Biased politicians and independent agencies

Bibliographic Data

ID6299869
AuthorsAmy Pond (0000-0002-6908-2791, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume33
Issue3
Pages279-299
Publication date2021-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Theoretical Politics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0951-6298 • E-ISSN: 1460-3667
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/09516298211003129
OpenAlexW3154266536
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited58

Some agencies derive legitimacy from their political independence: for example, political meddling in monetary policy is problematic, as politicians favor short-term electoral goals over long-term economic stability. Nevertheless, the process of agency reform, even for agencies that are thought to be independent, is seldom onerous and often follows standard legislative procedures. Furthermore, citizens frequently lack expertise to hold policymakers accountable for new bureaucratic policies. Why then do politicians abstain from exercising influence through agency reform? This article delineates an informational cost to agency reform. In issue areas where politicians are frequently biased and citizens cannot perfectly observe the quality of agency reforms, citizens assume that reforms serve the politicians’ self-interest and punish politicians for any reform at all. Agency independence then comes more from informational challenges than from institutional design. This article develops a formal model to explain when agencies are reformed and when they retain their independence

Agency (philosophy · Bureaucracy · Economics · Independence (probability theory · Law and economics · Legislature · Legitimacy · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Public economics · Sociology · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Local Government Finance and Decentralization · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access