Bawn: Political control versus expertiseFrom WikiSummary, the Free Social Science Summary Database This summary needs formatting (i.e. "wikification"). Can you help us improve it? (Formatting help.) Please volunteer.
Bawn. 1995. Political control versus expertise: Congressional choices about administrative procedures. APSR 89:62-73. MAIN POINT When delegating to agencies, Congressional coalitions (C) must minimize either procedural uncertainty (what will the agency do?) or technical uncertainty (is this the best regulation?); there is a tradeoff. Thus, the degree of agency independence (i.e. the strictness of of procedural rules) (Y) "reflects the legislature's willingness to trade uncertainty about policy consequences for uncertainty about agency behavior" (p 63). PROCEDURAL (POLITICAL) UNCERTAINTY Administrative procedures determine which external "signals" an agency hears: does it listen mostly to the industries it regulates (as in "capture" theory), to oversight committees (congressional dominance theory), or to itself (bureaucrat's ideology or professionalism)? Because "procedures determine the relative strenghts of signals received from different groups" (p 65), procedures can determine "the location of an agency's ideal point." However, there is uncertainty for C in how procedure's will affect A's (the agency's) ideal point. Thus, C uses procedures to determine the distribution of ideal points (both its mean and spread) from which A's ideal point will be drawn. TECHNICAL UNCERTAINTY Increasing independence allows A to incorporate more knowledge of policy consequences into its decisions. Thus, technical uncertainty falls as political uncertainty (independence) rises. LIMITATIONS/CONCERNS
|
– Toolbox Ads by Google Please report inappropriate ads. We do not endorse services that facilitate plagiarism. |