Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-956mj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-27T06:02:12.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Control and Feedback in Economic Regulation: The Case of the NLRB

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 1985

Terry M. Moe
Terry M. Moe*
Affiliation:
Stanford University The Brookings Institution
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article presents an empirical analysis of the National Labor Relations Board, focusing on the balance the agency strikes between the interests of business and labor. It is oriented by a theoretical framework that, relative to popular models, takes a broader view of the causal structure of regulatory performance—one that simultaneously allows for presidents, congressional committees, the courts, agency staff, constituents, and economic conditions. The empirical results are instructive. All of these factors prove to have significant impacts on NLRB decisions. In addition, the core regulatory actors —Board members, staff, and constituents—are shown to engage in mutually adaptive adjustment: each is responsive to the decisions of each of the others, and their reciprocal relationships impart equilibrating properties to the system as a whole. Thus, the evidence points to a varied set of important determinants and to the dynamic nature of their interconnection. To the extent that these findings are at all characteristic of other regulatory agencies, simple popular models of regulation are likely to give anemic explanations, if not highly distorted accounts, of why agencies behave as they do.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 79 , Issue 4 , December 1985 , pp. 1094 - 1116
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, R.K., Froyen, R., & Waud, R.N. Monetary policy reaction functions, consistent expectations, and the Burns era. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 1980,12, 30–42.10.2307/1991591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alt, J., & Chrystal, A. Political economy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983.Google Scholar
Alt, J., & Woolley, J. Reaction functions, optimization, and politics: Modelling the political economy of macroeconomic policy. American Journal of Political Science, 1982,26, 709–740.10.2307/2110969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barke, R., & Riker, W. A political theory of regulation with some observations on railway abandonments. Public Choice, 1982,39, 73–106.10.1007/BF00242149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, N. Presidential influence on the Federal Reserve in the 1970s. American Journal of Political Science, 1982, 26, 415–445.10.2307/2110936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, N. Politics and American monetary policy: 1955-1982. Journal of Politics, 1984, 46, 786–817.10.2307/2130856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bendor, J., & Moe, T. M. An adaptive model of bureaucratic politics. American Political Science Review, 1985, 79, 755–774.10.2307/1956842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, M. Regulating business by independent commission. Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1955.10.1515/9781400878789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calvert, R., & Weingast, B. The nature and measurement of congressional influence over policymaking: The case of the FTC, Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington D. C., 1984.Google Scholar
Cary, W. Politics and the regulatory agencies. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.Google Scholar
Chubb, J.E. Interest groups and the bureaucracy. Stanford Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
Chubb, J.E. The political economy of federalism. American Political Science Review, 1985, 79, 994–1015.Google Scholar
Cohen, M.D., March, J.G., & Olsen, J.P. A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1972,17, 1–25.10.2307/2392088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, W.N. & Gautschi, F.H. III. Political bias in NLRB unfair practice decisions. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 1982,55, 539–549.10.1177/001979398203500406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cyert, R., & March, J.G. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963.Google Scholar
DeLorme, C.D., Hill, R. C, & Wood, N.J. The determinants of voting by the National Labor Relations Board on unfair labor practice cases: 1955-1975. Public Choice, 1981,57, 207–218.10.1007/BF00138241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fair, R.C. The estimation of simultaneous equation models with lagged endogenous variables and first order serially correlated errors. Econometrica, 1970, 38, 507–516.10.2307/1909556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, J.P. The economics of legal conflicts. Journal of Legal Studies, 1973, 2, 279–300.10.1086/467499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, J.A. The reshaping of the National Labor Relations Board. Albany N.Y.: State University of New York Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Hibbs, D.A. Industrial conflict in advanced industrial societies. American Political Science Review, 1976, 70, 1033–1058.10.2307/1959373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbs, D.A. Political parties and macroeconomic policy. American Political Science Review, 1977,71, 1467–1487.10.2307/1961490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, S.P. The marasmus of the ICC: The Commission, the railroads, and the public interest. Yale Law Journal, 1952, 64, 467–509.10.2307/793586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 1976,3, 305–360.10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joskow, P.L., & Noll, R.C. Regulation in theory and practice: An overview. In Fromm, G. (Ed.). Studies in public regulation. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 1981, 1–65.Google Scholar
