IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucd/wpaper/200911.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mapping Specialisation and Fragmentation of Regulatory Bodies

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Rommel

    (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

  • Joery Matthys

    (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

  • Koen Verhoest

    (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven)

Abstract

The objective of the Flemish database is to determine the current level of proliferation of regulatory bodies and to map how regulatory regimes are structured (i.e. what kind of organizations are involved and what are their characteristics?). This paper explores whether there are ‘groups’ of regulators who share certain characteristics with other members of the same group, but differ from other groups. In specific, we test whether the sector in which a body is active and the level of government to which it belongs, have an impact on the organisational form of the body and the tasks it performs. We find that economic regulators differ significantly from other areas. They are more insulated from politicians, are more specialised and seem to have a relatively strong legal mandate. The level of government seems to be a relevant explanatory factor as well. Federal bodies are more insulated from government than other levels. In addition, they are more specialised in regulation and have a rather limited legal mandate. The results confirm the relevance of comparing different regulatory areas and levels of government.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Rommel & Joery Matthys & Koen Verhoest, 2009. "Mapping Specialisation and Fragmentation of Regulatory Bodies," Working Papers 200911, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucd:wpaper:200911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ucd.ie/geary/static/publications/workingpapers/gearywp200911.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2009
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thor O. Thoresen, 2004. "Reduced Tax Progressivity in Norway in the Nineties: The Effect from Tax Changes," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(4), pages 487-506, August.
    2. Bargain, Olivier & Orsini, Kristian, 2006. "In-work policies in Europe: Killing two birds with one stone?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 667-697, December.
    3. Anthony Barnes Atkinson, 2005. "EUROMOD and the Development of EU Social Policy," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 467, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. François Bourguignon & Amedeo Spadaro, 2006. "Microsimulation as a tool for evaluating redistribution policies," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, pages 77-106.
    5. Immervoll, Herwig & Levy, Horacio & Lietz, Christine & Mantovani, Daniela & O'Donoghue, Cathal & Sutherland, Holly & Verbist, Gerlinde, 2005. "Household Incomes and Redistribution in the European Union: Quantifying the Equalising Properties of Taxes and Benefits," IZA Discussion Papers 1824, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    6. Tim Callan & A. Van Soest & John R. Walsh, 2007. "Tax Structure and Female Labour Market Participation: Evidence from Ireland," Papers WP208, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    7. Olivier Bargain, 2004. "Aides au retour à l'emploi et activité des femmes en couple," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 88(1), pages 59-87.
    8. Stephen Jenkins & Philippe Kerm, 2005. "Accounting for income distribution trends: A density function decomposition approach," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, pages 43-61.
    9. Stanislav Kolenikov & Anthony Shorrocks, 2005. "A Decomposition Analysis of Regional Poverty in Russia," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 25-46, February.
    10. Kakwani, Nanak C, 1977. "Applications of Lorenz Curves in Economic Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(3), pages 719-727, April.
    11. Milanovic, Branko, 1994. "Income Tax Progression and Redistributive Effect: The Influence of Changes in the Pre-tax Income Distribution: Comment," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 49(1), pages 126-133.
    12. Atkinson, Tony & Cantillon, Bea & Marlier, Eric & Nolan, Brian, 2002. "Social Indicators: The EU and Social Inclusion," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199253494.
    13. repec:adr:anecst:y:2011:i:101-102:p:02 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. John Creedy & Guyonne Kalb & Rosanna Scutella, 2006. "Income distribution in discrete hours behavioural microsimulation models: An illustration," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 4(1), pages 57-76, April.
    15. Marja Riihelä & Risto Sullström & Ilpo Suoniemi & Matti Tuomala, 2001. "Recent Trends in Income Inequality in Finland," Working Papers 0106, University of Tampere, School of Management, Economics.
    16. Callan, Tim & Walsh, John, 2006. "Assessing the impact of tax/transfer policy changes on poverty: methodological issues and some European evidence," EUROMOD Working Papers EM1/06, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    17. Sheldon Danziger, 1980. "Do Working Wives Increase Family Income Inequality?," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 15(3), pages 444-451.
    18. Shorrocks, A F, 1982. "Inequality Decomposition by Factor Components," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 193-211, January.
    19. Herwig Immervoll & Horacio Levy & Christine Lietz & Daniela Mantovani & Holly Sutherland, 2006. "The sensitivity of poverty rates to macro-level changes in the European Union," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 181-199, March.
    20. Sutherland, Holly, 2001. "EUROMOD: an integrated European benefit-tax model: final report," EUROMOD Working Papers EM9/01, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    21. Jenkins, Stephen P, 1995. "Accounting for Inequality Trends: Decomposition Analyses for the UK, 1971-86," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 62(245), pages 29-63, February.
    22. Lambert, Peter J & Pfahler, Wilhelm, 1992. "Income Tax Progression and Redistributive Effect: The Influence of Changes in the Pre-tax Income Distribution," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 47(1), pages 1-16.
    23. Immervoll, Herwig, 2004. "Falling up the stairs: an exploration of the effects of 'bracket creep' on household incomes," EUROMOD Working Papers EM3/04, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    24. Brian Nolan & Bertrand Maitre, 2000. "A Comparative Perspective on Trends in Income Inequality in Ireland," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 31(4), pages 329-350.
    25. Mantovani, Daniela & Sutherland, Holly, 2003. "Social indicators and other income statistics using the EUROMOD baseline: a comparison with Eurostat and National Statistics," EUROMOD Working Papers EM1/03, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    26. Tom Clark & Andrew Leicester, 2004. "Inequality and two decades of British tax and benefit reform," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, pages 129-158.
    27. Bruno Jeandidier & Frédéric Berger, 2003. "Accompagner une réforme fiscale : avec une prime pour l’emploi ou avec une hausse des allocations familiales ?," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, pages 103-119.
    28. Lerman, Robert I & Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 1985. "Income Inequality Effects by Income," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(1), pages 151-156, February.
    29. Olivier Bargain & Isabelle Terraz, 2003. "Évaluation et mise en perspective des effets incitatifs et redistributifs de la Prime pour l'Emploi," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, pages 121-147.
    30. Dardanoni, Valentino & Lambert, Peter J., 2002. "Progressivity comparisons," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 99-122.
    31. Jakobsson, Ulf, 1976. "On the measurement of the degree of progression," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 161-168.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:ucd:wpaper:200911. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Geary Tech). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/geucdie.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.