IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buspol/v22y2020i1p25-51_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The politics of bank structural reform: Business power and agenda setting in the United Kingdom, France, and Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Howarth, David
  • James, Scott

Abstract

Following the financial crisis, the United Kingdom introduced major structural reforms to address concern about Too-Big-To-Fail (TBTF) banks, while France and Germany adopted much weaker reforms. This is puzzling given the presence of large universal banks engaged in market making activities in all three countries, which suffered significant losses during the international financial crisis, and given the commitments to reform made by political leaders in all three countries. The paper explains this policy divergence by analysing how dynamics of agenda setting contributed to the emergence of policy windows on structural reform. We explain the United Kingdom's decision to delegate the process to an independent commission as an example of venue shifting which helped to insulate the process from industry framing, and resulted in “conflict expansion†by mobilizing a wider coalition of actors in support of bank ringfencing. By contrast, in France and Germany the agenda was tightly managed through existing institutional venues, enabling industry to resist the framing of the issue around TBTF and limiting the role of non-business groups—a process we label as “conflict contraction.†We argue that analysis of agenda setting dynamics provides new insights into the cross-national variability of business power.

Suggested Citation

  • Howarth, David & James, Scott, 2020. "The politics of bank structural reform: Business power and agenda setting in the United Kingdom, France, and Germany," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 25-51, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:buspol:v:22:y:2020:i:1:p:25-51_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1469356919000053/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:buspol:v:22:y:2020:i:1:p:25-51_2. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bap .

    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.