Katzmann, R. Regulatory bureaucracy. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Kiewiet, D.R. & McCubbins, M. Congress, the president, and the appropriations process. Legislative Studies Quarterly, in press.Google Scholar
Kiewiet, D.R., & McCubbins, M. Congressional appropriations and the electoral connection. Journal of Politics, 1985, 47, 59–82.10.2307/2131066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landes, W. An economic analysis of the courts. Journal of Law and Economics, 1971,14, 61–107.10.1086/466704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landes, W., & Posner, R. Adjudication as a private good. Journal of Legal Studies, 1979,8, 235–284.10.1086/467609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowi, T.J. The end of liberalism. New York: Norton, 1969.Google Scholar
March, J.G., & Simon, H.A. Organizations. New York: Free Press, 1958.Google Scholar
McCubbins, M. Regulating the regulators: A theory of legislative delegation. American Journal of Political Science, in press.Google Scholar
McCubbins, M., & Schwartz, T. Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 1984, 28, 165–179.10.2307/2110792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCulloch, F., & Bronstein, T. The National Labor Relations Board. New York: Praeger, 1974.10.2307/1227943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melnick, S. Regulation and the courts. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1983.Google Scholar
Mitnick, B.M. The political economy of regulation. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Moe, T.M. Regulatory performance and presidential administration. American Journal of Political Science, 1982,26, 197–224.10.2307/2111036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moe, T.M. The new economics of organization. American Journal of Political Science, 1984,28, 739–777.10.2307/2110997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niskanen, W.A. Bureaucracy and representative government. Chicago: Aldine, 1971.Google Scholar
Noll, R.G. Reforming regulation. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1971.Google Scholar
Nordhaus, W. The political business cycle. Review of Economic Studies, 1975,42, 169–190.10.2307/2296528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peltzman, S. Toward a more general theory of regulation. Journal of Law and Economics, 1976, 19, 211–240.10.1086/466865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, R. An economic approach to legal procedure and judicial administration. Journal of Lega Studies, 1973,2, 399–458.10.1086/467503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priest, G.L. The common law process and the selection of efficient rules. Journal of Legal Studies, 1977,6, 65–82.10.1086/467563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priest, G.L. Selective characteristics of litigation. Journal of Legal Studies, 1980, 9, 399–427.10.1086/467647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priest, G.L., & Klein, B. The selection of disputes for litigation. Journal of Legal Studies, 1984,13, 1–35.10.1086/467732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzo, M. Can there be a principle of explanation in common law decisions? A comment on Priest. Journal of Legal Studies, 1980, 9, 423–427.10.1086/467648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roomkin, M. A quantitative study of unfair labor practice cases. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 1981, 34, 245–236.10.1177/001979398103400206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, S.A. The economic theory of agency: The principal's problem. American Economic Review, 1973, 13, 134–139.Google Scholar
Sabatier, P. Social movements and regulatory agencies: Toward a more adequate—and less pessimistic—theory of clientele capture. Policy Sciences, 1975,6, 301–342.10.1007/BF00139972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitter, P.C. Still the century of corporatism? Review of Politics, 1974, 36, 85–131.10.1017/S0034670500022178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selznick, P. TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A. Administrative behavior. New York: Macmillan, 1947.Google Scholar
Simon, H.A., Smithburg, D., & Thompson, V. Public administration. New York: Knopf, 1950.Google Scholar
Stigler, G.J. The theory of economic regulation. Belt Journal of Economics, 1971,2(1), 3–21.Google Scholar
Tufte, E. Political control of the economy. Princeton N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1978.10.1515/9780691219417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United States Senate Committee on Governmental Operations. Study on federal regulation. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1977, 2.Google Scholar
Wallis, K.F. Lagged dependent variables and serially correlated errors: A reappraisal of three-pass least squares. Review of Economics and Statistics, 1967, 49, 555–567.10.2307/1928341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, P.H. Regulation, social policy, and class conflict. The Public Interest, 1978, 50, 45–63.Google Scholar
Weingast, B. The congressional-bureaucratic system: A principal-agent perspective with applications to the SEC. Public Choice, 1984, 44, 147–192.10.1007/BF00124821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingast, B., & Moran, M. Bureaucratie discretion or congressional control: Regulatory policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission. Journal of Political Economy, 1983, 91, 765–800.10.1086/261181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J.Q. The politics of regulation. New York: Basic Books, 1980.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.