IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v35y2005i03p531-548_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Credible Commitment, Political Uncertainty or Policy Complexity? Explaining Variations in the Independence of Non-majoritarian Institutions in France

Author

Listed:
  • ELGIE, ROBERT
  • McMENAMIN, IAIN

Abstract

A common feature of contemporary political systems is the increasing amount of delegation from governments to non-majoritarian institutions. Governments may decide to delegate authority to such institutions for reasons relating to credible commitments, political uncertainty and policy complexity. This article focuses on Independent Administrative Authorities (Autorités administratives indépendantes) in France. We demonstrate that these institutions enjoy varying degrees of independence. We find that the degree of independence varies as a function of two factors: the need to make a credible commitment in areas subject to market opening and the complexity of policy in particular areas.

Suggested Citation

  • ELGIE, ROBERT & McMENAMIN, IAIN, 2005. "Credible Commitment, Political Uncertainty or Policy Complexity? Explaining Variations in the Independence of Non-majoritarian Institutions in France," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 531-548, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:35:y:2005:i:03:p:531-548_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123405000281/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Igor Guardiancich & Mattia Guidi, 2016. "Formal independence of regulatory agencies and Varieties of Capitalism: A case of institutional complementarity?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(3), pages 211-229, September.
    2. Manuel Becker & Thomas Dörfler & Thomas Gehring, 2018. "Credible commitment without independent regulatory agent: Evidence from the Security Council's United Nations Compensation Commission," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 395-412, September.
    3. Chris Hanretty & Christel Koop, 2013. "Shall the law set them free? The formal and actual independence of regulatory agencies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 195-214, June.
    4. Laurenz Ennser‐Jedenastik, 2016. "Do parties matter in delegation? Partisan preferences and the creation of regulatory agencies in Europe," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(3), pages 193-210, September.
    5. Işık D. Özel & Aslı Unan, 2021. "Decoupling trends: Drivers of agency independence in telecommunications: An analysis of high and middle‐income countries," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 32-62, January.
    6. Mattia Guidi, 2015. "The Impact of Independence on Regulatory Outcomes: the Case of EU Competition Policy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(6), pages 1195-1213, November.
    7. Budzinski, Oliver & Eckert, Sandra, 2015. "Wettbewerb und Regulierung," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 93, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    8. Stephen Greasley & Chris Hanretty, 2012. "Culling the quangos: when is delegation revoked," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2012-12, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    9. Mattia Guidi, 2011. "Does Independence Affect Regulatory Performance? The case of national competition authorities in the European Union," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 64, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    10. Mark Thatcher, 2007. "Regulatory Agencies, the State and Markets: A Franco-British Comparison," RSCAS Working Papers 2007/17, European University Institute.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:35:y:2005:i:03:p:531-548_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.