{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01806451612903226, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.360655737704918, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Impact of Environmental Regulation on theStructure of the US Hog Industry

While some research finds that environmental regulation of hog production reduces output by small farms, other work finds that large farms downsize to avoid regulation. None consider the potential size-bias of regulation. We show theoretically that when size-based regulations are also size-biased, large farms downsize, expand, or do neither depending on how regulations shift their marginal production cost relative to their average cost. Empirical testing suggests limited impact on small farms and large farms downsize because regulations have a negative size-bias. In this context, regulatory avoidance is simply one of the three outcomes determined by how regulations affect cost structure.