Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDunlop, CA
dc.contributor.authorKamkhaji, JC
dc.contributor.authorRadaelli, CM
dc.contributor.authorTaffoni, G
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-20T12:30:23Z
dc.date.issued2021-07-20
dc.description.abstractWe 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 (RIA), freedom of information (FOI), and the Ombudsman. By adopting the IGT as conceptual lens to direct us towards a single measurement template applicable to a variety of action situations, we are able to 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 practice and reform.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipH2020 European Research Council (ERC)en_GB
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 20 July 2021en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/psj.12440
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/126470
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWiley / Policy Studies Organizationen_GB
dc.rights© 2021 The Authors. Policy Studies Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Policy Studies Organization. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_GB
dc.subjectinstitutional grammar toolen_GB
dc.subjectpolicy designen_GB
dc.subjectpolicy instrumentsen_GB
dc.subjectregulationen_GB
dc.titleMeasuring Design Diversity: A New Application of Ostrom’s Rule Typesen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2021-07-20T12:30:23Z
dc.identifier.issn0190-292X
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available from Wiley / Policy Studies Organization via the DOI in this record.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalPolicy Studies Journalen_GB
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-05-19
exeter.funder::European Commissionen_GB
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2021-05-19
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2021-07-20T10:23:36Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2021-07-20T12:32:07Z
refterms.panelCen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2021 The Authors. Policy Studies Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Policy Studies Organization.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2021 The Authors. Policy Studies Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Policy Studies Organization. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.