Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:29:06.191Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The media accountability of independent regulatory agencies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2011

Martino Maggetti
Martino Maggetti*
Affiliation:
Lecturer, Department of Political Science, Affolternstrasse 56, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
*
* E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Independent regulatory agencies (IRAs) are increasingly attracting academic and societal attention, as they represent the institutional cornerstone of the regulatory state and play a key role in policy-making. Besides the expected benefits in terms of credibility and efficiency, these regulators are said to bring about a ‘democratic deficit’, following their statutory separation from democratic institutions. Consequently, a ‘multi-pronged system of control’ is required. This article focuses on a specific component of this system, that is, the media. The goal is to determine whether media coverage of IRAs meets the necessary prerequisites to be considered a potential ‘accountability forum’ for regulators. The results of a comparison of two contrasted cases – the British and Swiss competition commissions – mostly support the expectations, because they show that media coverage of IRAs corresponds to that of the most relevant policy issues and follows the regulatory cycle. Furthermore, a systematic bias in media coverage can be excluded.

Keywords

accountabilityindependenceIRAsmediaregulation
Type
Research Article
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , November 2012 , pp. 385 - 408
Copyright
Copyright © European Consortium for Political Research 2011

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

Altheide, D.L.Snow, R.P. (1988), ‘Toward a theory of mediation’, Communication Yearbook 11: 194–223.Google Scholar
Armingeon, K. (2002), ‘The effects of negotiation democracy: a comparative analysis’, European Journal of Political Research 41: 81–105.Google Scholar
Arnold, R.D. (2004), Congress, the Press, and Political Accountability. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Balboni, B. (2008), ‘Perceived corporate credibility as the emergent property of corporate reputation's transmission process’. MPRA Paper, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Barro, R.Gordon, D. (1983), ‘Rules, discretion and reputation in a model of monetary policy’, Journal of Monetary Economics 12: 101–121.Google Scholar
Bendor, J., Glazer, A.Hammond, T. (2001), ‘Theories of delegation’, Annual Review of Political Science 4: 235–269.Google Scholar
Besley, T.Burgess, R. (2001), ‘Political agency, government responsiveness and the role of the media’, European Economic Review 45: 629–640.Google Scholar
Besley, T.Prat, A. (2006), ‘Handcuffs for the grabbing hand? Media capture and government accountability’, The American Economic Review 96: 720–736.Google Scholar
Besley, T., Burgess, R.Prat, A. (2002), ‘Mass media and political accountability’, in The World Bank (ed.), The Right to Tell: the Role of Mass Media in Economic Development, Washington: WBI, pp. 45–60.Google Scholar
Blinder, A.S. (1999), ‘Central bank credibility: why do we care? How do we build it?’, The American Economic Review 90: 1421–1431.Google Scholar
Blühdorn, I. (2006), ‘Democracy, efficiency, futurity: contested objectives of societal modernization’, in I. Bluehdorn and U. Jun (eds), Economic Efficiency – Democratic Renewal. Contested Modernization in Britain and Germany, Lanham, MD, USA: Lexington Press, pp. 69–98.Google Scholar
Bovens, M. (2007), ‘Analysing and assessing accountability: a conceptual framework’, European Law Journal 13: 447–468.Google Scholar
Brabazon, T. (2000), ‘Behavioural finance: a new sunrise or a false dawn?’, in CoIL Summer School 2000, University of Limerick: Department of Accountancy, University College Dublin pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Braun, D. (2003), ‘Dezentraler Und Unitarischer Foderalismus. Die Schweiz Und Deutschland Im Vergleich’, Swiss Political Science Review 9: 57–90.Google Scholar
Braun, D.Gilardi, F. (2006), Delegation in Contemporary Democracies, Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brunetti, A., Kisunko, G.Weder, B. (1998), ‘Credibility of rules and economic growth: evidence from a worldwide survey of the private sector’, The World Bank Economic Review 12: 353–384.Google Scholar
Bryant, J.Zillmann, D. (2002), Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Busuioc, M. (2009), ‘Accountability, control and independence: the case of European agencies’, European Law Journal 15: 599–615.Google Scholar
