The economics of endangered species: Why less is more in the economic analysis of critical habitat designations

Harvard Environmental Law Review

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 129-214

  Sinden, Amy ^a  

^a TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

BOS TAURUS;

EID: 1842714258     PISSN: 01478257     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (120)

1. DANIEL A. FARBER, ECO-PRAGMATISM 39 (1999).
2. Douglas A. Kysar & James Salzman, Environmental Tribalism, 87 MINN. L. REV. 1099, 1102 (2003)
3. Cass R. Sunstein, Cost-Benefit Default Principles, 99 MICH, L. REV. 1651 (2001).
4. Lisa Heinzerling, Regulatory Costs of Mythic Proportions, 107 YALE L. J. 1981 (1998);
5. Thomas O. McGarity, Professor Sunstein's Fuzzy Math, 90 GEO. L. J. 234 (2002);
6. David M. Dreisen, The Societal Cost of Environmental Regulation: Beyond Administrative Cost-Benefit Analysis, 24 ECOL. L. Q. 545 (1997).
7. Matthew D. Adler & Eric Posner, Introduction: Cost-Benefit Analysis: Legal, Economic, and Philosophical Perspectives, 29 J. L. STUD. 837 (2000)
8. MICHAEL J. BEAN & MELANIE J. ROWLAND, THE EVOLUTION OF NATIONAL WILDLIFE LAW 203, n.49 (1997);
9. Daniel J. Rohlf, Jeopardy Under the Endangered Species Act: Playing A Game Protected Species Can't Win, 41 WASHBURN L.J. 114, 117 n.9 (2001).
10. CASS R. SUNSTEIN, THE COST-BENEFIT STATE 20 (2002).
11. Barton H. Thompson, Jr., People or Prairie Chickens: The Uncertain Search for Optimal Biodiversity, 51 STAN. L. REV. 1127 (1999);
12. Nancy K. Kubasek, M. Neil Browne & Michael D. Meuti, Cross-examining Market Approaches to Protecting Species, 30 ENVT'L L. REP. 10,721, 10,724 (2000).
13. Julie Cart, Species Protection Act "Broken": A Top Interior Officer Says the Law Should be Revised to Give Economic and Other Interests Equal Footing with Endangered Animals and Plants, L.A. TIMES, Nov. 14, 2003, at 6
14. WILLIAM H. RODGERS, JR., ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 119-22 (2d ed. 1994)
15. THEODORE M. PORTER, TRUST IN NUMBERS: THE PURSUIT OF OBJECTIVITY IN SCIENCE AND PUBLIC LIFE 149-89 (1995).
16. AJIT K. DASGUPTA & D.W. PEARCE, COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: THEORY AND PRACTICE 12 (1972).
17. Ronald H. Coase, The Problem of Social Cost, 3 J.L. & ECON. 1 (1960);
18. E.J. MISHAN, COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS (1971).
19. IAN MCHARG, DESIGN WITH NATURE 25 (1969):
20. ANTHONY E. BOARDMAN ET AL., COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: CONCEPTS AND PRACTICE (1996).
21. Matthew D. Adler & Eric Posner, Rethinking Cost-Benefit Analysis, 109 YALE L.J. 165, 190-92 (1999)
22. MARK SAGOFF, THE ECONOMY OF THE EARTH 21-22 (1988);
23. Richard H. Pildes & Cass R. Sunstein, Reinventing the Regulatory State, 62 U. CHI. L. REV. 1, 45 (1995).
24. Robert W. Hahn, State and Federal Regulatory Reform: A Comparative Analysis, 29 J. LEG. STUD. 873 (2000).
25. Amy Sinden, Cass Sunstein's Cost-Benefit Lite: Economics for Liberals, COLUM. J. ENVTL. L. (forthcoming)
26. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: LEGAL, ECONOMIC, AND PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVES (Matthew D. Adler & Eric Posner eds., 2001);
27. CASS R. SUNSTEIN, RISK AND REASON (2002).
28. David S. Brookshire et al., Valuing Public Goods: A Comparison of Survey and Hedonic Approaches, 72 AM. ECON. R. 165 (1982);
29. Thomas H. Stevens et al., Measuring the Existence Value of Wildlife: What Do CVM Estimates Really Show?, 67 LAND ECON. 390 (1991).
30. IAN J. BATEMAN & KENNETH G. WILLIS, VALUING ENVIRONMENTAL PREFERENCES: THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE CONTINGENT VALUATION METHOD IN THE US. EU. AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES (1999);
31. KRISTIN M. JAKOBSSON & ANDREW K. DRAGUN, CONTINGENT VALUATION AND ENDANGERED SPECIES: METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES AND APPLICATIONS 77-115 (1996).
32. John M. Heyde, Is Contingent Valuation Worth the Trouble?. 62 U. CHI. L. REV. 331 (1995).
