How do public good spillovers influence agent effort in an interconnected environment? We develop a model for a general class of problems in which agents share the provision of a public good and downstream agents experience spillovers. We characterize endogenous agent effort as the result of their location in the network, their responsibility over the resource, and a regulated facility’s location within the jurisdiction. We examine our findings with an empirical exercise centered on the regulation of 6000 major water pollution sources under the U.S. Clean Water Act. We construct a novel dataset of U.S. state water pollution regional offices and use geographic information on agency jurisdictions, watershed boundaries, and elevation-induced streamflow to characterize the propensity for agents to exert detection effort in their local environment. Our empirical results support our expectations.
AllouchN (2015) On the private provision of public goods on networks. Journal of Economic Theory157: 527–552.
2.
BallesterCCalvó-ArmengolAZenouY (2006) Who’s who in networks. Wanted: The key player. Econometrica74(5): 1403–1417.
3.
BeckerGS (1968) Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy76(2): 169–217.
4.
BergstromTBlumeLVarianH (1986) On the private provision of public goods. Journal of Public Economics29(1): 25–49.
5.
BlochFZenginobuzU (2007) The effect of spillovers on the provision of local public goods. Review of Economic Design11(3): 199–216.
6.
BowmanAWoodsN (2007) Strength in numbers: Why states join interstate compacts. State Politics and Policy Quarterly7(4): 347–368.
7.
BramoulléYKrantonR (2007) Public goods in networks. Journal of Economic Theory135(1): 478–494.
8.
BramoulléYKrantonRD’AmoursM (2014) Strategic interaction and networks. The American Economic Review104(3): 898–930.
9.
CarriganC (2017) Structured to Fail? Regulatory Performance Under Competing Mandates. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
ECOS (2001) State Environmental Agency Contributions to Enforcement and Compliance. Washington D.C.: Environmental Council of the States.
11.
EhrlichI (1973) Participation in illegitimate activities: A theoretical and empirical investigation. Journal of Political Economy81(3): 521–565.
12.
EkstromJYoungO (2009) Evaluating functional fit between a set of institutions and an ecosystem. Ecology and Society14(2): 16.
13.
ElliottMGolubB (2019) A network approach to public goods. Journal of Political Economy127(2): 730–776.
14.
FriesenL (2003) Targeting enforcement to improve compliance with environmental regulations. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management46(1): 72–85.
15.
GailmardSPattyJ (2013) Stovepiping. Journal of Theoretical Politics25(3): 388–411.
16.
GaleottiAGolubBGoyalS (2020) Targeting interventions in networks. Econometrica88(6): 2445–2471.
17.
GrayWBShadbegianRJ (2004) Optimal pollution abatement—Whose benefits matter, and how much?. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management47(3): 510–534.
18.
GrayWBShimshackJP (2011) The effectiveness of environmental monitoring and enforcement: A review of the empirical evidence. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy5(1): 3–24.
19.
GunninghamN (2011) Enforcing environmental regulation. Journal of Environmental Law23(2): 169–201.
20.
HarringtonW (1988) Enforcement leverage when penalties are restricted. Journal of Public Economics37(1): 29–53.
21.
HeikkilaTSchlagerEC (2012) Addressing the issues: The choice of environmental conflict-resolution venues in the United States. American Journal of Political Science56(4): 774–786.
22.
HellandE (1998) The enforcement of pollution control laws: Inspections, violations, and self-reporting. Review of Economics and Statistics80(1): 141–153.
23.
HunterSWatermanR (1996) Enforcing the Law: The Case of the Clean Water Acts. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.
24.
KoniskyDReenockC (2013) Examining sources of compliance bias in policy implementation. Journal of Politics75(2): 506–519.
25.
KoniskyDScharioTS (2010) Examining environmental justice in facility-level regulatory enforcement. Social Science Quarterly91(3): 835–855.
26.
KoniskyDM (2007) Regulatory competition and environmental enforcement: Is there a race to the bottom?American Journal of Political Science51(4): 853–872.
27.
LipscombMMobarakAM (2016) Decentralization and pollution spillovers: Evidence from the re-drawing of county borders in Brazil. The Review of Economic Studies84(1): 464–502.
28.
LowryWR (1992) The Dimensions of Federalism: State Government and Pollution Control. Durham: Duke University Press.
29.
MohaiPSahaR (2006) Reassessing racial and socioeconomic disparities in environmental justice research. Social Problems43(2): 383–399.
30.
MonoganJEIIKoniskyDMWoodsND (2017) Gone with the wind: Federalism and the strategic location of air polluters. American Journal of Political Science61: 257–270.
31.
OgawaHWildasinDE (2009) Think locally, act locally: Spillovers, spillbacks, and efficient decentralized policymaking. The American Economic Review99(4): 1206–1217.
32.
PeltzmanS (1976) Toward a more general theory of regulation. The Journal of Law and Economics19(2): 211–240.
33.
PotoskiM (1999) Managing uncertainty through bureaucratic design: Administrative procedures and state air pollution control agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory9(4): 623–640.
34.
ReenockCKoniskyDMUttermarkM (2022) Chain of command vs. who’s in command: Structure, politics and regulatory enforcement. Policy Studies Journal50(4): 797–821.
35.
RingquistEJ (1993) Environmental Protection at the State Level: Politics and Progress in Controlling Pollution. Armonk: ME Sharpe.
36.
SchlagerEHeikkilaT (2009) Resolving water conflicts: A comparative analysis of interstate river compacts. Policy Studies Journal37(3): 367–392.
37.
ScholzJT (1991) Cooperative regulatory enforcement and the politics of administrative effectiveness. American Political Science Review85(1): 115–136.
38.
ScholzJTWangCL (2006) Cooptation or transformation? Local policy networks and federal regulatory enforcement. American Journal of Political Science50(1): 81–97.
39.
StiglerGJ (1971) The theory of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science2(1): 3–21.
40.
TingM (2003) A strategic theory of bureaucratic redundancy. American Journal of Political Science47(2): 274–292.
41.
WhitfordA (2002) Decentralization and political control of the bureaucracy. Journal of Theoretical Politics14(2): 167–193.
42.
WoodBD (1991) Federalism and policy responsiveness. The Journal of Politics53(3): 851–859.
43.
WoodBD (1992) Modeling federal implementation as a system. American Journal of Political Science36(1): 40–67.
44.
WoodsNBowmanA (2018) Collective action and the evolution of intergovernmental cooperation. Policy Studies Journal46(3): 487–509.
45.
WoodsNPotoskiM (2010) Environmental federalism revisited: Second-order devoluion in air quality regulation. Review of Policy Research27(6): 721–739.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
