Abstract

Regulatory agencies in the United States have relied increasingly on consensus-based decision processes to build public support for their policies. If they are well-designed and managed effectively, consensus-based processes may increase support for an agency’s policies and enhance its institutional legitimacy. But poorly-designed processes may lead to a consensus trap, in which an agency commits to making decisions based on a consensus the participants will never be able to achieve. Two recent initiatives of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - negotiated rule making and the Common Sense Initiative - suggest factors that may be associated with more and less sucessful consensus-based processes.