We examine the relationship between the amount of information in a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) and the time it takes to write and review the RIA. We find that the longer an agency spends developing the regulation and the longer that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) spends reviewing it, the more information in the analysis. However, the direction of causality is unclear. Better analyses may take more time to review. Or more review may make analyses better. We recommend increasing OIRA staff, which has advantages regardless of the direction of causality.
AckermanF.HeinzerlingL. (2004). Priceless: On knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. New York, NY: The New Press.
2.
BelcoreJ.ElligJ. (2009). Homeland security and regulatory analysis: Are we safe yet?Rutgers Law Journal, Fall, 1-96
3.
CoglianeseC. (2008, May). Has judicial review caused a rulemaking retreat?Paper presented at the annual meeting of The Law and Society, J. W. Marriott Resort, Las Vegas, NV.
4.
CrewsC. (2011). Ten thousand commandments: An annual snapshot of the regulatory state. Washington, DC: Competitive Enterprise Institute.
5.
DemuthC.GinsburgD. (1986). White House review of agency rulemaking. Harvard Law Review, 99, 1075-1112.
6.
ElligJ.McLaughinP.MorrallJ. (2012). Continuity, change, and priorities: The quality and use of regulatory analysis across U.S. administrations. Regulation & Governance, 7, 153-173.
7.
FraasA.LutterR. (2010). The challenges of improving the economic analysis of pending regulations: The experience of OMB circular A-4. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 3, 71-85.
8.
FraasA.LutterR. (2011). On the economic analysis of regulations at independent regulatory commissions: Would greater use of economic analysis improve regulatory policy at independent regulatory commissions? RFF Discussion Paper 11-16. (April2011).
9.
HahnR. W.DudleyP. M. (2007). How well does the U.S. government do benefit-cost analysis?Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 1, 192-211.
10.
HahnR. W.TetlockP. C. (2008). Has economic analysis improved regulatory decisions?Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22, 67-84.
11.
HarringtonW.HeinzerlingL.MorgensternR. (Eds.). (2009). Reforming regulatory impact analysis. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.
12.
JohnsonS. (2008). Ossification’s demise: An empirical analysis of EPA rulemaking from 2001-2005. Environmental Law, 38, 767-792.
13.
KerwinC. M.FurlongS. R. (1992). Time and rulemaking: An empirical test of theory. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2113-138.
14.
MashawJ.HarfstD. (1990). The struggle for auto safety. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books.
15.
McGarityT. (1992). Some thoughts on deossifying the rulemaking process. Duke Law Journal, 41, 1385-1462.
16.
MorgensternR. (Ed.). (1997). Economic analysis at EPA resources for the future. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
17.
MorrallJ. (1997). An assessment of the US regulatory impact analysis program. In OECDRegulatory impact analysis: Best practices in OECD countries (pp. 71-88). Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/59/35258828.pdf
18.
PosnerE. (2001). Controlling agencies with cost-benefit analysis: A positive political theory perspective. University of Chicago Law Review, 68, 1137-1199.
19.
ReveszR. L.LivermoreM. A. (2008). Retaking rationality New York. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
20.
ShapiroS. (2008). Evaluating the benefits and costs of regulatory reforms: What questions need to be asked?Evaluation and Program Planning, 31, 223-230.
21.
ShapiroS. (2011). OIRA: Inside and out. Administrative Law Review, 63(SE), 135.
22.
ShapiroS. (2012). The evolution of cost-benefit analysis in U.S. regulatory decision-making. In Levi-FaurD. (Ed.), The handbook on the politics of regulation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
23.
ShapiroS.MorrallJ. (2012). The triumph of regulatory politics: Benefit cost analysis and political salience. Regulation & Governance, 6, 189-206.
24.
SunsteinC. (2001). Cognition and cost-benefit analysis. In AdlerM.PosnerE. (Eds.), Cost benefit analysis legal, economic, and philosophical perspectives (pp. 223-268). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
25.
SunsteinC. (2002). Risk and reason. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
WienerJ. B.AlemannoA. (2010). Comparing regulatory oversight bodies across the Atlantic: The office of information and regulatory affairs in the U.S. and the impact assessment board in the EU. In Rose-AckermanS.LindsethP. (Eds.), Comparative administrative law (pp. 309-335). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
27.
YackeeJ. W.YackeeS. (2010). Administrative procedures and bureaucratic performance: Is federal rule-making ossified?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20, 261.
