Local regulation may be excessively stringent

Regional Science and Urban Economics

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 553-558

  Glazer, Amihai ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Environmental regulation; Federalism

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; INDUSTRIAL REGULATION; REGULATORY APPROACH; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 0032869604     PISSN: 01660462     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0166-0462(99)90013-3     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Becker, R., Henderson, V., 1997. Effects of air quality regulation on decisions of firms in polluting industries. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 6160, September.
2. Deily M., Gray W.B. Enforcement of pollution regulations in a declining industry. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 21:(2):1991;260-274.
3. Duffy-Demo K.T. Pollution abatement expenditures and regional manufacturing activity. Journal of Regional Science. 32:(4):1992;419-436.
4. Gray, W.B., 1997. Manufacturing plant location: Does state pollution regulation matter? National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 5880 (January).
5. Oates W.E., Schwab R.M. Economic competition among jurisdictions: Efficiency enhancing or distortion reducing. Journal of Public Economics. 35:1988;333-354.
6. Peterson P.E. The Price of Federalism. 1995;The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC.
7. Revesz R.L. Rehabilitating interstate competition: Rethinking the 'race-to-the-bottom' rationale for federal environmental regulation. New York University Law Review. 67:(6):1992;1210-1254.
8. Stewart R.B. Pyramids of sacrifice? Problems of federalism in mandating state implementation of national environmental policy. Yale Law Journal. 86:(6):1977;1196-1272.
9. Wellisch D. Locational choices of firms and decentralized environmental policy with various instruments. Journal of Urban Economics. 37:(3):1995;290-310.