RegBlog’s fifth anniversary prompts illuminating debate about the best path for future regulators.
A 2009 court decision could spur more cost-benefit analysis in the regulatory process.
Combining better analysis with more meaningful participation will improve policy decisions.
CPSC considers costs of regulating corded window coverings, benefits to child safety.
At oral arguments, Justices question whether EPA considered costs of regulation at the right time.
Considering the costs and benefits of regulation should include indirect effects in the calculation.
EPA's consideration of costs in regulating toxic air pollutants should prove sufficient.
Apr 28, 2015 - Apr 30, 2015
RegBlog features commentaries on this term’s oral arguments in Michigan v. EPA.
A lower ozone standard means more benefits for Americans.
Two researchers propose a simpler way to perform cost-benefit analysis.