Skip to main content

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
Cancel
×
Home
Article
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Cited by 6
  • Cited by
    Crossref Citations
    Crossref logo
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Johnson, Carol and Tremblay, Manon 2016. Comparing Same-Sex Marriage in Australia and Canada: Institutions and Political Will. Government and Opposition, p. 1.

    Bell, Stephen and Hindmoor, Andrew 2015. Taming the City? Ideas, Structural Power and the Evolution of British Banking Policy Amidst the Great Financial Meltdown. New Political Economy, Vol. 20, Issue. 3, p. 454.

    Bell, Stephen and Hindmoor, Andrew 2015. Masters of the Universe but Slaves of the Market: Bankers and the Great Financial Meltdown. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, Vol. 17, Issue. 1, p. 1.

    Marsh, David Akram, Sadiya and Birkett, Holly 2015. The structural power of business: taking structure, agency and ideas seriously. Business and Politics, Vol. 17, Issue. 3,

    Johal, Sukhdev Moran, Michael and Williams, Karel 2014. Power, Politics and the City of London after the Great Financial Crisis. Government and Opposition, Vol. 49, Issue. 03, p. 400.

    Nesvetailova, Anastasia 2014. Innovations, Fragility and Complexity: Understanding the Power of Finance. Government and Opposition, Vol. 49, Issue. 03, p. 542.

    ×
  • Get access
    Add to cart $25.00
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
    Log in Register Recommend to librarian

The Ideational Shaping of State Power and Capacity: Winning Battles but Losing the War over Bank Reform in the US and UK

Abstract

This article extends a recent line of research arguing that the power and capacity of political actors (including states) is not just the product of particular fixed attributes but is also the outcome of political relations between key interlocutors, including ideational relations. State elites, especially government leaders, have persisted with a mindset that still values the economic centrality of a large and complex banking sector. This way of thinking has conditioned the relationship between, on the one hand, the US and UK governments and, on the other, Wall Street and the City of London and has led to a form of ‘dysfunctional embeddedness’. Government leaders may have been able to win high-profile policy victories over the banking sector in the post-crisis period, but in accepting a large, complex and constantly evolving financial system with high levels of systemic risk, they have unwittingly placed themselves at a continuing disadvantage in the regulatory arena.

Copyright
COPYRIGHT: © Government and Opposition Ltd 2014 
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Stephen Bell is Professor of Political Science at the University of Queensland. Contact email: stephen.bell@uq.edu.au.

Andrew Hindmoor is Professor in Politics at the University of Sheffield. Contact email: a.hindmoor@sheffield.ac.uk.

Footnotes
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

V.V. Acharya , N. Kulkarni and M. Richardson (2011), ‘Capital, Contingent Capital and Liquidity Requirements’, in V.V. Acharya et al. (eds), Regulating Wall Street: The Dodd–Frank Act and the New Architecture of Global Finance (New York: Wiley): 143–180.
A. Baker (2010), ‘Restraining Regulatory Capture? Anglo-America, Crisis Politics and the Trajectories of Change in Global Financial Governance’, International Affairs, 86: 647–663.
A. Baker (2013), ‘The New Political Economy of the Macroprudential Shift’, New Political Economy, 18: 112–139.
S. Bell (2012), ‘The Power of Ideas: The Ideational Shaping of the Structural Power of Business’, International Studies Quarterly, 56: 661–673.
S. Bell and A. Hindmoor (2009), Rethinking Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
M. Blyth (2003), ‘Structures Do not Come with an Instruction Sheet: Interests, Ideas and Progress in Political Science’, Perspectives on Politics, 1(4): 695–706.
A. Giustiniani and J. Thornton (2011), ‘Post-crisis Financial Reform: Where Do we Stand?’, Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 19: 323–336.
C. Hay and B. Rosamond (2002), ‘Globalisation, European Integration and the Discursive Construction of Economic Imperatives’, Journal of European Public Policy, 9: 147–167.
R. Lall (2012), ‘From Failure to Failure: The Politics of International Banking Regulation’, Review of International Political Economy, 19: 609–638.
M. Moran (2003), The British Regulatory State: High Modernism and Hyper-Innovation (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
M. Richardson , R.C. Smith and I. Walter (2011), ‘Large Banks and the Volcker Rule’, in V.V. Acharya et al. (eds), Regulating Wall Street: The Dodd–Frank Act and the New Architecture of Global Finance (New York: Wiley): 181–212.
S. Suarez and R. Kolodny (2011), ‘Paving the Road to “Too Big to Fail”: Business Interests and the Politics of Financial Deregulation in the United States’, Politics and Society, 39: 74–102.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Government and Opposition
  • ISSN: 0017-257X
  • EISSN: 1477-7053
  • URL: /core/journals/government-and-opposition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *

CAPTCHA *

Skip to the audio challenge
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 5
Total number of PDF views: 141 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 345 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 22nd August 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Cancel
Confirm
×