The purpose of this article was to question whether interest group actions during the pre‐proposal stage of U.S. federal rulemaking influences the language proposed in natural resource agency rules. The influence of interest groups during this stage was examined across three case studies: (1) the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) critical habitat designation for Nebraska's Salt Creek tiger beetle, (2) the USFWS critical habitat designation for the Utah/Arizona Shivwits and Holmgren milk vetch, and (3) the USFWS delisting of the Northern Rocky Mountain gray wolf population from the endangered species list. To analyze these three cases, a frame analysis approach is used and offers evidence to support the proposition that the instructive, expertise, and fiscal feasibility frames that stakeholders used during the pre‐proposal stage can shape the language of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. These cases suggest the rich potential for careful study of the earliest stages in the regulatory and administrative rulemaking process in the United States and beyond.

Rulemaking is an integral component of environmental policy at both the federal and state level; however, rulemaking at the state level is understudied. With this research, we begin to fill that gap by focusing on rulemaking regarding the issue of hydraulic fracturing (fracking) in three states: Colorado, New York, and Ohio. This policy issue is well suited to begin exploring state‐level rulemaking processes because the federal government has left fracking regulation to the states. Through semistructured interviews with a range of actors in the rulemaking process across these states, we establish a foundation from which future research in this area may build. This exploratory research yields some valuable insights into the roles different stakeholders are playing in regulating fracking in these three states, and our findings may be useful for explaining state‐level rulemaking more generally.

The United States lags behind European countries in adopting ecological modernisation policies and practices. Ecological modernisation (EM), as it has been developed in the EU, emphasises industrial efficiency and technological development in order to move beyond the perceived conflict between economic development and environmental quality. Despite early attempts by individuals and groups to promote such ideas in the United States, both governments and industry remained threatened by its discourse while it spread in Europe. More recently, however, the US appears more open to its own form of ecological modernisation, with some unique additions to the discourse. This paper examines this growing and increasingly popular US version of ecological modernisation, which incorporates two concepts generally absent from earlier European conceptions of EM -national security and blatant consumerism. We then turn to the limitations of such a discourse, and conclude with suggestions for how the framing of EM in the US could be broadened and strengthened.

No abstract

No abstract

In practice, building collaborative relationships between environmental groups and industry is not an easy task during environmental rulemaking. However, this article uses original interview data to document a different perspective from agency officials and stakeholders across two case studies within the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ): the renewable fuels standard and the locomotive and marine engine rule. This article argues that OTAQ used a new approach, shuttle diplomacy, in these particular cases to negotiate stakeholder differences prior to publication of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The findings from these interviews suggest that the intent of this rule development approach is to provide an atmosphere where stakeholders begin to trust in the process because they are helping to create it. Environmental Practice 13: 227-234 (2011)

No abstract

No abstract