Claire A Dunlop, Jonathan C Kamkhaji, Claudio M Radaelli, Gaia Taffoni
{"title":"衡量设计多样性:奥斯特罗姆规则类型的新应用。","authors":"Claire A Dunlop, Jonathan C Kamkhaji, Claudio M Radaelli, Gaia Taffoni","doi":"10.1111/psj.12440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We draw on the Institutional Grammar Tool's rule types to empirically analyze the design of four major procedural regulatory instruments in the 27 member states of the European Union and the UK. They are: consultation, regulatory impact assessment, freedom of information, and the Ombudsman. By adopting the Institutional Grammar Tool as conceptual lens we end up with a single measurement template applicable to a variety of action situations. We derive measures that are conceptually robust and suitable for comparative analysis. With original data gathered on the official legal base in the 28 cases, we carry out principal components analysis. We identify design patterns across countries and instruments; the specialization of each instrument in terms of rule type; and the components that best explain cross-country variation. In the conclusions we argue that to reframe the design features of the four instruments in conceptual, theoretical categories is not simply a taxonomical exercise but it extends to the territory of comparative policy analysis, practice and reform.</p>","PeriodicalId":48154,"journal":{"name":"Policy Studies Journal","volume":"50 2","pages":"432-452"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/psj.12440","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring design diversity: A new application of Ostrom's rule types.\",\"authors\":\"Claire A Dunlop, Jonathan C Kamkhaji, Claudio M Radaelli, Gaia Taffoni\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/psj.12440\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We draw on the Institutional Grammar Tool's rule types to empirically analyze the design of four major procedural regulatory instruments in the 27 member states of the European Union and the UK. They are: consultation, regulatory impact assessment, freedom of information, and the Ombudsman. By adopting the Institutional Grammar Tool as conceptual lens we end up with a single measurement template applicable to a variety of action situations. We derive measures that are conceptually robust and suitable for comparative analysis. With original data gathered on the official legal base in the 28 cases, we carry out principal components analysis. We identify design patterns across countries and instruments; the specialization of each instrument in terms of rule type; and the components that best explain cross-country variation. In the conclusions we argue that to reframe the design features of the four instruments in conceptual, theoretical categories is not simply a taxonomical exercise but it extends to the territory of comparative policy analysis, practice and reform.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48154,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy Studies Journal\",\"volume\":\"50 2\",\"pages\":\"432-452\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/psj.12440\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy Studies Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12440\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/7/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Studies Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12440","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Measuring design diversity: A new application of Ostrom's rule types.
We draw on the Institutional Grammar Tool's rule types to empirically analyze the design of four major procedural regulatory instruments in the 27 member states of the European Union and the UK. They are: consultation, regulatory impact assessment, freedom of information, and the Ombudsman. By adopting the Institutional Grammar Tool as conceptual lens we end up with a single measurement template applicable to a variety of action situations. We derive measures that are conceptually robust and suitable for comparative analysis. With original data gathered on the official legal base in the 28 cases, we carry out principal components analysis. We identify design patterns across countries and instruments; the specialization of each instrument in terms of rule type; and the components that best explain cross-country variation. In the conclusions we argue that to reframe the design features of the four instruments in conceptual, theoretical categories is not simply a taxonomical exercise but it extends to the territory of comparative policy analysis, practice and reform.
期刊介绍:
As the principal outlet for the Public Policy Section of the American Political Science Association and for the Policy Studies Organization (PSO), the Policy Studies Journal (PSJ) is the premier channel for the publication of public policy research. PSJ is best characterized as an outlet for theoretically and empirically grounded research on policy process and policy analysis. More specifically, we aim to publish articles that advance public policy theory, explicitly articulate its methods of data collection and analysis, and provide clear descriptions of how their work advances the literature.