Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T06:34:42.144Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Research Article: Getting to the Table: Incentives for Participation in Regulatory Negotiations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2009

Clare M. Ryan
Clare M. Ryan*
Affiliation:
College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, Seattle
*
Assistant Professor, University of Washington, College of Forest Resources, Box 352100, Seattle, WA 98195-2100; (fax) 206-685-0790; (e-mail) cmryan@u.washington.edu.
Get access

Abstract

As the use of collaborative, consensus-based decisionmaking procedures increases, so, too, do the obstacles to using these processes. For example, many managers and decision makers are now encountering limits on the participation in such processes by key stakeholder groups. Indeed, perhaps one of the most difficult challenges an agency faces in undertaking a consensus process is in securing participation by appropriate stakeholders. In order to more effectively sponsor and manage collaborative decisionmaking processes, an understanding of the incentives for stakeholder participation is critical. A recent study of negotiated rulemaking at the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) assessed participants' incentives for participation, which revolve around four major themes: (1) resources required for participation, (2) input into final decision and response to comments, (3) use of technical data, and (4) representation and communication issues. Keeping these incentives in mind when initiating a collaborative regulatory process may assist managers and sponsors in ensuring inclusion and participation by key participants.

Type
Features & Reviews
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , June 2000 , pp. 147 - 155
Copyright
Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Administrative Conference of the United States. 1990. Negotiated Rulemaking Sourcebook. Pritzker, David M. and Dalton, Deborah S., eds. Washington, DC, 923 pp.Google Scholar
Administrative Conference of the United States. 1995. Building Consensus in Agency Rulemaking: Implementing the Negotiated Rulemaking Act. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Amy, D. J. 1983. The Politics of Environmental Mediation, Ecology Law Quarterly 11 (1):332–350.Google Scholar
Bacow, L. S., and Wheeler, M.. 1984. Environmental Dispute Resolution. Plenum Press, New York, 372 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bingham, G. 1986. Resolving Environmental Disputes: A Decade of Experience. The Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Burkardt, N., Lamb, B. L., and Taylor, J. G. 1998. Desire to Bargain and Negotiation Success: Lessons About the Need to Negotiate from Six Hydropower Disputes. Environmental Management 22 (6):877–886.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coggins, George C. 1998. Of Californicators, Quislings and Crazies: Some perils of devolved collaboration. The Chronicle of Community 2(2).Google Scholar
Coglianese, C. 1997. Assessing Consensus: The Promise and Performance of Negotiated Rulemaking. Duke Law Journal 46:1255–1349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowfoot, J. E., and Wondolleck, J. M.. 1990. Environmental Disputes: Community Involvement in Conflict Resolution. Island Press, Washington, DC, 275 PP.Google Scholar
Executive Order No. 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” 09 30, 1993.Google Scholar
Fiorino, D. J. 1988. Regulatory Negotiation as a Policy Process. Public Administration Review 48 (4):764–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R., and Ury, W.. 1981. Getting to Yes. Houghton-Mifilin, New York.Google Scholar
Funk, W. 1997. Bargaining Toward the New Millennium: Regulatory Negotiation and the Subversion of the Public Interest. Duke Law Journal 46:1351–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harter, P. J. 1982. Negotiating Regulations: A Cure for Malaise. Georgetown Law Journal 71 (1):1–113.Google Scholar
Kerwin, C. M. 1994. Rulemaking: How Government Agencies Write Law and Make Policy. Congressional Quarterly Press, Washington, DC, 321 pp.Google Scholar
McCloskey, M. 1996. The Skeptic Collaboration Has its Limits. High Country News 28(9):15.Google Scholar
Modavi, N. 1996. Mediation of Environmental Conflicts in Hawaii: Win-Win or Co-Optation? Sociological Perspectives 39 (2):3O1–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council, 1996. Understanding Risk Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 249 pp.Google Scholar
Office of the Vice President, 1993. Accompanying Report of the National Performance Review Improving Regulatory Systems.Google Scholar
Perritt, H. H. Jr., 1987. Administrative Alternative Dispute Resolution: The Development of Negotiated Rulemaking and Other Processes. Pepperdine Law Review 14 (4):863–920.Google Scholar
Stern, P. C. and Fineberg, H. V., eds. 1996. Understanding Risk Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 249 pp.Google Scholar
Strauss, A., and Corbin, J.. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, NJ.Google Scholar
Susskind, L. and McMahon, G.. 1985. The Theory and Practice of Negotiated Rulemaking. Yale Journal of Regulation 3 (1):133–165.Google Scholar
Thomas-Lamer, J. 1998. Getting Reluctant Stakeholders to the Table. Consensus (07):5–6.Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1987. An Assessment of EPA's Negotiated Rulemaking Activities. Program Evaluation Division.Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1991. (Fact Sheet) Negotiated Rulemaking at the USEPA.Google Scholar
Wald, P. M. 1985. Negotiating Regulations: A New Role for the Courts? Columbia Journal of Environmental Law 10(1):18.Google Scholar