Starting from the paradox that successive waves of reforms have jeopardized the functional coherence of better regulation as a horizontal policy, this chapter highlights the challenge of meta... Show moreStarting from the paradox that successive waves of reforms have jeopardized the functional coherence of better regulation as a horizontal policy, this chapter highlights the challenge of meta-design of different appraisal procedures and institutions. Indeed, among countries with a long tradition of regulatory management systems, there is an evident proliferation of diverse better regulation objectives pursued by oversight bodies with different mandates. In order to capture the institutional coordination design in specific countries, we identified different theoretical scenarios, ranging from hierarchical coordination to ad hoc, extemporaneous coordination. By way of example, this typology has been applied to analyze how in the UK and the Netherlands better regulation policy tools, procedures and institutions are coordinated. Our analysis revealed some major differences. We show that the UK government lies closer to the hierarchical coordination extreme than the Dutch government. The latter traditionally tends to rely on positive modes of coordination, although informally the neoliberal goal of business deregulation still has a central position in the practices of the Dutch government. Besides these differences, the two governments display similarities in the use of performance metrics to reduce business compliance costs. Yet, whereas business impact targets are established through legislation in the UK, the pivotal role of the Standard Cost Model in the Netherlands is rather informal. Neither of the countries seem to have developed a strategy of coordination in terms of problem solving, which would entail the deployment of particular appraisal tools and institutions depending on a specific issue at stake. Show less
Toshkov, D.D.; Carroll, B.J.; Yesilkagit, A.K. 2021
European states responded to the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 with a variety of public policy measures. In this article we ask what can account for this variation in policy... Show moreEuropean states responded to the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 with a variety of public policy measures. In this article we ask what can account for this variation in policy responses, and we identify a number of factors related to institutions, general governance and specific health-sector related capacities, societal trust, government type, and party preferences as possible determinants. Using multivariate regression and survival analysis, we model the speed with which school closures and national lockdowns were imposed. The models suggest a number of significant and often counterintuitive relationships: more centralized countries with lower government effectiveness, freedom and societal trust, but with separate ministries of health and health ministers with medical background acted faster and more decisively. High perceived capacity might have provided false confidence to the governments, resulting in a delayed response to the early stages of the pandemic. Furthermore, more right-wing and authoritarian governments responded faster. Show less
Valid and reliable estimates of the policy preferences of political parties' supporters are essential for the study of political representation. However, such estimates are not directly available... Show moreValid and reliable estimates of the policy preferences of political parties' supporters are essential for the study of political representation. However, such estimates are not directly available from standard surveys of public opinion, which are typically representative by design only at the national level and rarely ask questions about public support for specific policies. In this article, we explore the possibility to use data from voting advice applications (VAA) to estimate the policy preferences of party supporters. To do that, first, we identify 10 questions on preferences towards issues of public policy that were asked around the same time and with similar wording in traditional surveys of public opinion and in VAAs fielded in Germany and in the Netherlands. Then we compare the VAA data disaggregated by political affiliation of the respondents to the survey data adjusted via multilevel regression modeling with poststratification (MRP). We find strong positive correlations between the estimates derived from both methods, especially after weighting the VAA data. Yet, point estimates are not always very close, and the match is sensitive to the treatment of neutral and ‘don't know’ answers. Overall, our results bode well for the validity of using VAA data in empirical research on political representation. Show less
