Institute for Policy Integrity

Twitter @policyintegrity

Publications

Viewing all publications in Policy Briefs
  • Measuring Flood Risk
    Policy Brief

    Measuring Flood Risk

    What Are NYC Residents Willing to Pay for a Flood Protection System?

    By J. Scott Holladay, Howard Kunreuther, and Valerie Stahl
    October 31, 2016

    This policy brief evaluates how willingness to pay (WTP) for a flood protection system varies with exposure to flood risk, using detailed flood maps and parcel-level data to identify households within and just beyond the 100-year flood plain in New York City. Past research has estimated that a homeowner’s WTP for flood insurance is largely contingent upon their risk level. However, no studies to date have analyzed the WTP for other forms of flood protection. We conducted a survey of single-family homeowners living in the 100- and 500-year flood plains in New York City, and found that WTP for flood control systems varies with the degree of risk that homeowners face. While the majority of residents living in the 100- year flood plain were willing to pay up to $10 a month to contribute to the cost of a seawall, the majority of residents living in the 500-year flood plain, an area that has a 0.2% risk of flooding in any given year, were only willing to pay up to $7 a month. These results are consistent with other studies demonstrating that risk—actual or perceived—plays a large role in individuals’ WTP for protection from floods.

  • Setting the Record Straight on the Clean Power Plan
    Policy Brief

    Setting the Record Straight on the Clean Power Plan

    What the Challengers Got Wrong at the D.C. Circuit Oral Argument

    By Richard L. Revesz, Denise A. Grab, and Jack Lienke
    October 27, 2016

    On September 27, opponents of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan presented their case against the rule in a hearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The Clean Power Plan aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s existing power plants. A coalition of states, utilities, coal companies, and other industry groups have sought to block the rule since it was first proposed in June 2014, while a competing group of states, municipalities, power companies, environmental and public health organizations, and clean energy producers have intervened to support the EPA. Over the course of the seven-hour hearing, the petitioners challenging the Clean Power Plan asserted and implied a number of things that don’t stand up to scrutiny. This report sets the record straight on some of their more notable misstatements.

  • Bounded Regulation
    Policy Brief

    Bounded Regulation

    How the Clean Power Plan Conforms to Statutory Limits on EPA’s Authority

    By Richard L. Revesz, Denise A. Grab, and Jack Lienke
    September 12, 2016

    This policy brief analyzes the limits of the EPA’s Section 111 regulatory authority and determines that the CPP explicitly acknowledges and respects each of the EPA’s statutory constraints. The brief discusses the eight major constraints for emissions guidelines under Clean Air Act Section 111, and examines how the CPP handles each one. The analysis finds no evidence to support petitioners’ accusations that the the EPA exceeded its regulatory authority.

  • The Bureau of Land Management’s Modeling Choice for the Federal Coal Programmatic Review
    Policy Brief

    The Bureau of Land Management’s Modeling Choice for the Federal Coal Programmatic Review

    By Peter H. Howard
    June 10, 2016

    There are multiple power sector models available to the Department of Interior (DOI)’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for analyzing the effect of current and alternative coal regulations and leasing policies during preparation of its programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS). This document lays out model selection criteria to assist BLM in weighing the benefits and costs of these available models, and offers recommendations for model selection, highlighting the tradeoff between model complexity and transparency.

  • Understanding the Stay
    Policy Brief

    Understanding the Stay

    Implications of the Supreme Court’s Stay of the Clean Power Plan

    By Richard L. Revesz and Alexander Walker
    April 27, 2016

    Since the Supreme Court stayed EPA’s Clean Power Plan, which regulates carbon dioxide emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired power plants, opponents of the plan have been making unfounded assertions about the consequences of the stay. This policy brief aims to clarify the stay’s implications for EPA’s implementation work and the plan’s future compliance deadlines.