Carpenter, D.P. (2001a), ‘State building through reputation building: coalitions of esteem and program innovation in the national postal system, 1883–1913’, Studies in American Political Development 14: 121–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, D.P. (2001b), The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy: Reputations, Networks, and Policy Innovation in Executive Agencies, 1862–1928, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Carpenter, D.P. (2002), ‘Groups, the media, agency waiting costs, and FDA drug approval’, American Journal of Political Science 46: 490–505.Google Scholar
Castiglione, D. (2006), ‘Accountability’, in M. Bevir (ed.), Encyclopedia of Governance, London: Sage, pp. 1–7.Google Scholar
Christensen, T.Laegreid, P. (2003), ‘Administrative reform policy: the challenges of turning symbols into practice’, Public Organization Review 3: 3–27.Google Scholar
Christensen, T.Laegreid, P. (2006a), ‘Agencification and regulatory reforms’, in T. Christensen and P. Laegreid (eds), Autonomy and Regulation: Coping with Agencies in the Modern State, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 8–52.Google Scholar
Christensen, T.Laegreid, P. (2006b), ‘Autonomy and Regulation: Coping with Agencies in the Modern State’, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, T.Laegreid, P. (2007), ‘Regulatory agencies – the challenges of balancing agency autonomy and political control’, Governance 20: 499–520.Google Scholar
Christensen, J.G.Yesilkagit, K. (2006), ‘Political responsiveness and credibility in regulatory administration’, in T. Christensen and P. Laegreid (eds), Autonomy and Regulation: Coping with Agencies in the Modern State, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 203–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, M. (2005), ‘Scandalous! The electoral effects of valence issues in Western Europe, 1976–1998’, Annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, pp. 1–41.Google Scholar
Coen, D.Heritier, A. (2005), Refining Regulatory Regimes: Utilities in Europe, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coglianese, C.Howard, M. (1998), ‘Getting the message out: regulatory policy and the press’, Politics 3: 39–55.Google Scholar
Cook, T.E. (1998), Governing with the News: the News Media as a Political Institution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Curran, J. (2005), ‘What democracy requires of the media’, in G. Overholser and K.H. Jamieson (eds), The Press, USA: Oxford University Press, pp. 120–140.Google Scholar
Dahl, R.A. (1989), Democracy and its Critics, New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
de Jonge, J., van Trijp, H., Jan Renes, R.Frewer, L. (2007), ‘Understanding consumer confidence in the safety of food: its two-dimensional structure and determinants’, An International Journal 27: 729–740.Google Scholar
de Vreese, C.H., Banducci, S.A., Semetko, H.A.Boomgaarden, H.G. (2006), ‘The news coverage of the 2004 European parliamentary election campaign in 25 countries’, European Union Politics 7: 477–504.Google Scholar
Deephouse, D.L. (2000), ‘Media reputation as a strategic resource: an integration of mass communication and resource-based theories’, Journal of Management 26: 1091–1112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doyle, G. (2002), Media Ownership: the Economics and Politics of Convergence and Concentration in the UK and European Media, Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drazen, A.Masson, P. (1994), ‘Credibility of policies versus credibility of policymakers’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 109: 735–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunleavy, P.Margetts, H. (2001), ‘From majoritarian to pluralist democracy?: electoral reform in Britain since 1997’, Journal of Theoretical Politics 13: 295–319.Google Scholar
Eilders, C. (2000), ‘Media as political actors? Issue focusing and selective emphasis in the German quality press’, German Politics 9: 181–206.Google Scholar
Eilders, C. (2002), ‘Conflict and consonance in media opinion: political positions of five German quality newspapers’, European Journal of Communication 17: 25–63.Google Scholar
Elgie, R.McMenamin, I. (2005), ‘Credible commitment, political uncertainty or policy complexity? Explaining variations in the independence of non-majoritarian institutions in France’, British Journal of Political Science 35: 531–548.Google Scholar
Emery, Y.Giauque, D. (2004), Paradoxes de la gestion publique. Paris: L'Harmattan.Google Scholar
