The way in which public policies are composed may lead to conflicts that manifest in an extended policymaking duration. This paper explores the associations between policy composition and the relative duration for policies to be adopted in 15 U.S. state legislatures. We treat policy passage duration as an indicator of policy conflicts in the legislative process. We adapt the institutional grammar tool (IGT) to examine how 168 oil and gas development policies are composed and gauge the association between the content of these policies and the speed of their adoption. We find policies that are more stringent, contain more constitutive rules, target issues related to oil and gas operations or tax and finance take relatively longer to pass. These findings offer theoretical insights into the relationships between policy composition and policy adoption duration. They also provide methodological insights on measuring policy design components using a semi‐automated application of the IGT.
- Award ID(s):
- 1734310
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10310598
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of environmental management
- Issue:
- 284
- ISSN:
- 1095-8630
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
null (Ed.)At every level of government, officials contract for technical systems that employ machine learning-systems that perform tasks without using explicit instructions, relying on patterns and inference instead. These systems frequently displace discretion previously exercised by policymakers or individual front-end government employees with an opaque logic that bears no resemblance to the reasoning processes of agency personnel. However, because agencies acquire these systems through government procurement processes, they and the public have little input into-or even knowledge about-their design or how well that design aligns with public goals and values. This Article explains the ways that the decisions about goals, values, risk, and certainty, along with the elimination of case-by-case discretion, inherent in machine-learning system design create policies-not just once when they are designed, but over time as they adapt and change. When the adoption of these systems is governed by procurement, the policies they embed receive little or no agency or outside expertise beyond that provided by the vendor. Design decisions are left to private third-party developers. There is no public participation, no reasoned deliberation, and no factual record, which abdicates Government responsibility for policymaking. This Article then argues for a move from a procurement mindset to policymaking mindset. When policy decisions are made through system design, processes suitable for substantive administrative determinations should be used: processes that foster deliberation reflecting both technocratic demands for reason and rationality informed by expertise, and democratic demands for public participation and political accountability. Specifically, the Article proposes administrative law as the framework to guide the adoption of machine learning governance, describing specific ways that the policy choices embedded in machine learning system design fail the prohibition against arbitrary and capricious agency actions absent a reasoned decision-making process that both enlists the expertise necessary for reasoned deliberation about, and justification for, such choices, and makes visible the political choices being made. Finally, this Article sketches models for machine-learning adoption processes that satisfy the prohibition against arbitrary and capricious agency actions. It explores processes by which agencies might garner technical expertise and overcome problems of system opacity, satisfying administrative law's technocratic demand for reasoned expert deliberation. It further proposes both institutional and engineering design solutions to the challenge of policymaking opacity, offering process paradigms to ensure the "political visibility" required for public input and political oversight. In doing so, it also proposes the importance of using "contestable design"-design that exposes value-laden features and parameters and provides for iterative human involvement in system evolution and deployment. Together, these institutional and design approaches further both administrative law's technocratic and democratic mandates.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract The world is facing new environmental challenges that may trigger the collapse of some social-ecological systems (SES). More extreme weather events may be much more common in the decades to come due to climate change. Although we have an idea of what climatic events to expect in each region, we know less about how SES can cope with these challenges. We study The Peruvian Piura Basin, which has been exposed to harsh environmental events associated with the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) for centuries. The Piura basin was home to the ancient Moche civilization, which collapsed due to a combination of factors, but strong El Niño events likely played a significant role. To analyze the resilience of The Piura Basin to flood events, we used as guidance the Robustness Framework and different propositions from prominent collapse theories to carry out a longitudinal study based on both primary and collected secondary data. We found that the Piura basin is very fragile based on almost all of the predictions of collapse theories (especially with respect to selfish elites, centralized governance, systems interconnection, anticipation capacity and sensitive dependence on resources), but the biggest strength is its growing stock of social capital. In small steps, user associations have been collectively working towards solutions for water conservation and public-infrastructure maintenance. There is a long way to go, but with the right policies to encourage the strengthening of these associations, the Piura basin could become more resilient to future El Niño events. This study also provides methodological and theoretical insights that can contribute to theory building for the resilience of SES.
