Happiness institutions

Duke Law Journal

Volumn 62, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 1701-1716

  Nou, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878648162     PISSN: 00127086     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. This idea draws in part on the "principle of institutional settlement" famously developed by Henry Hart and Albert Sacks. See HENRY M. HART, JR. & ALBERT M. SACKS, THE LEGAL PROCESS: BASIC PROBLEMS IN THE MAKING AND APPLICATION OF LAW 4 (William N. Eskridge, Jr. & Philip P. Frickey eds., 1994) ("The principle of institutional settlement expresses the judgment that decisions which are the duly arrived at result of duly established procedures of this kind ought to be accepted as binding upon the whole society unless and until they are duly changed.").
2. John Bronsteen, Christopher Buccafusco & Jonathan S. Masur, Well-Being Analysis vs. Cost-Benefit Analysis, 62 DUKE L.J. 1603 (2013). Though recognizing the potential for conceptual slipperiness, this Commentary will refer to SWB and happiness measures synonymously.
3. Matthew D. Adler, Happiness Surveys and Public Policy: What's the Use?, 62 DUKE L.J. 1510 (2013).
4. See generally AMY GUTMANN & DENNIS THOMPSON, DEMOCRACY AND DISAGREEMENT (1996) (arguing that a framework of "deliberative democracy" should guide moral disagreements and that this framework should be continually reevaluated in light of actual democratic disagreements)
5. See W.B. Gallie, Essentially Contested Concepts, 56 PROC. ARISTOTELIAN SOC'Y 167, 169 (1956) ("[T]here are concepts which are essentially contested, concepts the proper use of which inevitably involves endless disputes about their proper uses on the part of their users").
6. KARMA URA, SABINA ALKIRE, TSHOKI ZANGMO & KARMA WANGDI, CTR. FOR BHUTAN STUD., A SHORT GUIDE TO GROSS NATIONAL HAPPINESS INDEX 7 (2012), available at http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Short-GNH-Indexedited.pdf.
7. See EDITH STOKEY & RICHARD ZECKHAUSER, A PRIMER FOR POLICY ANALYSIS 278 (1978) (noting that monetary measures are "a surrogate [for welfare], of course, and an imperfect surrogate at that" but nevertheless arguing that it is still the best available)
8. For a similar critique, see Todd B. Kashdan, The Assessment of Subjective Well-Being (Issues Raised by the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire), 36 PERSONALITY & INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES 1225, 1225 (2004), which criticizes "[t]he operationalization of SWB by the [Oxford Happiness Questionnaire]" as "not based on relevant definition and theory" and thereby "invit[ing] nonrandom error into the study of SWB."
9. See BUREAU OF LABOR STAT., U.S. DEP'T OF LABOR, THE SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING MODULE OF THE AMERICAN TIME USE SURVEY: ASSESSMENT FOR ITS CONTINUATION 4 (2012), available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13535.
10. See, e.g., Weiting Ng, Ed Diener, Raksha Aurora & James Harter, Affluence, Feelings of Stress, and Well-Being, 94 SOC. INDICATORS RES. 257 (2009) (finding that stress correlates positively with well-being at the nation-level, though negatively at the individual-level)
11. Brett W. Pelham, Stress and Happiness: Often, but Not Always, Related, GALLUP (Aug. 21, 2009), http://www.gallup.com/poll/122420/stress-happiness-often-not-always-related.aspx (providing data indicating that states with higher stress levels sometimes have residents with higher happiness levels).
12. See Michael A. Livermore, Cost-Benefit Analysis and Agency Independence 40 (unpublished manuscript) (on file with the Duke Law Journal) ("Once particular methodological disputes are settled, some inertia is likely to set in. Conflicts between OIRA and agencies are costly....")
13. Cass Sunstein, The Real World of Cost-Benefit Analysis: Thirty-Six Questions (and Almost as Many Answers) 4 (Jan. 10, 2013) (unpublished manuscript), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2199112 (describing executive-branch documents that "are binding until they are changed, and for that reason, some of the hardest questions cannot be revisited during the process of rule review").
14. E.g., 42 U.S.C. §§ 4904(a)(2), 7409(b)(1) (2006) (discussing an "adequate margin of safety... requisite to protect the public health").
15. E.g., Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. §§ 1532-1538 (2006).
16. E.g., Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 601-612 (2006).
17. E.g., National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347 (2006 & Supp. V 2012).
18. E.g., Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. §§ 3501-3508 (2006).
19. See Jacob E. Gersen & Anne Joseph O'Connell, Deadlines in Administrative Law, 156 U. PA. L. REV. 923, 925-28, 935 (2008).
20. See generally STANDING RULES, ORDERS, LAWS, AND RESOLUTIONS AFFECTING THE BUSINESS OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE, S. DOC. NO. 112-1, at 1-1118 (2011)
21. CONSTITUTION, JEFFERSON'S MANUAL, AND RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, H.R. DOC. NO. 111-157, at 333-1018 (2011).
22. Exec. Order No. 12,866, 3 C.F.R. 638 (1994), reprinted as amended in 5 U.S.C. § 601 note at 745 (2006), and 5 U.S.C. § 601 note at 126 (Supp. V 2012).
23. Exec. Order No. 13,563, 3 C.F.R. 215 (2012).
24. See Exec. Order No. 12,866 § 3(b), 3 C.F.R. at 641, 5 U.S.C. § 601 note at 746 (defining agencies as those defined as an agency under 44 U.S.C. § 3502(1) (2006) other than those defined as an "independent regulatory agency" under id. § 3502(10)).
