Dovilė Rimkutė
Biographic Data
| ID | 4379415 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Dovilė Rimkutė |
| GIVEN NAMES | Dovilė |
| FAMILY NAME | Rimkutė |
| SIGNATURE | RIMKUTĖ D |
| AFFILIATIONS | Leiden University |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-6184-7868 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 16 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 296 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 16 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2014 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 8 |
Bureaucratic Responsiveness and Legitimacy
Bureaucratic responsiveness scholarship focused on examining how independent agencies align with the expectations of political principals and professional standards. However, little is known about how citizens perceive the legitimacy of these different responsiveness behaviors. To address this gap, we draw on insights from political science, public administration, and psychology. We hypothesize that three responsiveness signals increase citizens'…
Citizens' perceptions of the legitimacy of independent agencies
Legitimacy is a central concern for independent agencies tasked with shaping policies. While expertise‐based and reputation‐sourced authority bases are assumed to be relevant for agency legitimacy, their individual and joint effects on citizens' perceptions lack comprehensive examination. To address this gap, the study integrates insights from bureaucratic politics, bureaucratic reputation, and cognitive psychology. Our survey experiment with Dut…
Emotions and Reputation Learning by Audience Networks
Audiences that observe and interact with government agencies play a crucial role in shaping these agencies' reputations. However, existing research often treats these audience networks as monolithic, overlooking the inherent diversity in their cognitive and emotional processing of reputational information. This approach fails to account for the variations in how audiences experience and evaluate agencies. To address this gap, we propose a new res…
Affective regulatory governance
Reputational pragmatism at the European Central Bank
Amidst climate change, central banks' roles have broadened, encompassing new responsibilities beyond tradition through widening interventions.This expansion offers institutional prospects yet could entail reputational risks in reconciling long-standing and evolving responsibilities.Despite widening interventions' reputational risks, a comprehensive understanding of how these shape banks' behaviourpreserving existing reputations, fostering new one…
A widening authority–legitimacy gap in EU regulatory governance? An experimental study of the European Medicines Agency’s legitimacy in health security regulation
Agencification in the EU stretches the confines of the European regulatory state to the maximum by extending to policy domains that were formerly the exclusive terrain of national institutions. Although the challenge to legitimize EU-level agencies is widely acknowledged, scant empirical research has been done on the conditions under which EU-level epistemic authority prevails or fails. To fill this gap, we examine whether EU agencies are perceiv…
When do bureaucrats respond to external demands? A theoretical framework and empirical test of bureaucratic responsiveness
Bureaucrats must balance neutral competence with responsiveness to external demands. As external demands are simultaneous and multidimensional, this study analyzes bureaucratic responsiveness according to bureaucratic actors' prioritization decisions. Using a discrete choice experiment followed by qualitative interviews in the context of EU agencies, we investigate to what extent bureaucratic responsiveness depends upon the stakeholder that expre…
A behavioral view on responsibility attribution in multi‐level governance
Multi‐level governance systems provide decision‐makers with many avenues for external responsibility attribution in response to lacking performance. This study provides a behavioral perspective that examines responsibility attribution to the national government (upward) and policy implementers (downward) as a function of performance relative to decision‐makers' aspiration levels. The study proposes that perceived accountability increases the prop…
Meeting expectations in the EU regulatory state? Regulatory communications amid conflicting institutional demands
European Union agencies are crucial institutional agents of the EU regulatory state. As such, they are faced with multiple expectations from a broad array of audiences. Reputation literature teaches us that the process of how organisations manage the expectations of their multifaceted audiences is central to organisational reputation. However, there has been little research about the diverse aspects of organisational reputation that EU agencies c…
Building organizational reputation in the European regulatory state
Organizational‐reputation literature has advanced our understanding about the U.S. regulatory state and its agencies. However, we lack contributions on what a reputational account can add to our knowledge about the European regulatory state, the strategic behavior of supranational agencies, and their endeavors to legitimize themselves in a multilevel political system. We know little of how reputation‐management strategies vary across EU agencies …
