Delegation and Devolution After Brexit: A Revised Theory of Intergovernmental Policymaking

Anthony M. Bertelli, Giulia Leila Travaglini, N. Palma
{"title":"Delegation and Devolution After Brexit: A Revised Theory of Intergovernmental Policymaking","authors":"Anthony M. Bertelli, Giulia Leila Travaglini, N. Palma","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3484512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"British institutions allow the central government to make the key choices regarding the devolution of EU powers, but what incentives does it face when choosing whether to centralize or devolve authority post-Brexit? We offer a formal theory of the delegation and devolution of powers under both \"hard\" and \"soft\" Brexit scenarios that produces four main findings. First, when structural independence is less effective in reducing policy drift and incentivizing expertise for both European and territorial agents, hard Brexit yields more devolved policy-making. Second, however, the extent to which structural independence decreases policy drift and capacity acquisition does not influence the devolution choice of the central government. Third, if Westminster does not see a clear difference in the effect of independence on drift or expertise in the European or regional agencies, territorial agencies will enjoy at least as much independence as they did pre-Brexit. Fourth, a soft Brexit will lead to a decrease in devolution and structural independence compared with pre-Brexit levels. We also argue that technical policies will experience more devolved authority, while ideological policies will be more centralized.","PeriodicalId":426783,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Trade Policy (Topic)","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Trade Policy (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3484512","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

British institutions allow the central government to make the key choices regarding the devolution of EU powers, but what incentives does it face when choosing whether to centralize or devolve authority post-Brexit? We offer a formal theory of the delegation and devolution of powers under both "hard" and "soft" Brexit scenarios that produces four main findings. First, when structural independence is less effective in reducing policy drift and incentivizing expertise for both European and territorial agents, hard Brexit yields more devolved policy-making. Second, however, the extent to which structural independence decreases policy drift and capacity acquisition does not influence the devolution choice of the central government. Third, if Westminster does not see a clear difference in the effect of independence on drift or expertise in the European or regional agencies, territorial agencies will enjoy at least as much independence as they did pre-Brexit. Fourth, a soft Brexit will lead to a decrease in devolution and structural independence compared with pre-Brexit levels. We also argue that technical policies will experience more devolved authority, while ideological policies will be more centralized.
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
英国脱欧后的授权与权力下放:政府间政策制定理论的修正
英国的制度允许中央政府就欧盟权力下放做出关键选择,但在英国脱欧后,在选择是集中还是下放权力时,它面临着什么激励因素?我们提供了一个关于“硬”和“软”脱欧情景下的授权和权力下放的正式理论,产生了四个主要发现。首先,当结构性独立在减少政策漂移和激励欧洲和领土代理人的专业知识方面效果较差时,硬脱欧会导致政策制定更加下放。其次,结构独立性对政策漂移和能力获取的影响程度并不影响中央政府的权力下放选择。第三,如果英国政府没有看到独立对欧洲或地区机构的漂移或专业知识的影响有明显不同,那么地区机构将至少享有与英国退欧前一样多的独立性。第四,与脱欧前的水平相比,软脱欧将导致权力下放和结构独立性的下降。我们还认为,技术政策将经历更多的权力下放,而意识形态政策将更加集中。
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
Trade Diversion Effects of the US-China Trade War on Vietnam U.S. International Trade Commission Testimony The New Trade Route: The Story of the IEA, Brexit and the UK's New Approach to Global Trade Biden’s Trade Policies - Recalibrated, More Focused, and a Bit Concerning International Trade Costs in Services: An Empirical Analysis Through Gravity Framework
×
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