IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxivy2021i2bp1127-1141.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choice Preferences in the Process of Making Regulatory Decisions under Risk and Uncertainty Conditions: An Experimental Study

Author

Listed:
  • Piotr Szkudlarek

Abstract

Purpose: This paper aims to identify preferences in regulatory decision-making under conditions of risk and uncertainty. Design/Methodology/Approach: Research using the experimental method was conducted among top-management of the regulatory authority in Poland, Office of Electronic Communications (OEC) and telecommunications National Regulatory Authorities in UE -members of Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications. Findings: The findings suggest the occurrence of a certainty effect, loss avoidance effect, reflection, ambiguity aversion effect, and the status quo effect, all of which are psychological determinants shaping the preferences of regulatory decision selection under conditions of risk and uncertainty. The preferences under conditions of risk and uncertainty vary depending on the decision-making situation. There is no clear link between declared and actual risk preferences expressed by the OEC top management in decision-making situations. Risk preferences top-management OEC and BEREC are converging. Practical Implications: There is a need to shape the architecture of choice for public decision-makers in a decision-making situation in conditions of risk and uncertainty that take into account their cognitive tendencies. Originality/Value: The findings presented in the article contribute to the discussion on regulators’ cognitive tendencies in determining regulatory decision preferences under conditions of risk and uncertainty. An experimental research approach can explain the cognitive tendencies of public decision-makers.

Suggested Citation

  • Piotr Szkudlarek, 2021. "Choice Preferences in the Process of Making Regulatory Decisions under Risk and Uncertainty Conditions: An Experimental Study," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(2B), pages 1127-1141.
  • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:2b:p:1127-1141
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ersj.eu/journal/2332/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrei Shleifer, 2005. "Understanding Regulation," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 11(4), pages 439-451, September.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. J.A. den Hertog, 2010. "Review of economic theories of regulation," Working Papers 10-18, Utrecht School of Economics.
    4. James Cooper & William Kovacic, 2012. "Behavioral economics: implications for regulatory behavior," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 41-58, February.
    5. Matthew Bennett & Unknown & Amelia Fletcher & Liz Hurley & David Ruck, 2010. "What Does Behavioral Economics Mean for Competition Policy?," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 6.
    6. James Cooper & William Kovacic, 2012. "Erratum to: Behavioral economics: implications for regulatory behavior," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 292-292, April.
    7. Timothy J. Brennan, 2018. "The Rise of Behavioral Economics in Regulatory Policy: Rational Choice or Cognitive Limitation?," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 97-108, January.
    8. William H. Melody, 2016. "Institutionalizing “the Public Interest” in Public Utility Regulation: Harry M. Trebing and the Second Wave of Reform," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 519-526, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    2. Andrzej Baniak & Peter Grajzl, 2014. "Controlling Product Risks when Consumers are Heterogeneously Overconfident: Producer Liability vs. Minimum Quality Standard Regulation," CESifo Working Paper Series 5003, CESifo.
    3. Michael Collins, J. & Urban, Carly, 2014. "The dark side of sunshine: Regulatory oversight and status quo bias," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PB), pages 470-486.
    4. Kuehnhanss, Colin R. & Heyndels, Bruno & Hilken, Katharina, 2015. "Choice in politics: Equivalency framing in economic policy decisions and the influence of expertise," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 360-374.
    5. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2014. "Behavioral public choice: A survey," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 14/03, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    6. Shastitko, Anastasia (Шаститко, Анастасия), 2018. "Application of the Conclusions of the Behavioral Economy to the Behavior of Civil Servants: Methodological Aspects [Применение Выводов Поведенческой Экономики К Поведению Государственных Служащих: ," Working Papers 031823, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    7. Valentiny, Pál, 2019. "Közgazdaságtan a jogalkalmazásban [Forensic economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 134-162.
    8. Clifton, Judith & Díaz-Fuentes, Daniel & Fernández-Gutiérrez, Marcos, 2013. "How consumers’ socio-economic background influences satisfaction: Insights for better utility regulation," MPRA Paper 47271, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Kothari, S.P. & Ramanna, Karthik & Skinner, Douglas J., 2010. "Implications for GAAP from an analysis of positive research in accounting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 246-286, December.
    10. Stuart Shapiro & Debra Borie-Holtz, 2020. "Small business response to regulation: incorporating a behavioral perspective," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, December.
    11. Luis E. Mejía, 2021. "Judicial review of regulatory decisions: Decoding the contents of appeals against agencies in Spain and the United Kingdom," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 760-784, July.
    12. Avineri, Erel, 2012. "On the use and potential of behavioural economics from the perspective of transport and climate change," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 512-521.
    13. Shastitko, Anastasia (Шаститко, Анастасия), 2014. "Behavioral Antitrust [Поведенческий Антитраст]," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 76-91, December.
    14. David Hirshleifer, 2008. "Psychological Bias as a Driver of Financial Regulation," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 14(5), pages 856-874, November.
    15. Brennan, Timothy J., 2014. "Behavioral economics and policy evaluation," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 89-109, January.
    16. Jochen Bigus, 2015. "Loss Aversion, Audit Risk Judgments, and Auditor Liability," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 581-606, September.
    17. Trillas, Francesc, 2013. "The Institutional Architecture of Regulation and Competition: Spains's 2012 Reform," IESE Research Papers D/1067, IESE Business School.
    18. Budzinski, Oliver & Haucap, Justus, 2019. "Kartellrecht und Ökonomik: Institutions matter!," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 102, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    19. Martin, Brandie L. & Jayakar, Krishna, 2013. "Moving beyond dichotomy: Comparing composite telecommunications regulatory governance indices," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 691-701.
    20. Saad Azmat & Hira Ghaffar, 2021. "Ethical Commitments and Credit Market Regulations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 421-433, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Regulation; cognitive bias; choice preferences; risk; uncertainty.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • E71 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on the Macro Economy
    • H83 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - Public Administration
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications

    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:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:2b:p:1127-1141. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    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.