IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v15y1999i2p349-77.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic Instruments: Legal Structure and Political Games in Administrative Law

Author

Listed:
  • Tiller, Emerson H
  • Spiller, Pablo T

Abstract

This article presents models of strategic behavior by agencies and courts where the ability to manipulate the instruments of decision making, rather than merely selecting policy choices, allows actors to insulate their policy choices from higher level review. The theory is based on the notion that decision instruments (for example, rulemaking and adjudication for agencies, statutory interpretation and reasoning process review for courts) pose differential costs and payoffs for both the initiating and reviewing actors, each of whom have resource constraints. Because the initiating actor has the choice among instruments to make a decision (and to which a higher level reviewing actor is tied), the initiating actor can manipulate decision costs in a strategic fashion (choosing high-cost instruments to discourage higher level review, in particular). This article adds new insight into how judges and agencies engage in strategic decision making. Copyright 1999 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Tiller, Emerson H & Spiller, Pablo T, 1999. "Strategic Instruments: Legal Structure and Political Games in Administrative Law," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 349-377, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:15:y:1999:i:2:p:349-77
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pablo T Spiller & Rafael Gely, 2007. "Strategic Judicial Decision Making," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000001409, David K. Levine.
    2. George Tridimas, 2010. "Constitutional judicial review and political insurance," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 81-101, February.
    3. Marcel Boyer & Donatella Porrini, 2004. "Modelling the choice between regulation and liability in terms of social welfare," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 590-612, August.
    4. Silva, Jeovan Assis & Guimaraes, Tomas Aquino, 2021. "Factors affecting judicial review of regulatory appeals," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    5. Michael Abramowicz & Emerson H. Tiller, 2009. "Citation to Legislative History: Empirical Evidence on Positive Political and Contextual Theories of Judicial Decision Making," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 419-443, June.
    6. Holburn, Guy L.F., 2012. "Assessing and managing regulatory risk in renewable energy: Contrasts between Canada and the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 654-665.
    7. Robert J. Hume, 2007. "Administrative Appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court: The Importance of Legal Signals," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(3), pages 625-649, November.
    8. Emerson H. Tiller, 2015. "The Law and Positive Political Theory of Panel Effects," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S1), pages 35-58.
    9. Adam R. Fremeth & Guy L. F. Holburn & Richard G. Vanden Bergh, 2016. "Corporate Political Strategy in Contested Regulatory Environments," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 272-284, December.
    10. John M. de Figueiredo, 2009. "Integrated Political Strategy," NBER Working Papers 15053, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. John R. Wright, 2010. "Ambiguous Statutes and Judicial Deference To Federal Agencies," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 217-245, April.

    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:oup:jleorg:v:15:y:1999:i:2:p:349-77. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    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.