How Do Ideas Shape National Preferences? The Financial Transaction Tax in Ireland

N. Hardiman, Saliha Metinsoy
{"title":"How Do Ideas Shape National Preferences? The Financial Transaction Tax in Ireland","authors":"N. Hardiman, Saliha Metinsoy","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3060351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"European countries have been required to formulate a national preference in relation to the EU Financial Transaction Tax. The two leading approaches to explaining how the financial sector makes its views felt in the political process – the structural power of the financial services sector based on potential disinvestment, and its instrumental power arising from direct political lobbying – fall short of providing a comprehensive account. The missing link is how and why policy-makers might be willing to adopt the priorities of key sectors of the financial services industry. We outline how two levels of ideational power might be at work in shaping outcomes, using Ireland as a case study. We argue firstly that background systems of shared knowledge that are institutionalized in policy networks generated broad ideational convergence between the financial sector and policymakers over the priorities of industrial policy in general. Secondly, and against that backdrop, debate over specific policy choices can leave room for a wider range of disagreement and indeed political and ideational contestation. Irish policymakers proved responsive to industry interests in the case of the FTT, but not for the reasons normally given. This work seeks to link literatures in two fields of inquiry. It poses questions for liberal intergovernmentalism in suggesting that the translation of structurally grounded material interests into national policy preferences is far from automatic, and argues that this is mediated by ideational considerations that are often under-estimated. It also contributes to our understanding of how constructivist explanations of policy outcomes work in practice, through a detailed case study of how material and ideational interests interact.","PeriodicalId":414741,"journal":{"name":"Econometric Modeling: Financial Markets Regulation eJournal","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Econometric Modeling: Financial Markets Regulation eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3060351","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

European countries have been required to formulate a national preference in relation to the EU Financial Transaction Tax. The two leading approaches to explaining how the financial sector makes its views felt in the political process – the structural power of the financial services sector based on potential disinvestment, and its instrumental power arising from direct political lobbying – fall short of providing a comprehensive account. The missing link is how and why policy-makers might be willing to adopt the priorities of key sectors of the financial services industry. We outline how two levels of ideational power might be at work in shaping outcomes, using Ireland as a case study. We argue firstly that background systems of shared knowledge that are institutionalized in policy networks generated broad ideational convergence between the financial sector and policymakers over the priorities of industrial policy in general. Secondly, and against that backdrop, debate over specific policy choices can leave room for a wider range of disagreement and indeed political and ideational contestation. Irish policymakers proved responsive to industry interests in the case of the FTT, but not for the reasons normally given. This work seeks to link literatures in two fields of inquiry. It poses questions for liberal intergovernmentalism in suggesting that the translation of structurally grounded material interests into national policy preferences is far from automatic, and argues that this is mediated by ideational considerations that are often under-estimated. It also contributes to our understanding of how constructivist explanations of policy outcomes work in practice, through a detailed case study of how material and ideational interests interact.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
思想如何影响国家偏好?爱尔兰的金融交易税
欧洲国家被要求制定与欧盟金融交易税相关的国家优惠政策。解释金融部门如何在政治过程中表达其观点的两种主要方法——基于潜在撤资的金融服务部门的结构性权力,以及源于直接政治游说的工具权力——都未能提供一个全面的解释。缺失的一环是,政策制定者可能愿意如何以及为什么采取金融服务业关键部门的优先事项。我们以爱尔兰为例,概述了两个层次的观念力量如何在塑造结果方面发挥作用。首先,我们认为,在政策网络中制度化的共享知识背景系统,在金融部门和政策制定者之间产生了广泛的观念趋同,使他们对产业政策的优先事项产生了共识。其次,在这种背景下,关于具体政策选择的辩论可以为更广泛的分歧,甚至政治和理念上的争论留下空间。事实证明,爱尔兰政策制定者在征收金融交易税的问题上对行业利益做出了回应,但不是出于通常给出的理由。这项工作旨在将两个研究领域的文献联系起来。它向自由政府间主义提出了一些问题,表明将基于结构的物质利益转化为国家政策偏好远非自动的,并认为这是由经常被低估的观念考虑所介导的。它还有助于我们理解政策结果的建构主义解释如何在实践中发挥作用,通过对物质利益和思想利益如何相互作用的详细案例研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Dynamic CoVaR Third Party Monitoring, Regulatory Compliance and Financial Reporting: Evidence from Banking Who watches the Auctioneer? Supervising primary bond markets to reduce agency costs MiCA and DeFi ('Proposal for a Regulation on Market in Crypto-Assets' and 'Decentralised Finance') COVID-19, Credit Risk and Macro Fundamentals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1