The promise of bureaucratic reputation approaches for the EU regulatory state

References

• Arras, S. and Braun, C. (2018) ‘Stakeholders wanted! Why and how European Union agencies involve non-state stakeholders’, Journal of European Public Policy 25 (9): 1257–1275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertelli, T. and Busuioc, M. (2018) ‘Reputation-sourced authority and the prospect of unchecked bureaucratic power’, ECPR General Conference, 22-25 August, Hamburg.
   Google Scholar
• Black, J. (2008) ‘Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes’, Regulation & Governance 2 (2): 137–164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunsson, N. (1989) The Organization of Hypocrisy: Talk, Decisions and Actions in Organizations, New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Bunea, A. and Ibenskas, R. (2017) ‘Unveiling patterns of contestation over better regulation reforms in the European Union’, Public Administration 95 (3): 589–604.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busuioc, M. (2013) European Agencies: Law and Practices of Accountability, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Busuioc, M. (2015) ‘Friend or foe? Inter-agency cooperation, organizational reputation, and turf’, Public Administration 94 (1): 40–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busuioc, M. and Lodge, M. (2016) ‘The reputational basis of public accountability’, Governance 29: 247–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busuioc, M. and Lodge, M. (2017) ‘Reputation and accountability relationships: mana- ging accountability expectations through reputation’, Public Administration Review 77 (1): 91–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busuioc, M. and Rimkutė, D. (2019) ‘Meeting expectations in the EU regulatory state? Regulatory communications amid conflicting institutional demands’, Journal of European Public Policy: 1–23. Online first. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1603248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter, D. (2001) The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy: Reputations, Networks, and Policy Innovation in Executive Agencies, 1862–1928, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter, D. (2010) Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter, D. and Krause, G.A. (2012) ‘Reputation and public administration’, Public Administration Review 72 (1): 26–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curtin, D. (2007) ‘Holding (quasi-)autonomous EU administrative actors to public account’, European Law Journal 13 (4): 523–541.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egeberg, M. and Trondal, J. (2011) ‘EU-level agencies: new executive centre formation or vehicles for national control?’, Journal of European Public Policy 18 (6): 868–887.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EPRS (2018) Regulation (EC) 1107/2009 on the Placing of Plant Protection Products on the Market, Brussels: European Parliament.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission (2002) ‘Communication from the Commission: The operating framework for the European Regulatory Agencies’ COM(2002) 718 final, 11 December, Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission (2008) ‘European agencies – The way forward’ COM(2008) 135 final, 11 March, Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• Font, N. and Pérez-Durán, I. (2016) ‘The European Parliament oversight of EU agencies through written questions’, Journal of European Public Policy 23 (9): 1349–1366.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilad, S. (2008) ‘‘Exchange without capture: The UK financial Ombudsman service’s struggle for accepted domain’’, Public Administration 86 (4): 907–924.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilad, S. (2009) ‘Juggling conflicting demands: The case of the UK financial Ombudsman service’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19 (3): 661–680.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilad, S., Maor, M. and Bloom, P.B.-N. (2013) ‘Organizational reputation, the content of public allegations, and regulatory communication’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25 (2): 451–478.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groenleer, M. (2009) The Autonomy of European Union Agencies: A Comparative Study of Institutional Development, Delft: Eburon Uitgeverij BV.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, C. (2011) The Blame Game. Spin, Bureaucracy, and Self-Preservation in Government, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D.R. and Tarrant, A.D. (2011) ‘The political foundations of the Eurocracy’, West European Politics 34: 922–947.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lodge, M. (2008) ‘Regulation, the regulatory state and European politics’, West European Politics 31 (1-2): 280–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majone, G. (1997) ‘The new European agencies: regulation by information’, Journal of European Public Policy 4 (2): 262–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majone, G. (1999) ‘The regulatory state and its legitimacy problems’, West European Politics 22 (1): 1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Majone, G. (2006) ‘The common sense of European integration’, Journal of European Public Policy 13: 607–626.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maor, M. (2011) ‘Organizational reputations and the observability of public warnings in 10 pharmaceutical markets’, Governance 24 (3): 557–582.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maor, M., Gilad, S. and Bloom, P.B.-N. (2013) ‘Organizational reputation, regulatory talk and strategic silence’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 23 (3): 581–608.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1991) ‘Institutionalized organizations: formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony’, in W.W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio (eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 340–363.
   Google Scholar
• Moffitt, S.L. (2010) ‘Promoting agency reputation through public advice: Advisory committee use in the FDA’, The Journal of Politics 72 (3): 880–893.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen, J.P. (2017) Democratic Accountability, Political Order, and Change: Exploring Accountability Processes in an Era of European Transformation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pérez-Durán, I. (2017) ‘‘Political and stakeholder’s ties in European Union agencies’’, Journal of European Public Policy 26 (1): 1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potter, R.A. (2019) Bending the Rules: Procedural Politicking in the Bureaucracy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rimkutė, D. (2018) ‘Organizational reputation and risk regulation: The effect of reputational threats on agency scientific outputs’, Public Administration 96 (1): 70–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rimkutė, D. (2019) ‘Building organizational reputation in the European regulatory state: An analysis of EU agencies’ communications’, Governance: 1–22. Online first. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittberger, B. and Wonka, A. (2015) ‘EU agencies’, in J. Richardson and S. Mazey (eds), European Union, London: Routledge, pp. 233–257.
   Google Scholar
• Scharpf, F.W. (1999) Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic?, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, J.Q. (1989) Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It, New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Wonka, A. and Rittberger, B. (2010) ‘Credibility, complexity and uncertainty: explaining the institutional independence of 29 EU agencies’, West European Politics 33 (4): 730–752.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, M. (2018) ‘Mapping EU agencies as political entrepreneurs’, European Journal of Political Research 57 (2): 404–426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar