IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v13y2019i3p362-383.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technocracy, democracy, and public policy: An evaluation of public participation in retrospective regulatory review

Author

Listed:
  • Mercy B. DeMenno

Abstract

Retrospective review of existing regulations is an increasingly common aspect of the regulatory policy cycle. As with prospective regulatory policymaking, public participation is a central feature of many retrospective review initiatives. Despite its theoretical and practical significance, participation in retrospective review has received little scholarly attention. This paper presents the first systematic assessment of participation in United States retrospective regulatory review. Utilizing content analysis of an original dataset of government documents and public input produced pursuant to Executive Orders 13563, 13579, and 13610, the paper analyzes participatory institutional design, the level and composition of participants, and participation processes. The results suggest that retrospective review participation processes largely reflected the modes of stakeholder outreach and engagement employed in prospective regulatory policymaking, but resulted in comparatively low levels of participation. Consistent with the purposes enumerated in the executive orders, participation processes facilitated information exchange and were relatively representative of and responsive to stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Mercy B. DeMenno, 2019. "Technocracy, democracy, and public policy: An evaluation of public participation in retrospective regulatory review," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 362-383, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:13:y:2019:i:3:p:362-383
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12173
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12173?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Archon Fung & Erik Olin Wright, 2001. "Deepening Democracy: Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance," Politics & Society, , vol. 29(1), pages 5-41, March.
    2. Keith Naughton & Celeste Schmid & Susan Webb Yackee & Xueyong Zhan, 2009. "Understanding commenter influence during agency rule development," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(2), pages 258-277.
    3. McCubbins, Mathew D & Noll, Roger G & Weingast, Barry R, 1987. "Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 243-277, Fall.
    4. Vivien A. Schmidt, 2013. "Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union Revisited: Input, Output and ‘Throughput’," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(1), pages 2-22, March.
    5. Balla, Steven J., 1998. "Administrative Procedures and Political Control of the Bureaucracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(3), pages 663-673, September.
    6. Lutter Randall, 2013. "Regulatory policy: what role for retrospective analysis and review?," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 17-38, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jayanath Ananda & Nicholas Pawsey & Tahmid Nayeem, 2022. "Customer‐centric regulation: The case of Victorian urban water sector," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 536-556, April.

    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. John M. de Figueiredo & Edward H. Stiglitz, 2015. "Democratic Rulemaking," NBER Working Papers 21765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Edmund Malesky & Markus Taussig, 2019. "How Do Firms Feel About Participation by Their Peers in the Regulatory Design Process? An Online Survey Experiment Testing the Substantive Change and Spillover Mechanisms," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 129-150, June.
    3. Karen Bassarab & Jill K. Clark & Raychel Santo & Anne Palmer, 2019. "Finding Our Way to Food Democracy: Lessons from US Food Policy Council Governance," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 32-47.
    4. James C. Clingermayer, 2004. "Heresthetics and Happenstance: Intentional and Unintentional Exclusionary Impacts of the Zoning Decision-making Process," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(2), pages 377-388, February.
    5. Deepak Hegde & Bhaven Sampat, 2015. "Can Private Money Buy Public Science? Disease Group Lobbying and Federal Funding for Biomedical Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2281-2298, October.
    6. Mercy B. DeMenno, 2020. "Banking on burden reduction: how the global financial crisis shaped the political economy of banking regulation," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(4), pages 315-342, December.
    7. Peter Bils & Robert J. Carroll & Lawrence S. Rothenberg, 2024. "Strategic avoidance and rulemaking procedures," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 36(2), pages 156-185, April.
    8. Kwan Nok Chan & Shiwei Fan, 2021. "Friction and bureaucratic control in authoritarian regimes," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1406-1418, October.
    9. Amy McKay, 2011. "The decision to lobby bureaucrats," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 123-138, April.
    10. Nathan Favero & Amanda Rutherford, 2020. "Will the Tide Lift All Boats? Examining the Equity Effects of Performance Funding Policies in U.S. Higher Education," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 61(1), pages 1-25, February.
    11. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    12. Richard Hyman & Rebecca Gumbrell-McCormick, 2020. "(How) can international trade union organisations be democratic?," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 26(3), pages 253-272, August.
    13. Lehmann, Markus A., 2002. "Error minimization and deterrence in agency control," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 373-391, May.
    14. Christoph Engel & Luigi Mittone & Azzurra Morreale, 2024. "Outcomes or participation? Experimentally testing competing sources of legitimacy for taxation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 563-583, April.
    15. Euclid Tsakalotos, 2007. "Competitive Equilibrium and the Social Ethos: Understanding the Inegalitarian Dynamics of Liberal Market Economies," Politics & Society, , vol. 35(3), pages 427-446, September.
    16. Tonja Jacobi, 2009. "The Role of Politics and Economics in Explaining Variation in Litigation Rates in the U.S. States," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(1), pages 205-233, January.
    17. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    18. Alexander Kentikelenis & Erik Voeten, 2021. "Legitimacy challenges to the liberal world order: Evidence from United Nations speeches, 1970–2018," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 721-754, October.
    19. Pablo T. Spiller, 2003. "The Institutional Foundations of Public Policy: A Transactions Approach with Application to Argentina," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 281-306, October.
    20. Isuru Koswatte & Chandrika Fernando, 2022. "Policy Development for Crisis Management in the Context of Sri Lanka," Managing Global Transitions, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 20(3 (Fall)), pages 295-327.

    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:wly:reggov:v:13:y:2019:i:3:p:362-383. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    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.