25. Exec. Order No. 12,866 § 6(a)(3)(B)(ii), 3 C.F.R. at 645, 5 U.S.C. § 601 note at 748; see also Cass R. Sunstein, The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs: Myths and Realities, 126 HARV. L. REV. (forthcoming 2013) (manuscript at 13), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/ sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2192639 (describing "Regulatory Impact Analysis" as "a careful and detailed account of the costs and benefits of economically significant rules").
26. OFFICE OF MGMT. & BUDGET, EXEC. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, CIRCULAR A-4, REGULATORY ANALYSIS (2003), available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf.
27. U.S. ENVTL. PROT. AGENCY, GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING ECONOMIC ANALYSES 1-1 (2010), available at http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/pages/Guidelines.html.
28. See, e.g., Memorandum from Dan M. Berkovitz, Gen. Counsel, Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, & Jim Moser, Acting Chief Economist, Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, to Rulemaking Teams, Guidance on and Templates for Presenting Cost-Benefit Analyses for Commission Rulemakings 1-2 (Sept. 29, 2010), available at http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/public/@aboutcftc/documents/file/oig_investigation_061311.pdf
29. see also Arthur Fraas & Randall Lutter, On the Economic Analysis of Regulations at Independent Regulatory Commissions 9 (Res. for the Future, Discussion Paper RFF DP 11-16, 2011), available at http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/Rff-DP-11-16_final.pdf.
30. Business Roundtable v. SEC, 647 F.3d 1144 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
31. Memorandum from the Div. of Risk, Strategy, & Fin. Innovation of the SEC & the Office of Gen. Counsel of the SEC, to Staff of the Rulewriting Divs. & Offices, Current Guidance on Economic Analysis in SEC Rulemakings 1-4 (Mar. 16, 2012), available at http://www.sec.gov/divisions/riskfin/rsfi_guidance_econ_analy_secrulemaking.shtml.
32. See Memorandum from Polly Trottenberg, Assistant Sec'y for Transp. Policy, U.S. Dep't of Transp., & Robert Rivkin, Gen. Counsel, to Secretarial Officers & Modal Adm'rs, Guidance on Treatment of the Economic Value of a Statistical Life in Departmental Analyses-2011 Interim Adjustment 1 (July 29, 2011), available at http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/Value_of_Life_Guidance_2011_Update_07-29-2011.pdf.
33. Frequently Asked Questions on Mortality Risk Valuation, NAT'L CTR. FOR ENVTL. ECON., U.S. ENVTL. PROT. AGENCY, http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/pages/MortalityRiskValuation.html#whatvalue (last updated Apr. 5, 2013).
34. See CORNELIUS M. KERWIN & SCOTT R. FURLONG, RULEMAKING: HOW GOVERNMENT AGENCIES WRITE LAW AND MAKE POLICY 75-88 tbl.2-1 (4th ed. 2011); Elizabeth Magill & Adrian Vermeule, Allocating Power Within Agencies, 120 YALE L.J. 1032, 1036-40 (2011).
35. Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-559, 701-706 (2006).
36. See United States v. N.S. Food Prods. Corp., 568 F.2d 240, 252-53 (2d Cir. 1977).
37. See, e.g., Andreas Knabe, Steffen Rätzel, Ronnie Schöb & Joachim Weimann, Dissatisfied with Life but Having a Good Day: Time-Use and Well-Being of the Unemployed, 120 ECON. J. 867 (2010)
38. Richard E. Lucas, Andrew E. Clark, Yannis Georgellis & Ed Diener, Unemployment Alters the Set Point for Life Satisfaction, 15 PSYCHOL. SCI. 8 (2004).
39. See Matthew Adler & Eric A. Posner, Happiness Research and Cost-Benefit Analysis, 37 J. LEGAL STUD. S253, S281-84 (2008).
40. Note that OIRA "continues to investigate the relevant [SWB] literature and to explore, in a preliminary way, its possible implications for improving regulatory policy in ways that promote the goals of economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation." See OFFICE OF MGMT. & BUDGET, EXEC. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, 2011 REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE BENEFITS AND COSTS OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND UNFUNDED MANDATES ON STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL ENTITIES 42-46 (2011), available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ sites/default/files/omb/inforeg/2011_cb/2011_cba_report.pdf.
41. See Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Nat'l Highway Traffic Safety Admin., 538 F.3d 1172, 1180 (9th Cir. 2008).
42. See Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions Under the Clean Air Act, 73 Fed. Reg. 44,354, 44,415-16 (proposed July 30, 2008).
43. See Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions Under the Clean Air Act, 73 Fed. Reg. at 44,416.
44. See Energy Conservation Program for Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner and Packaged Terminal Heat Pump Energy Conservation Standards, 73 Fed. Reg. 58,772, 58,773, 58,813 (Oct. 7, 2008) (to be codified at 10 C.F.R. pt. 431).
45. See FRANK ACKERMAN & ELIZABETH A. STANTON, THE SOCIAL COST OF CARBON: A REPORT FOR THE ECONOMICS FOR EQUITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT NETWORK 3 (2010), available at http://sei-us.org/Publications_PDF/SEI-E3-SocialCostCarbon-10.pdf.
46. See Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, Beyond Outcomes: Measuring Procedural Utility, 57 OXFORD ECON. PAPERS 90, 105-06 (2005) (finding that reported SWB increases with the right to participate in the political decisionmaking process, though not with actual participation itself)
47. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, Happiness, Economy and Institutions, 110 ECON. J. 918, 918 (2000) (finding empirically that institutional factors such as direct participation and local autonomy "systematically and sizeably raise self-reported individual well-being").