{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"organization":["Institute for Policy Integrity"]},"warnings":[]},"total":{"value":102,"relation":"eq"},"page":6,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?organization=institute-for-policy-integrity&page=6","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"polint-000066","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/polint-000066","title":"Comments on Forest Service’s West Elk Mine Environmental Impact Statement","publisher":{"name":"Institute for Policy Integrity","organization":"institute-for-policy-integrity"},"document_type":"statement","language":"en","date_published":null,"source_url":"https://policyintegrity.org/what-we-do/update/comments-on-forest-services-west-elk-mine-environmental-impact-statement","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","geography_discussed","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The Institute for Policy Integrity, alongside several environmental organizations, argues that the U.S. Forest Service's Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the West Elk coal mine expansion is deficient because it does not monetize greenhouse gas emissions using the social cost of carbon and methane. The authors contend that since the Forest Service used a cost-benefit analysis to list federal revenue increases, it is required to monetize climate damages using the best available data, especially as the expansion could represent \"1.67% of all federal coal produced nationally\".","ai_generated":true,"unit":"polint-000066#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The U.S. Forest Service's new Environmental Impact Statement for the West Elk mine expansion fails to monetize climate damages in its cost-benefit analysis, despite a 2014 U.S. District Court of Colorado ruling that previous plans had \"inadequately disclosed the effects of greenhouse gas emission\".","ai_generated":true,"unit":"polint-000066#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The Forest Service justifies the lack of monetization by claiming the methods are inappropriate at the project level, that a previous court ruling no longer applies due to an executive order withdrawing federal guidance, and that other benefits or costs were also not monetized.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"polint-000066#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The authors argue that monetization is required because the Forest Service used cost-benefit analysis to calculate federal revenue and that the project's scale is significant, potentially representing \"1.67% of all federal coal produced nationally\".","ai_generated":true,"unit":"polint-000066#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":[],"geography_discussed":["Colorado"],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["policy critique"]},{"id":"polint-000088","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/polint-000088","title":"Our History and Approach – Institute for Policy Integrity","publisher":{"name":"Institute for Policy Integrity","organization":"institute-for-policy-integrity"},"document_type":"statement","language":"en","date_published":null,"source_url":"https://policyintegrity.org/about/statement","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The Institute for Policy Integrity, founded in 2008, employs academic research and economic analysis to advocate for government protections for the environment, public health, and consumers. The organization was established to counter the biased use of cost-benefit analysis by industry groups and to provide advocacy groups with the economic tools necessary to justify smart government protections.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"polint-000088#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"The Institute for Policy Integrity was established in 2008 by Richard Revesz and Michael Livermore, based on principles from their book 'Retaking Rationality: How Cost-Benefit Analysis Can Better Protect the Environment and Our Health'.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"polint-000088#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The organization was created to address a gap where environmental groups lacked the economic expertise to compete with industry lawyers and economists, which often resulted in cost-benefit analysis being used to promote deregulation or the weakening of rules.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"polint-000088#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The Institute works through academic research and collaboration with advocacy partners to demonstrate that government protections for the environment, public health, and consumers are economically sound and cost-benefit justified.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"polint-000088#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["environmental policy","public health"],"geography_discussed":[],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["organizational statement"]}]}