IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v28y2009i2p258-277.html

Understanding commenter influence during agency rule development

Author

Listed:
  • Keith Naughton

    (University of Southern California)

  • Celeste Schmid

    (University of Southern California)

  • Susan Webb Yackee

    (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

  • Xueyong Zhan

    (School of Public Economics and Administration, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics)

Abstract

We provide the first empirical assessment of commenter influence during the rule development stage of administrative rulemaking. We argue that public com-menters play a critical agenda-setting role during rule development. To test this proposition, we analyze data from 36 Department of Transportation rules and almost 500 comments. Each of these rules began with an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking-a procedure that allows us to track the formal participation of interested parties during rule development. Our analyses are supplemented by face-to-face interviews with agency officials. We find a strong agenda-setting role for early commenters-both in terms of affecting the content of future regulations and in thwarting unwanted regulations. We conclude that “early-bird” com-menters are well positioned to frame public policy debates as rules move through the regulatory process. © 2009 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Suggested Citation

  • Keith Naughton & Celeste Schmid & Susan Webb Yackee & Xueyong Zhan, 2009. "Understanding commenter influence during agency rule development," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(2), pages 258-277.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:28:y:2009:i:2:p:258-277
    DOI: 10.1002/pam.20426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/pam.20426
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/pam.20426?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. Wood, B. Dan & Waterman, Richard W., 1991. "The Dynamics of Political Control of the Bureaucracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(3), pages 801-828, September.
    2. Bachrach, Peter & Baratz, Morton S., 1962. "Two Faces of Power1," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 56(4), pages 947-952, December.
    3. Balla, Steven J., 1998. "Administrative Procedures and Political Control of the Bureaucracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 92(3), pages 663-673, September.
    4. Dorothy M. Daley, 2007. "Citizen groups and scientific decisionmaking: Does public participation influence environmental outcomes?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 349-368.
    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. Mercy B. DeMenno, 2019. "Technocracy, democracy, and public policy: An evaluation of public participation in retrospective regulatory review," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 362-383, September.
    2. Steven J. Balla & Alexander R. Beck & Elizabeth Meehan & Aryamala Prasad, 2022. "Lost in the flood?: Agency responsiveness to mass comment campaigns in administrative rulemaking," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 293-308, January.

    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. Kwan Nok Chan & Shiwei Fan, 2021. "Friction and bureaucratic control in authoritarian regimes," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1406-1418, October.
    2. Gilad, Sharon & Sulitzeanu-Kenan, Raanan & Levi-Faur, David, 2024. "Partisan Alignment and the Propensity to Choose a Job in a Government Ministry," SocArXiv ufzcj, Center for Open Science.
    3. Fuchs, Dieter, 1993. "A metatheory of the democratic process," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions and Social Change FS III 93-203, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Dave Buchanan, 1999. "Ways Ahead for Organisations: Disappointing Guidebooks," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 13(2), pages 399-402, June.
    5. Mareike Kleine, 2013. "Daniel Finke, Thomas König, Sven-Oliver Proksch and George Tsebelis. 2012. Reforming the European Union: Realizing the Impossible (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press)," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 111-115, March.
    6. Nicolai PETROVSKY, 2011. "Measuring The Performance Of Federal Agencies And Programs In The Usa: An Overview And Some Reflections," Proceedings of Administration and Public Management International Conference, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 7(1), pages 17-26, June.
    7. Jeremy Hall, 2007. "Implications of Success and Persistence for Public Sector Performance," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 281-297, September.
    8. Edmund Malesky & Markus Taussig, 2019. "How Do Firms Feel About Participation by Their Peers in the Regulatory Design Process? An Online Survey Experiment Testing the Substantive Change and Spillover Mechanisms," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(2), pages 129-150, June.
    9. Egerod, Benjamin C. K. & Stuckatz, Jan & Mueller, Michael, 2024. "Revolvers in the corporate elite," Working Papers 351, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    10. Karen Maguire, 2013. "Drill Baby Drill? Political and Market Influences on Federal Onshore Oil and Gas Leasing in the Western United States," Economics Working Paper Series 1401, Oklahoma State University, Department of Economics and Legal Studies in Business, revised Apr 2013.
    11. repec:osf:socarx:ufzcj_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Bugarin, Mauricio & Vieira, Laercio, 2008. "Benefit sharing: An incentive mechanism for social control of government expenditure," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 673-690, November.
    13. Chung, Phillip & Grogan, Colleen M. & Mosley, Jennifer E., 2012. "Residents' perceptions of effective community representation in local health decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(10), pages 1652-1659.
    14. Lewis, Jenny M., 2006. "Being around and knowing the players: Networks of influence in health policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(9), pages 2125-2136, May.
    15. de Kervenoael, Ronan & Palmer, Mark & Hallsworth, Alan, 2013. "From the outside in: Consumer anti-choice and policy implications in the mobile gaming market," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 439-449.
    16. Joao A. Ribeiro & Robert W. Scapens, 2004. "Power, ERP systems and resistance to management accounting: a case study," FEP Working Papers 141, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    17. Šálka, Jaroslav & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Hricová, Zuzana, 2016. "Factors of political power — The example of forest owners associations in Slovakia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 88-98.
    18. Bugarin, M. B., 2007. "Benefit Sharing: An Incentive Mechanism for Social Control of Government Expenditure," Insper Working Papers wpe_77, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    19. André Corrêa d’Almeida & Donald Klingner, 2008. "FEMA and the Witt Revolution: Testing the Hypothesis of “Bureaucratic Autonomy”," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 291-305, December.
    20. Liliane Manny & Mert Duygan & Manuel Fischer & Jörg Rieckermann, 2021. "Barriers to the digital transformation of infrastructure sectors," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 943-983, December.
    21. Perrons, Robert K., 2009. "The open kimono: How Intel balances trust and power to maintain platform leadership," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1300-1312, 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:wly:jpamgt:v:28:y:2009:i:2:p:258-277. 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: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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.