Bruce Yandle - Böcker

Federal and state regulatory agencies are increasingly making use of litigation as a means of regulation. In this book, three experts in regulatory law and theory offer a systematic analysis of the use of litigation to impose substantive regulatory measures, including a public choice-based analysis of why agencies choose to litigate in some circumstances. The book examines three major cases in which litigation was used to achieve regulatory ends: the EPA’s suit against heavy duty diesel engine manufacturers; asbestos and silica dust litigation by private attorneys; and private and state lawsuits against cigarette manufacturers. The authors argue that litigation is an inappropriate means for establishing substantive regulatory provisions, and they conclude by suggesting a variety of reforms to help curb today’s growing reliance on such practice.

In The Political Limits of Environment Regulation, Bruce Yandle analyzes the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) twenty-year record and concludes that the agency's monopoly powers have not always been conducive to positive environmental results. In fact, Yandle argues, special interest groups and lobbyists have often been very successful in obtaining federal legislation favoring large industries. In constructing his argument, Yandle provides a detailed overview of the EPA's twenty-year efforts at environmental regulation based on numerous empirical investigations aimed at indentifying the chief elements of both major and minor regulatory episodes.Yandle begins by exploring the origins of the U.S. environmental saga and the status of environmental protection before federal regulation. He goes on to discuss the rise of the federal regulator and such issues as cost minimization and the move to manage hazardous and toxic wastes. Turning to a discussion of the effects of U.S. environmental regulation efforts, Yandle concludes that the EPA has not been as effective as it could be and recommends that state and local governments be given more responsibility for ensuring environmental protection. He suggests further that the country return to competitive regulation, cost-efficient pollution control legislation, flexibility on a state level, and divestiture of the EPA's monopoly in this domain, arguing that these combined actions will enable the EPA and state legislatures to control and protect the environment more efficiently.

Written by specialists in law and economics, this book studies the role of liability rules in an effort to illustrate the possible consequences of statutory tampering with them. The contributors explain how statutory and common law liability rules evolved, how they work in current practice, and how changes in rules can alter economic outcomes in significant and unintended ways. Although price theory is the primary analytical tool employed in the study, the contributors also provide a wealth of institutional detail intended to illuminate the structure and operation of forces at work when questions of product or service liability arise.Throughout, the contributors focus on the effects of individual decision making: how incentives faced by individuals are affected by liability rules and how the collective actions of purposeful individuals working in private markets and through the political process affect social outcomes. Among the specific topics addressed are using liability rules to deter government takings, the impact of government liability on private risk avoidance, the allocation of product liability by market share, liability and environmental quality, the effects of the flammability rule, deposit insurance and the savings and loan fiasco, and the political debate over automobile air bags. The contributors conclude that attempts to remedy alleged defects in the common law by legislative edict are not well grounded. Ideal as supplemental reading for courses in business and government, this volume will also be of significant interest to students of law and economics.

Policy analysts, academics, journalists, and even politicians lament the influence of money on politics. But in the political economy, politicians often carefully design regulations so that two very different interest groups will be satisfied. The Bootlegger and Baptist theory, an innovative public choice theory developed more than 30 years ago, holds that for a regulation to emerge and endure, both the bootleggers," who seek to obtain private benefits from the regulation, and the Baptists," who seek to serve the public interest, must support the regulation. Economists Adam Smith and Bruce Yandle provide an accessible description of the theory and cite numerous examples of coalitions of economic and moral interests who desire a common goal. The book applies the theory's insights to a wide range of current issues, including the recent financial crisis and environmental regulation, and provides readers with both an understanding of how regulation is a product of economic and moral interests and a fresh perspective on the ongoing debate of how special interest groups influence politics.