Strategic silence or regulatory talk? Regulatory agency responses to public allegations amidst the glyphosate controversy
How do regulatory agencies manoeuvre to diffuse potential risk endangering their organisational reputation in the eyes of relevant stakeholders and what explains the substantial variation in the reputational repertoire on which agencies draw to legitimise their conduct? This study relies on a bureaucratic reputation account to enhance our understanding of the strategic behaviour of regulatory agencies and their endeavours to justify their outputs…
The promise of bureaucratic reputation approaches for the EU regulatory state
Daniel Carpenter’s influential account painstakingly demonstrates the relevance of reputation to bureaucratic ‘power’ and to early institutional state-building in the US context. We argue that adopting a reputational lens provides important insights for the EU regulatory state, the evolution of its regulatory agents, and their efforts at legitimation. This contribution proposes a novel research agenda by applying core bureaucratic reputation conc…
EU Rules Beyond its Borders
The European Union (EU) is increasingly involved in its rule advancement outside its borders through a dense net of transgovernmental networks. However, we know little about the effects of these networks. This article assesses the impact of transgovernmental networks across various policy domains in the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) region. Building on a novel longitudinal dataset, we demonstrate that the effects of transgovernmental networ…
Organizational reputation and risk regulation
This article aims to explain the variation in the scientific risk assessments conducted by two regulatory agencies: the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES). To explain the merits of scientific risk assessments that have caused polarization within the EU, this article draws on bureaucratic reputation theory. The theory argues that regulators are political or…
Explaining Differences in Scientific Expertise Use
Despite the growing importance of EU regulatory agencies in European decision-making, academic literature is missing a systematic explanation of how regulatory agencies actually contend with their core tasks of providing scientific advice to EU institutions. The article contributes to the theoretical explanation of when and under what conditions different uses of scientific expertise prevail. In particular, it focuses on theoretical explanations …
How does the European Commission use scientific expertise? Results from a survey of scientific members of the Commission’s expert committees
Building organizational reputation in the European regulatory state
Organizational‐reputation literature has advanced our understanding about the U.S. regulatory state and its agencies. However, we lack contributions on what a reputational account can add to our knowledge about the European regulatory state, the strategic behavior of supranational agencies, and their endeavors to legitimize themselves in a multilevel political system. We know little of how reputation‐management strategies vary across EU agencies …
The promise of bureaucratic reputation approaches for the EU regulatory state
Daniel Carpenter’s influential account painstakingly demonstrates the relevance of reputation to bureaucratic ‘power’ and to early institutional state-building in the US context. We argue that adopting a reputational lens provides important insights for the EU regulatory state, the evolution of its regulatory agents, and their efforts at legitimation. This contribution proposes a novel research agenda by applying core bureaucratic reputation conc…
Meeting expectations in the EU regulatory state? Regulatory communications amid conflicting institutional demands
European Union agencies are crucial institutional agents of the EU regulatory state. As such, they are faced with multiple expectations from a broad array of audiences. Reputation literature teaches us that the process of how organisations manage the expectations of their multifaceted audiences is central to organisational reputation. However, there has been little research about the diverse aspects of organisational reputation that EU agencies c…
Organizational reputation and risk regulation
This article aims to explain the variation in the scientific risk assessments conducted by two regulatory agencies: the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES). To explain the merits of scientific risk assessments that have caused polarization within the EU, this article draws on bureaucratic reputation theory. The theory argues that regulators are political or…
Strategic silence or regulatory talk? Regulatory agency responses to public allegations amidst the glyphosate controversy
How do regulatory agencies manoeuvre to diffuse potential risk endangering their organisational reputation in the eyes of relevant stakeholders and what explains the substantial variation in the reputational repertoire on which agencies draw to legitimise their conduct? This study relies on a bureaucratic reputation account to enhance our understanding of the strategic behaviour of regulatory agencies and their endeavours to justify their outputs…