Epstein, D.O'Halloran, S. (1999), Delegating Powers: a Transaction Cost Politics Approach to Policy Making Under Separate Powers, Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Follesdal, A.Hix, S. (2006), ‘Why there is a democratic deficit in the EU: a response to Majone and Moravcsik’, Journal of Common Market Studies 44: 533–562.Google Scholar
Fox, J. (2000), Civil Society and Political Accountability: Propositions for Discussion, USA: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
Franchino, F. (2002), ‘Efficiency or credibility? Testing the two logics of delegation to the European Commission’, Journal of European Public Policy 9: 677–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GCR (2006), ‘The 2006 handbook of competition enforcement agencies’, Global Competition Review Special Report, December, pp. 1–60.Google Scholar
Gentzkow, M.Shapiro, J.M. (2006), ‘Media bias and reputation’, Journal of Political Economy 114: 280–316.Google Scholar
Gerber, E.R. (1999), The Populist Paradox: Interest Group Influence and the Promise of Direct Legislation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2004), ‘What is a case study and what is it good for?’, American Political Science Review 98: 341–354.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2007a), ‘Is there a (viable) crucial-case method?’, Comparative Political Studies 40: 231–253.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2007b), Case Study Research: Principles and Practices, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gilardi, F. (2002), ‘Policy credibility and delegation to independent regulatory agencies: a comparative empirical analysis’, Journal of European Public Policy 9: 873–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilardi, F. (2005), ‘The institutional foundations of regulatory capitalism: the diffusion of independent regulatory agencies in Western Europe’, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 598: 84–101.Google Scholar
Gilardi, F. (2008), Delegation in the Regulatory State: Independent Regulatory Agencies in Western Europe, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Goertz, G. (2006), Social Science Concepts: a User's Guide, Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, P.A.Soskice, D.W. (2001), Varieties of Capitalism: the Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage, Oxford, England, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hallin, D.C.Mancini, P. (2004), Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, A.F.Krippendorff, K. (2007), ‘Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data’, Communication Methods and Measures 1: 77–89.Google Scholar
Héritier, A.Eckert, S. (2008), ‘New modes of governance in the shadow of hierarchy: self-regulation by industry in Europe’, Journal of Public Policy 28: 113–138.Google Scholar
Hodge, G.A.Coghill, K. (2007), ‘Accountability in the privatized state’, Governance 20: 675–702.Google Scholar
Hood, C., Rothstein, H.Baldwin, R. (2001), The Government of Risk: Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hopenhayn, H.Lohmann, S. (1996), ‘Fire-alarm signals and the political oversight of regulatory agencies’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 12: 196–213.Google Scholar
Katzenstein, P.J. (2003), ‘Small states and small states revisited’, New Political Economy 8: 9–30.Google Scholar
Kepplinger, H.M. (2002), ‘Mediatization of politics: theory and data’, Journal of Communication 52: 972–986.Google Scholar
Kepplinger, H.M.Weißbecker, H. (1991), ‘Negativität als Nachrichtenideologie’, Publizistik 36: 330–342.Google Scholar
Kepplinger, H.M., Donsbach, W., Brosius, H.B.Staab, J.F. (2004), ‘Media tone and public opinion: a longitudinal study of media coverage and public opinion on Chancellor Kohl’, International Journal of Public Opinion Research 1: 326–342.Google Scholar
Kim, J.N., Bach, S.B.Clelland, I.J. (2007), ‘Symbolic or behavioral management? Corporate reputation in high-emission industries’, Corporate Reputation Review 10: 77–98.Google Scholar
Knill, C. (1998), ‘European policies: the impact of national administrative traditions’, Journal of Public Policy 18: 1–28.Google Scholar
Krause, G.A.Douglas, J.W. (2005), ‘Institutional design versus reputational effects on bureaucratic performance: evidence from US government macroeconomic and fiscal projections’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15: 281–306.Google Scholar
Krippendorff, K. (2004), Content Analysis: an Introduction to its Methodology, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Kydland, F.Prescott, E. (1977), ‘Rules rather than discretion: the inconsistency on optimal plans’, Journal of Political Economy 85: 473–491.Google Scholar
Laegreid, P., Roness, P.G.Rubecksen, K. (2008), ‘Controlling regulatory agencies’, Scandinavian Political Studies 31: 1–26.Google Scholar
