The following working papers and research projects examine political institutions, environmental governance, democratic resilience, and political behavior.
Screening for Justice: How EJ Mapping Tools Can Remedy Disparities in Clean Air Act Enforcement
With David Konisky and James Stewart III
This project examines whether environmental justice mapping tools can reduce disparities in regulatory enforcement. We argue that providing regulators with information about the demographic and environmental characteristics of communities may change how enforcement resources are allocated, although substantial discretion among state agencies may limit the effectiveness of these tools. We investigate the introduction of the Environmental Protection Agency’s EJScreen program, combining facility-level Clean Air Act inspection records from EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO), census block-group demographic data, and environmental justice indicators. Using longitudinal data on approximately 16,000 major air-polluting facilities annually, we employ fixed-effects models to compare enforcement patterns before and after EJScreen’s public release in 2015, examining whether regulatory attention shifted toward disadvantaged communities.
The Political Economy of Protected Area Management
With Eric Coleman and Barna Bose
This project examines how domestic political institutions influence the designation and management of protected areas. While existing research has focused primarily on how much land governments designate for conservation, we argue that the restrictiveness of protected-area management represents a distinct and consequential political choice. Conservation generates broadly distributed public benefits but can impose concentrated costs on local communities through restrictions on land use and resource extraction. Our theoretical framework suggests that political institutions influence these decisions by shaping the relative political power of local interests and broader conservation constituencies. Using data on more than 52,000 protected areas over the past decade, we examine how democratic institutions affect both the extent of protected territory and the restrictiveness of management, measured using International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) classifications.
Latent Judicial Independence: Update and Validation
With Jeffrey K. Staton and James Carroll Stewart III
This project updates and validates the Latent Judicial Independence (LJI) measure originally developed by Linzer and Staton (2015). Judicial independence is inherently difficult to observe, and existing indicators capture different dimensions of the concept with varying degrees of measurement error. We employ a Bayesian latent-variable measurement model to integrate twelve indicators of judicial independence, including measures of judicial autonomy and compliance from the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) project. The analysis extends the historical coverage of LJI to approximately 181 countries over the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. We evaluate the measurement validity of the updated estimates, examine uncertainty across countries and political regimes, and assess how incorporating V-Dem indicators affects the precision and interpretation of comparative measures of judicial independence.
Stai Fuori or Benvenuto?: Immigration and the Italian Far Right
With Giulia Venturini
This project examines how exposure to refugee populations influences electoral support for far-right political parties. Drawing on competing arguments from intergroup contact theory and realistic group conflict theory, we investigate whether direct exposure to refugees reduces hostility toward newcomers or generates political backlash. We study Italy’s refugee reception system, focusing on municipal participation in the Protection System for Asylum Seekers and Refugees (SPRAR) during the period between the 2013 and 2018 national elections. Using municipality-level electoral returns, administrative records of operating refugee reception centers, and demographic data, we employ instrumental-variable models using deepwater port locations and spatial regression techniques to estimate the effects of refugee reception on far-right voting, including spillover effects across neighboring municipalities.
Borders, Spillovers, and the Watershed Lattice
With Robert J. Carroll and David M. Konisky
This project examines how the geographic boundaries of regulatory jurisdictions affect the provision of environmental public goods when pollution crosses political borders. We develop a formal model in which regulators operate within jurisdictions imposed on an interconnected watershed system, while pollutants flow downstream across administrative boundaries. Our analysis characterizes the relationship between jurisdictional fragmentation, regulatory incentives, and social welfare, identifying conditions under which consolidating or dividing jurisdictions improves environmental outcomes. Using game-theoretic and mathematical approaches to model watershed networks and alternative jurisdictional configurations, we also investigate whether intergovernmental grants can compensate for inefficient political boundaries. The research contributes to theories of fiscal federalism, environmental governance, and institutional design.
Ambiguity and Democratic Backsliding: Eye-Tracking Evidence on How Citizens Read Contested Acts
With Gretchen Sunderman, Antje Muntendam, and Barna Bose
This project investigates why citizens sometimes tolerate violations of democratic norms committed by political leaders from their own party. We argue that partisan differences in democratic accountability may arise not only because citizens knowingly accept violations but also because they interpret ambiguous political actions differently. Drawing on political psychology and psycholinguistics, we develop an experimental design that uses eye-tracking technology to examine how individuals process competing interpretations of potentially undemocratic actions. Participants evaluate political scenarios that vary in their legal ambiguity and the partisan identity of the responsible official, while eye movements and cognitive measures capture attention and information processing. A complementary candidate-choice experiment will examine whether these interpretive differences translate into electoral tolerance of democratic backsliding.
