Advertisement

Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences

, Volume 1, Issue 4, pp 277–288 | Cite as

Making sense of the front lines: environmental regulators in Ohio and Wisconsin

  • Michelle C. Pautz
  • Sara R. RinfretEmail author
Article

Abstract

Although about 90% of environmental policy is delegated to the states for implementation, the individuals responsible for implementing a majority of that policy are largely understudied. Existing acknowledgment of these regulators typically extends only to the regulatory enforcement strategy their agency employs. Missing in these conversations is a focused study on the regulators themselves and their perceptions of the regulated community that they interact with daily. Understanding these perceptions will provide insights into how regulators approach their interactions and how they ensure regulatory compliance. This paper uses an exploratory case study approach to focus on front-line regulators with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources via agency-wide surveys. Findings from the surveys reveal generally positive perceptions of the regulated community in both states and experiences with them. The findings call attention to a neglected population and emphasize the importance of regulators’ perceptions in their regulatory approach.

Keywords

Front-line regulators Wisconsin Ohio OEPA WI DNR Environmental policy 

References

  1. Anderson W (1960) Intergovernmental relations in review. University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews RNL (2006) Managing the environment, managing ourselves: a history of American environmental policy. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  3. Bardach E (1978) The implementation game: what happens after a bill becomes a law. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. Bardach E, Kagan R (2002/1982) Going by the book: the problem of regulatory unreasonableness. Transaction Publishers, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar
  5. Black J (1998) Talking about regulation. Public Law 15:77–105Google Scholar
  6. Braithwaite J, Walker J, Grabosky P (1987) An enforcement taxonomy of regulatory agencies. Law & Policy 9:325–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cline K (2008) Working relationships in the national superfund program: The state administrators’ perspective. J Pub Admin Res Theor 20(1):117–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coglianese C, Nash J (eds) (2001) Regulating from the inside: can environmental management systems achieve policy goals? Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Coglianese C, Nash J (eds) (2006) Leveraging the private sector: management-based strategies for improving environmental performance. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Day P, Klein R (1987) The regulation of nursing homes: a comparative perspective. The Milbank Q 65(3):303–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dillman D (2000) Mail and Internet surveys: the tailored design method, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Eisinger PK, Gormley W (eds) (1988) The Midwest response to the new federalism. The University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  13. Eisner MA (2006) Governing the environment: the transformation of environmental regulation. Rienner, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  14. Environmental Council of the States (2001) State environmental agency contributions to enforcement and compliance. Report to Congress (April). http://ecos.org
  15. Fineman S (1998) Street-level bureaucrats and the social construction of environmental control. Org Studies 16(6):953–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fiorino DJ (2006) The new environmental regulation. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Gormley WT, Peters BG (1992) National styles of regulation: child care in three countries. Policy Sci 25(3):381–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. U.S. Government Accounting Office (2002) Environmental protection: overcoming obstacles to innovative state regulatory programs. Report to Congressional Requesters, GAO-02-268, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. Hawkins K (1984) Environment and enforcement: regulation and the social definition of pollution. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Hedge DM, Menzel DC, Williams GH (1988) Regulatory attitudes and behavior: the case of surface mining regulation. Western Politic Quart 41(2):323–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hoffman A (2001) From heresy to dogma: an institutional history of corporate environmentalism. Stanford Business Books, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  22. Hutter BM (1997) Compliance: regulation and environment. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Kagan RA (2001) Adversarial legalism: the American way of law. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. Kaplowitz MD, Hadlock TD, Levine R (2004) A comparison of web and mail survey response rates. Pub Opinion Quart 68(1):94–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kettl D (2002) Conclusion: the next generation. In: Kettl D (ed) Environmental governance: a report on the next generation of environmental policy. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, pp 177–190Google Scholar
