• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
Although the issue of regulatory devolution has received much scholarly scrutiny, rigorous empirical studies of its effects on important policy outcomes are scarce. This paper explores the effects of partial regulatory devolution in the occupational safety arena by exploiting a unique historical anomaly whereby some states enforce protective labor regulations that are enforced elsewhere by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Analyzing data from the construction industry, this article contains several important findings. State inspectors, although using more cooperative enforcement techniques, appear to use traditional enforcement tools more sparingly than their federal counterparts, typically imposing lower fines per violation and having less measurable impact on inspected firms' regulatory compliance. Surprisingly, however, although the estimated frequency of non-fatal construction injuries is approximately ten percent higher in the presence of state enforcement, the estimated frequency of fatal injuries is fifteen percent lower. I suggest that although higher underreporting of non-fatal injuries by companies in state-plan states could explain this puzzling finding, it is also possible that different regulatory styles have different "comparative advantages" in deterring nonfatal injuries on one hand and occupational fatalities on the other.

Abstract:
This study examines the effects on occupational injury claims of a recently implemented post-accident drug testing (PADT) program in a large retail chain. We find that claims have fallen significantly in affected districts, suggesting that PADT programs can reduce injury claims, even in workplaces that already utilize other forms of drug testing. Our results also suggest that some types of employees-such as full-time workers, male workers, and higher-tenure workers-are particularly responsive. Finally, we find some “circumstantial evidence” that a portion of the observed decline could be caused by employees’ reduced willingness to report workplace accidents.

D21, H11, H51, H73, H75, I18, I38, J32, J33, J38, J81, J88, K00, K13, K31, K32, L51, M50, M52

Abstract:
This study examines the effects on occupational injury claims of a recently implemented post-accident drug testing (PADT) program in a national Fortune 100 retail chain that operates homogeneous facilities in more than twenty U.S. states. We find that claims have fallen significantly in affected districts, suggesting that PADT programs can reduce injury claims, even in workplaces that already utilize other forms of drug testing. Our results also suggest that some types of employees - such as full-time workers, male workers, and higher-tenure workers - are particularly responsive. Finally, we find some "circumstantial evidence" that a portion of the observed decline could be caused by employees' reduced willingness to report workplace accidents. We conclude that although PADT is a promising method of improving occupational safety, it raises special policy concerns insofar as it may encourage some employees to hide their injuries.

Abstract:
In the latter nineteenth century, most U.S. states passed laws granting special protections to family homesteads. As long as the head of a "family" resided on land with his or her dependents, creditors were prevented from seizing the homestead for non-payment of debts, and some immediate family members could enjoy such protections even after the death of the family head. Promoted as a means to deter family poverty and homelessness, the statutes perplexed contemporary jurists. This article explores why the homestead exemption proved so divisive, and reconstructs the laws' major doctrinal fault lines. Analysis of state high court opinions reveals that the laws had complex effects on women's interests in homestead land. Ironically, although the laws formally vested married women with new rights over family property, their husbands may have been its primary material beneficiaries. More broadly, judicial decisionmaking reflected a widespread concern with safeguarding the link between property ownership, manhood, and citizenship. Homestead exemption laws also, for the first time in U.S. history, transformed the definition of "family" into a politically charged locus of public policy. Instead of strictly limiting the scope of the protected class to nuclear families, most high courts exercised their discretion to permit several other groups of related cohabitants to enjoy the same privileges as husband and wife.

Abstract:
Although the issue of regulatory devolution has received much scholarly scrutiny, rigorous empirical studies of its effects on important policy outcomes are scarce. This article explores the effects of partial regulatory devolution in the occupational safety arena by exploiting a unique historical anomaly whereby some US states enforce protective labor regulations that are enforced elsewhere by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Analyzing data from the construction industry, this article contains several important findings. First, state inspectors use traditional enforcement tools more sparingly than their federal counterparts, typically citing fewer violations and collecting lower fines per violation. Second, although federal enforcement significantly lowers the estimated frequency of nonfatal construction injuries, it also predicts a significant increase in occupational fatalities. I suggest that although higher underreporting of nonfatal injuries in federally regulated states could explain this puzzling finding, it is equally possible that different regulatory styles have different “comparative advantages” in deterring nonfatal injuries on one hand and occupational fatalities on the other. (JEL D73, D78, H73, I18, J08, J28, J88, K00, K23, K31, K32, L51, and L74)