Institute for Policy Integrity

Twitter @policyintegrity

News & Events

In the News

  • Advisers urge agency to revamp regulatory analysis

    July 13, 2009 – E&E News PM

    Michael Livermore, executive director of New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity, said he expects the Obama administration to ultimately adopt most, if not all, of the science advisory board’s recommendations. “I’d be surprised if they disagreed with the [Science Advisory Board],” he said. The full board is expected to consider the draft report in August before sending its final comments to EPA.

  • Low-profile changes at EPA could have major environmental impacts.

    July 13, 2009 – Environmental Valuation & Cost-Benefit News

    EPA has been quietly working on some serious changes to the guidelines it uses to conduct cost-benefit analysis. Tweaks to the powerful but low-profile Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses could have major impacts on the environment. The Guidelines is little known outside of EPA, but is used in the design of every major environmental regulation.

  • State budget crisis could be key to climate change

    July 9, 2009 – Grist

    If climate change legislation doubles as a plan to avoid a fiscal crisis back home, there will be a new powerful constituency behind a yes vote—an unusual marriage of convenience between state budget offices and environmentalists that may be the key to getting ACES over the hump.

  • Here Comes the Sunstein: Cass Sunstein Takes Over as Regulatory Czar

    July 1, 2009 – Inside Counsel

    “The fact that he’s not a stereotype is definitely a good thing, both for public health and the environment and for businesses,” says Michael Livermore, executive director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University’s School of Law. “If you fit him in the stereotype, he’s either going to be bad for business or bad for the environment, and that’s not a choice we want to have to make. He’s going to be looking to make sure we achieve our environmental public health goals in a way that gives companies maximum flexibility to achieve our social goals at the lowest possible costs.”

  • Group calls on state to mandate monitoring at coal ash sites

    June 16, 2009 – The Iowa Independent

    [A] recent study by the Institute for Policy Integrity (IPI), a non-partisan think tank based in New York City, found the benefits of upgrading disposal sites would exceed the costs of tougher regulations by almost 10 to 1. The research focused mostly on coal ash ponds like the one that failed in Kingston, Tenn., in December. The costs for quarries to upgrade would be much lower than the costs for ponds, according Scott Holladay, an economist who researched the issue for IPI.

  • Ash regulation makes enviro, economic sense—study

    June 11, 2009 – Greenwire

    Federal regulation of coal ash from power plants will help protect the environment and could also help electric utilities save billions of dollars, according to a study released yesterday. The New York University School of Law policy brief says requiring utilities to keep coal ash in dry, covered, synthetically lined storage areas would reduce risks of catastrophic spills, water pollution and respiratory ailments caused by airborne particles.

  • Coal ash update: Regulations make economic sense

    June 10, 2009 – The Charleston Gazette’s Coal Tattoo Blog

    Real regulation of toxic ash from coal-fired power plants would not only protect the environment, but would make economic sense. That’s the conclusion of a new report issued today by New York University School of Law’s Institute for Policy Integrity.

  • Are We Wishfully Seeing Green in Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor?

    May 28, 2009 – Treehugger

    Immediately after word came out that Sonia Sotomayor was the President’s pick for the Supreme Court, the environmental community (this author included) immediately went searching for the green angle. We found it in one decision: Riverkeeper v. EPA, which was seized upon as proof of Judge Sotomayor having a modicum of green cred. However, in a new Huffington Post piece Richard Revesz (dean of the NYU School of Law) and Michael Livermore (executive director of NYU’s Institute for Policy Integrity) think the green community might be reading too much into things.

  • OPEC Punts, Al Gore Cribs, Obama Promises

    May 28, 2009 – Wall Street Journal’s Environmental Capital Blog

    Be careful about reading too much into Sonia Sotomayor’s environmental leanings from one cost-benefits case, warn Richard Revesz and Michael Livermore in the Huffington post: “Some environmentalist have seized on the Riverkeeper opinion as proof that Sotomayor bleeds eco-green, while industry is afraid that she is insensitive to the costs imposed by green regulation. But both sides are misreading the Judge’s opinion.”

  • Sotomayor’s “Green” Decision

    May 28, 2009 – Huffington Post

    Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s paper trail on the environment is slim, but one decision has drawn praise from environmentalists, and some concerns from business. In Riverkeeper v. EPA, Sotomayor wrote the opinion for the court of appeals. She found that the Clean Water Act prohibited EPA from conducting cost-benefit analysis when deciding whether to impose regulations at power plants that would protect fish, but have high costs for utility companies.