FDA-EPA Public Health Guidance on Fish Consumption: A Case Study on Informal Interagency Cooperation in "Shared Regulatory Space".

Abstract

This article is a case study on how administrative agencies interact with each other in cases of shared regulatory jurisdiction. The theoretical literature on the topic of overlapping jurisdiction both (1) makes predictions about how agencies are expected to behave when they share jurisdiction, and (2) in recent iterations argues that overlapping jurisdiction can confer unique policymaking benefits. Through the lens of that theoretical literature, this article examines the relations between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding the public health risks posed by mercury in fish. It concludes that the FDA-EPA case study (1) corroborates the extant theoretical accounts of how agencies behave in cases of overlapping jurisdiction, (2) supports the conclusion of the recent scholarship that overlapping jurisdiction can confer unique policy benefits, and (3) reveals a few wrinkles not given adequate treatment in the extant literature.