{"title":"好管闲事的中间人还是公民专家?环境法中的请愿与公共信息生产","authors":"Eric Biber, B. Brosi","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1432652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Commentators have bemoaned the role that petitions and citizen suits play in driving the regulatory agendas for environmental agencies. The argument is that these forms of public participation frequently distract agencies from the priorities that experts believe should be the focus of regulatory efforts. Using data from the listing of species for protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, we examine whether petitions and citizen suits result in suboptimal agenda setting by agencies. We find that petitions and litigation result in the identification of species that are at least as deserving of protection under the Act as the species identified by the agency. Our results raise the possibility that public participation, by collecting diffuse information about environmental conditions, might help improve the performance of environmental agencies.","PeriodicalId":53555,"journal":{"name":"Ucla Law Review","volume":"25 1","pages":"321"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2009-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Officious Intermeddlers or Citizen Experts? Petitions and Public Production of Information in Environmental Law\",\"authors\":\"Eric Biber, B. Brosi\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1432652\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Commentators have bemoaned the role that petitions and citizen suits play in driving the regulatory agendas for environmental agencies. The argument is that these forms of public participation frequently distract agencies from the priorities that experts believe should be the focus of regulatory efforts. Using data from the listing of species for protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, we examine whether petitions and citizen suits result in suboptimal agenda setting by agencies. We find that petitions and litigation result in the identification of species that are at least as deserving of protection under the Act as the species identified by the agency. Our results raise the possibility that public participation, by collecting diffuse information about environmental conditions, might help improve the performance of environmental agencies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53555,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ucla Law Review\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"321\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ucla Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1432652\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ucla Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1432652","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Officious Intermeddlers or Citizen Experts? Petitions and Public Production of Information in Environmental Law
Commentators have bemoaned the role that petitions and citizen suits play in driving the regulatory agendas for environmental agencies. The argument is that these forms of public participation frequently distract agencies from the priorities that experts believe should be the focus of regulatory efforts. Using data from the listing of species for protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, we examine whether petitions and citizen suits result in suboptimal agenda setting by agencies. We find that petitions and litigation result in the identification of species that are at least as deserving of protection under the Act as the species identified by the agency. Our results raise the possibility that public participation, by collecting diffuse information about environmental conditions, might help improve the performance of environmental agencies.
期刊介绍:
In 1953, Chief Justice Earl Warren welcomed the UCLA Law Review''s founding volume by stating that, “[t]o a judge, whose decisions provide grist for the law review mill, the review may be both a severe critique and a helpful guide.” The UCLA Law Review seeks to publish the highest quality legal scholarship written by professors, aspiring academics, and students. In doing so, we strive to provide an environment in which UCLA Law Review students may grow as legal writers and thinkers. Founded in December 1953, the UCLA Law Review publishes six times per year by students of the UCLA School of Law and the Regents of the University of California. We also publish material solely for online consumption and dialogue in Discourse, and we produce podcasts in Dialectic.