IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/7uw3j.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Policymaking under Influence

Author

Listed:
  • Blumenthal, Benjamin

Abstract

Policymaking is a fraught process: politicians often fail to change the status quo despite their best efforts. Influential players, e.g. interest groups, bureaucrats or legislators, can make politicians’ proposals more or less likely to be implemented. I consider a model of policymaking with an imperfectly effective politician and an influential player who, through costly effort, can make the politician’s proposal more or less likely to replace the status quo. Introducing and exploiting a simple taxonomy of influential players’ preferences over policies, I show how and when threats, sabotage, or support can affect policymaking, depending on the influential player’s cost and strength of effort. Subsequently, I show that the relationship between the influential player’s ability to shape proposals and her cost of effort can be non-monotonic, discuss empirical implications of the model, highlight the importance of status quo policies, and connect this work to related strands of the literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Blumenthal, Benjamin, 2022. "Policymaking under Influence," SocArXiv 7uw3j, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:7uw3j
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/7uw3j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/636ce9c364d67e0629a07a47/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/7uw3j?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. Peter Buisseret & Dan Bernhardt, 2017. "Dynamics of Policymaking: Stepping Back to Leap Forward, Stepping Forward to Keep Back," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(4), pages 820-835, October.
    2. Schultz, Kenneth A., 1999. "Do Democratic Institutions Constrain or Inform? Contrasting Two Institutional Perspectives on Democracy and War," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 233-266, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gersbach, Hans & Jackson, Matthew O. & Muller, Philippe & Tejada, Oriol, 2023. "Electoral competition with costly policy changes: A dynamic perspective," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    2. Philip B. K. Potter, 2007. "Does Experience Matter?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(3), pages 351-378, June.
    3. Lee, Barton E., 2022. "Gridlock, leverage, and policy bundling," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    4. Michael Horowitz & Rose McDermott & Allan C. Stam, 2005. "Leader Age, Regime Type, and Violent International Relations," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(5), pages 661-685, October.
    5. Zapal, Jan, 2020. "Simple Markovian equilibria in dynamic spatial legislative bargaining," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    6. Muhammet A. Bas, 2012. "Measuring Uncertainty in International Relations: Heteroskedastic Strategic Models," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(5), pages 490-520, November.
    7. Abigail Post, 2019. "Flying to Fail: Costly Signals and Air Power in Crisis Bargaining," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(4), pages 869-895, April.
    8. Morelli, Massimo & Osnabrügge, Moritz & Vannoni, Matia, 2020. "Legislative Activity and Private Benefits: A Natural Experiment in New Zealand," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 565-570, July.
    9. David H. Clark & Patrick M. Regan, 2003. "Opportunities to Fight," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(1), pages 94-115, February.
    10. Jelnov, Artyom & Tauman, Yair & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2018. "Confronting an enemy with unknown preferences: Deterrer or provocateur?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 124-143.
    11. Hülya Eraslan & Kirill S. Evdokimov & Jan Zápal, 2022. "Dynamic Legislative Bargaining," Springer Books, in: Emin Karagözoğlu & Kyle B. Hyndman (ed.), Bargaining, chapter 0, pages 151-175, Springer.
    12. Fiona McGillivray & Alastair Smith, 2005. "The Impact of Leadership Turnover and Domestic Institutions on International Cooperation," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 49(5), pages 639-660, October.
    13. Kristopher W. Ramsay, 2004. "Politics at the Water’s Edge," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(4), pages 459-486, August.
    14. Andrew P. Owsiak, 2019. "Foundations for integrating the democratic and territorial peace arguments," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(1), pages 63-87, January.
    15. Xinyuan Dai, 2006. "The Conditional Nature of Democratic Compliance," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 50(5), pages 690-713, October.
    16. Darren Filson & Suzanne Werner, 2007. "Sensitivity to Costs of Fighting versus Sensitivity to Losing the Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 51(5), pages 691-714, October.
    17. Kathryn Hedgecock & Lauren Sukin, 2023. "Responding to Uncertainty: The Importance of Covertness in Support for Retaliation to Cyber and Kinetic Attacks," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 67(10), pages 1873-1903, November.
    18. Brian Lai, 2004. "The Effects of Different Types of Military Mobilization on the Outcome of International Crises," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(2), pages 211-229, April.
    19. Jelnov, Artyom & Tauman, Yair & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2017. "Attacking the unknown weapons of a potential bomb builder: The impact of intelligence on the strategic interaction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 177-189.
    20. Matthew Hauenstein, 2020. "The conditional effect of audiences on credibility," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(3), pages 422-436, May.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:7uw3j. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.