Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Appendix E Program Evaluation of Environmental Policies: Toward Evidence-Based Decision Making--Cary Coglianese and Lori D. Snyder Bennear
Pages 246-273

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 246...
... Appendix E Program Evaluation of Environmental Policies: Toward Evidence-Based Decision Making Cary Coglianese and Lori D Snyder Bennear Do environmental policies work?
From page 247...
... APPENDIX E 247 made at the state and federal level, as well as relative to the amount of evaluation research found in other fields, such as medicine, education, or transportation safety. A renewed and greatly expanded commitment to program evaluation of environmental policy would help move environmental decision making closer to an evidence-based practice.
From page 248...
... 248 DECISION MAKING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT tal policy are probably closer to becoming routine practices today than they have ever been before. THE ROLE OF PROGRAM EVALUATION IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY Since the overarching purpose behind environmental policies is to improve environmental conditions, and often thereby to improve human health, program evaluation can identify whether specific policies are serving their purposes and are having other kinds of effects, such as reducing environmental inequities, imposing economic costs, or promoting or inhibiting technological change.
From page 249...
... APPENDIX E 249 Implementation of Policy FIGURE E-1 A simple model of the environmental policy process. Regulatory policies are adopted, and then implemented and enforced, in order to change the behavior of a class of businesses or individuals.
From page 250...
... 250 DECISION MAKING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT try to identify regulatory options that will be the most efficient (Viscusi, 1996; Hahn, 1998)
From page 251...
... APPENDIX E 251 ning laws were associated with a roughly 30 percent decline in releases of toxic chemicals. Other regulatory policies have been evaluated retrospectively, including hazardous waste cleanup laws (Hamilton and Viscusi, 1999; Revesz and Stewart, 1995)
From page 252...
... 252 DECISION MAKING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT Implementation of Policy FIGURE E-2 Program evaluation in the policy process. spective analyses -- such as benefit-cost analysis -- can be grounded in experience as well as theory and forecasting.
From page 253...
... APPENDIX E 253 ernmental initiatives that are designed to effect the environment, such as trade association self-regulatory efforts like the chemical industry's Responsible Care program or the wood and paper industry's Sustainable Forestry Initiative. For each treatment to be evaluated, the researcher must obtain reliable measures of outcomes.
From page 254...
... In observational studies where strict random assignment does not hold, there may be random assignment conditional on other observable variables. For example, imagine that one state's legislature passes a new regulation on hazardous waste while another state's does not.
From page 255...
... In our hypothetical two-state example, a researcher could estimate the causal effect of the treatment by controlling for confounders such as the size or age of the facilities in both states. The researcher would essentially be comparing the environmental performance of facilities in the two states that have the same size, age, and other characteristics related to the generation of hazardous wastes.
From page 256...
... 256 DECISION MAKING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT would then calculate the difference in pollution levels for the Massachusetts facility and its matching facility in Connecticut. The average of these differences for all Massachusetts plants is the average effect of the regulation on pollution.
From page 257...
... APPENDIX E 257 two facilities do not have identical indicators of environmental performance before the program is created. In fact, let us suppose that the facilities that participate in the program have, on average, lower pollution levels even before participation.
From page 258...
... Thus, researchers have toxics release data available from the TRI, but only on facilities that are subject to the TRI regulations and only for the years during which these regulations have been in effect. Similarly, data are reported by regulated facilities on their air emissions, water discharges, and hazardous waste generation, but these data exist only for the facilities that are regulated under the relevant statutes and for the years in which the regulations have been in effect.
From page 259...
... APPENDIX E 259 close connection between data and regulation necessarily limits researchers' ability to evaluate the effects of these regulations as a treatment, since the mandated data are not available for unregulated facilities (the control group)
From page 260...
... 260 DECISION MAKING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT tions of government programs certainly have spilled over into the field of environmental policy from time to time. Yet, compared with other types of government programs, environmental policy has generated only a paucity of systematic program evaluation research.
From page 261...
... Finally, increasing availability and quality of environmental performance data will make it easier for researchers to conduct systematic evaluations of environmental policies. Although the EPA has collected data on air emissions, water discharges, hazardous waste generation, and toxics releases for several decades, in the past these data were collected and maintained separately by the respective program offices within the agency.
From page 262...
... 262 DECISION MAKING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT vided information about the facility, including production capacity and demographic characteristics of the surrounding area. Although there is much more work to be done to develop and categorize meaningful metrics (Metzenbaum, 2003)
From page 263...
... APPENDIX E 263 example, the EPA has recently released a strategy document on environmental management systems that gives priority to the need for careful program evaluation of initiatives in this area (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004)
From page 264...
... 264 DECISION MAKING FOR THE ENVIRONMENT study designs. Angrist and Krueger (1999)
From page 265...
... 2001 Assessing the advocacy of negotiated rulemaking. New York University Environ mental Law Journal 9:386-447.
From page 266...
... Viscusi 1999 Calculating Risks? : The Spatial and Political Dimensions of Hazardous Waste Policy.
From page 267...
... Commission on Behav ioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
From page 268...
... Ward 2003 Enforcement and Environmental Compliance: A Statistical Analysis of the Pulp and Paper Industry. Medford, MA: Tufts University.
From page 269...
... APPENDIX E 269 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation 1997 Final Report to Congress on Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990.
From page 270...
... 270 that Covered facilities thresholds. sites sites Facilities of certain Types Manufacturing meet Superfund Superfund of the of including on List, on water, transferred on files includes are chemicals air, activities data and sites, information, data Priority descriptions sites.
From page 271...
... 271 waste systems Continued and water hazardous Elimination holders. holders Permit of hazardous storage and facilities permit and drinking permit National air Generators waste treatment disposal All Discharge System Public All and large for and the System.
From page 272...
... 272 AIRS, AIRS, Data PCS, PCS, Covered databases. databases.
From page 273...
... 273 and and Canadian Canadian approved eight and private proprietary subscription and private proprietary subscription of by are by are by centers.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.