Lang, G.E.Lang, K. (1984), Politics and Television Re-viewed, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Lee, M. (1999), ‘Reporters and bureaucrats: public relations counter-strategies by public administrators in an era of media disinterest in government’, Public Relations Review 25: 451–463.Google Scholar
Levi-Faur, D. (2005), ‘The global diffusion of regulatory capitalism’, Annals, AAPSS 598: 12–32.Google Scholar
Levi-Faur, D. (2006a), ‘Regulatory capitalism: the dynamics of change beyond telecoms and electricity’, Governance 19: 497–525.Google Scholar
Levi-Faur, D. (2006b), ‘Varieties of regulatory capitalism: sectors and nations in the making of a new global order’, Governance 19: 363–366.Google Scholar
Lodge, M. (2002), ‘The wrong type of regulation? Regulatory failure and the railways in Britain and Germany’, Journal of Public Policy 22: 271–297.Google Scholar
Lodge, M. (2004), ‘Accountability and transparency in regulation: critiques, doctrines and instruments’, in J. Jordana and D. Levi-Faur (eds), The Politics of Regulation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 124–144.Google Scholar
Louw, P.E. (2005), The Media and Political Process. Sage Publications Ltd, pp. 311.Google Scholar
Maeda, Y.Miyahara, M. (2003), ‘Determinants of trust in industry, government, and citizen's groups in Japan’, Corporate Reputation Review 10: 303–310.Google Scholar
Maggetti, M. (2007), ‘De facto independence after delegation: a fuzzy-set analysis’, Regulation & Governance 1: 271–294.Google Scholar
Maggetti, M. (2009a), ‘Delegated authority: legitimizing independent regulatory agencies’, in I. Blühdorn (ed.), In Search of Legitimacy. Policy Making in Europe and the Challenge of Societal Complexity, Opladen/Farmington Hills, MI: Barbara Budrich.Google Scholar
Maggetti, M. (2009b), ‘The role of independent regulatory agencies in policy-making: a comparative analysis’, Journal of European Public Policy 16: 445–465.Google Scholar
Maggetti, M. (2010), ‘Legitimacy and accountability of independent regulatory agencies: a critical review’, Living Reviews in Democracy 2: 1–9.Google Scholar
Maggetti, M.Gilardi, F. (2010), ‘Establishing regulatory networks and the diffusion of best practices’, Network Industries Quarterly 12: 10–13.Google Scholar
Maggetti, M., Afonso, A.Fontana, M.C. (2011), ‘The more it changes, the more it stays the same?’, in C. Trampusch and A. Mach (eds), Switzerland in Europe, Oxon: Routledge, pp. 205.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (1994a), Independence vs. Accountability?: Non-Majoritarian Institutions and Democratic Government in Europe. Florence: European University Institute.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (1994b), ‘The rise of the regulatory state in Europe’, West European Politics 17: 77–101.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (1996a), “Temporal Consistency and Policy Credibility: Why Democracies Need Non-majoritarian Institutions.” EUI Working Paper SPS 96, Florence: European University Institute, pp. 1–31.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (1996b), Regulating Europe, London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (1997a), The Agency Model: The Growth of Regulation and Regulatory Institutions in the European Union. Florence: European University Institute.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (1997b), ‘From the positive to the regulatory state: causes and consequences of changes in the mode of governance’, Journal of Public Policy 17: 139–167.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (1999), ‘The regulatory state and its legitimacy problems’, West European Politics 22: 1–24.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (2000), ‘The credibility crisis of community regulation’, Journal of Common Market Studies 38: 273–302.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (2001a), ‘Regulatory legitimacy in the United States and the European Union’, in K. Nicolaidis and R. Howse (eds), The Federal Vision. Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 252–275.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (2001c), ‘Two logics of delegation: agency and fiduciary relations in EU governance’, European Union Politics 2: 103–122.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (2002), ‘Europe's “democratic deficit”: the question of standards’, European Law Journal 4: 5–28.Google Scholar
Majone, G. (2005), ‘Delegation of powers and the fiduciary principle’, CONNEX Workshop, Paris.Google Scholar
Manin, B. (1996), Principes du gouvernement représentatif, Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
