I am seeking references for articles on the principles by which one
decides what regulatory powers should be controlled by the central
national government (or co-ordinated) between the sub-national
governments (ie states, or provinces) and which should be managed
autonomously by sub-national governments.
References would be from books, learned articles in journals and more
general discussion in the press, and urls to all articles available on
the internet, or bibliographies of such articles would be provided.
This is the begining of a research project so some very recent
articles would be appreciated as consulting the bibliographies of such
articles woudld assist in tracking down recent literature on the
subject.
The principle criterion in the study I am undertaking for deciding
whether a particular arrangement is a good one will be economic
efficiency, but other criteria would include equity and also the more
general and amorphous principle of good government. |
Request for Question Clarification by
pafalafa-ga
on
07 May 2006 06:32 PDT
It's not as if this question hasn't been hotly discussed, with lots of
material written in the process. After all, you're basically talking
about the debate between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists at
the founding of the US, and any similar sets of discussions at the
formation of any new government (it's happening in Iraq, for sure).
The sticky point is the matter of efficiency, a very economic notion.
I'm not aware of anyone making a theoretical case that, for instance,
a broad, strong central government is more economically efficient than
strong states. Countries just work with the systems they have to
build up the best economies they can.
Are the historical papers of the Federalists/Anti-Feds of interest
here? Or are you looking for something more explicit to your topic?
Let us know.
pafalafa-ga
|
Clarification of Question by
nicholasgruen-ga
on
08 May 2006 17:38 PDT
A lot of discussion is about the division of fiscal powers. I'm
seeking discussion of the division of regulatory powers - what powers
should be state powers, what powers should be either of the central
government or would require efforts towards uniformity from the
states. The focus is Australia, but the literature need not be. I am
seeking to develop a set of principles/considerations by which one
would consider the question of any given area of regulatory power in
order to decide whether it would benefit from greater state
autonomy/competition or greater harmonization. The Federalist Papers
are not irrelevant but really only provide a backdrop given the very
extensive expansion of the state. I doubt if Alexander Hamilton and
others discussed who should have power to operate extensive
occupational health and safety or consumer protection legislation for
instance.
|
Request for Question Clarification by
pafalafa-ga
on
08 May 2006 17:59 PDT
Thanks for getting back to me.
I'm not sure where to go with this. My sense is that countries
organize divisions between federal and state authorities largely
according to their own historical and cultural particulars, without
explicit attention to economic efficiencies.
Thus, the US has a strong central government, Germany has a lot of
power vested in states, the UK is a hodge-podge of
countries-within-a-country and the EU is forming into a supra-national
state.
Probably, the EU commitment to subsidiarity is the most explicit
statement of what powers belong at what levels. In the US (my home),
the libertarians advocate an absolute minimum of authority be vested
in the federal government. Internationalists are advocating
harmonization of regulations not only within a nation, but across
national boundaries.
None of this, though, really gets to the matter of economic
efficiency. Somehow, the US, Germany, the UK and the EU and others
manage to operate relatively efficient economies even with very
different 'formulas' for how power is vested.
Like I said, I'm just not sure where to go on this one...any thoughts???
paf
|
Clarification of Question by
nicholasgruen-ga
on
09 May 2006 20:08 PDT
Paf,
That's the difference between a positive and normative question. The
question isn't what ARE the divisions of regulatory power. It is what
they SHOULD be. Of course the answer may depend to some extent on the
practicalities dictated by where you start from. But the focus is
what the division of powers should be, not what they are.
There should be a rich literature on this, on the principles and
considerations to be borne in mind if one is considering how
regulatory powers SHOULD be distributed and the exercise is to do an
initial annotated bibliography from which a literature review can be
worked up.
|
Request for Question Clarification by
pafalafa-ga
on
10 May 2006 17:35 PDT
Throw around college-words at me, will ya...?
Take a look at these, and let me know if they are on target:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=506062
Federalism and Regulation: An Overview
...This paper examines arguments for and against the centralization of regulation
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0844739634/103-0351593-8535853?v=glance&n=283155
Using Federalism to Improve Environmental Policy
...This book explores the effects of current regulatory policies and
proposes a radical restructuring of the environmental regulatory
authority
http://www.thefuturefaster.com/pdf/20040203_v26n47.pdf
Federalism and Regulation
...What sorts of regulation are best handled on the federal level?
[In addition to the article itself, take note of the interesting set
of references it provides]
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0844738204/026-7260370-4979648
Product-Risk Labeling: A Federal Responsibility
...examines state regulations for hazard warnings for foods, drugs,
and medical devices and demonstrates why a federal warnings approach
would be preferable
|
Clarification of Question by
nicholasgruen-ga
on
10 May 2006 23:08 PDT
Sorry about the college words. I hate them too, but there you go -
difference between 'is' and 'ought' and they're not college words.