  26. Kickert WJM, Klijn E, Koppenjan JFM (1997) Managing networks in the public sector: findings and reflections. In: Kickert WJM, Klijn E, Koppenjan JFM (eds) Managing complex networks: strategies for the public sector. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 166–191Google Scholar
  27. Konisky D (2007) Regulator attitudes and the environmental race to the bottom argument. J Public Admin Res Theory 18(2):321–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kraft M (2011) Environmental politics and policy. Longman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Kraft ME, Stephan M, Abel TD (2011) Coming clean: information disclosure and environmental performance. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee E (2008) Socio-political contexts, identity formation, and regulatory compliance. Adm & Soc 40(7):741–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lipsky M (1980) Street-level bureaucracy: dilemmas of the individual in public services. Russell Sage, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Makkai T, Braithwaite J (1992) In and out of the revolving door: making sense of regulatory capture. J Public Policy 12(1):61–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. May PJ (2005) Compliance motivations: perspective of farmers, homebuilders, and marine facilities. Law & Policy 27(2):318–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. May PJ, Winter S (2009) Politicians, managers, and street-level bureaucrats: influences on policy implementation. J Public Admin Res Theory 19(3):456–476Google Scholar
  35. May PJ, Wood RS (2003) At the regulatory frontlines: inspectors’ enforcement styles and regulatory compliance. J Public Admin Res Theory 13(2):117–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maynard-Moody S, Musheno M (2003) Cops, teachers, counselors: stories from the front lines of public service. The University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  37. Pautz MC (2009a) Trust between regulators and the regulated: a case study of environmental inspectors and facility personnel in Virginia. Politics & Policy 37(5):1001–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pautz MC (2009b) Perceptions of the regulated community in environmental policy: the view from below. Rev Policy Res 26(5):533–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pautz MC (2010) Front-line regulators and their approach to environmental regulation in Southwest Ohio. Rev Policy Res 27(6):761–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Potoski M, Prakash A (2004) The regulation dilemma: cooperation and conflict in environmental governance. Public Admin Rev 64(2):152–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pressman JL, Wildavsky A (1984) Implementation: how great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland, 3rd edn. University of California Press, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  42. Quick PJ (1981) Industry influence in federal regulatory agencies. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  43. Rabe BG (2003) Statehouse and greenhouse: the emerging politics of American climate change policy. Brookings Institute, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  44. Rabe BG (2010) Power to the states: the promise and pitfalls of decentralization. In: Vig NJ, Kraft ME (eds) Environmental policy: new directions for the twenty-first century, 6th edn. CQ Press, Washington, pp 34–56Google Scholar
  45. Reiss A (1984) Selecting strategies of social control over organizational life. In: Hawkins K, Thomas J (eds) Enforcing regulation. Kluwer, Boston, pp 23–25Google Scholar
  46. Riccucci NM (2005) How management matters: street-level bureaucrats and welfare reform. Georgetown University Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  47. Sandfort JR (2000) Moving beyond discretion and outcomes: examining public management from the front lines of the welfare system. J Public Admin Res Theory 10(4):729–756Google Scholar
  48. Scheberle D (2004) Federalism and environmental policy: trust and the politics of implementation, 2nd edn. Georgetown University Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  49. Scholz JT (1994) Managing regulatory enforcement. In: Rosenbloom D, Schwartz RD (eds) Handbook of regulation and administrative law. Marcel Decker, New York, pp 423–463Google Scholar
  50. Sheehan K (2001) E-mail survey response rates: a review. J Comp Media Comm 6:2Google Scholar
  51. Sigman H (2003) Letting states do the dirty work: state responsibility for federal environmental regulation. National Tax J 56(1):107–122Google Scholar
  52. Vogel D (1986) National styles of regulation: environmental policy in Great Britain and the United States. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  53. Waterman RW, Rouse AA, Wright RL (2004) Bureaucrats, politics, and the environment. University of Pittsburgh Press, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  54. Wilson JQ (ed) (1980) The politics of regulation. Basic Books, Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  55. Wingfield B, Marcus M (2007) America’s greenest states. Forbes, October 17Google Scholar
  56. Yin RK (2003) Case study research: design and methods. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© AESS 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of DaytonDaytonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceHartwick CollegeOneontaUSA

Personalised recommendations