IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v20y2004i2p458-483.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Influencing Agencies Through Pivotal Political Institutions

Author

Listed:
  • Guy L. F. Holburn

Abstract

We draw on the positive political theory and campaign finance literatures to examine how interest groups allocate influence activities (e.g., monetary donations, lobbying) across multiple government institutions when seeking more favorable agency policy decisions. By modeling agency behavior in the context of legislative oversight, we derive testable predictions about the political conditions under which an interest group will influence (1) only the agency, (2) the legislature and/or executive instead of the agency, and (3) the legislature or executive in addition to the agency in order to induce a shift in regulatory policy. One implication of our conclusions relating to (2) and (3) is that empirical studies seeking to identify a relationship between electoral campaign contributions and public policy using data on legislative votes are potentially misspecified. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Guy L. F. Holburn, 2004. "Influencing Agencies Through Pivotal Political Institutions," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 458-483, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:20:y:2004:i:2:p:458-483
    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. Roland Königsgruber, 2010. "A political economy of accounting standard setting," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 14(4), pages 277-295, November.
    2. Daniel J. Blake & Srividya Jandhyala, 2019. "Managing Policy Reversals: Consequences for Firm Performance," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 111-128, June.
    3. Kaufhold, Ann-Katrin & Langenbucher, Katja & Blank, Patrick & Krahnen, Jan Pieter, 2021. "BaFin (in)dependence - a reform proposal," SAFE White Paper Series 82, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    4. Estache, Antonio & Wren-Lewis, Liam, 2010. "What Anti-Corruption Policy Can Learn from Theories of Sector Regulation," CEPR Discussion Papers 8082, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Kshitij Awasthi & Rejie George, 2021. "Influence Capital in Boards: a study of ex-bureaucrats in India," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1525-1559, December.
    6. Croci, Ettore & Pantzalis, Christos & Park, Jung Chul & Petmezas, Dimitris, 2017. "The role of corporate political strategies in M&As," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 260-287.
    7. John M. de Figueiredo, 2004. "The Timing, Intensity, and Composition of Interest Group Lobbying: An Analysis of Structural Policy Windows in the States," NBER Working Papers 10588, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Jeffrey Macher & John Mayo, 2012. "The World of Regulatory Influence," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 59-79, February.
    9. John de Figueiredo, "undated". "The Timing, Intensity, and Composition of Interest Group Lobbying: An Analysis of Structural Policy Windows in the States," American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings 1082, American Law & Economics Association.
    10. Rodolphe Durand & Robert M. Grant & Tammy L. Madsen & Sinziana Dorobantu & Aseem Kaul & Bennet Zelner, 2017. "Nonmarket strategy research through the lens of new institutional economics: An integrative review and future directions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 114-140, January.
    11. John M. de Figueiredo & Brian Kelleher Richter, 2013. "Advancing the Empirical Research on Lobbying," NBER Working Papers 19698, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Deepak Somaya & Christine A. McDaniel, 2012. "Tribunal Specialization and Institutional Targeting in Patent Enforcement," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 869-887, June.
    13. Bonardi, Jean-Philippe & Holburn, Guy & Vanden Bergh, Rick, 2006. "Nonmarket performance: Evidence from U.S. electric utilities," MPRA Paper 14437, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Amy McKay, 2011. "The decision to lobby bureaucrats," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 123-138, April.
    15. Sérgio Augusto Pereira Bastos & Teresia Diana Lewe van Aduard de Macedo Soares, 2014. "Management of Corporate Political Strategies: the Case of Light," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 11(2), pages 62-86, March.
    16. Cosmina Lelia Voinea & Hans Kranenburg, 2018. "Feeling the Squeeze: Nonmarket Institutional Pressures and Firm Nonmarket Strategies," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 58(5), pages 705-741, October.

    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:20:y:2004:i:2:p:458-483. 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.