Objective
In all parliamentary democracies, governments delegate some policymaking competence to bureaucrats. The very conception of cabinet governments comprised of ministers, who are derived from the party majorities and held in toe with the party line, implies a certain overlap between the executive and legislature. Policy delegation in both presidential and parliamentary systems may be motivated by limited resources, informational asymmetries and a desire to gain from bureaucratic expertise, but it also creates a certain moral hazard by granting bureaucrats the opportunity to act against the legislative preferences of the parliament. Parliamentary legislation can limit the potential for this drift, but also comes at the cost of less informed, more cumbersome legislation and the less efficient use of parliamentary resources. The propensity of decision makers to delegate vary widely across political systems and policy areas. This project asks how differences in the preferences of the legislating actors and the degree of institutional control over bureaucrats may affect the extent of policy delegation in four parliamentary systems (Germany, UK, France and Turkey).
Although theoretical approaches to this topic abound, empirical research remains starkly limited. This project will test, extend and refine the transaction cost, principal-agent theory based on divided government in the US presidential system with a comparative perspective on parliamentary democracies. The selected countries vary with regard to their electoral systems, party tradition, level of democratic consolidation and legal tradition. The project will assess the relative potential for and intervening factors limiting or encouraging the use of executive policy instruments in these states over a twenty-five year period. This approach will link bureaucratic delegation to institutional design and political considerations such as popular legitimacy and preference constellations of legislating actors.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/euroscivoc.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/euroscivoc.
- social sciences political sciences political transitions elections
- social sciences political sciences public administration bureaucracy
- social sciences political sciences government systems democracy
You need to log in or register to use this function
We are sorry... an unexpected error occurred during execution.
You need to be authenticated. Your session might have expired.
Thank you for your feedback. You will soon receive an email to confirm the submission. If you have selected to be notified about the reporting status, you will also be contacted when the reporting status will change.
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
FP7-PEOPLE-2011-CIG
See other projects for this call
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
MC-CIG - Support for training and career development of researcher (CIG)
Coordinator
34956 Istanbul
Türkiye
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.