IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v17y2021i4p681-700_9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A case study of bureaucratic discretion: heterogeneous application of market entry regulation in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Runst, Petrik

Abstract

All law is relatively coarse after its initial implementation as the legislature cannot foresee all contingencies that can arise in the actual application of the law. Therefore, decisions need to be made by street-level administrators as novel and particular circumstances arise. Economists have largely ignored the political science literature on street-level bureaucrats, such as policemen, welfare case managers, or regulatory agents. I present a case study in the context of market entry regulation in Germany. Qualitative and quantitative evidence suggests that bureaucratic discretion exists, that is, administrative actions can be found on different ends of a decision space, and that its effects are potentially large. Administrators do not apply legislation in a uniform manner and we observe a systematically different application of rules across subnational jurisdictions.

Suggested Citation

  • Runst, Petrik, 2021. "A case study of bureaucratic discretion: heterogeneous application of market entry regulation in Germany," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 681-700, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:17:y:2021:i:4:p:681-700_9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137421000096/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. Imran Arif & John W. Dawson, 2023. "Pro‐market institutions and labor market outcomes: A panel‐data analysis of U.S. metropolitan areas," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(4), pages 629-652, October.

    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:jinsec:v:17:y:2021:i:4:p:681-700_9. 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/joi .

    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.