Explore the vast range of titles available.

A citizen’s right to comment on, and criticize, government decisions makes a difference. The U.S. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) institutionalized public engagement in environmental review in the belief it would lead to better decisions and more sustainable outcomes. But, 50 years later, NEPA’s public comment process has been criticized as costly and slow, while doing little to change outcomes. Data science now makes it possible to track progress and evaluate the influence of public participation. We examined 108 environmental impact statement (EIS) processes spanning 22 years. Our analysis revealed that public comments resulted in substantive decision alterations in 62% of cases, with 64% showing modifications to alternatives, 42% showing modifications to mitigation plans and 11% leading to the selection of an entirely new preferred alternative. When federal agencies changed project alternatives (78 EISs), 88% of the time (69 of the 78 EISs) they credited public comments as the reason. In 45 of the 108 EISs, agencies modified mitigation plans and credited public comments as the reason 100% of the time. Agencies only occasionally selected a new preferred alternative (21 out of 104 EISs), but when they did, they credited public comments as the reason 100% of the time. As the United States and the 190+ states and countries that have adopted NEPA’s example consider how to address environmental change, it is important to assess the role of public participation in environmental decision making. Our data say public comments matter.

The construction of charging infrastructure has a positive effect on promoting the diffusion of new energy vehicles (NEVs). This study uses natural language processing (NLP) technology to explore consumer preferences for charging infrastructure from consumer comments posted on public social media. The findings show that consumers in first-tier cities pay more attention to charging infrastructure, and the number of comments accounted for 36% of the total. In all comments, consumers are most concerned about charging issues, national policy support, driving range, and installation of private charging piles. Among the charging modes of charging piles, direct current (DC) fast charging is more popular with consumers. The inability to find public charging piles in time to replenish power during travel or high energy consumption caused by air conditioning is the main reason for consumers’ range anxiety. Increasing battery performance, improving charging convenience, and construction of battery swap station are the main ways consumers prefer to increase driving range. Consumers’ preference for charging at home is the main reason for their high attention to the installation of private charging piles. However, the lack of fixed parking spaces and community properties have become the main obstacles to the installation of private charging piles. In addition, consumers in cities with different development levels pay different amounts of attention to each topic of charging infrastructure. Consumers in second-tier and above cities are most concerned about charging issues. Consumers in third-tier and above cities pay significantly more attention to the installation of private charging piles than consumers in fourth-tier and fifth-tier cities. Consumers in each city have almost the same amount of attention to driving range.

In the United States, the conservation of federal lands reflects a social history of public advocacy, public policy, and public comments. US federal agencies solicit public comments to scope for ideas, solve problems, and use the best available science for policy‐making, legislation, and management. Online comment submission has led to staggering numbers of comments that are challenging to summarize. Here, we analyze comments received by the Department of the Interior in response to the proposed executive review of 27 national monuments designated and expanded between 1996 and 2016. We used a deep recurrent neural network (AWD‐LSTM) to classify sentiment of 754,707 comments with higher precision and recall (F1‐score = 0.98) than support vector machine and Naïve Bayes approaches. Over 97% of unique comments opposed the executive review, suggesting overwhelming support for maintaining national monument designations. Using cosine similarity, we also found that duplicates or potential automated software bots comprised over two‐thirds of comments. We offer recommendations for comment submission, collection, and analysis in the current techno‐political climate.

In the United States, forest governance practices have utilized a variety of public participation mechanisms to improve decision-making and instill public legitimacy. However, comments, one of the most frequent and accessible avenues for the public to provide input, has received little attention. Further, there has been no analysis of the ways that government actors utilize this form of public participation in their decision-making. I empirically examine responses to public comments across the United States Forest Service to understand how they handle and deal with public feedback on forestry projects. I employed two qualitative approaches that examine comment handling processes and agency justifications for responding to comments. Through this empirical work, I found that agency employees utilize a range of strategies to handle and respond to public concerns. I present data suggestive that most public comments received are outside of agency personnel decision-making capacity and thus, personnel respond to comments in ways that deny their worth and block those concerns from project agenda setting. Understanding how the United States Forest Service thinks about and deals with public input will help forest managers and public commenters better negotiate efficacy in projects and decisions that affect forestland areas.

All coastal states are expected to establish marine protected areas (MPAs) in line with international targets. For most, this will mean a radical increase in the amount of marine area protected in this way. In order to achieve effective MPAs, the opinions of stakeholders must be carefully considered. This article examines the views of marine extractive users (people engaged in fishery and mining industries) in three coastal countries, the United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand, using public comments submitted in response to recent proposals for new MPAs. Specifically, I focus on practically ideal size, duration, required information for regulation, burden of proof and post-designation monitoring of MPAs. Therefore, the gathered material was analyzed to capture views on four issues: 1) to what extents MPAs should target geographical and time scale?; 2) to what extents MPAs should conserve objects and regulate activities based on limited evidence?; 3) who should bear the burden of proof with respect to the environmental impact of regulated activities?; and 4) who and how monitoring and research on ecosystems should be done in MPAs? The study finds that some extractive users oppose the large geographic/temporal scales of MPAs especially when these are based on the application of the precautionary approach. Others accepted these but use them to argue that their own activities are environmentally insignificant. Further, the arguments of some extractive users in favor of their industrial use of MPAs are also considered. These views were commonly found across all three countries, indicating that users in countries committed to the MPA project hold views that challenge this commitment. These findings suggest that challenges to the achievement of MPA targets lie ahead but also suggest new avenues of research and potential solutions. The paper makes six proposals for adjusting the application of the precautionary approach and related targets and regulations. In all cases, my results reinforce the importance of dialogue with marine extractive users for effective MPA reforms at the national and international levels.

