving the regulatory process.