littl(tiol

so-(

ion t;opolicy tor coc

.at reloc

is and radiation).idemic work toactice, there certahave well-develolrotocols for addrc

Corps oftise in'Doll

Col

,lop risk as,.rast, all th(focus on c

have ador00. 0pne

OC

11n advance otor Drovidin0

social se

,ClSlonmaklng tec-ong policy tools

alysis or competiIn the full Articleicussion is drawn,g list of lessons foi:

than provil-lsion of eachso as to proN

zanes, tornadocAs - for exam

or floodwalls;0reinforcing e)

Of

om the flood

-hnl

ftor tfroE

)ecific flood 0ergency food

vices to ancontrast,!

-on of sorEfor choos

is cost-ben

inl(Thicfor

(9) Do not adopconservatism

Nontrivial noiE; policy matters is:to controversial. I d

als recon-mendatiore,* policy analysis ar

-obal posture ofhandling uncerttive advice abotriablv somewh.

.o not

- e rob2

adopting some T,fore highly controxgeneral moral flaresion, one that I havwork, 2 is "weak wet

foIlovs polic

OVc

CO1

t pretendr natural I)ust acrosthe otherloes not;pecified'sial morayork for tidopted 1i

urallStlC tramework tmat recI1 well-being as a morally re:leration, but also allows forconsiderations and moral ri

ot:we]

0o

OOS

flavor of

ngage in more st-ow to evaluate t-azards pose to hrty, and other ht:lesirability of goieducing those tlh,trategy I adopt h

sons totrds. I focipol

aryto s

out

rs needt toussion abouiat naturalealth, Prop-ts, and the

)olicies for

to draw0ror

on cautio

)ortant to

Do not give priority toparticular aspect of well-])Do not use proxy tests ()Do not ignore populatic)Do not use arbitrary nonumerical cutoffs)Do not conflate moral iinfringements with well(even to vital interests)

)Develop risk assessmentsuitable for multidimenstion-size sensitive polic

nono eMid r(-X0 n

prlorltiover ot

ronmenta policy aEzes safety (longevityher aspects of huma,incases are the Detrequires FDA to refiitz carcinog enic fooc

ot

0- tOS

ro

onto, po

CI:or

gr the nutritive or hedor,e additives or, for thatnefits in preventing-eral provision for food.demands that they beion 109 of the Clean Aijuires EPA to issue stan-a major air pollutants atct[s] the public health"ate margin of safety"

OtW0tstanding econo c cos

31)Y

lOUS kindls ot lnterventlor

HeinOnline -- 32 Admin. & Reg. L. News 11 2006-2007

ion, having to do

fand o

)Out,

ctical reason; affiy; control overcourse, one migSof Professor

only kill or ivariety of ot

se observatlorionality of we]

ion abotncorpor

-rotsots 01

ro

rotracte or

'ests, or as interests that)rority over others.it is possible, at least in t1 44institutional" J*ustificioritizing policy-analytthat sounds in adminis,Ls and the possibility of

losses oft-wealthtemporary o

'ess, psycholog

ia, unemployment (oteivith distress, anxiety,4 or,,)tion of famiffies and coriterruption of schooliniction of cultural heritaI hazards decisionmakerronmental counterpart,s employ choice criteri

al priority to certain ast

's cost-benefithal decision costs,orth incorporatir

Juation of ecol%on slightly firme,d economi~sts

coror

)os0tol

'other nand,uld be Justifi(;from its cosl

ors01n

iunt

Sot ot

cologlcal resotecreational val-ing, boating, h-

ood

,ion proceduLe- how to'

I flood control sn re0ed on cos

Talues; and so on.T11iterature in ecologibnonetizing use valuiLnd manipulability(hese in ACES cost-vould seem to be Ic

lov

ere is now a largCal economics or,es, and so the declcosts of incorpor.,-benefit procedur:wer than the be

