IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Sachverständige und der Einfluss von Expertise auf Reformen: Eine räumliche Analyse der Föderalismusreform II

  • Thomas König
  • Bernd Luig
  • Stephan Marc Solomon
Registered author(s):

    This article sheds light on the relationship between politicians and scientific advisors in the second stage of reform of Germany's fiscal federalism. Based on the principal agent theory and a specific model presented by Bueno de Mesquita we derive two hypotheses. Concretely, we expect that policy change depends on both the homogeneity of the experts' signals (H1) and the strength of the experts' signals independently of their preferred policies (H2). For an empirical investigation, we exploit a dataset that includes information about the status quo, the experts' positions and the degree of policy change relating to 416 conflict issues. According to two separate questionnaires in the policy advisory process we differentiate between the fiscal reform in narrower sense and the administrative reform. Our findings show that H1 and H2 have explanatory power for the partly far-reaching fiscal reform, whereas only H1 explains the "fig leaf" of administrative reform. Copyright 2010 die Autoren. Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik 2010 Verein für Socialpolitik.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Verein für Socialpolitik in its journal Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik.

    Volume (Year): 11 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 3 (08)
    Pages: 307-323

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:bla:perwir:v:11:y:2010:i:3:p:307-323
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    Order Information: Web:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Battaglini Marco, 2004. "Policy Advice with Imperfectly Informed Experts," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-34, April.
    2. Wolfgang Franz, 2000. "Wirtschaftspolitische Beratung: Reminiszenzen und Reflexionen," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 1(1), pages 53-71, 02.
    3. Krishna, Vijay & Morgan, John, 2004. "The art of conversation: eliciting information from experts through multi-stage communication," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 147-179, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:perwir:v:11:y:2010:i:3:p:307-323. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

    or (Christopher F. Baum)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.