Comparative Administrative Law
Show Less

Comparative Administrative Law

Edited by Susan Rose-Ackerman and Peter L. Lindseth

This research handbook is a comprehensive overview of the field of comparative administrative law. The specially commissioned chapters in this landmark volume represent a broad, multi-method approach combining perspectives from history and social science with more strictly legal analyses. Comparisons of the United States, continental Europe, and the British Commonwealth are complemented by contributions that focus on Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The work aims to stimulate comparative research on public law, reaching across countries and scholarly disciplines.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 18: A Comparison of US and European Independent Agencies

Martin Shapiro


Martin Shapiro A comparison of ‘independent’ agencies in the United States and Europe inevitably must address two questions. First, what do we mean by independence and from whom? Second, why do we want some agencies to be independent? I consider each issue in turn for the United States and the European Union. 1. The United States No doubt a review of the whole history of public administration would reveal hundreds of administrative units in many times and places that correspond to whatever definition of ‘independent’ we choose to adopt. A comparison of contemporary US-European independent agencies safely may begin, however, with the US Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) established in 1887. US agency independence begins in the context of government regulation of private business enterprise in a resolutely capitalist economy. 1.1. What is independence? The case of the ICC The ICC is the very model of, and indeed a principal source of, the more or less standard ‘law and economics’ model of capitalist regulation.1 The proliferation of rail lines owned by a host of separate private entrepreneurs led to a curious paradox. From the point of view of agricultural shippers, each rail line constituted a natural monopoly for the second nearest line would be too far away from any given farm to offer an economically feasible shipping alternative. From the railroads’ point of view, however, two, or often many more, lines that were indeed far apart in the agricultural hinterlands converged at the big city terminals, resulting in ruinous, rate-cutting competition....

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.