Article thumbnail

Political Regimes, Bureaucracy, and Scientific Productivity

By Juan Remo Fernández-Carro and Víctor Lapuente Giné

Abstract

Can a scientist trust that the government is going to pay him or her fairly? In the science–government relationship, an incumbent may be better off if he or she does not provide—or does not provide a fair pay to public scientists. We propose a simple game-theoretic model for understanding the trust problem in the relationship between governments and scientists. The model shows how with reliable governments (democracies), bureaucratic contracts (e.g., secure tenure) are not optimal since they have low-powered incentives (in contrast to the highpowered private-sector type of contracts) and run against scientists’ responsiveness to government demands. However, with nonreliable governments (dictatorships), bureaucratic contracts are second-best solutions because they protect scientists against the possibility of governments’ misbehavior (i.e., ex post opportunistic defections, such as canceling research programs overnight). An empirical analysis confirms the predictions: bureaucratic contracts enhance scientific productivity with nonreliable governments (dictatorships) but hamper scientific productivity with reliable governments (democracies).Publicad

Topics: Sociología
Publisher: 'Wiley'
Year: 2008
DOI identifier: 10.1111/j.1747-1346.2008.00148.x
OAI identifier: oai:e-archivo.uc3m.es:10016/5471
Journal:

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2007). A Principal-Agent Model of Public Research with a Retrospective Payoff Rule.”
  2. (1990). An Exercise in Forethought: The Research System in Transition—ToWhat?”
  3. (1999). Bureaucracy and Growth: A Cross-National Analysis of the
  4. (1995). Bureaucracy, Infrastructure, and Economic Growth: Evidence from U.S. Cities during the Progressive Era.”
  5. (1996). Civil Services in the Europe of Fifteen: Current Situation and Prospects. Maastricht: European Institute of Public Administration.
  6. (1998). Common Agency Contracting and the Emergence of
  7. (2004). Cómo encontrar la flauta mágica.
  8. (1990). Corporate Culture and Economic Theory.” In Perspectives on Positive Political Economy, edited by
  9. (1995). Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism andMultipartidism.”
  10. Democratic Republic, Costa Rica,
  11. (2001). Entrevista: Si no Cumplen, Regresaría a EEUU.” [“Interview: If They Do Not Keep Their Word, I Will Go Back to the USA.”]. El Pais.
  12. (2002). Golden Parachutes: Credible Commitments or Evidence of
  13. (2004). Kleptocracy and Divide-andRule: A Theory of Personal Rule.
  14. (1977). Lapuente/Fernández-Carro Political Regimes and Scientific Productivity 1039 Beyerchen, Alan D.
  15. (2000). Long-Term Employment Relationships by Credible Commitments: The Carl Zeiss Foundation.”
  16. (1993). Los Primeros años del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, una Introducción a la Política Científica del Régimen Franquista,
  17. (1992). Managerial Dilemmas: The Political Economy of Hierarchy. Cambridge:
  18. (2001). Parallel Paths? Administrative Reform, Public Policy and Politico-Bureaucratic Relationships in Sweden.” In Politicians, Bureaucrats and Administrative Reform,
  19. (2005). Power and Political Institutions.”
  20. (1988). Precommitment and the Paradox of Democracy.” In Constitutionalism and Democracy, edited by Jon Elster and Rune Slagstad. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
  21. (1985). Principals and Agents: An Overview.” In Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business, edited by
  22. (2001). Prosperity and Violence.
  23. (1999). Public and Private Bureaucracies: A Transaction Cost Economics Perspective.”
  24. (1995). Published Papers, Tacit Competencies and
  25. (2002). Regímenes políticos y actividad científica. Las políticas de la ciencia en las dictaduras y las democracias [Political Regimes and Scientific Activity.
  26. (1993). Rules and Governance in the Public Sector: The Case of Civil Service.”
  27. (1977). Rules Rather than Discretion: The Time Inconsistency of Optimal Plans.”
  28. (2000). Sanidad pretende cercenar en 1.000 millones el presupuesto del instituto de Barbacid, [Health seeks to curtail 1000 million in the budget for the Barbacid’s institute].” El Pais.
  29. (1998). Science Policies as Principal-Agent Games: Institutionalization and
  30. (1975). Science Policy. In The Handbook of Political Science, edited by Fred Greenstein and Norman Polsby.
  31. (2004). Scrutinising Science: The Changing UK Government of Science.
  32. (2003). Setting an Example: Mariano Barbacid’s New Institute in Madrid is Open for Business.” The Elso Gazette. February 13. Accessed on
  33. (1991). Sociology of Science: A Sociological Pilgrimage. Milton Keynes,
  34. (2000). The Institutional Determinant of Economic Policy Outcomes.”
  35. (1994). The Institutional Foundations of Democratic Government:
  36. (2003). The Logic of Political Survival.
  37. (1995). The Political Economy of Public Administration: Institutional Choice in the Public Sector. Cambridge:
  38. (1990). The Politics of Structural Choice: Toward a Theory of Public Bureaucracy.” In Organization Theory, edited by Oliver Williamson.
  39. (1997). The Positive Theory of Public Bureaucracy.” In Perspectives on Public Choice: A Handbook, edited by Dennis Mueller. Cambridge:
  40. (1975). The Recruitment and Training of Administrative and Technical Personnel.” In The Formation of National States in Western Europe, edited by Charles Tilly.
  41. (1965). The Scientific Community.
  42. (1970). The Scientific Ethos: A Deviant Viewpoint.”
  43. (2004). Trends in Human Resources Management Policies in OECD Countries. An Analysis of the Results of the OECD
  44. (2006). Veto Players and Political Control of Bureaucracy.”