33. John B. Loomis & Douglas S. White, Economic Benefits of Rare and Endangered Species: Summary and Meta-analysis. 18 ECOLOGICAL ECON. 197. 199 tbl. 1 (1996).
34. Regulatory Working Group, Office of Management and Budget, Economic Analysis of Federal Regulations under Executive Order 12866 § III(B)(4) (Jan. 1, 1996), available at http://www.whitehouse./gov/omb/inforeg/riaguide.html#iii (last viewed Oct. 24. 2003)
35. Earl R. Ekstrand & John Loomis. Incorporating Respondent Uncertainty When Estimating Willingness to Pay for Protecting Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Fish. 34 WATER RESOURCES RES. 3149 (1998);
36. Paul Portney, The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economics Care. J. ECON. PERSP. 3. 8. 15 (Fall 1994).
37. George Cameron Coggins, An Ivory Tower Perspective on Endangered Species Law, 8 NAT. RESOURCES & ENV'T 3, 3 (1993);
38. Timothy Egan, Strongest U.S. Environment Law May Become Endangered Species, N.Y. TIMES, May 26, 1992, at A11
39. Mark Sagoff, Economic Theory and Environmental Law, 79 MICH. L. REV. 1393, 1396 (1981)
40. Michael C. Blumm & Greg D. Corbin, Salmon and the ESA: Lessons from the Columbia Basin, 74 WASH. L. REV. 519. 589 (1999)
41. STEVEN LEWIS YAFFEE, PROHIBITIVE POLICY: IMPLEMENTING THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT 86-89 (1982)
42. Shannon Petersen, Congress and Charismatic Megafauna: A Legislative History of the Endangered Species Act, 29 ENVTL. L. 463, 478 (1999).
43. William J. Snape III, The Endangered Species Act: Anatomy of an Environmental Scapegoat, in ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: LAW, POLICY, AND PERSPECTIVES 520 (Donald C. Baur & William R. Irvin eds., 2002)
44. MICHAEL J. BEAN, Historical Background to the Endangered Species Act, in ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: LAW, POLICY, AND PERSPECTIVES 15 (Donald C. Baur & William R. Irvin eds., 2002).
45. RODERICK NASH, THE RIGHTS OF NATURE 172-74 (1989).
46. RACHEL CARSON, SILENT SPRING (1962).
47. Hearings before Subcomm. on Resource Protection of Senate Comm. on Env't and Public Works, 95th Cong. 1 (1977)
48. NAT'L RESEARCH COUNCIL, SCIENCE AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT 7 (1995)
49. James Salzman, Evolution and Application of Critical Habitat under the Endangered Species Act, 14 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 311, 315 (1990).
50. Zigmunt J. B. Plater, The Embattled Social Utilities of the Endangered Species Act-A Noah Presumption and Caution against Putting Gasmasks on the Canaries in the Coalmine, 27 ENVTL. L. 845 (1997).
51. Endangered Species Act Authorization: Hearing on H.R. 10883 Before the House Subcomm. on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation and the Environment, 95th Cong. 462-76 (1978)
52. ZYGMUNT J. B. PLATERS ET AL., ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY: NATURE, LAW, AND SOCIETY 674-78 (2d ed. 1998).
53. Northern Spotted Owl ESA Exemptions, 52 FED. REG. 23,405, 23,406 (June 3, 1992)
54. Amending the Endangered Species Act of 1973: Hearings on S. 2899 Before the Subcomm. on Resource Protection of the Senate Comm. on Environment and Public Works, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 17 (1978)
55. Oliver A. Houck, The Endangered Species Act and Its Implementation by the U.S. Departments of Interior and Commerce, 64 U. COLO. L. REV. 277, 298 (1993)
56. Vernal Pool Crustaceans and Plants Critical Habitat Designation, 68 Fed. Reg. 46,683, 46,683 (Aug. 6, 2003)
57. U.S. Dep't of Interior, News Release: Endangered Species Act "Broken"-Flood of Litigation over Critical Habitat Hinders Species Conservation (May 28, 2003), available at http://endangered.fws.gov/criticalhabitat/ch_pressrelease.pdf
58. Martin Taylor et al., Critical Habitat Significantly Enhances Endangered Species Recovery (Oct, 2003). at http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/swcbd/programs/policy/ch/ CHSEER9-2003.pdf
59. William Snape III. et al., Protecting Ecosystem Under the Endangered Species Act: The Sonoran Desert Example, 41 WASHBURN L.J. 14, 20 (2001).
