IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/ebp5m.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Political Agency, Oversight, and Bias: The Instrumental Value of Politicized Policymaking

Author

Listed:
  • Turner, Ian R

    (Yale University)

Abstract

We develop a theory of policymaking between an agent and an overseer, with a principal whose welfare is affected by agent-overseer interactions. The agent can increase the quality of policy outcomes through costly capacity investments. Oversight and agent bias jointly determine optimal agent capacity investments. We show that when oversight improves agent investment incentives the principal always benefits from an agent with biases opposite the overseer. Competing agent-overseer biases translate into higher quality policy outcomes than the principal could induce were she monitoring the agent. Effective oversight is necessary for these incentive effects. The results imply that political principals ought to consider the nature of the broader policymaking environment when appointing agents to make policy on their behalf and when designing managerial strategies aimed at motivating agents.

Suggested Citation

  • Turner, Ian R, 2021. "Political Agency, Oversight, and Bias: The Instrumental Value of Politicized Policymaking," SocArXiv ebp5m, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:ebp5m
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/ebp5m
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6148af0d8adbd3000a6ea893/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/ebp5m?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. Fox, Justin & Stephenson, Matthew C., 2011. "Judicial Review as a Response to Political Posturing," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 397-414, May.
    2. Ryan Bubb & Patrick L. Warren, 2014. "Optimal Agency Bias and Regulatory Review," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 95-135.
    3. HUBER, JOHN D. & McCARTY, NOLAN, 2004. "Bureaucratic Capacity, Delegation, and Political Reform," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(3), pages 481-494, August.
    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. Boehmke, Frederick J. & Gailmard, Sean & Patty, John Wiggs, 2006. "Whose Ear to Bend? Information Sources and Venue Choice in Policy-Making," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 1(2), pages 139-169, March.
    6. Gilligan, Thomas W & Krehbiel, Keith, 1987. "Collective Decisionmaking and Standing Committees: An Informational Rationale for Restrictive Amendment Procedures," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 287-335, Fall.
    7. Gordon, Sanford C. & Hafer, Catherine, 2005. "Flexing Muscle: Corporate Political Expenditures as Signals to the Bureaucracy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(2), pages 245-261, May.
    8. Sean Gailmard & John W. Patty, 2007. "Slackers and Zealots: Civil Service, Policy Discretion, and Bureaucratic Expertise," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(4), pages 873-889, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ian R Turner, 2017. "Working smart and hard? Agency effort, judicial review, and policy precision," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(1), pages 69-96, January.
    2. Brian D. Feinstein & Jennifer Nou, 2023. "Strategic subdelegation," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 746-817, December.
    3. Bueno de Mesquita, Ethan & Landa, Dimitri, 2015. "Political accountability and sequential policymaking," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 95-108.
    4. Sean Gailmard, 2020. "Game theory and the study of American political development," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 335-357, December.
    5. Steven Callander & Keith Krehbiel, 2014. "Gridlock and Delegation in a Changing World," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 819-834, October.
    6. John M. de Figueiredo & Edward H. Stiglitz, 2015. "Democratic Rulemaking," NBER Working Papers 21765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Patty, John & Turner, Ian R, 2024. "Strange Bedfellows: How the Need for Good Governance Shapes Budgetary Control of Bureaucracy," OSF Preprints pnx2u, Center for Open Science.
    8. Duvanova, Dinissa, 2014. "Economic Regulations, Red Tape, and Bureaucratic Corruption in Post-Communist Economies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 298-312.
    9. Dhammika Dharmapala & Nuno Garoupa & Richard H. McAdams, 2016. "Punitive Police? Agency Costs, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Procedure," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(1), pages 105-141.
    10. Joshua A Strayhorn & Clifford J Carrubba & Micheal W Giles, 2016. "Time constraints and the opportunity costs of oversight," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(3), pages 431-460, July.
    11. Montagnes, B. Pablo & Wolton, Stephane, 2015. "Rule Versus Discretion: Regulatory Uncertainty, Firm Investment, and the Ally Principle," MPRA Paper 65047, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Vincent Anesi & Daniel J. Seidmann, 2009. "Optimal Delegation with a Finite Number of States," Discussion Papers 2009-20, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    13. Peter Grajzl, 2011. "A property rights approach to legislative delegation," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 177-200, June.
    14. Little, Andrew T., 2022. "Bayesian Explanations for Persuasion," OSF Preprints ygw8e, Center for Open Science.
    15. Christopher Carrigan, 2018. "Clarity or collaboration: Balancing competing aims in bureaucratic design," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 30(1), pages 6-44, January.
    16. Abbott, Kenneth W. & Genschel, Philipp & Snidal, Duncan & Zangl, Bernhard, 2018. "The governor's dilemma: Competence versus control in indirect governance," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Global Governance SP IV 2018-101, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Harris, Adam S. & Sigman, Rachel & Meyer-Sahling, Jan-Hinrik & Mikkelsen, Kim Sass & Schuster, Christian, 2020. "Oiling the bureaucracy? political spending, bureaucrats and the resource curse," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    18. Ryan Bubb & Patrick L. Warren, 2014. "Optimal Agency Bias and Regulatory Review," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 95-135.
    19. Hollibaugh, Gary E. & Klingler, Jonathan & Ramey, Adam, 2014. "More than a Feeling: Personality and Congressional Behavior," IAST Working Papers 14-09, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    20. Pedro P. Barros & Steffen H. Hoernig, 2018. "Sectoral Regulators and the Competition Authority: Which Relationship is Best?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 52(3), pages 451-472, May.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:ebp5m. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.