Table of Contents

Comparative Law and Regulation

Comparative Law and Regulation

Understanding the Global Regulatory Process

Research Handbooks in Comparative Law series

Edited by Francesca Bignami and David Zaring

Governance by regulation – rules propounded and enforced by bureaucracies – is taking a growing share of the sum total of governance. Once thought to be an American phenomenon, it is now a central form of state action in every part of the world, including Europe, Latin America, and Asia, and it is at the core of much international lawmaking. In Comparative Law and Regulation, original contributions by leading scholars in the field focus both on the legal dimension of regulation and on how this dimension operates in those places that have turned to regulation to meet their obligations.

Chapter 4: Participation in the U.S. administrative process

Wendy Wagner

Subjects: law - academic, comparative law, regulation and governance


At least on paper, U.S. administrative law places a premium on ensuring complete and meaningful participation in agency rulemakings. Participants are not only guaranteed the opportunity to comment on agency proposals, but agencies are legally required to consider participant comments. If an agency fails to comply with these requirements, it can find itself defending its rule in court. Since each commenter is a potential litigant, U.S. agencies have legal incentives to take the comments seriously. What actually happens in practice, however, can be quite different. Even though legal requirements impress upon agencies the need to provide formal opportunities for participation, agencies are not required to ensure that the opportunities they provide are effective. Administrative law also does not require that all significantly affected parties be actively represented in rulemaking that affects their interests. Instead, in the model contained in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) the agency operates as a passive recipient of stakeholder input. Agencies are generally not required to monitor the intensity or diversity of stakeholder engagement, subsidize or actively solicit underrepresented groups, or otherwise ensure that the actual participants bear any resemblance to those who are actually affected by the agency’s action. The success of U.S. participation requirements ultimately relies on the stamina and resources of the affected parties, a dependence that can lead to significant imbalances in representation. Exacerbating these limitations are gaps in the formal participation requirements themselves.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information