Evaluating the Social Effects of Environmental Leadership Programs

In the past decade, EPA and over 20 states have created voluntary environmental leadership programs designed to recognize and reward businesses that take steps that go beyond compliance with the strictures of environmental law. Environmental leadership programs seek not only to spur direct improvements to environment quality but also to advance broader social goals that may lead indirectly to environmental improvements, such as improving business-government relationships and changing business culture. Measuring progress toward leadership programs’ social goals is a particularly challenging but essential task if researchers and decision makers are to understand the full impacts of these programs. In this paper, Jonathan C. Borck, Cary Coglianese, and Jennifer Nash present strategies for overcoming the three core challenges in evaluating the social effects of leadership programs and any voluntary environmental initiative: (1) defining appropriate measures of social goals, (2) inferring whether programs achieve those goals, and (3) linking social effects to environmental outcomes. Only through careful attention to these three empirical issues will it be possible to rule out alternative explanations and determine whether environmental leadership programs are truly generating their intended positive social effects as well as improvements to the environment

Environmental Leadership Programs: Toward an Empirical Assessment of their Performance*

Over the past decade, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and states have developed environmental leadership programs (ELPs), a type of voluntary environmental program designed to recognize facilities with strong environmental performance records and encourage facilities to perform better. Proponents argue that ELPs overcome some of the limitations of traditional environmental regulation by encouraging managers to address the full gamut of environmental problems posed by their facilities, reducing the costs of environmental regulation, easing adversarialism, and fostering positive culture change. Although ELPs have been in place for at least five years at the federal level and in seventeen states, these programs have been subject to little empirical evaluation. In this paper, we chart a course for assessing whether ELPs achieve their goals. Drawing on archival research and interviews with government officials who manage these programs, we provide the first comprehensive analysis of the characteristics of these programs, describing program goals, activities, communication strategies, and data collection practices. We find that EPA and many states have established ELPs to improve the environment and to achieve various social goals such as improving relationships between business and government. When it comes to collecting data that could be used to assess these programs\u27 successes, however, government efforts fall short. Even when agencies collect reliable data, these data usually cannot be aggregated sensibly and are insufficient to draw inferences about the true impact of these programs. They also cannot help answer the question of whether ELPs are actually prompting pollution reductions or improving regulatory relationships. These general data weaknesses are significant, even surprising, given the aspirations for ELPs to facilitate policy learning and advocates\u27 claims that these programs are delivering important environmental benefits

Evaluating the Social Effects of Environmental Leadership Programs

In the past decade, EPA and over 20 states have created voluntary environmental leadership programs designed to recognize and reward businesses that take steps that go beyond compliance with the strictures of environmental law. Environmental leadership programs seek not only to spur direct improvements to environment quality but also to advance broader social goals that may lead indirectly to environmental improvements, such as improving business-government relationships and changing business culture. Measuring progress toward leadership programs’ social goals is a particularly challenging but essential task if researchers and decision makers are to understand the full impacts of these programs. In this paper, Jonathan C. Borck, Cary Coglianese, and Jennifer Nash present strategies for overcoming the three core challenges in evaluating the social effects of leadership programs and any voluntary environmental initiative: (1) defining appropriate measures of social goals, (2) inferring whether programs achieve those goals, and (3) linking social effects to environmental outcomes. Only through careful attention to these three empirical issues will it be possible to rule out alternative explanations and determine whether environmental leadership programs are truly generating their intended positive social effects as well as improvements to the environment

Patient and public involvement: how much do we spend and what are the benefits?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is seen as a way of helping to shape health policy and ensure a patient-focused health-care system. While evidence indicates that PPI can improve health-care decision making, it also consumes monetary and non-monetary resources. Given the financial climate, it is important to start thinking about the costs and benefits of PPI and how to evaluate it in economic terms. DESIGN: We conducted a literature review to assess the potential benefits and costs of involvement and the challenges in carrying out an economic evaluation of PPI. RESULTS: The benefits of PPI include effects on the design of new projects or services, on NHS governance, on research design and implementation and on citizenship and equity. Economic evaluation of PPI activities is limited. The lack of an appropriate analytical framework, data recording and understanding of the potential costs and benefits of PPI, especially from participants' perspectives, represent serious constraints on the full evaluation of PPI. CONCLUSIONS: By recognizing the value of PPI, health-care providers and commissioners can embed it more effectively within their organizations. Better knowledge of costs may prompt organizations to effectively plan, execute, evaluate and target resources. This should increase the likelihood of more meaningful activity, avoid tokenism and enhance organizational efficiency and reputation

Association of Novel Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Stress With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy and Dysfunction: Implications for Screening