The references are right on target - though with a couple I couldn't
access them on the net without paying.
So I'd like to get you hunting around for as many - and as recent ones
as you can find to produce an annotated bibliography on which we would
build a lit review. If you want to tender for the lit review that
would be worthwhile too. HOWEVER, I'd be grateful if you'd not do
anything for at least another 24 hours as your returned info has
fallen between two stools. We wanted it to do our tender. We've done
that now and (though we expect to get the job) there is no reason to
commit more resources to the task until we do get the go ahead. Hope
that's OK with you.
I hope we'll get our go ahead tomorrow, but may happen after the
weekend. I'll stay in touch.
|
Clarification of Question by
nicholasgruen-ga
on
11 May 2006 17:53 PDT
Can you confirm this is OK pafalafa-ga?
|
Request for Question Clarification by
pafalafa-ga
on
11 May 2006 18:01 PDT
It's OK...I think!
It sounded like you just wanted me to wait until you get a go ahead
from...someone.
So...I'm waiting. When you're ready to get back in action, let me
know, and also, if you can, restate what it is you're after at this
point, as I'm not 100% clear about what you need.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
paf
|
Clarification of Question by
nicholasgruen-ga
on
13 May 2006 23:40 PDT
Will do. Can't be more than a couple of days away to find out if we
have the go ahead.
|
Clarification of Question by
nicholasgruen-ga
on
14 May 2006 18:38 PDT
Please proceed as soon as you can.
Once again, the final piece of work we must produce (with your work as
a small input) is a checklist of the considerations involved in
deciding which regulatory functions are best dealt with
'competitively' between states (with each taking their own direction
to advantage themselves, and which regulatory functions should be
harmonised to some extent between states.
There is the subsidiary question of whether that harmonisation should
take place by way of intergovernmental institutions (like Councils of
Federal and state ministers or intergovernmental agreements) or by way
of referral of powers from governments at one level (eg States) to
those at another level (eg the Feds).
Note that of all the references you've so far produced,
http://www.thefuturefaster.com/pdf/20040203_v26n47.pdf is most
precisely on point. As it says its fundamental question is "What sorts
of regulation are best handled on the federal level?" and that is ours
- or rather what considerations should one take into account in
deciding where regulatory powers should lie.
So we're after an annotated bibliography of such references. The
reference you have is a general look at the question we're looking at.
But obviously specific examinations of the issues relating to
specific areas is also of use. The areas we wish to focus on
particularly are occupational health and safety and financial matters.
|
Clarification of Question by
nicholasgruen-ga
on
15 May 2006 21:18 PDT
I'd like to get this show on the road. pafalafa-ga or anyone else,
please let me know when you can get it done by. Sending progress
reports would be prefered to waiting longer for final input.
|
Request for Question Clarification by
pafalafa-ga
on
16 May 2006 03:33 PDT
I've been looking, but truth be told, I haven't found much that is
directly on topic, outside of the refs I already mentioned.
If I feel I come up with enough to warrant an answer, I'll certainly
post it, and perhaps other researchers will look into this as well.
paf
|
Clarification of Question by
nicholasgruen-ga
on
16 May 2006 19:18 PDT
OK - are you searching academic databases as well as google?
|
For thoretical principles, one may have to turn to societal models,
currently found in the 'complex systems' category of sciences, such as
://www.google.com/search?q=control+efficiency&btnG=Search&domains=pespmc1.vub.ac.be&sitesearch=pespmc1.vub.ac.be
e.g.
http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/Papers/Superorganism.pdf
pafalafa says in
Request for Question Clarification by pafalafa-ga on 08 May 2006 17:59 PDT
" None of this, though, really gets to the matter of economic
efficiency. Somehow, the US, Germany, the UK and the EU and others
manage to operate relatively efficient economies even with very
different 'formulas' for how power is vested"
I disagree: If we include wider variety of 'formulas', such as e.g.
centralized command economy of former Soviet Union, we will conclude that
some formulas are indeed inefficient, given the size and complexity
of a controlled system.
Biological organisms (selected naturaly for efficiency) are examples of that:
CNS does not controls evrything. Within the brain itself, there are autonomous
control centers, such as visual cortex, preprocessing level data for
higher centers.
In general, a muti-scale system will, to be efficient, requires
hiearchical c control structure with optimal scale-spectrum of
power. Today, we are in a
stone age of proper theory - so I am not at all surprised that
original researcher gave up on this question.
It is an interesting, but difficult topic.
Good luck. |