How does the European Commission use scientific expertise? Results from a survey of scientific members of the Commission’s expert committees
EU Rules Beyond its Borders
The European Union (EU) is increasingly involved in its rule advancement outside its borders through a dense net of transgovernmental networks. However, we know little about the effects of these networks. This article assesses the impact of transgovernmental networks across various policy domains in the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) region. Building on a novel longitudinal dataset, we demonstrate that the effects of transgovernmental networ…
A behavioral view on responsibility attribution in multi‐level governance
Multi‐level governance systems provide decision‐makers with many avenues for external responsibility attribution in response to lacking performance. This study provides a behavioral perspective that examines responsibility attribution to the national government (upward) and policy implementers (downward) as a function of performance relative to decision‐makers' aspiration levels. The study proposes that perceived accountability increases the prop…
A widening authority–legitimacy gap in EU regulatory governance? An experimental study of the European Medicines Agency’s legitimacy in health security regulation
Agencification in the EU stretches the confines of the European regulatory state to the maximum by extending to policy domains that were formerly the exclusive terrain of national institutions. Although the challenge to legitimize EU-level agencies is widely acknowledged, scant empirical research has been done on the conditions under which EU-level epistemic authority prevails or fails. To fill this gap, we examine whether EU agencies are perceiv…
Explaining Differences in Scientific Expertise Use
Despite the growing importance of EU regulatory agencies in European decision-making, academic literature is missing a systematic explanation of how regulatory agencies actually contend with their core tasks of providing scientific advice to EU institutions. The article contributes to the theoretical explanation of when and under what conditions different uses of scientific expertise prevail. In particular, it focuses on theoretical explanations …
Affective regulatory governance
Reputational pragmatism at the European Central Bank
Amidst climate change, central banks' roles have broadened, encompassing new responsibilities beyond tradition through widening interventions.This expansion offers institutional prospects yet could entail reputational risks in reconciling long-standing and evolving responsibilities.Despite widening interventions' reputational risks, a comprehensive understanding of how these shape banks' behaviourpreserving existing reputations, fostering new one…
How does the European Commission use scientific expertise? Results from a survey of scientific members of the Commission’s expert committees
Explaining Differences in Scientific Expertise Use
Despite the growing importance of EU regulatory agencies in European decision-making, academic literature is missing a systematic explanation of how regulatory agencies actually contend with their core tasks of providing scientific advice to EU institutions. The article contributes to the theoretical explanation of when and under what conditions different uses of scientific expertise prevail. In particular, it focuses on theoretical explanations …
Organizational reputation and risk regulation
This article aims to explain the variation in the scientific risk assessments conducted by two regulatory agencies: the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES). To explain the merits of scientific risk assessments that have caused polarization within the EU, this article draws on bureaucratic reputation theory. The theory argues that regulators are political or…
EU Rules Beyond its Borders
The European Union (EU) is increasingly involved in its rule advancement outside its borders through a dense net of transgovernmental networks. However, we know little about the effects of these networks. This article assesses the impact of transgovernmental networks across various policy domains in the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) region. Building on a novel longitudinal dataset, we demonstrate that the effects of transgovernmental networ…
Meeting expectations in the EU regulatory state? Regulatory communications amid conflicting institutional demands
European Union agencies are crucial institutional agents of the EU regulatory state. As such, they are faced with multiple expectations from a broad array of audiences. Reputation literature teaches us that the process of how organisations manage the expectations of their multifaceted audiences is central to organisational reputation. However, there has been little research about the diverse aspects of organisational reputation that EU agencies c…
Building organizational reputation in the European regulatory state
Organizational‐reputation literature has advanced our understanding about the U.S. regulatory state and its agencies. However, we lack contributions on what a reputational account can add to our knowledge about the European regulatory state, the strategic behavior of supranational agencies, and their endeavors to legitimize themselves in a multilevel political system. We know little of how reputation‐management strategies vary across EU agencies …