60. Amy Armstrong, Critical Habitat Designations under the Endangered Species Act: Giving Meaning to the Requirements for Habitat Protection, 10 S.C. ENVTL. L.J. 53, 71 (2002).
61. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE GULF STURGEON 1 (prepared by Industrial Economics, Inc., July 2002)
62. Douglas Jehl, Rare Arizona Owl (All 7 Inches of It) is in Habitat Furor, N.Y. TIMES, Mar. 17, 2003, at A1
63. Thomas F. Darin, Designating Critical Habitat Under the Endangered Species Act: Habitat Protection Versus Agency Discretion, 24 HARV. ENVT'L REV. 209, 224 (2000).
64. Status of Court-Ordered Critical Habitat Actions (2003), http://endangered.fws.gov/criticalhabitat/ch-actions.pdf (listing court-ordered critical habitat designations) (last visited Dec. 5, 2003).
65. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATCHER, S3 (1997)
66. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE SAN BERNARDI NO KANGAROO RAT ES-6
67. "Prime Habitat for Pygmy-Owl Nearing Critical Point," 7 Endangered Species & Wetlands Rep. No. 6 at 10 (Mar. 2002).
68. U.S FISH WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE QUINO CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY at Preface (prepared by Industrial Economics, Inc., June 2001)
69. U.S FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE SCOTTS VALLEY SPINEFLOWER AND THE SCOTTS VALLEY POLYGONUM 3 (July 2001)
70. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR ELEVEN MOBILE RIVER BASIN MUSSELS (June 2003);
71. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THREATENED AND ENDANGERED PLANTS ON MOLOKAI (prepared by Anden Consulting, Aug. 2002);
72. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR OAHU PLANTS, ISLAND OF OAHU, HAWAII (prepared by Research Solutions, LLC, Dec. 2002)
73. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE RIO GRANDE SILVERY MINNOW, FINAL DEPT (May 2002)
74. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR VERNAL POOL SPECIES 123-24 (prepared by Industrial Economics, Inc., Oct. 28, 2002)
75. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE NORTHERN GREAT PLAINS BREEDING POPULATION OF THE PIPING PLOVER 3-27 (Nov. 2001)
76. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., FINAL DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE SANTA CRUZ TARPLANT 8-20 (prepared by Industrial Economics, Inc., Apr. 2002)
77. Cass R. Sunstein, The Arithmetic of Arsenic, 90 GEORGETOWN L.J. 2255, 2290-92 (2002)
78. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., FINAL DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE PURPLE AMOLE AND THE CAMATTA CANYON AMOLE 19
79. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THREATENED AND ENDANGERED PLANTS ON THE ISLAND OF HAWAII VI-97 to VI-99
80. "FWS Species Program Having Trouble Keeping Staff, GAO Finds," 7 ENDANGERED SPECIES & WETLANDS REP. No. 10 at 12 (July/Aug. 2002)
81. ROBERT V. PERCIVAL ET AL., ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION: LAW, SCIENCE AND POLICY 363-64 (4th ed. 2003)
82. Federal Regulation and Regulatory Reform: Report by the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, H. REP 75-931, 94th Cong. 2d Sess. 510-11, 515 (1976).
83. Study on Federal Regulation, vol. VI, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, 96th Cong., 1st Sess. xxiv (1978)
84. THOMAS O. MCGARITY, REINVENTING RATIONALITY: THE ROLE OF REGULATORY ANALYSIS IN THE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY 140-41 (1991).
85. Howard Latin, Ideal Versus Real Regulatory Efficiency: Implementation of Uniform Standards and "Fine-Tuning" Regulatory Reforms, 37 STAN. L. REV. 1267, 1271 (1985)
86. Office of Management and Budget. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Informing Regulatory Decisions: 2003 Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations and Unfunded Mandates on State, Local, and Tribal Entities (2003), at http://www. whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/2003st-bennal℘t.pdf
87. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT OF 1970, at 510 (1971).
