Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T11:35:29.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Comparative administrative law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2013

Mauro Bussani
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Trieste
Ugo Mattei
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Torino, Italy
Get access

Summary

Overview

The field of administrative law is inextricably bound to two phenomena that trace their origins to the nineteenth century: the rise of large state bureaucracies designed to fulfil a complex array of societal needs and the development of liberal democratic norms of social organization and public authority. Much of administrative law can be understood as an attempt to work out the tension inherent in these two phenomena: the recognition that the attainment of public purposes is contingent on a cadre of full-time employees, paid by the public purse and loyal to the state, and, at the same time, the belief that public authority is legitimate only if embedded in democratic politics and liberal societies. To put it more succinctly, these are the objectives, on the one hand, of neutrality and expertise, and, on the other hand, of democracy and liberal rights.

The common aspiration of making public administration both capable and accountable serves as the springboard for the comparative analysis in this chapter. I begin with a discussion of what, in the law, is taken to be the hallmark of modern bureaucracy – the legal guarantees of civil service employment – together with national variations in the professionalization of administration and contemporary efforts to cut back on civil service guarantees. I then turn to three important types of accountability: the contestation of administrative action before the courts, the involvement of organized interests in administrative policymaking, and informal accountability to the general public through parliamentary ombudsmen and transparency guarantees. These categories serve as a framework for exploring the similarities and differences that shape contemporary administrative law systems. The chapter concludes with the increasingly important phenomenon of the globalization of administrative law and the rapid migration of administrative principles across legal systems throughout the world, both national and international. In line with the intellectual purpose of this volume, I have omitted topics that have traditionally been considered peripheral to the field or that fall at the intersection with other disciplines, for instance the constitutional powers of the executive branch over public administration and the empowerment of private groups through self-regulation, and refer the reader to the bibliography at the end of the chapter for guidance.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Skowronek, S.Building a New American State: The Expansion of Administrative Capacities, 1877–1920Cambridge University Press 1982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziller, J.Administrations comparées: Les systèmes politico-administratifs de l’Europe des DouzeParisMontchrestien 1993Google Scholar
Rose, R.Giving Direction to Government in Comparative PerspectiveAberbach, J. D.Peterson, M. A.The Executive BranchNew YorkOxford University Press 2005 72Google Scholar
Battini, S.Il PersonaleTorchia, L.Il Sistema Amministrativo ItalianoBolognaMulino 2009 279Google Scholar
Cassese, S.Hypotheses on the Italian Administrative System 1993 16 West European Politics325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suleiman, E.Dismantling Democratic StatesPrinceton University Press 2003Google Scholar
Minow, M.Outsourcing PowerFreeman, J.Minow, M.Government by Contract: Outsourcing and American DemocracyCambridge, MAHarvard University Press 2009 110Google Scholar
Dolovich, S.State Punishment and Private Prisons 2005 55 Duke Law Journal441Google Scholar
D’Alberti, M.Diritto amministrativo comparatoBolognaMulino 1992Google Scholar
Mitchell, J. D. B.The Causes and Effects of the Absence of a System of Public Law in England 1965 Public Law 95 96Google Scholar
Dicey, A. V.Introduction to the Study of the Law of the ConstitutionLondonMacmillan 1885Google Scholar
Taggart, M.The Peculiarities of the English: Resisting the Public/Private Law DistinctionCraig, P.Rawlings, R.Law and Administration in Europe: Essays in Honour of Carol HarlowOxford University Press 2003 107Google Scholar
Picard, E.The Public–Private Divide in French Law through the History and Destiny of French Administrative LawRuffert, M.The Public–Private Law Divide: Potential for TransformationLondonBIICL 2009 17Google Scholar
Gaudemet, Y.L’exportation du droit administratif français: Breves remarques en forme de paradoxeBorgetto, MichelMélanges Philippe Ardant: Droit et politique a la croisée des culturesParisLGDJ 1999Google Scholar
Custos, D.Droits administratifs: américain et français: sources et procédure 2007 Revue internationale de droit comparé 285 295Google Scholar
Brewer-Carias, A. R.Etudes de droit public comparéParisLGDJ 2001Google Scholar
