Self-Policing and the environment: Predicting self-disclosure of Clean Air Act violations under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Audit Policy

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 18, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 871-887

  Stretesky, Paul B ^a   Gabriel, Jackie ^a  

^a Veterinary Dentistry and Oral Surgery   (United States)

Author keywords

Corporate crime; Corporate environmental behavior; Effectiveness of government interventions; Pollution prevention; Self regulation; Voluntary initiatives

Indexed keywords

POLLUTION POLICY; REGULATORY APPROACH; VOLUNTARY APPROACH;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 32144434371     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941920500248772     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. American Business Disc. 1998. Omaha, NE: InformUSA.
2. American Business Disc. 1999. Omaha, NE: InformUSA.
3. Arora, S. and T. N.Cason. 1995. An experiment in voluntary environmental regulation: Participation in EPA's 33/50 program. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 28(3):271-286.[CSA]
4. Braithwaite, J. and G.Geis. 1982. On theory and action for corporate crime control. Crime Delinquency 28(2):292-314.[CSA]
5. Braithwaite, J. and T.Makkai. 1991. Testing an expected utility model of corporate deterrence. Law Society Rev. 25(1):7-40.[CSA]
6. Clinard, M. and P.Yeager. 1980. Corporate crime. New York: Free Press.
7. Davidson, W., D.Worrell, and C.Lee. 1994. Stock-market reactions to announced corporate illegalities. J. Business Ethics 13(12):979-987.[CSA][CROSSREF]
8. DeCanio, S. J. and W. E.Watkins. 1998. Investment in energy efficiency: Do the characteristics of firms matter? Rev. Econ. Stat. 80(1):95-107.[CSA][CROSSREF]
9. Dun and Bradstreet/Gale Industry Reference Handbooks. 1998. Detroit: Gale.
10. Earnhart, D.2004. Panel data analysis of regulatory factors shaping environmental performance. Rev. Econ. Stat. 86(1):391-401.[CSA][CROSSREF]
11. Edelman, L. B. and M. C.Suchman. 1997. The legal environments of organizations. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 23:479-515.[CSA][CROSSREF]
12. Hawks, R.1998. Environmental self-audit privilege and immunity: Aid to enforcement or polluter protection? Arizona State Law J. 30(1):235-273.[CSA]
13. Khanna, M.2001. Non-mandatory approaches to environmental protection. J. Econ. Surveys 15(3):291-324.[CSA][CROSSREF]
14. Kraft, M. E. and N. J.Vig. 2000. Environmental policy from the 1970s to the twenty-first century. In Environmental policy: New directions for the twenty-first century, eds.N.Vig and M.Kraft, 1-31. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
15. Lacy, M.1997. Efficiently studying rare events: Case-control methods for sociologists. Sociol. Perspect. 40(1):129-154.[CSA]
16. Mazurek, J.1998. The use of voluntary agreements in the United States: An initial survey. CAVA Working Paper No. 98/11/1, Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development, Working Party on Economic and Environmental Policy Integration, Paris.
17. McKinney, L.1998. Technical complexity, regionalism, and decision-making: Case processing outcomes in EPA's Toxic Substances Program. Social Sci. J. 35(3):377-392.[CSA][CROSSREF]
18. Morandi, L.1998. State environmental audit laws and policies: An evaluation. Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislatures. October.
19. Pfaff, A. and C. W.Sanchirico. 2004. Big fields, small potatoes: An empirical assessment of EPA's self-audit policy. J. Policy Anal. Manage. 23(3):415-432.[CSA][CROSSREF]
20. Piquero, N. L., S. G.Tibbetts, and M. B.Blankenship. 2005. Examining the role of differential association and techniques of neutralization in explaining corporate crime. Deviant Behav. 26(1):159-188.[CSA][CROSSREF]
21. Price Waterhouse LLP. 1995. The voluntary environmental audit survey of U.S. business. Washington, DC: Price Waterhouse LLC.
22. Rebovich, D. J.1998. Environmental crime research: Where we have been, where we should go. In Environmental crime: Enforcement, policy, and social responsibility, ed. M.Clifford, 341-354. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
23. Renn, O., C. C.Jaeger, E. A.Rosa, and T.Webler. 2000. The rational actor paradigm in risk theories: Analysis and critique. In Risk in the modern age, ed. M. J.Cohen, 35-61. New York: St. Martin.
24. Scalia, J.1999. Federal enforcement of environmental laws, 1997. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
25. Scholz, J. T. and W. B.Gray. 1997. Can government facilitate cooperation? An informational model of OSHA enforcement. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 41(3):693-717.[CSA]
26. Simpson, S.1986. The decomposition of antitrust: Testing a multi-level, longitudinal model of profit-squeeze. Am. Sociol. Rev. 51(6):859-875.[CSA]
27. Simpson, S. and C. S.Koper. 1992. Deterring corporate crime. Criminology 30(3):347-375.[CSA]
28. Stafford, S. L.2003. Does self-policing help the environment? EPA's audit policy and hazardous waste compliance. Department of Economics, College of William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA. Unpublished manuscript.
29. StataCorp. 2001. Stata statistical software: Release 7.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation.
30. Thomas, R. A.1999. Improving communications between a company and its neighbors: A logical process and model. New Orleans, LA: Loyola University, Center for Environmental Communications. Retrieved October 21, 2004 (http://www.loyno.edu/lucec/csi.html).
31. Trostel, A. and M.Nichols. 1982. Privately-held and publicly-held companies: A comparison of strategic choices and management processes. Acad. Manage. J. 25(1):47-62.[CSA]
32. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. Incentives for self-policing: Discovery, disclosure, corrections, and prevention of violations. Fed. Reg. 60:66705-66712.[CSA]
33. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Audit policy user survey results. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA. Retrieved October 21, 2004 (http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/incentives/ programs/audit-results.pdf).
34. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Evaluation of incentives for self-policing, discovery, disclosure, correction and prevention of violations policy statement, proposed revisions and request for public comment. Fed. Reg. 64(94):26745-26756.[CSA]
35. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2004a. What is Project XL? Washington, DC: U.S. EPA. Retrieved October 10, 2004 (http://www.epa.gov/projectxl/file2.htm).
36. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2004b. National environmental Performance Track: Basic information. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA. Retrieved October 26, 2004 (http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/about.htm).
37. U.S. General Accounting Office. 2000. Environmental protection: More consistency needed among EPA regions in approach to enforcement. GAO/ RCED-00-108. Washington, DC: U.S. GAO.
38. Vaughan, D.1998. Rational choice, situated action, and the social control of organizations. Law Society Rev. 32(1):23-61.[CSA]
39. Videras, J. and A.Alberini. 2000. The appeal of voluntary environmental programs: Which firms participate and why? Contemp. Econ. Policy 18(4):449-461.[CSA][CROSSREF]
40. Voluntary Protection Programs Participants' Association. 2004. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initiatives. Falls Church, VA: Voluntary Protection Programs Participants' Association. Retrieved October 17, 2004 (http://www.vpppa.org/GovAffairs/EPA.cfm).
41. Zimring, F. E. and G.Hawkins. 1973. Deterrence: The legal threat in crime control. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.