IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v64y2020i3p634-648.html

Policymaking with Multiple Agencies

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Bils

Abstract

Authority over related policy issues is often dispersed among multiple government agencies. In this article, I study when Congress should delegate to multiple agencies, and how shared regulatory space complicates agency decision making. To do so, I develop a formal model of decentralized policymaking with two agencies that incorporates information acquisition and information sharing, delineating situations where legislators should and should not prefer multiple agencies. Greater divergence between the agencies' ideal points distorts information sharing and policy choices, but it may increase the amount of information acquisition. Congress achieves better policy outcomes by delegating authority to both agencies if the agencies have strong policy disagreements. If the agencies have similar policy preferences, however, then Congress may want to consolidate authority within one agency because this approach mitigates free‐riding and takes advantage of returns to scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Bils, 2020. "Policymaking with Multiple Agencies," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 634-648, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:64:y:2020:i:3:p:634-648
    DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12474
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12474
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ajps.12474?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. Callander, Steven, 2011. "Searching for Good Policies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(4), pages 643-662, November.
    2. Joshua D. Clinton & Anthony Bertelli & Christian R. Grose & David E. Lewis & David C. Nixon, 2012. "Separated Powers in the United States: The Ideology of Agencies, Presidents, and Congress," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 341-354, April.
    3. Shin, Dongsoo, 2008. "Information acquisition and optimal project management," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 1032-1043, July.
    4. Michael M. Ting, 2003. "A Strategic Theory of Bureaucratic Redundancy," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(2), pages 274-292, April.
    5. Sean Farhang & Miranda Yaver, 2016. "Divided Government and the Fragmentation of American Law," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 60(2), pages 401-417, April.
    6. Moe, Terry M, 1990. "Political Institutions: The Neglected Side of the Story," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(0), pages 213-253.
    7. Steven Shavell, 1994. "Acquisition and Disclosure of Information Prior to Sale," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(1), pages 20-36, Spring.
    8. Paul R. Milgrom, 1981. "Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 380-391, Autumn.
    9. Gailmard, Sean & Patty, John W., 2019. "Giving Advice Versus Making Decisions: Transparency, Information, and Delegation," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 471-488, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ba, Cuimin & Gindin, Alice, 2023. "A multi-agent model of misspecified learning with overconfidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 315-338.

    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. Bueno de Mesquita, Ethan & Landa, Dimitri, 2015. "Political accountability and sequential policymaking," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 95-108.
    2. Shuo Liu & Dimitri Migrow, 2019. "Designing organizations in volatile markets," ECON - Working Papers 319, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Alexander E. Saak, 2017. "The Value of Delegated Quality Control," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 309-335, June.
    4. Gabriele Gratton & Richard Holden & Anton Kolotilin, 2015. "Timing Information Flows," Discussion Papers 2015-16, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    5. Claude Fluet & Thomas Lanzi, 2021. "Cross-Examination," Working Papers of BETA 2021-40, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    6. Tianle Song, 2022. "Quality Disclosure and Product Selection," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 323-346, June.
    7. Yeon-Koo Che & Navin Kartik, 2009. "Opinions as Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(5), pages 815-860, October.
    8. Dahm, Matthias & González, Paula & Porteiro, Nicolás, 2018. "The enforcement of mandatory disclosure rules," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 21-32.
    9. Mitja Kovac & Rok Spruk, 2019. "Does the ban on trans-fats improve public health? In search of the optimal policy response," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 258-281, June.
    10. Xu Guan & Baoshan Liu & Ying‐ju Chen & Hongwei Wang, 2020. "Inducing Supply Chain Transparency through Supplier Encroachment," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(3), pages 725-749, March.
    11. Oliver Board, 2009. "Competition And Disclosure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 197-213, March.
    12. Zhao, Ming & Dong, Ciwei & Cheng, T.C.E., 2018. "Quality disclosure strategies for small business enterprises in a competitive marketplace," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(1), pages 218-229.
    13. Kwon, Illoong & Jun, Daesung, 2015. "Information disclosure and peer effects in the use of antibiotics," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-16.
    14. Bhattacharya, Sourav & Goltsman, Maria & Mukherjee, Arijit, 2018. "On the optimality of diverse expert panels in persuasion games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 345-363.
    15. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell, 2012. "Mandatory Versus Voluntary Disclosure of Product Risks," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 360-379.
    16. Ting Liu & Monic Jiayin Sun, 2007. "Informal Payments in Developing Countries' Public Health Sectors¤," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2007-032, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    17. Charles Cameron & John M. de Figueiredo, 2020. "Quitting in Protest: Presidential Policymaking and Civil Service Response," NBER Working Papers 26944, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Skreta, Vasiliki & Veldkamp, Laura, 2009. "Ratings shopping and asset complexity: A theory of ratings inflation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(5), pages 678-695, July.
    19. Jeremy Bertomeu & Davide Cianciaruso, 2018. "Verifiable disclosure," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(4), pages 1011-1044, June.
    20. Mathias Dewatripont & Jean Tirole, 1999. "Advocates," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(1), pages 1-39, February.

    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:wly:amposc:v:64:y:2020:i:3:p:634-648. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.