88. Bruce A. Ackerman and Richard B. Stewart, Reforming Environmental Law, 37 STAN. L. REV. 1333, 1335 (1985)
89. James E. Krier, The Irrational National Air Quality Standards: Macro- and Micro- Mistakes, 22 U.C.L.A. L. REV. 323 (1974)
90. Daniel C. Esty, Revitalizing Environmental Federalism, 95 MICH. L. REV. 570 (1996);
91. Richard L. Revesz, Rehabilitating Interstate Competition: Rethinking the "Race to the Bottom" Rationale for Federal Environmental Regulation, 67 N.Y.U. L. REV. 1210 (1992).
92. A LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1972, at 170 (1973);
93. Barry A. Pineles, Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972: A Proposal for Congressional Action, 67 IowA L. REV. 1057 (1982).
94. CASS R. SUNSTEIN, FREE MARKETS AND SOCIAL JUSTICE 246 (1996).
95. Jane B. Baron & Jeffrey L. Dunoff, Against Market Rationality: Moral Critiques of Economic Analysis in Legal Theory, 17 CARDOZO L. REV. 431, 485-87 (1996)
96. Cass R. Sunstein, Incommensarability and Valuation in Law, 92 MICH. L. REV. 779, 841 (1994);
97. ELIZABETH ANDERSON. VALUE IN ETHICS AND ECONOMICS (1993): Sagoff, supra note 35. at 1393 (1981);
98. Lawrence H. Tribe. Ways Not to Think About Plastic Trees: New Foundations for Environmental LAw, 83 YALE L. J. 1315 (1974);
99. Steven Kelman, Cost-Benefit Analysis: An Ethical Critique, REGULATION 33 (Jan. Feb. 1981).
100. CHARLES C. MANN & MARK L. PLUMER, NOAH'S CHOICE: THE FUTURE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES (1995).
101. Duncan Kennedy, Cost-Benefit Analysis of Entitlement Problems: A Critique, 33 STAN. L. REV. 387 (1981);
102. Thomas O. McGarity, Regulatory Analysis and Regulatory Reform, 65 TEX. L. REV. 1243 (1987);
103. William B. Rodgers, Benefits, Costs, and Risks: Oversight of Health and Environmental Decisionmaking, 4 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 191 (1980).
104. Mark Kelman, Consumption Theory, Production Theory, and Ideology in the Coase Theorem, 52 S. CAL. L. REV. 669, 678-82 (1979).
105. C. Edwin Baker, The Ideology of the Economic Analysis of Law, 5 PHIL. & PUB. AFF. 3 (1975);
106. RICHARD POSNER, ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF LAW 13 (5th ed. 1998);
107. Arthur Leff, Economic Analysis of Law: Some Realism About Nominalism, 60 VA. L. REV. 451 (1974).
108. John Heyde, Is Contingent Valuation Worth the Trouble? 62 U. CHI. L. REV. 331, 343-44 (1995).
109. John Loomis & Earl Ekstrand, Economic Benefits of Critical Habitat for the Mexican Spotted Owl: A Scope Test Using a Multiple-Bounded Contingent Valuation Survey, 22 J. AGRIC. & RES. ECON. 356 (1997).
110. Robert Costanza et al., The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital, 387 NATURE 253 (1997).
111. DANIEL B. BOTKIN, DISCORDANT HARMONIES: A NEW ECOLOGY FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY 9 (1990);
112. A. Dan Tarlock, The Nonequilibrium Paradigm in Ecology and the Partial Unraveling of Environmental Law, 27 LOY. L.A. L. REV. 1121, 1129 (1994).
113. Harold Mooney & Paul Ehrlich, Ecosystem Services: A Fragmentary History, in NATURE'S SERVICES 15-16 (Gretchen C. Daily ed., 1997).
114. Kenneth Arrow, et al., Is There a Role for Benefit-Cost Analysis in Environmental, Health, and Safety Regulation?, 272 SCIENCE 221, 221 (1996)
115. Wendy E. Wagner, The Science Charade in Toxic Risk Regulation, 95 COLUM. L. REV. 1613, 1618-25 (1995)
116. Frank Ackerman & Lisa Heinzerling, Pricing the Priceless: Cost Benefit Analysis of Environmental Protection, 150 U. PA. L. REV. 1553, 1579-80 (2002).
117. Jason Johnston, A Game Theoretic Analysis of Alternative Institutions for Regulatory Cost-Benefit Analysis, 150 U. PENN L. REV. 1343, 1401 (2002)
118. U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERV., DRAFT ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE MEXICAN SPOTTED OWL, 49-51 (prepared by Industrial Economics, Inc., Oct. 2000).
119. Jennifer Lee, Money Gone, U.S. Suspends Designations of Habitats, N.Y. TIMES, May 29, 2003, at At 8
120. Robert H. Frank, Why is Cost-Benefit Analysis So Controversial? 29 J. LEG. STUDIES 913, 930 (2000).