Strategic silence or regulatory talk? Regulatory agency responses to public allegations amidst the glyphosate controversy
How do regulatory agencies manoeuvre to diffuse potential risk endangering their organisational reputation in the eyes of relevant stakeholders and what explains the substantial variation in the reputational repertoire on which agencies draw to legitimise their conduct? This study relies on a bureaucratic reputation account to enhance our understanding of the strategic behaviour of regulatory agencies and their endeavours to justify their outputs…
The promise of bureaucratic reputation approaches for the EU regulatory state
Daniel Carpenter’s influential account painstakingly demonstrates the relevance of reputation to bureaucratic ‘power’ and to early institutional state-building in the US context. We argue that adopting a reputational lens provides important insights for the EU regulatory state, the evolution of its regulatory agents, and their efforts at legitimation. This contribution proposes a novel research agenda by applying core bureaucratic reputation conc…
A behavioral view on responsibility attribution in multi‐level governance
Multi‐level governance systems provide decision‐makers with many avenues for external responsibility attribution in response to lacking performance. This study provides a behavioral perspective that examines responsibility attribution to the national government (upward) and policy implementers (downward) as a function of performance relative to decision‐makers' aspiration levels. The study proposes that perceived accountability increases the prop…
A widening authority–legitimacy gap in EU regulatory governance? An experimental study of the European Medicines Agency’s legitimacy in health security regulation
Agencification in the EU stretches the confines of the European regulatory state to the maximum by extending to policy domains that were formerly the exclusive terrain of national institutions. Although the challenge to legitimize EU-level agencies is widely acknowledged, scant empirical research has been done on the conditions under which EU-level epistemic authority prevails or fails. To fill this gap, we examine whether EU agencies are perceiv…
When do bureaucrats respond to external demands? A theoretical framework and empirical test of bureaucratic responsiveness
Bureaucrats must balance neutral competence with responsiveness to external demands. As external demands are simultaneous and multidimensional, this study analyzes bureaucratic responsiveness according to bureaucratic actors' prioritization decisions. Using a discrete choice experiment followed by qualitative interviews in the context of EU agencies, we investigate to what extent bureaucratic responsiveness depends upon the stakeholder that expre…
Reputational pragmatism at the European Central Bank
Amidst climate change, central banks' roles have broadened, encompassing new responsibilities beyond tradition through widening interventions.This expansion offers institutional prospects yet could entail reputational risks in reconciling long-standing and evolving responsibilities.Despite widening interventions' reputational risks, a comprehensive understanding of how these shape banks' behaviourpreserving existing reputations, fostering new one…
Bureaucratic Responsiveness and Legitimacy
Bureaucratic responsiveness scholarship focused on examining how independent agencies align with the expectations of political principals and professional standards. However, little is known about how citizens perceive the legitimacy of these different responsiveness behaviors. To address this gap, we draw on insights from political science, public administration, and psychology. We hypothesize that three responsiveness signals increase citizens'…
Citizens' perceptions of the legitimacy of independent agencies
Legitimacy is a central concern for independent agencies tasked with shaping policies. While expertise‐based and reputation‐sourced authority bases are assumed to be relevant for agency legitimacy, their individual and joint effects on citizens' perceptions lack comprehensive examination. To address this gap, the study integrates insights from bureaucratic politics, bureaucratic reputation, and cognitive psychology. Our survey experiment with Dut…
Emotions and Reputation Learning by Audience Networks
Audiences that observe and interact with government agencies play a crucial role in shaping these agencies' reputations. However, existing research often treats these audience networks as monolithic, overlooking the inherent diversity in their cognitive and emotional processing of reputational information. This approach fails to account for the variations in how audiences experience and evaluate agencies. To address this gap, we propose a new res…
Affective regulatory governance
Political science (15 works) · Law (14 works) · Law (14 works) · Business (12 works) · Public relations (12 works) · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies (10 works) · Politics (10 works) · Public Administration (8 works) · Public Administration (8 works) · Reputation (8 works)