1on criterion economic costsf'ect) correla- safety or ecoloverall recreational valing pro*et sion from the e-

flood control pro

I effects (ot). So there 1ronmental (

to increase o

flip. Furtcriterior

hough0er con

higher decision costs,ated with a higher raterror, than safety ma),ion costs include botl,eay costs.As for errotit criterion mght lea(

rough a coicost-benefied with ove

cUrecu cosk

, the cost-to a high(ninistratol

vhch 0 regulators often give prIifety over econoic costs.It is hard to see what the instistification for ACE's truncate

enefit analysis would be. Conenefits.The marginal decisioEredicting both the safety and

enefitsof flood control struct.an simply the economic benvould seem to be low. Further.ere are now well-accepted tc

tor

Otlvated to emlo-etTy it is not cleal

to the list of mol

lOrltV to mental provisions otto technological 'ea-t." For example, SectItiol

-ost-

dilllty 77or-on 112 of

ul

costs ofconomn

SO

iSSlOnS level tor a new pollutl-orlevel which is no higher than

;ion control that is achieved inSthe best controlled similar

for worh "mosi

o em0lo

more difficult for agenas courts, legislators, an(oversee compliance wiladministrators motivatc

D,

e crlterlor,other Zoa

to staff.To be sure, decby build flood control

; or error by ACEions about how to

iffect ooffloo

iong some group ot actoraagine the first sort of

over otfrom tl

ronmental pole priority to soiterests is worr

ol0V

iought,;ion; ot

bo

0iOtOr

ones env0ror

ounts oi

categorical fHowever,

to provide afor safety-prtests - onedecision cosi

rovisO

Iror to set polhtnization cr

-rlterlon of-o-rovision inst)olution level

COS

to ,an,

S01

onstruct of o

SOC

rorho,

,.Utlonal COnSIioritizing pro(

COS

mictional caTechnolo

OS

of a flood. Ho

HeinOnline -- 32 Admin. & Reg. L. News 12 2006-2007

ious kinds), or, a close cousin, reliabili00 Even though proS. Or they might take some other form. out suboptimal polkc

of feet hihnd strong. Surelytop well short ofSits levees. Parallelbout the construcmuildings and stru,

roxy testtool foregulator:

on of 01OI

appropriate polronmental or ne answer shoul,)roxy tests are j Iutional ground&that proxy testsLboptimal polici

L 0ul1101ILCLUto employ

roxiffc

ratic error und-ffciently high.

ond, pol

,is more t000. 0e o

lolo

practices,.pNew construction cotaired to be as protective as someZentile of existing construction.different sort of technology-bas

roach to policy analysis, exempli

Df thumb. Untilly added 3 feet cnight of its leve(Ding caused byhst for the desigi-d to technologand an importa

.1 the 1990sc)f fre eb oarc

es, so as to

to o

d tests in environr)oint, showing hov

)IO to ine cien

overregulation (if, for example, smfirms are required to employ high-cost technologies) or underregulatit would be most efficient to redu,

pollution beyond the point that islologic,)roduct

floo(

tool

o00oi

)ro)oli*

ally feasible given co

-on of the good, foSdown production

ar observations can )ased criteria for naiaking. Consider AC

ot-freeboard ruprovide an extrcommunities atprotection provfrom communirecent study byCouncil foundi offlooding0

onal cr0terlor

flood

oth econo

rgin of Protof flooding

,on

,on

aot

6ostpro(pro)

optimal ift-theyotie in tracking ova, and moral right

is this possilomain of c.swer is diffi

rolo

lure will. So0 technology-based's May have lower decision costs.iven advances in computationalsoftware, and data availability, whict,te risk assessment, the decision-cos,re, is shrinking. Technology-ad

