IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v19y2016i9p1129-1140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transparency and the regulatory process in Europe and the United States: two research priorities

Author

Listed:
  • Robert E. O’Connor

Abstract

Transparency research related to the regulatory process would benefit most from two types of empirical studies. One batch of studies, described in the fifth section of this essay, would focus on the American states and the member states of the European Union to identify the factors that determine whether regulatory processes are more transparent and whether transparency is successful in improving regulations and the regulatory process. In other words, we need comparative state (for the US) and member state (for the EU) studies to develop metrics for the quality of regulations and the role of transparency is advancing or weakening the quality of regulations at the state (for the US) and member state (for the EU) level. The second batch of studies, described in the sixth section of this essay, would explore who uses the information currently provided at the levels of transparency currently available in regulatory processes at the European Union and federal government of the United States. Who benefits from transparency and how are they using the available transparency mechanisms?

Suggested Citation

  • Robert E. O’Connor, 2016. "Transparency and the regulatory process in Europe and the United States: two research priorities," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(9), pages 1129-1140, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:19:y:2016:i:9:p:1129-1140
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2015.1071866
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2015.1071866
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2015.1071866?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:jriskr:v:19:y:2016:i:9:p:1129-1140. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    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.