Extent of Cooperative Enforcement: Effect of the Regulator-Regulated Facility Relationship on Audit Frequency

Dietrich H. Earnhart, Robert L. Glicksman
{"title":"Extent of Cooperative Enforcement: Effect of the Regulator-Regulated Facility Relationship on Audit Frequency","authors":"Dietrich H. Earnhart, Robert L. Glicksman","doi":"10.1561/102.00000058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A spirited debate explores the comparative merits of two different approaches to the enforcement of environmental law: the noncooperative approach, which emphasizes the deterrence of noncompliance through inflexibly imposed sanctions, and the cooperative approach, which emphasizes the inducement of compliance through flexibility and assistance. Both scholarly and policymaking communities are interested in this topic of enforcement approach within the realms of finance, tax compliance, occupational safety, food and drug safety, consumer product safety, and environmental protection, among others. To inform this debate, our study explores enforcement of environmental protection laws where the debate has been especially spirited yet lacking in much empirical evidence.Specifically, our study empirically analyzes the effect of enforcement approach on the frequency of self-audits linked to compliance with wastewater discharge limits imposed on chemical manufacturing facilities. For this analysis, we view the enforcement approach as representing a relationship between a regulator and a regulated facility that is measured in multiple dimensions. The empirical results reveal that, in general, a cooperative relationship induces more frequent auditing and, in particular, a more stable and higher quality relationship increases audit frequency, while a completely fair relationship yields less frequent auditing. However, these conclusions may depend on the extent of regulatory monitoring and enforcement. Specifically, they rely on sufficiently lower monitoring and enforcement. Once the extent of monitoring and enforcement becomes sufficiently strong, the empirical results appear to support the opposite conclusions.","PeriodicalId":378017,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Environment (Topic)","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Environment (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1561/102.00000058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

A spirited debate explores the comparative merits of two different approaches to the enforcement of environmental law: the noncooperative approach, which emphasizes the deterrence of noncompliance through inflexibly imposed sanctions, and the cooperative approach, which emphasizes the inducement of compliance through flexibility and assistance. Both scholarly and policymaking communities are interested in this topic of enforcement approach within the realms of finance, tax compliance, occupational safety, food and drug safety, consumer product safety, and environmental protection, among others. To inform this debate, our study explores enforcement of environmental protection laws where the debate has been especially spirited yet lacking in much empirical evidence.Specifically, our study empirically analyzes the effect of enforcement approach on the frequency of self-audits linked to compliance with wastewater discharge limits imposed on chemical manufacturing facilities. For this analysis, we view the enforcement approach as representing a relationship between a regulator and a regulated facility that is measured in multiple dimensions. The empirical results reveal that, in general, a cooperative relationship induces more frequent auditing and, in particular, a more stable and higher quality relationship increases audit frequency, while a completely fair relationship yields less frequent auditing. However, these conclusions may depend on the extent of regulatory monitoring and enforcement. Specifically, they rely on sufficiently lower monitoring and enforcement. Once the extent of monitoring and enforcement becomes sufficiently strong, the empirical results appear to support the opposite conclusions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
合作执法程度:监管机构与被监管机构关系对审计频率的影响
一场激烈的辩论探讨了执行环境法的两种不同方法的比较优点:非合作方法,强调通过僵化的制裁来威慑不遵守,合作方法,强调通过灵活性和援助来诱导遵守。学术界和政策制定界都对金融、税务合规、职业安全、食品和药品安全、消费品安全和环境保护等领域的执法方法感兴趣。为了为这场辩论提供信息,我们的研究探讨了环境保护法的执行情况,其中的辩论尤其激烈,但缺乏太多的经验证据。具体而言,我们的研究实证分析了执法方法对化学制造设施遵守废水排放限制的自我审计频率的影响。对于这一分析,我们认为执行方法代表了监管者和受监管设施之间的关系,这种关系是在多个维度上衡量的。实证结果表明,一般来说,合作关系会导致更频繁的审计,特别是更稳定和更高质量的关系会增加审计频率,而完全公平的关系会导致更少的审计频率。然而,这些结论可能取决于监管监督和执行的程度。具体来说,它们依赖于足够低的监督和执行。一旦监测和执行的范围变得足够强大,经验结果似乎支持相反的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Do Investor-State Dispute Settlement Cases Influence Domestic Environmental Regulation? The Role of Respondent State Capacity The Ongoing Re-Centralization Trends in Environmental Policy in China: The Case of Green Finance Policy On the Effects of Linking Voluntary Cap-and-Trade Systems for Co2 Emissions EPA Regulation and Relative Food Cost International Transmission of the Business Cycle and Environmental Policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1