Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Administrative Law (1)
- American Politics (1)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (1)
- Business (1)
- Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics (1)
-
- Comparative Politics (1)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (1)
- Courts (1)
- Economic History (1)
- Economic Policy (1)
- Economics (1)
- Growth and Development (1)
- Law and Politics (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Policy Design, Analysis, and Evaluation (1)
- Policy History, Theory, and Methods (1)
- Political Economy (1)
- Public Administration (1)
- Public Policy (1)
- Social Policy (1)
- Social Welfare (1)
- Social Welfare Law (1)
- Transnational Law (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Social and Behavioral Sciences
Planning For Excellence: Insights From An International Review Of Regulators' Strategic Plans, Adam M. Finkel, Daniel Walters, Angus Corbett
Planning For Excellence: Insights From An International Review Of Regulators' Strategic Plans, Adam M. Finkel, Daniel Walters, Angus Corbett
All Faculty Scholarship
What constitutes regulatory excellence? Answering this question is an indispensable first step for any public regulatory agency that is measuring, striving towards, and, ultimately, achieving excellence. One useful way to answer this question would be to draw on the broader literature on regulatory design, enforcement, and management. But, perhaps a more authentic way would be to look at how regulators themselves define excellence. However, we actually know remarkably little about how the regulatory officials who are immersed in the task of regulation conceive of their own success.
In this Article, we investigate regulators’ definitions of regulatory excellence by drawing on …
Progressive Antitrust, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Progressive Antitrust, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
Several American political candidates and administrations have both run and served under the “progressive” banner for more than a century, right through the 2016 election season. For the most part these have pursued interventionist antitrust policies, reflecting a belief that markets are fragile and in need of repair, that certain interest groups require greater protection, or in some cases that antitrust policy is an extended arm of regulation. This paper argues that most of this progressive antitrust policy was misconceived, including that reflected in the 2016 antitrust plank of the Democratic Party. The progressive state is best served by a …