Ginsburg, T.Dismantling the “Developmental State”? Administrative Procedure Reform in Japan and Korea 2001 48 American Journal of Comparative Law585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cane, PeterJudicial Review in the Age of Tribunals 2009 Public Law479Google Scholar
Craig, P.Administrative LawLondonSweet & Maxwell 2008 437Google Scholar
2000
Nolte, G.General Principles of German and European Administrative Law – A Comparison in Historical Perspective 1994 57 Modern Law Review191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberle, E. J.The West German Administrative Procedure Act: A Study in Administrative Decision Making 1984 3 Dickinson Journal of International Law67Google Scholar
Sandulli, A.La proporzionalità dell’azione amministrativaPaduaCedam 1998Google Scholar
Schwarze, J.European Administrative LawLondonSweet & Maxwell 1992Google Scholar
Ackerman, B.We the People: TransformationsCambridge, MAHarvard University Press 1998Google Scholar
1983
Freeman, J.Collaborative Governance in the Administrative State 1997 45 University of California Los Angeles Law Review1Google Scholar
Yackee, J. WebbYackee, S. WebbA Bias Towards Business? Assessing Interest Group Influence on the U.S. Bureaucracy 2006 68 Journal of Politics128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuellar, M.-F.Rethinking Regulatory Democracy 2005 57 Administrative Law Review411Google Scholar
1977
Stewart, R. B.The Reformation of American Administrative Law 1975 88 Harvard Law Review1669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, R. B.Madison’s Nightmare 1990 57 University of Chicago Law Review335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiss, D. RubinsteinParticipation in Governance from a Comparative Perspective: Citizen Involvement in Telecommunications and Electricity in the United Kingdom, France and Sweden 2009 Journal of Dispute Resolution 381Google Scholar
Schmitter, P. C.Still the Century of CorporatismSchmitter, P. C.Lehmbruch, G.Trends Toward Corporatist IntermediationLondonSage 1979 13Google Scholar
Streeck, W.The study of organized interests: before “The Century” and afterCrouch, C.Streeck, W.The Diversity of DemocracyCheltenhamEdward Elgar 2006 17Google Scholar
Gellhorn, W.Ombudsmen and Others: Citizens’ Protectors in Nine CountriesCambridge, MAHarvard University Press 1966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowat, D.The Ombudsman: Citizen’s DefenderLondonGeorge Allen & Unwin 1968Google Scholar
Heede, K.European Ombudsman: Redress and Control at the Union LevelThe HagueKluwer 2000Google Scholar
European OmbudsmanThe European Code of Good Administrative BehaviourLuxembourgOPOCE 2005 12Google Scholar
Ackerman, J. M.Sandoval-Ballesteros, I. E.The Global Explosion of Freedom of Information Laws 2006 58 Administrative Law Review85Google Scholar
Kingsbury, B.The Concept of “Law” in Global Administrative Law 2009 20 European Journal of International Law23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, J. S.Comparative Administrative LawReimann, M.Zimmermann, R.The Oxford Handbook of Comparative LawOxford University Press 2006 1259Google Scholar
Bignami, F.‘From Expert Administration to Accountability Network: A New Paradigm for Comparative Administrative Law’ 2011 59 American Journal of Comparative Law859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassese, S.La costruzione del diritto amministrativo: Francia e Regno UnitoCassese, S.Trattato di diritto amministrativoMilanGiuffrè 2003 1Google Scholar
Craig, P. P.Tomkins, A.The Executive and Public Law: Power and Accountability in Comparative PerspectiveOxford University Press 2006Google Scholar
D’Alberti, M.Diritto amministrativo comparato. Trasformazioni dei sistemi amministrativi in Francia, Gran Bretagna, Stati Uniti, ItaliaBolognaMulino 1995Google Scholar
Fairgrieve, D.Andenas, M.Bell, J.Tort Liability of Public Authorities in Comparative PerspectiveLondonBIICL 2002Google Scholar
Fromont, M.Droit administratif des États européensParisThémis 2006Google Scholar
Lindseth, P. L.“Always Embedded” Administration? The Historical Evolution of Administrative Justice as an Aspect of Modern GovernanceJoerges, C.Stråth, B.Wagner, P.The Economy as a Polity: The Political Constitution of Contemporary CapitalismLondonUCL Press 2005 117Google Scholar
Napolitano, G.Diritto Amministrativo ComparatoMilanGiuffrè 2007
Rose-Ackerman, S.Controlling Environmental Policy: The Limits of Public Law in Germany and the United StatesNew HavenYale University Press 1995Google Scholar
Rose-Ackerman, S.From Elections to Democracy: Building Accountable Government in Hungary and PolandCambridge University Press 2005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose-Ackerman, S.Lindseth, P. L.Comparative Administrative LawCheltenhamEdward Elgar 2010CrossRef
Schepel, H.Falke, J.Legal Aspects of Standardisation in the Member States of the EC and EFTA: Comparative ReportLuxembourgOPOCE 2000Google Scholar
Strøm, K.Müller, W. C.Bergman, T.Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary DemocraciesOxford University Press 2003CrossRef
Verhey, L.Zwart, T.Agencies in European and Comparative PerspectiveThe HagueKluwer 2003

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×