FEIOCK, Richard
Regulatory reform, property rights, and economic development - New York : Marcel Dekker, 2000
Overcoming tradeoffs between the social benefits of regulation and the economidc benefits of development has never been easy in practice. This article examines the economic development consequences of state and local regulation by developing a consequences of state and local regulation by developing a framework that provides a theoretical basis for expecting regulatory costs to influence the amount and location of new development. After elaborating the theory, I identify two ways state and local governments may be able to pursue regulatory goals without creating disincentives for economic development. One approach is for state or local government to socialize costs of regulatory compliance through public expenditures or subsidies. A second, and more promising, approach is to pursue regulatory reform which lessens private sector transaction costs by reducing regulatory uncertainty. This framework is illustrated using two cases: state regulation of the chemical industry, and growth management regulation
Regulatory reform, property rights, and economic development - New York : Marcel Dekker, 2000
Overcoming tradeoffs between the social benefits of regulation and the economidc benefits of development has never been easy in practice. This article examines the economic development consequences of state and local regulation by developing a consequences of state and local regulation by developing a framework that provides a theoretical basis for expecting regulatory costs to influence the amount and location of new development. After elaborating the theory, I identify two ways state and local governments may be able to pursue regulatory goals without creating disincentives for economic development. One approach is for state or local government to socialize costs of regulatory compliance through public expenditures or subsidies. A second, and more promising, approach is to pursue regulatory reform which lessens private sector transaction costs by reducing regulatory uncertainty. This framework is illustrated using two cases: state regulation of the chemical industry, and growth management regulation