Mazzoleni, G. (1987), ‘Media logic and party logic in campaign coverage: the Italian general election of 1983’, European Journal of Communication 2: 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzoleni, G.Schulz, W. (1999), ‘ “ Mediatization” of politics: a challenge for democracy?’, Political Communication 16: 247–261.Google Scholar
McCubbins, M.D., Noll, R.G.Weingast, B.R. (1987), ‘Administrative procedures as instruments of political control’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 3: 243–277.Google Scholar
Meyer, C. (2004), ‘The hard side of soft policy co-ordination in EMU: the impact of peer pressure on publicized opinion in the cases of Germany and Ireland’, Journal of European Public Policy 11: 814–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, M. (2002), ‘Review article: understanding the regulatory state’, British Journal of Political Science 32: 391–413.Google Scholar
Moran, M. (2003), The British Regulatory State: High Modernism and Hyper-innovation, Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mulgan, R. (2000), ‘ “Accountability”: an ever-expanding concept?’, Public Administration 78: 555–573.Google Scholar
Mulgan, R. (2003), Holding power to account: accountability in modern democracies. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Norris, P. (2001), ‘The twilight of Westminster? Electoral reform and its consequences’, Political Studies 49: 877–900.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, G.A. (1998), ‘Horizontal accountability in new democracies’, Journal of Democracy 9: 112–126.Google Scholar
OECD (2005), ‘Switzerland – the role of competition policy in regulatory reform’, OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform.Google Scholar
Papadopoulos, Y. (2008), ‘Europeanization? Two logics of change of policy-making patterns in Switzerland’, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 10: 255–278.Google Scholar
Peters, B.G. (2004), ‘2. Administrative traditions and the Anglo-American democracies’, in J. Halligan (ed.), Civil Service Systems in Anglo-American Countries, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Peters, R.G., Covello, V.T.McCallum, D.B. (1997), ‘The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: an empirical study’, Risk Analysis 17: 43–54.Google Scholar
Pfetsch, B., Adam, S., Berkel, B.Medrano, J.D. (2004), The Voice of the Media in European Public Sphere: Comparative Analysis of Newspaper Editorials, Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum für Sozialforschung.Google Scholar
Pollack, M.A. (1996), ‘The new institutionalism and EC governance: the promise and limits of institutional analysis’, Governance 9: 429–458.Google Scholar
Pollitt, C., Tablot, C., Caufield, J.Smullen, A. (2004), Agencies: How Governments Do Things Through Semi-Autonomous Organizations, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Pollock, T.G.Rindova, V.P. (2003), ‘Media legitimation effects in the market for initial public offerings’, Academy of Management Journal 46: 631–642.Google Scholar
Radaelli, C.M.De Francesco, F. (2007), Regulatory Quality in Europe: Concepts, Measures and Policy Processes, Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, A. (2001), ‘Structural pluralism and the right to information’, University of Toronto Law Journal 51: 243–271.Google Scholar
Roberts, N.C. (2002), ‘Keeping public officials accountable through dialogue: resolving the accountability paradox’, Public Administration Review 62: 658–669.Google Scholar
Sarcinelli, U. (1987), Symbolische Politik: zur Bedeutung symbolischen Handelns in der Wahlkampfkommunikation der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Schedler, A. (1999), ‘Conceptualizing accountability’, in A. Schedler, L. Diamond, and M.F. Plattner (eds), The Self-restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp. 13–28.Google Scholar
Scott, C. (2000), ‘Accountability in the regulatory state’, Journal of Law and Society 27: 38–60.Google Scholar
Seawright, J.Gerring, J. (2008), ‘Case selection techniques in case study research: a menu of qualitative and quantitative options’, Political Research Quarterly 61: 294–308.Google Scholar
Shepsle, K.A. (1991), ‘Discretion, institutions, and the problem of government commitment’, in P. Bourdieu and J. Coleman (eds), Social Theory for a Changing Society, Boulder; New York: Westview Press; Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 245–265.Google Scholar
Snyder, J.M.Strömberg, D. (2008), ‘Press coverage and political accountability’, Journal of Political Economy 118: 355–408.Google Scholar
