 Economic Criteria for Settling Federalism Disputes with an Application to Food Safety RegulationJulie Caswell (caswell@resecon.umass.edu) and Jaana K. Kleinschmit No 116114, Working Papers from Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance Abstract: Federal ism disputes arising from state regulations, particularly those pursuing health, safety, and environmental goals, are a common feature of the U.S . political system. Discussion of bases for settling such disputes often focuses on the in- and out-state incidence of benefits and costs but incidence is a complex concept that has not been systematically analyzed. We discuss five factors important to evaluating incidence and present spillover criteria for judging disputes based on them. When applied to a Massachusetts regulation of daminozide residues in heat-processed apple products, the criteria reach different conclusions on its appropriateness, although the main criteria suggest it should be invalidated by the courts or preempted by federal law. The application illustrates how the spillover criteria can clarify analysis of federalism disputes. Keywords: Food; Consumption/Nutrition/Food; Safety (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:rpspwp:116114 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in Working Papers from Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to econpapers@oru.se.
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.