Our issue brief on Regulatory Co-Benefits analyzes the importance of using unbiased economic analysis to consider all direct and indirect costs and benefits of any environmental safeguard. By considering a rule’s direct and indirect effects, a regulator can weigh all relevant information and act in the best interest of the public. Excluding some of this information could lead to economically irrational decisionmaking. Although critics would prefer that EPA ignore co-benefits, the agency’s consideration of indirect regulatory effects is consistent with logic, law, scholarship, and decades of regulatory precedent.
