IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v8y1992i1p93-110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organizational Design and Political Control of Administrative Agencies

Author

Listed:
  • Macey, Jonathan R

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Macey, Jonathan R, 1992. "Organizational Design and Political Control of Administrative Agencies," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 93-110, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:8:y:1992:i:1:p:93-110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Stirton, Lindsay & Lodge, Martin, 2002. "Embedding regulatory autonomy: the reform of Jamaican telecommunications regulation 1988-2001," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 35986, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Besley, Timothy & Burgess, Robin & Pratt, Andrea, 2002. "Mass media and political accountability," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 35988, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Andrew B. Whitford, 2002. "Decentralization and Political Control of the Bureaucracy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(2), pages 167-193, April.
    4. Breig, Zachary & Downey, Mitch, 2021. "Agency breadth and political influence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 253-268.
    5. Schinkel, M.P. & Tóth, L. & Tuinstra, J., 2014. "Discretionary Authority and Prioritizing in Government Agencies," CeNDEF Working Papers 14-15, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance.
    6. Zitzewitz Eric W, 2009. "Prosecutorial Discretion in Mutual Fund Settlement Negotiations, 2003-7," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-42, June.
    7. Fleck, Robert K. & Hanssen, F. Andrew, 2010. "Repeated adjustment of delegated powers and the history of eminent domain," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 99-112, June.
    8. Werner Troesken, 2010. "Competition and Corruption: Lessons from 150 Years of Industrial Governance," Working Paper 426, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2010.
    9. Werner Troesken, 2006. "Regime Change and Corruption. A History of Public Utility Regulation," NBER Chapters, in: Corruption and Reform: Lessons from America's Economic History, pages 259-281, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Ogus, Anthony, 2002. "Comparing Regulatory Systems: Institutions, Processes and Legal Forms in Industrialised Countries," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30609, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    11. Timo Goeschl & Johannes Jarke, 2013. "The warnings puzzle: an upstream explanation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 339-360, December.
    12. Mariano Tommasi & Pablo T. Spiller, 2004. "The Institutions of Regulation," Working Papers 67, Universidad de San Andres, Departamento de Economia, revised Mar 2004.
    13. Pardow Diego G., 2020. "Political Insulation, Technical Expertise and the Technocrat’s Paradox," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 1-21, March.
    14. Moser, Peter, 1999. "The impact of legislative institutions on public policy: a survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-33, March.
    15. Neal D. Woods, 2024. "Structuring Bureaucratic Performance? Assessing the Policy Impact of Environmental Agency Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-11, August.

    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:oup:jleorg:v:8:y:1992:i:1:p:93-110. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    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.