The de facto independence of regulatory agencies and its consequences for policy making and regulatory outcomes

This dissertation focuses on the practice of regulatory governance, throughout the study of the functioning of formally independent regulatory agencies (IRAs), with special attention to their de facto independence. The research goals are grounded on a "neo-positivist" (or "reconstructed positivist") position (Hawkesworth 1992; Radaelli 2000b; Sabatier 2000). This perspective starts from the ontological assumption that even if subjective perceptions are constitutive elements of political phenomena, a real world exists beyond any social construction and can, however imperfectly, become the object of scientific inquiry. Epistemologically, it follows that hypothetical-deductive theories with explanatory aims can be tested by employing a proper methodology and set of analytical techniques. It is thus possible to make scientific inferences and general conclusions to a certain extent, according to a Bayesian conception of knowledge, in order to update the prior scientific beliefs in the truth of the related hypotheses (Howson 1998), while acknowledging the fact that the conditions of truth are at least partially subjective and historically determined (Foucault 1988; Kuhn 1970). At the same time, a sceptical position is adopted towards the supposed disjunction between facts and values and the possibility of discovering abstract universal laws in social science. It has been observed that the current version of capitalism corresponds to the golden age of regulation, and that since the 1980s no government activity in OECD countries has grown faster than regulatory functions (Jacobs 1999). Following an apparent paradox, the ongoing dynamics of liberalisation, privatisation, decartelisation, internationalisation, and regional integration hardly led to the crumbling of the state, but instead promoted a wave of regulatory growth in the face of new risks and new opportunities (Vogel 1996). Accordingly, a new order of regulatory capitalism is rising, implying a new division of labour between state and society and entailing the expansion and intensification of regulation (Levi-Faur 2005). The previous order, relying on public ownership and public intervention and/or on sectoral self-regulation by private actors, is being replaced by a more formalised, expert-based, open, and independently regulated model of governance. Independent regulation agencies (IRAs), that is, formally independent administrative agencies with regulatory powers that benefit from public authority delegated from political decision makers, represent the main institutional feature of regulatory governance (Gilardi 2008). IRAs constitute a relatively new technology of regulation in western Europe, at least for certain domains, but they are increasingly widespread across countries and sectors. For instance, independent regulators have been set up for regulating very diverse issues, such as general competition, banking and finance, telecommunications, civil aviation, railway services, food safety, the pharmaceutical industry, electricity, environmental protection, and personal data privacy. Two attributes of IRAs deserve a special mention. On the one hand, they are formally separated from democratic institutions and elected politicians, thus raising normative and empirical concerns about their accountability and legitimacy. On the other hand, some hard questions about their role as political actors are still unaddressed, though, together with regulatory competencies, IRAs often accumulate executive, (quasi-)legislative, and adjudicatory functions, as well as about their performance.

Obedience-disobedience dynamic and the role of responsibility

Obedience has been thoroughly studied in social psychology, both in its positive and negative aspects. Nevertheless, in these empirical studies disobedience has been considered to be the opposite of obedience and indeed its negation. Instead, some recent studies suggest that if obedience to authority is important in ensuring the continuity of social and group life, disobedience is crucial, under some circumstances, in stopping the authority relationship from degenerating into an authoritarian relationship. In this perspective, disobedience may be conceived of as a protest undermining the legitimacy of authority, or else it can represent an instrument of the community for controlling the legitimacy of the authority's demands, becoming a factor safeguarding against authoritarianism. The aim of the present study was to empirically verify the dynamics existing between disobedience and obedience. The results show that people who attach importance to both obedience and disobedience in the relationship between the individual and society recognize the importance of democratic values and consider themselves responsible for the defence of human rights. Instead, people who only recognize the value of obedience and consider disobedience as a threat to the status quo are more authoritarian, individualistic people.

Drugs, schizotypy and cognition: Cognitive attenuations seem more consistently associated with substance use than schizotypal symptoms

Psychosis is a debilitating disease, causing harm to the individual and society. Since early detection of the disease is associated with a more benign course, factors are warranted that enable the early detection of psychosis. In the present thesis we will be focusing on two potential risk factors, namely schizotypy and drug use. The schizotypy concept, originally developed by Meehl (1962), states that schizophrenia symptoms exist on a spectrum, with symptoms ranging from the most severe in patients with schizophrenia to the least affected individual in the general population. Along the schizophrenia spectrum cognitive impairments are commonly found, for instance reduced hemispheric asymmetry or frontal lobe functions. The second risk factor (drug use), affects similar cognitive functions as those attenuated along the schizophrenia spectrum, and drug use is elevated in schizophrenia and people scoring high on schizotypy. Therefore, we set out to investigate whether cognitive attenuations formerly allocated to schizotypal symptoms could have been influenced by elevated substance use in this population. To test this idea, we assessed various drugs (nicotine, cannabis, mephedrone, general substance dependence) and schizotypy symptoms (O-LIFE), and measured either hemispheric asymmetry of function (left hemisphere dominance for language, and right hemisphere dominance for facial processing) or functions largely relying on the frontal lobes (such as cognitive flexibility, working memory, verbal short-term memory, verbal learning and verbal fluency). Results of all studies suggest that it is mostly drugs, and not schizotypy in general that predict cognitive functioning. Therefore, cognitive attenuations subscribed to schizotypy dimensions are likely to have been affected by enhanced drug use. Future studies should extend the list of potential risk factors (e.g. depression and IQ) to acquire a comprehensive overview of the most reliable predictors of disadvantageous cognitive profiles.