)Out fro

rolOiree-teet- to tneant to pofl.'ction for Cle

tion

iroacroach to

egulatl-on otion 112 of t

,FDI

t00(

t 0v to commun 0ooot aware of

in come

to the oicfeet of

,nnual pro Linities prothundred-eeboard va

)roxy testucodes: ensi

,DJ

rement to serve nonsatety goat:-llars need to think about DroN

looking toIcratic error

.ests. as comdo not coor

onto

const,

how low t]or overtortraditional

of

roughlysays to

issociatedto alternat

pol

ro

c aUV i

Article, ftorIt-of-ffeeboa.of no-collaing codes >l

ioro n

a variety of pro)or might conc(

(tor eon O(

loss C,

their impact on well-its dimensions. Proxy.nology-based tests (of

ort of coor lights fal]

ch economi-gs are shakeconomic losing compo-

0ts, systems, or co-onomic loss by viription, and other i1n

opposed to, foranalysis. Deterylevel, by contrasis. does not rec

Cosof I

i ff

cnnolo-orms-and-]ible. For exa

00

overtolpas forec,

Clos)olc

le is the approaor quasi-govei

bodies twill avoi

any non(

I to I-olla

olapse in no

lonmakers.1ar as they fo(tion on sore-es other than,or some ofmight be tec

-ost-bernO-cofl

COS

IOuS pOS"So thern

t(

HeinOnline -- 32 Admin. & Reg. L. News 13 2006-2007

cono of decisior pos

poll

POF0-ote or

0otto

pollc)0 t3(3

polofi1

ronmental o

pol0E

ce to the numberby, or exposed to,natural hazard that

In the area ofural hazards polic.

two ways. First,0loy a proxy test for

ctlng policies. Second, the ag,ght employ a policy-analytic0 0 c

t does focus on some or all ofaensions of well-being, but is si opulation-size-insensitiveN

mnalogue in aised in decidiluch as buildi)rotect settlediurricanes. C,,"ion" criteriol

one hun

ated pollrotectiorof PO

ions Co

or new0sot

erlon that is so-how to design

,vees and flooc0as fromfloods

flood, the or

i flood, the F).Although lcy is not toicriterion ill

erre(1 pro-benefit aierion is lir

ional Flocnolo, o

effe

gory s emissions ai-e number of indikilled by its pollutizards example of

or prol

pol

to

ecisionmaker on someies other than wel-beirilation-size insensitivityequence of this refocusi.Using may be warrantecias sufficient advantagesion costs and bureaucramportant for agency ovmics to be attentive toIof proxy tests, includin

.ze insensitivity. Note also thatst might incorporate administ,

roxies for population size-forsin0 a more extreme earthqual

g the no-collopposed tot about the s(

pse criterion tornal structures.cond kind of pol

iw or by the closely analogotrotection" criterion for natui

id1 onrotectior

)ortant un rotectl ion is also diffitoAd Insurance Program

0oyed in other conte, the area-protectioncthe annual risk of pherty damage to anyona must not exceed on

one hundred (fitfte ocutoff is used) or zero

tooltsomc

Sdevelopec'years, to qof enviroE

roflo

0on toi or o

1101

ihito porshoul

0ion doto populatl

,or thousands. $1hivity of the b-Lurs in environ- of-dividual risk" ON

of th(population that occupies somer that is endangered by a floodie, and the expected benefit to

foci

(SUC

to -

or r

recognize that the foundation-onstructs which drive policy- overall well-being, moral

nd distributive considerationstidimensional and sensitive toion size. Policy criteria whichreply on one aspect of well-be

safety), or do not directly atte--being at all (as with technolo)ility-based proxy tests), shoulc

X-yearflood orpopulation-size.should view suctools, warrantedcontrol adminisl

r pop ato

0ofjustification. Proxy tests fo

of

Opulatlo

roi

rox

ot poouteirence to tlustrial cate-ticular, to t)osed to or

ion-

pro)

. Consli1er, torthat seisrmic CO(

-o buildinz coll

ot attento

ions, and sho

tior.Pocon, routinely oc

,virtue of"

0ol

)orne by SOifistribution. an to

OS

,son is (1ra-oral righ

)0o

0r~

7or a(11TlnI often not

OE

e

1n

-11

oc

HeinOnline -- 32 Admin. & Reg. L. News 14 2006-2007