Sosay, G. (2006), ‘Consequences of legitimizing independent regulatory agencies in contemporary democracies. Theoretical scenarios’, in D. Braun and F. Gilardi (eds), Delegation in Contemporary Democracies, Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, pp. 171–190.Google Scholar
Stimson, J.A., MacKuen, M.B.Erikson, R.S. (1994), ‘Opinion and policy: a global view’, PS: Political Science and Politics 27: 29–34.Google Scholar
Strömbäck, J.Esser, F. (2009), ‘Shaping politics: mediatization and media interventionism’, in Mediatization. Concept, Changes, Consequences, New York: Peter Lang, S205–S223.Google Scholar
Strömberg, D. (2004), ‘Mass media competition, political competition, and public policy’, The Review of Economic Studies 71: 265–284.Google Scholar
Swanson, D.L. (1981), ‘A constructivist approach’, in D.D. Nimmo and K.R. Sanders (eds), Handbook of Political Communication, Beverly Hills; London: Sage Publication, pp. 169–191.Google Scholar
Swanson, D.L.Mancini, P. (1996), Politics, Media, and Modern Democracy: an International Study of Innovations in Electoral Campaigning and their Consequences. Westport, Conn: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Thatcher, M. (2002a), ‘Analysing independent regulatory agencies in Western Europe: functional pressures mediated by context’, Swiss Political Science Review 8: 103–110.Google Scholar
Thatcher, M. (2002b), ‘Analysing regulatory reform in Europe’, Journal of European Public Policy 9: 859–872.Google Scholar
Thatcher, M. (2002c), ‘Delegation to independent regulatory agencies: pressures, functions and contextual mediation’, West European Politics 25: 125–147.Google Scholar
Thatcher, M. (2002d), ‘Regulation after delegation: independent regulatory agencies in Europe’, Journal of European Public Policy 9: 954–972.Google Scholar
Thatcher, M.Stone Sweet, A. (2002), ‘Theory and practice of delegation to non-majoritarian institutions’, West European Politics 25: 1–22.Google Scholar
Varone, F. (2007), ‘The federal administration’, in U. Klöti, P. Knoepfel, H. Kriesi, W. Linder, Y. Papadopoulos, and P. Sciarini (eds), Handbook of Swiss Politics, Zürich: Neue Zürcher Zeitung Publishing, pp. 282–308.Google Scholar
Verschuere, B., Verhoest, K., Meyers, F.Peters, B.G. (2006), ‘10. Accountability and accountability arrangements in public agencies’, in T. Christensen and P. Laegreid (eds), Autonomy and Regulation: Coping with Agencies in the Modern State, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Vibert, F. (2007), The Rise of the Unelected: Democracy and the New Separation of Powers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vogel, S.K. (1996), Freer Markets, More Rules: Regulatory Reform in Advanced Industrial Countries, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Voltmer, K. (1998), Medienqualität und Demokratie: eine empirische Analyse publizistischer Informations-und Orientierungsleistungen in der Wahlkampfkommunikation, Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
Voltmer, K. (2010), ‘The media, government accountability, and citizen engagement’, in P. Norris (ed.), Public Sentinel: News Media and Governance Reform, Washington: World Bank, pp. 395.Google Scholar
Voltmer, K.Eilders, C. (2003), ‘The media agenda: the marginalization and domestication of Europe’, in K. Dyson and K.H. Goetz (eds), Germany, Europe and the Politics of Constraint, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 173–197.Google Scholar
Walgrave, S., Soroka, S.Nuytemans, M. (2008), ‘The mass media's political agenda-setting power’, Comparative Political Studies 41: 814–836.Google Scholar
Waterman, R.W.Rouse, A. (1999), ‘The determinants of the perceptions of political control of the bureaucracy and the venues of influence’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 9: 527–569.Google Scholar
Waterman, R.W., Rouse, A.Wright, R. (1998), ‘The venues of influence: a new theory of political control of the bureaucracy’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 8: 13–38.Google Scholar
Widmer, T.Neuenschwander, P. (2004), ‘Embedding evaluation in the Swiss federal administration: purpose, institutional design and utilization’, Evaluation 10: 388–409.Google Scholar
Wilks, S. (2007), ‘Agencies, networks, discourses and the trajectory of European competition enforcement’, European Competition Journal 3: 437–464.Google Scholar
Wilks, S.Bartle, I. (2002), ‘The unanticipated consequences of creating independent competition agencies’, West European Politics 25: 148–172.Google Scholar
Yesilkagit, K. (2004), ‘The design of public agencies: overcoming agency costs and commitment problems’, Public Administration and Development 24: 119–127.Google Scholar
Zaller, J. (1992), The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion, Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar