Assessing the Mandatory Accountability of Regulatory Agencies

  • Chapter
Accountability and Regulatory Governance

Part of the book series: Executive Politics and Governance Series ((EXPOLGOV))

Abstract

Over the past three decades, regulatory agencies have become increasingly important actors in the policy process. While the role of government in the provision of goods and services has been reduced in most established democracies, the number of regulatory activities has increased, which has led scholars to coin such terms as ‘the regulatory state’ (Majone 1994b) and ‘regulatory capitalism’ (Levi-Faur 2005). Yet rather than relying on ministerial departments for the development and implementation of regulatory policies, governments and parliaments have tended to delegate these responsibilities to agencies that operate at arm’s length from ministerial hierarchies and the political process (Gilardi 2005, 2008; Jordana et al. 2011). These independent agencies are not only involved in policymaking at the national level, but they also participate in international policy networks, particularly at the European level (Coen and Thatcher 2008; Maggetti and Gilardi 2011). Hence, they are ‘the main institutional characteristic of the regulatory state’ (Gilardi 2008: p. 21; cf. Levi-Faur and Gilad 2004).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In their study of the establishment of regulatory agencies in 48 countries, Jordana and his colleagues find that financial market regulation and competition policy currently are the responsibility of independent agencies in, respectively, 94 and 88 per cent of the countries (2011: p. 1346).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Independent agencies with responsibilities in the area of competition policy are present in all 21 countries on which this study focuses, with some countries (Canada, Denmark, Finland and the United Kingdom) having two competition authorities. Independent financial market regulators are only present in 19 of the countries. In Ireland, financial market regulation is the responsibility of the central bank. In Denmark, the financial market regulator (Finanstilsynet) is part of the hierarchy of the Ministry of Business and Growth, and is therefore not regarded as an independent agency. Both Australia and Canada have two financial market regulators.

    Google Scholar 

References

  • Bartolini, S. (2008) Taking ‘constitutionalism’ and ‘legitimacy’ Seriously. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) Discussion Paper No. 1. Available from: http://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/9642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bawn K. (1995) Political Control versus Expertise: Congressional Choices about Administrative Procedures. American Political Science Review, 89(1), 62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behn, R. (2001) Rethinking Democratic Accountability (Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Binderkrantz, A.S. and Christensen, J.G. (2009) DelegationWithout Agency Loss? The Use of Performance Contracts in Danish Central Government. Governance, 22(2), 263–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovens, M. (2007) Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coen, D. and Thatcher, M. (2008) Network Governance and Multi-Level Delegation: European Networks of Regulatory Agencies. Journal of Public Policy, 28(1), 9–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R.A. (1956) A Preface to Democratic Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Flinders, M. and Smith, M. (1999) ‘Realizing the Democratic Potential of Quangos’ in M. Flinders and M. Smith (eds.) Quangos, Accountability and Reform (Basingstoke: Macmillan), pp. 201–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilardi, F. (2005) The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Capitalism: The Diffusion of Independent Regulatory Agencies inWestern Europe. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1), 84–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilardi, F. (2008) Delegation in the Regulatory State: Independent Regulatory Agencies in Western Europe (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jordana, J., Levi-Faur, D. and Fernández iMarín, X. (2011) The Global Diffusion of Regulatory Agencies: Channels of Transfer and Stages of Diffusion. Comparative Political Studies, 44(10), 1343–1369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koop, C. (2011) Explaining the Accountability of Independent Agencies: The Importance of Political Salience. Journal of Public Policy, 31(2), 209–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koop, C. (2014) Theorizing and Explaining Voluntary Accountability. Public Administration, 92(3), 565–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi-Faur, D. (2005) The Global Diffusion of Regulatory Capitalism. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598, 12–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi-Faur, D. and Gilad, S. (2004) The Rise of the British Regulatory State: Transcending the Privatization Debate. Comparative Politics, 37(1), 105–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, B. and Spiller, P.T. (1996) Regulations, Institutions, and Commitment: Comparative Studies of Telecommunications (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maggetti, M. (2010) Legitimacy and Accountability of Independent Regulatory Agencies: A Critical Review. Living Reviews in Democracy 2, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maggetti, M. and Gilardi, F. (2011) The Policy-Making Structure of European Regulatory Networks and the Domestic Adoption of Standards. Journal of European Public Policy, 18(6), 830–847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (1994a) Independence vs. Accountability? Non-Majoritarian Institutions and Democratic Government in Europe. EUI Working Paper SPS No 94/3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (1994b) The Rise of the Regulatory State in Europe. West European Politics, 14(3), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (1996) Temporal Consistency and Policy Credibility: Why Democracies Need Nonmajoritarian Institutions. EUI Working Paper RSC No 96/57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majone, G. (1999) The Regulatory State and its Legitimacy Problems. West European Politics, 22(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mény, Y. and Surel, Y. (eds.) (2002) Democracies and the Populist Challenge (Basingstoke: Palgrave).

    Google Scholar 

  • Philp, M. (2009) Delimiting Democratic Accountability. Political Studies, 57(1), 28–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C. and Summa, H. (1997) Reflexive Watchdogs? How Supreme Audit Institutions Account for Themselves. Public Administration, 75(2), 313–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, G. (1995) How Far Can Government Travel? Journal of Democracy, 6(3), 101–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schedler, A. (1999) ‘Conceptualizing Accountability’ in A. Schedler, L. Diamond and M. Plattner (eds.) The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies (Boulder: Lynne Rienner), pp. 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, C. (2000) Accountability in the Regulatory State. Journal of Law and Society, 27(1), 38–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, M. (2002) Judicial Delegation Doctrines: The US, Britain, and France. West European Politics, 25(1), 173–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C. (1998) The Appointed State: Quasi-Governmental Organizations and Democracy (Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Thatcher, M. (2002) Regulation After Delegation: Independent Regulatory Agencies in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 9(6), 954–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thatcher, M. and Stone Sweet, A. (2002) Theory and Practice of Delegation to Non-Majoritarian Institutions. West European Politics, 25(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vibert, F. (2007) The Rise of the Unelected: Democracy and the New Separation of Powers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weir, S. (1995) Quangos: Questions of Democratic Accountability. Parliamentary Affairs, 48(2), 306–323.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2015 Christel Koop

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Koop, C. (2015). Assessing the Mandatory Accountability of Regulatory Agencies. In: Bianculli, A.C., Fernández-i-Marín, X., Jordana, J. (eds) Accountability and Regulatory Governance. Executive Politics and Governance Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137349583_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Navigation