Skip to main content

Explaining Delegation Patterns

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Regulatory Delegation in the European Union

Part of the book series: European Administrative Governance ((EAGOV))

  • 255 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter formulates conjectures to answer the research questions specified in Chapter 1 and spells out their theoretical underpinning. Each research question, related to the sectoral variation of delegation patterns and their delegation over time, is addressed with a series of conjectures. The conjectures involve an adaptation of the principal-agent framework to complex delegation configurations and include feedback loop mechanisms. The chapter then spells out the theoretical background of the conjectures, which draws into the concept of institutional complementarity (related to the Variety of Capitalism theory) and is rooted into historical and rational-choice institutionalism. It emphasizes the role of functional pressure and theorizes how the functional factor interacts with institutional framework and power-distributional considerations in the processes of institutional design and institutional change. Finally, the chapter ends with a synthetic overview of the elements composing the conjectured delegation patterns and processes of institutional change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Boeger, N., & Corkin, J. (2012). How regulatory networks shaped institutional reform under the EU telecoms framework. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 14, 49–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boeger, N., & Corkin, J. (2013). Are expert networks driving the trend towards soft transnational coordination? In P. Jurcys, P. Kjaer, & R. Yatsunami (Eds.), Regulatory hybridisation in the transnational sphere (pp. 149–170). Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, T., & Larsson, T. (2007). Introduction: The role of committees in the policy-process of the European Union. In T. Christiansen & T. Larsson (Eds.), The role of committees in the policy-process of the European Union. Legislation, implementation and deliberation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, T., Larsson, T., & Schaefer, G. (2007). Conclusion. In T. Christiansen & T. Larsson (Eds.), The role of committees in the policy-process of the European Union. Legislation, implementation and deliberation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehousse, R. (2008). Delegation of powers in the European Union: The need for a multi-principals model. West European Politics, 31(4), 789–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douillet, A.-C., & de Maillard, J. (2010). Les comités d’experts: une ressource institutionnelle pas toujours maîtrisée. Politique européenne, 32(3), 77–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franchino, F. (2007). The powers of the union: Delegation in the EU. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In P. A. Hall & D. Soskice (Eds.), Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hancké, B., Rhodes, M., & Thatcher, M. (2007). Introduction: Beyond varieties of capitalism. In B. Hancké, M. Rhodes, & M. Thatcher (Eds.), Beyond varieties of capitalism. Conflict, contradictions and complementarities in the European economy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Heclo, H. (1974). Modern social politics in Britain and Sweden: From relief to income maintenance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelemen, D. R. (2002). The politics of ‘Eurocratic’ structure and the new European agencies. West European Politics, 25(4), 93–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelemen, D. R., & Tarrant, A. (2011). The political foundations of the Eurocracy. West European Politics, 34(5), 922–947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, alternatives and public policies (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J. (1995). Models, interpretations, and theories: Constructing explanations of institutional emergence and change. In J. Knight & I. Sened (Eds.), Explaining social institutions. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, S. D. (1988). Sovereignty: An institutional perspective. Comparative Political Studies, 21(1), 66–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsson, T., & Murk, J. (2007). The Commission’s relations with expert advisory groups. In T. Christiansen & T. Larsson (Eds.), The role of committees in the policy-process of the European Union, legislation, implementation and deliberation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L. L. (1992). Interests, power, and multilateralism. International Organization, 46(4), 765–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCubbins, M. D., & Schwartz, T. (1984). Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 28(1), 165–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D., & Silberberg, E. (1987). Ideology and legislator shirking. Economic Inquiry, 25(1), 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (1996). The path to European integration a historical institutionalist analysis. Comparative Political Studies, 29(2), 123–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. The American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time: History, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Robert, C. (2003). L’expertise comme mode d’administration communautaire: entre logiques technocratiques et stratégies d’alliance. Politique européenne, 11(3), 57–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skocpol, T. (1992). Protecting soldiers and mothers: The political origins of social policy in United States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snidal, D. (1996). Political economy and international institutions. International Review of Law and Economics, 16, 121–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thatcher, M., & Coen, D. (2008). Reshaping European regulatory space: An evolutionary analysis. West European Politics, 31(4), 806–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thatcher, M., & Stone Sweet, A. (2002). Theory and practice of delegation to non-majoritarian institutions. West European Politics, 25(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G. (2002). Veto players: How political institutions work. New York: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and the Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mathieu, E. (2016). Explaining Delegation Patterns. In: Regulatory Delegation in the European Union. European Administrative Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57835-8_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics