Plain-text conversions of U.S. Final Environmental Impact Statements from 2013-2020

Administrative procedures are intended to increase transparency and help
agencies make better decisions. However, these requirements also increase
agency workload. Understanding how public agencies satisfy procedural
requirements is a critical facet of agency performance. This analysis
focuses on the language agencies use in Environmental Impact Statements
(EISs) required by the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) –
specifically, the reuse of similar text within and between assessments. We
synthesize theories of institutional isomorphism and bureaucratic coping
to understand why and how text is reused, and consider the tradeoffs
associated with this behavior. Using a national dataset of 1014 EISs
published by 22 U.S. agencies from 2013 to 2020, we explore how
boilerplate language varies by agency, authors, project type, location,
and consulting firm involvement. We find that text reuse primarily occurs
where there is a clear substantive rationale for boilerplate language or
where studies share authors or contract consulting firms. This indicates:
(1) that agencies largely do not merely engage in pro forma
compliance efforts; and (2) that while NEPA procedures are oriented around
individual projects and decisions, cross-project learning and the
narrowness – or breadth – of agencies’ project
portfolios shape analytical routines and the relative tradeoffs of
boilerplate text in policy analysis. This paper adds to our theoretical
understanding of agencies’ coping strategies in response to institutional
pressures and makes a methodological contribution by demonstrating the
application of text reuse measurement and information extraction methods
in public administration research.

行政程序旨在提升透明度，助力公共机构作出更科学的决策。然而，此类程序要求同时也会加重机构的工作负荷。厘清公共机构如何满足程序合规要求，是衡量机构绩效的关键维度。
本分析聚焦于美国《国家环境政策法》（U.S. National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA）所要求编制的环境影响报告书（Environmental Impact Statements, EIS）中机构使用的文本语言，具体探讨各类评估文本内部及不同评估之间相似文本的复用行为。
我们整合制度同形性（institutional isomorphism）与官僚应对（bureaucratic coping）相关理论，解析文本复用的动因与实现路径，并探讨该行为背后的权衡取舍。我们使用2013年至2020年间22家美国机构发布的1014份EIS全国数据集，探究套语文本（boilerplate language）如何因机构、作者、项目类型、地域及咨询机构参与情况而存在差异。
研究发现，文本复用主要出现在两类场景：一是套语文本具备明确的实质性依据之时，二是不同研究共享作者或委托同一咨询机构之时。这一结果表明：其一，机构并非仅仅流于形式地开展合规工作；其二，尽管《国家环境政策法》的程序设计围绕单个项目与决策展开，但跨项目学习以及机构项目组合的宽窄程度，会塑造机构的分析惯例，以及政策分析中套语文本的相对权衡。
本研究既深化了我们对公共机构应对制度压力之策略的理论认知，又通过展示文本复用测度与信息提取方法在公共行政（public administration）研究中的应用，作出了方法论层面的贡献。