Background: Currently available screening tools for left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy (LVH) and systolic dysfunction (LVSD) are either expensive (echocardiography) or perform suboptimally (B‐type natriuretic peptide [BNP]). It is unknown whether newer biomarkers are associated with LVH and LVSD and can serve as screening tools. Methods and Results: We studied 2460 Framingham Study participants (mean age 58 years, 57% women) with measurements of biomarkers mirroring cardiac biomechanical stress (soluble ST‐2 [ST2], growth differentiation factor‐15 [GDF‐15] and high‐sensitivity troponin I [hsTnI]) and BNP. We defined LVH as LV mass/height2 ≥the sex‐specific 80th percentile and LVSD as mild/greater impairment of LV ejection fraction (LVEF) or a fractional shortening <0.29. Adjusting for standard risk factors in logistic models, BNP, GDF‐15, and hsTnI were associated with the composite echocardiographic outcome (LVH or LVSD), odds ratios (OR) per SD increment in log‐biomarker 1.29, 1.14, and 1.18 (95% CI: 1.15 to 1.44, 1.004 to 1.28, and 1.06 to 1.31), respectively. The C‐statistic for the composite outcome increased from 0.765 with risk factors to 0.770 adding BNP, to 0.774 adding novel biomarkers. The continuous Net Reclassification Improvement was 0.212 (95% CI: 0.119 to 0.305, P<0.0001) after adding the novel biomarkers to risk factors plus BNP. BNP was associated with LVH and LVSD in multivariable models, whereas GDF‐15 was associated with LVSD (OR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.70), and hsTnI with LVH (OR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.36). ST2 was not significantly associated with any outcome. Conclusions: Our community‐based investigation suggests that cardiac stress biomarkers are associated with LVH and LVSD but may have limited clinical utility as screening tools

Interpreting neurologic outcomes in a changing trial design landscape: An analysis of HeartWare left ventricular assist device using a hybrid intention to treat population

Randomized controlled trials can provide optimal clinical evidence to assess the benefits of new devices, and it is these data that often shape device usage in real-world practice. However, individual clinical trial results sometimes appear discordant for the same device, and alternative devices are sometimes not employed in similar patient populations. To make sound evidence-based decisions, clinicians routinely rely on cross-trial comparisons from different trials of similar but not identical patient populations to assess competing technology when head-to-head randomized comparisons are unavailable

Understanding Resident Satisfaction with Involvement in Highway Planning: In-depth interviews during a highway planning process in the Netherlands

This study investigates resident satisfaction with provided involvement activities during highway planning processes, with particular attention given to the planned Southern Ring Road highway project in Groningen, the Netherlands. In-depth interviews with 38 residents living in the project area reveal important themes contributing to satisfaction. Satisfaction with passive information activities is motivated by the extent to which information addresses concerns, but (dis)trust in government and other information sources also plays a role. For residents preferring to obtain additional information, perceived access to such information and the extent to which it reduces concerns are also important to satisfaction. Finally, for residents who would rather participate actively, satisfaction is motivated by their perceived access to participation activities and the sense of being heard. Study results show how residents’ evaluations of the themes underpinning involvement satisfaction are based on their perceptions of actual project team activities and contextual factors

After the sunset: the residual effect of temporary legislation

The difference between permanent legislation and temporary legislation is the default rule of termination: permanent legislation governs perpetually, while temporary legislation governs for a limited time. Recent literature on legislative timing rules considers the effect of temporary legislation to stop at the moment of expiration. When the law expires, so does its regulatory effect. This article extends that literature by examining the effect of temporary legislation beyond its expiration. We show that in addition to affecting compliance behavior which depends on statutory enforcement, temporary legislation also affects compliance behavior which does not depend on statutory enforcement, and more generally, organizational behavior after a sunset. When temporary legislation expires therefore, it can continue to administer regulatory and other effects. We specify the conditions for this process and give the optimal legislative response

Making Self-Regulation More than Merely Symbolic: The Critical Role of the Legal Environment

Using data from a sample of U.S. industrial facilities subject to the federal Clean Air Act from 1993 to 2003, this article theorizes and tests the conditions under which organizations’ symbolic commitments to self-regulate are particularly likely to result in improved compliance practices and outcomes. We argue that the legal environment, particularly as it is constructed by the enforcement activities of regulators, significantly influences the likelihood that organizations will effectively implement the self-regulatory commitments they symbolically adopt. We investigate how different enforcement tools can foster or undermine organizations’ normative motivations to self-regulate. We find that organizations are more likely to follow through on their commitments to self-regulate when they (and their competitors) are subject to heavy regulatory surveillance and when they adopt self-regulation in the absence of an explicit threat of sanctions. We also find that historically poor compliers are significantly less likely to follow through on their commitments to self-regulate, suggesting a substantial limitation on the use of self-regulation as a strategy for reforming struggling organizations. Taken together, these findings suggest that self-regulation can be a useful tool for leveraging the normative motivations of regulated organizations but that it cannot replace traditional deterrence-based enforcement