Back to Search Start Over

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Brief

Authors :
Richard J. Zeckhauser
Robert W. Crandall
W. Kip Viscusi
Janet L. Yellen
Paul Krugman
Sam Peltzman
Elizabeth E. Bailey
John D. Graham
James C. Miller
Milton Friedman
Paul W. MacAvoy
William J. Baumol
William A. Niskanen
Jagdish N. Bhagwati
Laura D'Andrea Tyson
Kenneth J. Arrow
Robert N. Stavins
George C. Eads
Randall Lutter
Lester B. Lave
Alfred E. Kahn
Alice M. Rivlin
Christopher DeMuth
Paul W. McCracken
Michael J. Boskin
Milton Russell
Robert E. Litan
David F. Bradford
Murray L Weidenbaum
Paul L. Joskow
William D. Nordhaus
Wallace E. Oates
V. Kerry Smith
Maureen L. Cropper
Charles L. Schultze
Peter Passell
Robert M. Solow
Richard Schmalensee
Joseph E. Stiglitz
Paul R. Portney
Robert W. Hahn
Wendy L. Gramm
Source :
SSRN Electronic Journal.
Publication Year :
2000
Publisher :
Elsevier BV, 2000.

Abstract

As we understand it, the D.C. Circuit did not allow the EPA to consider the costs of complying with ozone and PM NAAQS. As we further understand it, this legal ruling can be overturned only by this Court. As economists, we believe that the D.C. Circuit's ruling not allowing the EPA to consider important information relating to the consequences of its regulatory actions is economically unsound. Without delving into the legal aspects of the case, we present below why we think the Court should allow the EPA to consider costs in setting standards. In particular, we believe that, as a general principle, regulators should be allowed to consider explicitly the full consequences of their regulatory decisions. These consequences include the regulation's benefits, costs, and any other relevant factors.

Details

ISSN :
15565068
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
SSRN Electronic Journal
Accession number :
edsair.doi...........4b56085c7dd92173dff16e826ce17b2d
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.945378