Addressing social and ecological values is a central aim of democratic environmental management and policymaking, especially during deliberative and participatory processes. Agencies responsible for managing public lands would benefit from a deepened understanding of how various publics value those lands. Federal land management agencies receive millions of written comments from the public on proposed management actions annually, providing a unique source of insights into how the public assigns value to public lands. To date, little attention has been directed towards methods for analysing the public's comments to understand their expressed values, in part because the volume of comments often makes manual analysis unworkable. This study introduces and applies a novel computational approach to inferring values in written text by using natural language processing and a method that combines a lexicon with semantic embedding models. We developed embedding models for four types of values that are expressed in public comments. We then fit models to 409,241 public comments on actions proposed by the United States Forest Service from 2011 to 2020 and regulated by the National Environmental Policy Act. The embedding model generally outperformed the lexicon word‐count, particularly for value types with shorter lexicons, and, like human evaluators, the embedding models performed better for more evident values and were less reliable for more or latent values. By applying the resulting model, we furthered our understanding of how the public values National Forest lands in the United States. We observed that aesthetic and moral values were expressed more often in comments for projects that received more public interest, as gauged by the number of comments a project received and in comments for projects addressing recreational management. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

The use of race and ethnicity in biomedical research has been a subject of debate for the past three decades. Initially the two major race categories were: White and Black, leaving other minorities uncounted or inappropriately misclassified. As the science of health disparities evolves, more sophisticated and detailed information has been added to large databases. Despite the addition of new racial classifications, including multiracial denominations, the quality of the data is limited to the data collection process and other social misconceptions. Although race is viewed as an imposed or ascribed status, ethnicity is an achieved status, making it a more challenging variable to include in biomedical research. Ambiguity between race and ethnicity often exists, ultimately affecting the value of both variables. To better understand specific health outcomes or disparities of groups, it is necessary to collect subgroup-specific data. Cultural perceptions and practices, health experiences, and susceptibility to disease vary greatly among broad racial-ethnic groups and requires the collection of nuanced data to understand. Here, we provide an overview of the classification of race and ethnicity in the United States over time, the existing challenges in using race and ethnicity in biomedical research and future research directions.

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease with devastating personal and social consequences. In June 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to aducanumab (Aduhelm; Biogen), a first-in-class monoclonal antibody (mAb) for treatment of AD. In July 2021, responding to the significant controversy sparked by aducanumab’s approval, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) opened a National Coverage Determination (NCD) analysis for mAbs intended for the treatment of AD. CMS received a record number of public comments on the proposed NCD, which included a proposal for coverage with evidence development (CED). We undertook an in-depth qualitative analysis of those comments. Broad themes included: the appropriateness of FDA’s approval of aducanumab; the nature of the relationship between CMS and FDA; anticipated downstream effects of CED on innovation and health equity; aducanumab’s cost, value, and affordability; and whether aducanumab offered patients hope. The aducanumab controversy occurred at the intersection of multiple contentious issues; in the discussion, we contextualize our findings within these broader debates. Though Biogen pulled aducanumab from the market in early 2024, the effects of the public discourse surrounding its approval and coverage have been long-lasting and far-reaching, affecting health law, policy, and clinical practice.

Not since the 1960s have U.S. politicians, Republican or Democrat, campaigned on platforms defending big government, much less the use of regulation to help solve social ills. And since the late 1970s, \"deregulation\" has become perhaps the most ubiquitous political catchword of all. This book takes on the critics of government regulation. Providing the first major alternative to conventional arguments grounded in public choice theory, it demonstrates that regulatory government can, and on important occasions does, advance general interests. Unlike previous accounts,Regulation and Public Intereststakes agencies' decision-making rules rather than legislative incentives as a central determinant of regulatory outcomes. Drawing from both political science and law, Steven Croley argues that such rules, together with agencies' larger decision-making environments, enhance agency autonomy. Agency personnel inclined to undertake regulatory initiatives that generate large but diffuse benefits (while imposing smaller but more concentrated costs) can use decision-making rules to develop socially beneficial regulations even over the objections of Congress and influential interest groups. This book thus provides a qualified defense of regulatory government. Its illustrative case studies include the development of tobacco rulemaking by the Food and Drug Administration, ozone and particulate matter rules by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service's \"roadless\" policy for national forests, and regulatory initiatives by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission.

Corporate law shapes the fundamental business environment and affects various stakeholders. It is possible to determine the behaviour of various stakeholders by examining the politics of the reform process of corporate law. In order to understand the process, this paper uses the notice-and-comment procedure (public-comment procedure). Under this procedure, people submit comments to the Ministry of Justice; some of the comments are reflected in the final Bill, while others are not. The paper performs a quantitative analysis of a hand-collected dataset from two recent public-comment procedures on corporate law reform. The results showed that the bureaucrats are rigid and not willing to take public comments seriously. However, on some technical issues, legal academics, and legal professionals influence the behaviour of the bureaucrats. In addition, the bureaucrats employed these comments to honour the technical views of professionals. In other cases, corporate managers significantly influence the reform process.