scholarly journals Diffuse interest groups and regulatory policy change: financial consumer protection in Turkey

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-243
Author(s):  
Mehmet Kerem Coban
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehmet Kerem Coban

This article examines why and how a regulation on retail banking fees, commissions, and charges emerged in Turkey after a long period of regulatory forbearance. The article shows that when regulatory forbearance caused stasis, and the “statist”, exclusionary policymaking context limited consumer groups’ access to the policymaking process, consumer groups challenged the policy regime of the banking sector and the regulator by appealing to another state actor, the Ministry of Customs and Trade. The Ministry took advantage of an opportunity structure to pass a new consumer protection law which assigned a de facto mandate on the regulatory agency to regulate fees, commissions, and charges. The article argues that the regulatory policy change was a product of a policy regime change with the Ministry emerging as a veto player, as it redefined the institutional arrangements in the policymaking process, and imposed its preferences and its stricter policy approach. As such, the article contributes to our understanding of the conditions of how diffuse interest groups can trigger regulatory policy change, but more importantly policy regime change.


Significance Market sectors under scrutiny include buy-now-pay-later (BNPL) platforms, cryptocurrency exchanges and digital wallets. All have seen a recent leap in popularity, driven in part by COVID-related concerns but mostly by the mainstream interest in alternative payment methods, leaving regulators concerned. Impacts The Treasurer is likely to gain extended powers to plug gaps in regulatory policy and address convergence issues. Liquidity concerns over cryptocurrency trading could be overcome through a central bank digital currency. Concerns over lost tax revenue and consumer protection, as well as the need to contain market risk, are driving reform efforts.


2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas T. Holyoke ◽  
Heath Brown

What happens after longstanding policies are overthrown in fierce political battles, events scholars refer to as punctuated equilibrium? Do these new policies remain static and unchanging until the next big punctuation, or do they continue to change in explainable and predictable ways? In this article, we develop a model of postpunctuation policy change grounded in theories of boundedly rational decision-making by policymakers. Uncertain about how well the new policy will perform, policymakers learn to rely on competing interest groups for information or, under certain circumstances, look to other political jurisdictions for cues on how their policies ought to be further refined. We test our predictions by studying changes in state charter school laws from 1996 to 2014. We find evidence of policy change, and even convergence, across states suggesting that policies after punctuation do change in ways explained as reactions to political pressures in an environment fraught with uncertainty.


1998 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 727-747 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Dudley ◽  
Jeremy Richardson

A key task of governments is to construct and manage systems of consultation whereby the vast array of interest groups seeking to influence public policy can be accommodated. Conventional wisdom holds that key insider groups secure for themselves special privileges, not least of which is an ability to prevent radical policy change. A concomitant view is that public policy emerges from relatively stable networks of actors who have some mutual resource dependencies. One reason why this paradigm is showing signs of intellectual fatigue is that it seems weak in explaining policy change. Yet, policy change does take place. Indeed, it is one of the characteristics of the 1980s and 1990s. This article examines an example of the traditional modalities of consultation failing to accommodate new interests, knowledge and ideas. This breakdown appears to have occurred by the use of alternative policy ‘arenas without rules' by outsider groups, leading to a radical new ‘framing’ of transport policy. Moreover, government has failed to constrain the new policy issues in predictable and stable systems of consultation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document