-
This Article develops a framework for both assessing and designing content moderation systems consistent with public values. It argues that moderation should not be understood as a single function, but as a set of subfunctions common to all content governance regimes. By identifying the particular values implicated by each of these subfunctions, it explores the appropriate ways the constituent tasks might best be allocated-specifically to which actors (public or private, human or technological) they might be assigned, and what constraints or processes might be required in their performance. This analysis can facilitate the evaluation and design of content moderation systems to ensure the capacity and competencies necessary for legitimate, distributed systems of content governance. Through a combination of methods, legal schemes delegate at least a portion of the responsibility for governing online expression to private actors. Sometimes, statutory schemes assign regulatory tasks explicitly. In others, this delegation often occurs implicitly, with little guidance as to how the treatment of content should be structured. In the law's shadow, online platforms are largely given free rein to configure the governance of expression. Legal scholarship has surfaced important concerns about the private sector's role in content governance. In response, private platforms engaged in content moderation have adopted structures that mimic public governance forms. Yet, we largely lack the means to measure whether these forms are substantive, effectively infusing public values into the content moderation process, or merely symbolic artifice designed to deflect much needed public scrutiny. This Article's proposed framework addresses that gap in two ways. First, the framework considers together all manner of legal regimes that induce platforms to engage in the function of content moderation. Second, it focuses on the shared set of specific tasks, or subfunctions, involved in the content moderation function across these regimes. Examining a broad range of content moderation regimes together highlights the existence of distinct common tasks and decision points that together constitute the content moderation function. Focusing on this shared set of subfunctions highlights the different values implicated by each and the way they can be "handed off' to human and technical actors to perform in different ways with varying normative and political implications. This Article identifies four key content moderation subfunctions: (1) definition of policies, (2) identification of potentially covered content, (3) application of policies to specific cases, and (4) resolution of those cases. Using these four subfunctions supports a rigorous analysis of how to leverage the capacities and competencies of government and private parties throughout the content moderation process. Such attention also highlights how the exercise of that power can be constrained-either by requiring the use of particular decision-making processes or through limits on the use of automation-in ways that further address normative concerns. Dissecting the allocation of subfunctions in various content moderation regimes reveals the distinct ethical and political questions that arise in alternate configurations. Specifically, it offers a way to think about four key questions: (1) what values are most at issue regarding each subfunction; (2) which activities might be more appropriate to delegate to particular public or private actors; (3) which constraints must be attached to the delegation of each subfunction; and (4) where can investments in shared content moderation infrastructures support relevant values? The functional framework thus provides a means for both evaluating the symbolic legal forms that firms have constructed in service of content moderation and for designing processes that better reflect public values.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Natural gas production in the United States has increased rapidly over the past decade, along with concerns about methane (CH4) fugitive emissions and its climate impacts. Quantification of CH4emissions from oil and natural gas (O&NG) operations is important for establishing scientifically sound policies for mitigating greenhouse gases. We use the aircraft mass balance approach for three flight experiments in August and September 2015 to estimate CH4emissions from O&NG operations over the southwestern Marcellus Shale. We estimate a mean CH4emission rate as 21.2 kg/s with 28% coming from O&NG operations. The mean CH4emission rate from O&NG operations was estimated to be 1.1% of total NG production. The individual best‐estimate emission rates from the three flight experiments ranged from 0.78 to 1.5%, with overall limits of 0% and 3.5%. These emission rates are at the low end of other top‐down studies, but consistent with the few observational studies in the Marcellus Shale region as well as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency CH4inventory. A substantial source of CH4(~70% of observed CH4emissions) was found to contain little ethane, possibly due to coalbed CH4emitted either directly from coal mines or from wells drilled through coalbed layers in O&NG operations. Recent regulations requiring capture of gas from the completion‐venting step of hydraulic fracturing appear to have reduced the atmospheric release of CH4. Our study suggests that for a 20‐year time scale, energy derived from the combustion of natural gas extracted from this region likely exerts a net climate benefit compared to coal.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112069
