On the Front Lines of Implementing Environmental Regulation: The Perspective of the Regulated Community in Montana

Abstract

Although discussions about environmental policy often focus on the federal level of decision making and action in the United States, implementation occurs predominately at the state level. The individuals largely responsible for implementation are the state regulators and members of the regulated community as they constitute the front lines in environmental regulation. Much of the existing research on regulatory interactions investigates the regulatory enforcement styles of regulators and the compliance motivations of firms. It is equally important to consider the perceptions and actual experiences of regulated community members. To examine this perspective, this exploratory study utilizes a mail survey to investigate the perceptions and experiences of members of the regulated community in Montana. The survey respondents report positive and cooperative interactions with environmental regulators. This survey provides much‐needed insight into the perspectives of some members of the regulated community, challenging traditional viewpoints that the regulated community is hostile toward regulation, and promotes adversarial relationships with regulators. Accordingly, this research encourages debate about the fundamental assumptions surrounding the interactions of regulators and the regulated community in U.S. environmental policy.

Small business response to regulation: incorporating a behavioral perspective

“…3 Indeed, we did do one interview with someone in the environmental office of a large business to test this premise and he bore out the assumption that large businesses see regulation as part of their business and use offices dedicated to compliance to manage their regulatory responses. This is consistent with arguments that large businesses view regulation differently than small businesses (Rinfret and Pautz, 2018). Our interview subject noted, "I don't think the cost is too significant…rolling back regulations would be more disruptive…the big companies understand there is a benefit.…”

“…There are many possible hypotheses that could follow from this work. The difference between small and large businesses is likely to be important as the one representative of a large business had very different reactions to regulation (see Rinfret and Pautz (2018) for broader examples of this phenomenon). Do heuristics affect the regulatory behavior and attitudes of small businesses more than large businesses?…”

“…In large businesses, there are specialists who are charged with this function and only major issues rise to higher management. This is likely to have a major effect on the way business owners perceive regulation (Rinfret and Pautz, 2018). 3 Business executives including managers, directors, owners and partners were randomly recruited.…”

“…But there are two important reasons to also focus on the perceptions of the regulated community. First, the perceptions of the regulated entity may affect their decision about whether to comply with a regulation and whether to take steps above and beyond compliance (Rinfret and Pautz, 2018). If the regulated party fears enforcement or public embarrassment, they may "overcomply" with regulations (Bozeman and Anderson, 2016) increasing the cost of regulation.…”

Different encounter behaviors: Businesses in encounters with regulatory agencies

“…However, as pointed out, to have a full picture of the encounters between regulators and regulated communities we need to improve our knowledge about the behavior regulatees bring into these encounters (Pautz, 2009a; Raaphorst & Loyens, 2020; Rinfret & Pautz, 2018). What is still missing from the body of literatures on regulatory encounters, we argue, is a systematic set of concepts to describe behavior on “the other side of the table.” Such a framework should treat behavior as multidimensional, as we expect regulatees—as well as regulators—to exhibit a mix of specific behaviors (see e.g., May & Winter, 2000).…”