Abstract
AbstractThis essay examines certain epistemic problems facing administrative states’ efforts to draft efficient regulations for their societies. I argue that a basic feature of the administrative state’s authority, namely its monopoly over the production of legally binding rules for all members of a geographically defined society, creates epistemic problems that impede efficient rule-making. Specifically, the administrative state’s monopoly over the production of legally binding rules prevents multiple public policies from being simultaneously implemented and compared. The resulting singularity of administrative states’ regulatory decisions prevents observation of the counterfactual effects of policies that were possible but which were not implemented. The absence of observable policy counterfactuals frustrates efforts to assess the efficiency of administrative states’ decisions, as it is impossible to determine whether different policies would have generated greater benefits at lower cost than the policy the state implemented. As these epistemic problems are derived from the singularity of administrative states’ decisions, they exist independently of principal agent problems, suboptimal incentives, or the preferences and capabilities of administrative personnel.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
General Social Sciences,Philosophy
Reference60 articles.
1. Experiments in International Relations: Lab, Survey, and Field
2. The Complexity of Regulatory Capture: Diagnosis, Causality, and Remediation;Shapiro;Roger Williams University Law Review,2012
3. Small Things Like Reasons Are Put in a Jar: Reason and Legitimacy in the Administrative State;Mashaw;Fordham Law Review,2001
4. The Theory of Public Choice - II
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献