Public Comments’ Influence on Science Use in U.S. Rulemaking: The Case of EPA’s National Emission Standards

Mia Costa, Bruce A. Desmarais, Jr., John A. Hird

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Scholarship on bureaucratic policymaking has long focused on both the use of expertise and public accountability. However, few have considered the degree to which public input affects the use of research in U.S. regulatory impact analyses (RIAs). We examine changes in the research that is cited in RIAs in response to public comments to assess the influence of participation on the use of information for rulemaking. We conduct an in-depth analysis of comments on a major proposed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule to determine whether regulators alter the evidence used based on public input and whether some types of commenters have more influence than others. We analyze the text similarity of comments to scientific research utilized in the RIAs to determine whether regulators iteratively update their rule justification based on scientific information referenced in comments. We find support for seminal subgovernment theories about the relationship between business interests, Congress, and the bureaucracy; in relation to all kinds of commenters, members of Congress and industry groups had the strongest effect on changes in the research used in the RIAs. The article provides one of the first statistical analyses of science exchange between the public and a bureaucratic agency.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)36-50
Number of pages15
JournalAmerican Review of Public Administration
Volume49
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

science
business relationship
bureaucracy
environmental protection
expertise
responsibility
participation
Emission standards
industry
evidence
Group
Public input

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Public Administration
  • Marketing

Cite this

@article{3d7e4a65057942baaec97f071f5df3a4,
title = "Public Comments’ Influence on Science Use in U.S. Rulemaking: The Case of EPA’s National Emission Standards",
abstract = "Scholarship on bureaucratic policymaking has long focused on both the use of expertise and public accountability. However, few have considered the degree to which public input affects the use of research in U.S. regulatory impact analyses (RIAs). We examine changes in the research that is cited in RIAs in response to public comments to assess the influence of participation on the use of information for rulemaking. We conduct an in-depth analysis of comments on a major proposed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule to determine whether regulators alter the evidence used based on public input and whether some types of commenters have more influence than others. We analyze the text similarity of comments to scientific research utilized in the RIAs to determine whether regulators iteratively update their rule justification based on scientific information referenced in comments. We find support for seminal subgovernment theories about the relationship between business interests, Congress, and the bureaucracy; in relation to all kinds of commenters, members of Congress and industry groups had the strongest effect on changes in the research used in the RIAs. The article provides one of the first statistical analyses of science exchange between the public and a bureaucratic agency.",
author = "Mia Costa and {Desmarais, Jr.}, {Bruce A.} and Hird, {John A.}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0275074018795287",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "49",
pages = "36--50",
journal = "American Review of Public Administration",
issn = "0275-0740",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "1",

}

Public Comments’ Influence on Science Use in U.S. Rulemaking : The Case of EPA’s National Emission Standards. / Costa, Mia; Desmarais, Jr., Bruce A.; Hird, John A.

In: American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 49, No. 1, 01.01.2019, p. 36-50.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Public Comments’ Influence on Science Use in U.S. Rulemaking

T2 - The Case of EPA’s National Emission Standards

AU - Costa, Mia

AU - Desmarais, Jr., Bruce A.

AU - Hird, John A.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Scholarship on bureaucratic policymaking has long focused on both the use of expertise and public accountability. However, few have considered the degree to which public input affects the use of research in U.S. regulatory impact analyses (RIAs). We examine changes in the research that is cited in RIAs in response to public comments to assess the influence of participation on the use of information for rulemaking. We conduct an in-depth analysis of comments on a major proposed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule to determine whether regulators alter the evidence used based on public input and whether some types of commenters have more influence than others. We analyze the text similarity of comments to scientific research utilized in the RIAs to determine whether regulators iteratively update their rule justification based on scientific information referenced in comments. We find support for seminal subgovernment theories about the relationship between business interests, Congress, and the bureaucracy; in relation to all kinds of commenters, members of Congress and industry groups had the strongest effect on changes in the research used in the RIAs. The article provides one of the first statistical analyses of science exchange between the public and a bureaucratic agency.

AB - Scholarship on bureaucratic policymaking has long focused on both the use of expertise and public accountability. However, few have considered the degree to which public input affects the use of research in U.S. regulatory impact analyses (RIAs). We examine changes in the research that is cited in RIAs in response to public comments to assess the influence of participation on the use of information for rulemaking. We conduct an in-depth analysis of comments on a major proposed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule to determine whether regulators alter the evidence used based on public input and whether some types of commenters have more influence than others. We analyze the text similarity of comments to scientific research utilized in the RIAs to determine whether regulators iteratively update their rule justification based on scientific information referenced in comments. We find support for seminal subgovernment theories about the relationship between business interests, Congress, and the bureaucracy; in relation to all kinds of commenters, members of Congress and industry groups had the strongest effect on changes in the research used in the RIAs. The article provides one of the first statistical analyses of science exchange between the public and a bureaucratic agency.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053428154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053428154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0275074018795287

DO - 10.1177/0275074018795287

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85053428154

VL - 49

SP - 36

EP - 50

JO - American Review of Public Administration

JF - American Review of Public Administration

SN - 0275-0740

IS - 1

ER -