For over a decade, scholars and policymakers have identified regulatory gridlock as a critical barrier to construction in the United States. Complex permitting rules, protracted community review processes, labyrinthine zoning rules, and extensive environmental litigation have made it extraordinarily difficult to build the housing and infrastructure Americans need. What began as a YIMBY movement in San Francisco has evolved into a broader abundance agenda focused on simplifying the supply of essential goods and services. This regulatory thicket emerged as a response to mid-20th century development practices--exemplified by Robert Moses--that prioritized rapid construction at the expense of community displacement and environmental harm. Statutes like NEPA and CEQA were enacted to constrain developer power and protect communities. Marc Dunkelman's recent book Why Nothing Works traces this historical arc, explaining how America's reaction to Moses-era development produced today's gridlock. Yet these frameworks have evolved into what many now consider abusive statutory schemes, with ex post litigation serving as an ineffective and costly mechanism for addressing construction and environmental concerns. Professor Zambrano's forthcoming book on private enforcement examines this problem systematically, arguing that ex post litigation over construction and environmental harm represents a misuse of private enforcement mechanisms. The central challenge is clear: how do we design decision-making processes for housing and infrastructure that meaningfully incorporate community input while enabling expeditious, cost-effective construction (without ex post litigation)? This policy lab will undertake comparative research on permitting and approval processes across multiple dimensions: different project types within the U.S. (housing, infrastructure), a range of statutory frameworks (including national security), and international models--particularly from Europe and East Asia. Case studies will examine success stories like Spain's rapid deployment of high-speed rail infrastructure. The lab's objective is to produce a report presenting a menu of decision-making alternatives that do not rely on ex post litigation as the primary accountability mechanism. The lab will be led by Professor Diego Zambrano, Neukom Center Executive Director Lucy Ricca, JD/PhD candidate Olivia Hope Martin, and will have extensive involvement by author Marc Dunkelman. Elements used in grading: Attendance, performance, class participation, written assignments, final paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete a Consent Application Form available at SLS Registrar https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/.
2 units · Law Mandatory P/R/F
For over a decade, scholars and policymakers have identified regulatory gridlock as a critical barrier to construction in the United States. Complex permitting rules, protracted community review processes, labyrinthine zoning rules, and extensive environmental litigation have made it extraordinarily difficult to build the housing and infrastructure Americans need. What began as a YIMBY movement in San Francisco has evolved into a broader abundance agenda focused on simplifying the supply of essential goods and services. This regulatory thicket emerged as a response to mid-20th century development practices--exemplified by Robert Moses--that prioritized rapid construction at the expense of community displacement and environmental harm. Statutes like NEPA and CEQA were enacted to constrain developer power and protect communities. Marc Dunkelman's recent book Why Nothing Works traces this historical arc, explaining how America's reaction to Moses-era development produced today's gridlock. Yet these frameworks have evolved into what many now consider abusive statutory schemes, with ex post litigation serving as an ineffective and costly mechanism for addressing construction and environmental concerns. Professor Zambrano's forthcoming book on private enforcement examines this problem systematically, arguing that ex post litigation over construction and environmental harm represents a misuse of private enforcement mechanisms. The central challenge is clear: how do we design decision-making processes for housing and infrastructure that meaningfully incorporate community input while enabling expeditious, cost-effective construction (without ex post litigation)? This policy lab will undertake comparative research on permitting and approval processes across multiple dimensions: different project types within the U.S. (housing, infrastructure), a range of statutory frameworks (including national security), and international models--particularly from Europe and East Asia. Case studies will examine success stories like Spain's rapid deployment of high-speed rail infrastructure. The lab's objective is to produce a report presenting a menu of decision-making alternatives that do not rely on ex post litigation as the primary accountability mechanism. The lab will be led by Professor Diego Zambrano, Neukom Center Executive Director Lucy Ricca, JD/PhD candidate Olivia Hope Martin, and will have extensive involvement by author Marc Dunkelman. Elements used in grading: Attendance, performance, class participation, written assignments, final paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete a Consent Application Form available at SLS Registrar https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/.